That's ridiculous. It's as though EETimes is pretending there have been no Ryzen keynotes in the past.
Her keynotes have been way better than the average hardware keynote for some time now.
The thing that makes her better than many others is that she clearly knows and understands the technical details of her company's products, and she comes off as genuinely stoked about how great the products are.
Ever since the first keynote I saw of her for the early Ryzen announcements, I've been making a point to watch any keynote she's done.
Rumours of Intel acquiring AMD strike me as outlandish. I have doubts such a merger would even be approved given the monopolies that Intel would gain.
But the FTC might view the mobile market as separate from the desktop market and block a merger between Intel and AMD.
Does this site have any reputation? I'm also unimpressed with publishers who make statements like
>> The first [AMD] 7-nm chip will become available next month. In contrast, Intel unveiled a 10-nm PC processor at its CES press conference.
without any qualification on how to compare feature lengths.
I do not want a monopoly in x86.
Intel is very greedy in their cpu prices. Their consumer cpu never gave the option of ecc memory and have gimp certain things. AMD was more flexible. Having two company competing will be great for the consumers.
Strictly speaking, x86-64 patents must be about to expire anyway - the first Intel EM64T implementation (which can be assumed to be fully compatible even with modern-day software--IIRC the original AMD64 ISA had some unfortunate quirks which make this less likely) is from 2004. So, it's only a matter of time until we see compatible x86-64 CPUs from other vendors.
Considering last year's AMD stock price development, I don't think she will leave AMD for Intel unless Intel buys AMD. But:
> Kathleen Maher, vice president at Jon Peddie Research and the editor-in-chief of JPR's TechWatch Report, told us, “Obviously, the idea of Intel acquiring AMD is something that bubbles up from time to time, as does the idea of Nvidia acquiring AMD. But in that [latter] case, forget the FTC, Europe would have a cow (or whatever).”
This article piked my attention exactly because, if you can read in between the lines, it asks what Su can do with Intel to improve her position.
See, as pointed out in the article, any excessively concessionary move is out of the question. No Intel buying AMD, or poaching Su herself.
Nvidia may want Intel or AMD CPU
Intel may want Nvidia or AMD GPU
AMD's only interest is not to let Intel and Nvidia to combine their strong sides. She can only want "an insurance policy" against that happening, more like a castling manoeuvre.
She can take a stake in hypothesised join GPU unit with Intel, or x86 CPU unit with Nvidia.
Intel would lose nothing in that arrangement, and AMD decreases their risk in GPU.
Nvidia would lose nothing in the opposite arrangement, and AMD decreases their risk in CPU.
Will Headless Intel Woo
AMD's Lisa Su
2016 is the latest numbers I can find:
Employees Intel 106k AMD 9K
Sales Intel $59.3B AMD $4.3B
One sees the "Dr." moniker used by insecure lesser educational institutions. No self-respecting MIT PhD goes by doctor, unless they're an MD/PhD.
That "Doctor" all over her intro was a code smell I wasn't expecting.
Intel's "headlesless" is a consequence of harvesting for years.
I certainly don’t long for a descrete GPU.
In fact this is the only thing I miss going to Ryzen. Now I’ll have to buy a GPU.
There are many cases where the Intel hardware should be sufficient to play a game, but some driver weirdness makes it unplayable anyway.
His link only describes why they are worthless to the author of that article. It hardly means that they are worthless to the market at large.
Can we please not imagine there is sexism just because there is some stretchy reference which can be made to marital traditions? Just don't. It's not hard.
"Woo" is often used in this very context, with both male and female employees, and has been since as far back as I can remember. In fact, it's not just used for CEOs, it's also used in the vernacular for anything involving finding personnel, where the variables are complex and the stakes are relatively high.
Here's one example from earlier this year: https://triblive.com/sports/columnists/timbenz/breakfastwith... "First call: NFC Pro Bowler trying to woo Steelers' Antonio Brown to 49ers?"
I also wouldn't care if they were actually using gendered language but this isn't even an instance of that. More likely they used the word "Woo" for the sake of wordplay with the name "Lisa Su"
Mind you I still object to it, but on aesthetic grounds, i.e. it's lazy & cliché. "SoHo eateries woo Millenial foodies" would be my best attempt at a 100% cliché headline.
In short, I think this is OK. But I also upvoted your comment because I think it's worth discussing.
1) 'Bachelor' fans
2) a male peanut seller
> google search 'woo site:foxnews.com', first hits doing the wooing or getting wooed are:
1) John McCain
3) Bernie Sanders
> google search 'woo site:news.bbc.co.uk', first hits doing the wooing or getting wooed are:
4) Clinton and Obama
5) Japanese hotels