Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (55727)	5/17/1998 11:23:00 AM
From: Time Traveler	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

What Yousef was talking about was an issue of quality control. In a `creative' manufacturing environment, you would find product that are supposed to be exactly the same ending up as different products. An example would be the US auto industry in the 70s and 80s. Once some thing goes into production, you should not even think about improving it. Companies being too creative do not get certified with QS-9000 or ISO-9000's. Mary, welcome to the world of mass-production. Time Traveler Ps. To continue the same production process does take a tremendous amount of discipline.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (55727)	5/17/1998 2:09:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, RE: "Apple's best days were when Steve Jobs had John Scully holding him in check - but when Scully got rid of Jobs, the "professional" manager just didn't have the creative juices to run a company like Apple." Now, where ever did you get that idea? Apple never had any "best days" when Scully was there. Scully was an overpaid, mis-informed ....$($*&$. He was so gullible he once got snookered into believing a technology existed when it didn't. Apples hey days came a long time before Scully. Jim

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (55727)	5/18/1998 12:59:00 AM
From: Yousef	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary, Re: "I hope you are speaking for yourself and not for Intel's management." Don't be silly, Mary ... of course I speak for myself, just like 99.99% of the people that post on this thread. I also agree that technical knowledge and creativity are important to any "high tech" company, but I have worked with many companies in the IC process development business and Intel does exhibit strong discipline in the use of documentation, procedures and methodologies. When I use the word "discipline", I am not talking about punishing or working people hard ... instead, I am talking about a well defined way of implementing new processes/products that includes documentation, procedures and methodologies that get continuously improved with each generation. Let me give you an example, Intel has a methodology called "Copy Exactly" for transferring IC processes from their development site to their manufacturing site(s). As part of "new hire" orientation, every Intel employee is taught this methodology and the reasons behind it. This is a well documented and disciplined approach to transferring processes and insuring that the process "matches" (in yield, reliability ...) the original developed process. Some engineers (especially on the receiving end) would find this methodology might stifle their "creativity". This is a good example of what I mean by discipline. I also strongly believe that the ONE of the reasons that AMD had trouble bringing up their .35um process in Austin was because they don't follow a strict transfer methodology ... it was much more of a "happening" (One of my favorite sayings is ... "AMD Happens"). Hopefully this better explains my earlier comments. Yousef