Slashdot Mirror
Pre-Retirement Interview With Intel CEO Barrett
kevcol writes "The San Francisco Chronicle has an excellent interview with Intel's CEO Craig Barrett who retires next year. In it, he is asked about topics ranging from labor distribution (oh I'm sorry- outsourcing), the Chinese market, the perils and promise of expanding operations in the Middle East, the state of K-12 schools in the U.S. and declining numbers of home-grown engineers, and more. Notably absent are any questions of AMD. Notice how he likes to pick on sensationalist press by prepending some comments with 'you in the media...'. Anyway, good interview."
"We're graduating a decreasing number of engineers each year" -- Get your ass whomped for 4 years in a engineering program, while all your friends slide by as buisness majors. When you all graduate, they get jobs as managers and you stand in the unemployment line because Intel outsourced all those jobs to India or filled them with H-1B workers. Wow, with those prospects, who *wouldn't* want to go into engineering. (PS - I say this as a PhD student in engineering)
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
"We have very high standards for our performance at Intel, for a variety of reasons. The memo was in reference to our performance and (said) that we could improve our performance and we should improve our performance." How many times can you say performance?
This guy's smugness is a more than a little ridiculous . . . Unlike Newton, who said that he stood of the shoulders of giants . . . this guys thinks he is a giant.
It sounds so incredibly smug. I would say that building something with a lot of transistors is like building something with a lot of bricks (how many bricks/stones in the Great Wall of China?). . . If you count bricks, or rivets, or grams of steel, there are lots of complicated things out there that humans have built . . . Many of these things take a lot more labor and a lot larger organization than Intel . . . Saturn 5's, Great Pyramids, etc. Some things are even intangible . . . the supply chain and resourcing used to move the military might of the US to Europe during WWII for example. At one time there were over one million US troops based in the UK alone . . . and that doesn't consider their supplies and equipment. Not to say Intel doesn't do complex and amazing things, they do . . . but let's keep it in perspective.
And finally for that matter, if I build a multi-processor system am I making a more complicated device than he is? I'm using move transitors than he is . . .
You gotta retire undefeated. Mark my words, folks, no sooner than Steve Ballmer says he's "retiring" you can say that "Microsoft is dying".
Intel is in a LOT of trouble right now I've heard. Their chips have historically been overpriced, and this just doesn't work anymore because AMD is undercutting them. They've fucked up the 64-bit transition, too. Their only undefeated front right now is mobile processors - they kick all sorts of butt there. But other than that, "it's time for CEOs to retire".
For the uninformed, I note that Intel grades its employees on a bell curve each quarter. Any employee who falls in the bottom 25% for two consecutive quarters "qualifies" to be fired. During an economic recession, the employee is automatically fired. When there is a labor shortage, the employee is given a stern warning.
My information comes from a managing director at Intel.
I haven't done any research, but I'd be willing to bet that the itanium was the most expensive processor ever researched, and possibly the most complex. I'd have liked to have asked if he feels it is a sucess, or if it will be, and how AMD's quick response to public demand in the 64bit market affects ( effects? ) the itanium.
I can well imagine the response, but this guy is a joker: I am a god, you all need to put in 80 hour weeks, because that's what I do. No I don't care if you have families to take care of, ect... ( relative worked for intel ).
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
I don't doubt that there are various things that need to be brought to light about Intel's employment policies, but WHY if that site has such a VALID MESSAGE to promote and has ALL THE NECESSARY FACTS to back up their case do they need to resort to sensationalism and sub-high-school-newspaper journalism to get their point across? The whole site reads like a propaganda newletter, with links supposedly linking to relevant documentation just pointing at more sensationalist commentary, and their random emphasis and italicising of words reminds me of MAD magazine.
That site is going to hurt their cause more than help it.
"The dew has clearly fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning"
No, but all the MBAs I've encountered seem convinced that, if they just had the time away from their oh-so-important duties, they could jump right into the lab and show the engineers how to make things hum. On the other hand, I don't know many engineers that feel particularly comfortable operating outside their own areas of expertise, and generally eschew business matters on principle as, well ... uninteresting.
... I'd be inclined to believe that the average engineer is a damn sight brighter than your average MBA. Certainly a lot more useful.
The sad truth is, my friend, that the continued viability of what is left of the American technical and manufacturing sector is far more at risk from the ongoing loss of all kinds of engineering, scientific and technical talent, that it is from a lack of administration. One might easily argue that the poor job prospects of engineers in today's marketplace are directly due to MBAs who've shown little compassion towards their fellow Americans, and no understanding whatsoever of the long-term consequences of their actions. So, yeah
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
The following quote just tells me how hard CEOs must work:
A: We have very high standards for our performance at Intel, for a variety of reasons. The memo was in reference to our performance and (said) that we could improve our performance and we should improve our performance.
while working for Scorpio:
Homer(to some geeks):"Are you guys working?"
Geeks:"Yes sir."
Homer:"Can you work harder?"
Oy, and he wonders why Americans don't want to become engineers anymore.....
Monstar L
it hardly goes in deep to any of the subjects.
when you read it, what's left is that the guy is a big fan of tests(exams) to put people in a nice order(from best to worst) and that he would have chosen forestry if it had been available in stanford.
*** Balance your personal life with your professional life, but do both at 200 miles an hour.
Q: What do you play hard at?
A: I play hard at outdoor activities. My wife and I own a ranch in Montana, which we get to as often as we can. When I was a little kid, I always wanted to be a forest ranger, but I went to Stanford and they don't have a school in forestry, so I became an engineer. But I've always had this passion to be a forest ranger, so now I have a ranch in Montana, and I'm my own forest ranger.
****
there's a golden nugget of insight right there, when you're growing a forest DO IT AT 200 MPH! damn is he gonna be disappointed after planting those trees and watching them grow at abit less than 200mph for a long time..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
At my University, the Business department refers the Engineering department as "Pre-Business". If you look at the students in business a lot of them started out as engineering students and then got burned out and switched to business because it was easier (and the fact that the department tried to schedual classes so there were no Friday classes didn't hurt much either).
I think the whole business department is creating a really bad feedback loop. You have a lot of (poor) students graduating in business who get jobs and are usually in administrative positions. Since they usually aren't very bright/hard working (in my experience) they either make things worse or more inefficient, putting more red tape and levels of burracracy, thus creating a need for yet more business majors. That is why business departments are usually some of the largest on campus and why businesses, especially large ones, are so huge and convoluted. Until business because as hard as engineering, the loop will continue. That's my opinion at least.
Space for rent, inquire within
I'm probably not the only Intel employee that won't be missing Craig. Hopefully Paul Otelleni can make less bad choices over the next decade.
I encountered this jaw-dropper from the interview:
"How much does the United States invest annually in basic R&D in physical sciences? About $5 billion."
Huh? Anyone know any different? Or is this A-1 confirmable fact? I call shenanigans, so I will go look...
google found me this reference back to 2002, where the figure is stated to be 100 billion.
Is this dude talking out his nether regions, using his "exalted" CEO royal intellectual poohbah position going up against a lowly journalist, just to buffalo him? Or d'ya think he believes his 5 billion figure?
Maybe it's a good idea he's being forced to retire..... Or maybe something terrible happened between 2002 and now, just don't know, but 5 billion just seemed incredibly low ball. I mean, that seems the buidget for maybe just one firm, like IBM perhaps. Or is this apples/oranges? What is considered "hard" science research?
And his views on outsourcing and what it means job wise for US middle class folks... popuh leeze, here's a guy talking about his multiple homes, his 12,000 acre + sized "ranch", his private corporate airline, etc, and he's qualified to *relate* to joe worker, even if joe worker is an engineer?
Sounds like these millionaire politicians who "feel your pain" when they are talking it up at some diner for the TV cameras. Just "regular guys", aw shucks and stuff...
Joe sixpack white collar with a calculator and a PC loses his job to some guy who has to come up with 35$ (whatever, low ball for example) a month rent. Uh huh, he's supposed to "compete" wage wise with that inside the US. uh huh. Yep, that's gonna be just *spiffy* for the economy.
We got rid of buggywhip jobs when most folks switched from carriages and horses. What we are getting rid of now are *not* buggywhip jobs. That's the big difference between what happened with the industrial revolution and this scam they push called "globalization". I certainly didn't see Mr. Barret outsourcing HIS job for 1/2 price or less so his corporation could save money and make profits for the investors. And funny, I don't see any news reports of any other CEOs doing that either. Why is that? Oh ya, THEY like THEIR jobs, don't they?
Big famous rich dudes talking up globalization is an example of "do as we say, not as we do".
Hypocrites
That's not entirely true, at least in India's case -- the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) are amongst the most well-respected technical universities in the world.
the article's basically a typical CEO interview. A lot of "I'm the pioneer; I'm God" type of arrogance that you often see in any typical EE Times interviews. Basically he's just using "outsourcing", which sounds negative, into "[is just our way of expansion because we're starting to have higher demand of our products overseas, and we need our man power there to do production and support]". It's just another way of him to say that his company's products are doing well and because [they're "customer oriented"] (damn I hate these stupid business-type buzzwords) they need to have the man-power there to provide the support of their (uhh.. again) "solutions".
Well I see he's a pretty good speaker... in turning something negative and make it seem positive, but in the end it's the company that benifits, not us, the north-american engineers.
For the record, I'm working my ass off in my Masters EE program (takes longer to finish in Canadian schools than US,) and I really hope I'll be able to find some decent employment when I finish within this academic year... Unless I can find full-time employment in my field, I wouldn't want to do a PhD. fulltime.
my blog
this is a myth, promoted by the faceintel site (run by a disgruntled former employee).
There is no requirement to fit a bell curve. There is a guideline that says how many should fit into the upper and lower reaches of expectations, given a large enough sample. But I know of many instances of exactly what you describe (a small group of excellent people) where the guideline is ignored for the obvious reasons.
Ken Hamidi is a crank. He got fired years ago by Intel, and has been on a tirade against them ever since. I've heard that even his attorney has told him that he needs serious help. There are many things wrong with Intel, but Hamidi doesn't really hit them on the head.