What's wrong with Intel, and how to fix it: Former principal engineer unloads
This is purely a total outsider&#x27;s opinion, so I caveat that and please don&#x27;t get all offended if I&#x27;m totally wrong.<p>Sometimes it&#x27;s really difficult to tell the difference between a crackpot theorist and a good equities analyst.  Watching this guy&#x27;s video, it&#x27;s hard to tell which he comes off as more.<p>He&#x27;s just coherent and convincing enough that as an outsider I could believe his collection of observations.  But the presentation is also just disorganized enough, fixated on certain details enough, and a scattered collection enough that I can&#x27;t tell whether these factors matter.<p>Of course I&#x27;m sure an expert in the field could tell instantly.<p>I&#x27;ve seen enough interviews of former engineers (usually retired guys) of whatever &lt;xyz&gt; company who know about a very specific fault of the product&#x2F;tool&#x2F;etc and can claim convincingly up and down that it will cause catastrophic failure, fundamental strategy misstep, etc.  But will it really be a major factor for overall outcome?<p>He proceeds from analysis of the smallest die area detail to the opposite end of the spectrum, the problem with MBAs + Marketing, within 1 minute.  With typos.   Also, the guy doesn&#x27;t have a long history of posting analysis of this type, and he&#x27;s honest about his info being 8 years old.  Not sure what his motivation for making the video is.   So it&#x27;s hard to put too much weight on it, as if were like a Ming-Chi Kuo predicting Apple&#x27;s next iPhone form factor or something like that.<p>I would love to know what industry people here think, and then I might study the video &#x2F; findings with more attention.