OMG INTEL SUCKS AMD IS THE BEST THEY WOULDN'T DO THAT SHIT TO THEIR EMPLOYEES

You ARE mistaken. AMD lays off because they can't afford not too. Intel lays off to remove unnecessary management layers and inefficiencies/redundancies.

To the contrary, AMD is known for layoffs. Just do a quick google search. Intel is known for being cautious with layoffs. I am not a Intel or AMD fanboy, but just be correct when making factual statements, and not be so biased. You sound like a typical fan boy.

Typical big business move. Lay off a bunch of people to make the stock holders happy. Hire a bunch of new ones real quietly to replace them. Saves lots and lots of money, especially retirement. Gets the CEO's big fat checks. Typical big business. I worked in a one of the toughest big companies in the world, I saw this happen over and over while the CEO bankrolled.

I work for Intel. This is simple. We got fat during the dot com boom, now we're trimming. No corporate conspiracy. No "get the little guy". we're firing managers who have too few people reporting to them (and, therefore, too little to do). We're getting rid of the "health and wellness" people (who no one needs anyway). We're getting back to just business.

We used to be able to sell a square centimeter if silicon for $1000. Now we have to sell 3 square centimeters for $250. You do the math. We're kicking all kinds of ass considering the situation we're in.

I give a 1:3 chance he will disappear (figures suggest closer to 1:7).

More seriously though, i wish i bought shares of intel when i bought my amd rig. I *now* am replacing my amd rig with an intel. I dont believe that amd will recover in any period of time worthy of a return on investment.

All i can say is, well done intel, strong business strategy for the last year and a bit has lead to dramatic change in both the market and industry.

Lets hope that AMD can work more efficiently or find a niche to continue to exist.. if not, maybe someone new could start marketing in the area that amd is dropping out of (also unlikely).

Glad they're cutting out unnecessary positions and hopefully that 2,000 includes a lot of "unfilled" positions. The sad reality is some good folks will be let go all in the name of maximizing profits. Bonuses will be aplenty for executives - you can bank on it.

What do you want to bet, Skythra? Maybe your 1983 Corolla?

To sum up your comment: "There is a large chance you'll be laid off, even though I have no information about it. So, really, i just want to be insulting for no reason. ...Also, i totally agree with the rest of your comments." Is this accurate?

Seriously though, useless additions to the conversation aside, very, very few people will be shown the door. Articles like the word "layoff" because it's provocative, but Intel will be doing this through attrition (sorry Skythra... big word; that means that the people quit. I am sure you know what it means to quit).

The article can now be boiled down to mean: Intel plans to hire fewer people than the number who leave over the next year... and thus becomes a non-issue.

I wrote an earlier comment to the same extent, challenging the author to provide a single direct link to Intel (not quoting other misinformation like another lazy reporter), and shockingly enough the comment was not posted.

Wolfgang has made articles like this in the past - he has done a poor job with finance articles and his main objective seems to be a good headline.

So again to the author, could you point me to the spot in the conference call where Intel stated they are laying off 2000 people? The audio is still online, so if you didn't bother to listen to it in the first place, perhaps you can do some "reporting" now?

I'll repeat what I previously posted - attrition in a high tech company can typically be 5-9% (sometimes even higher), taking the midpoint of 7%, that is a little more than 6000 people leaving a year (or 1500/qtr to help the author out with the math). While there may be SOME layoffs it is a joke to think that at least 50% of that # will be not be for normal attrition related issues.

So again, nice reporting, and nice disregarding comments that challenge the accuracy of the story.

.. its just tipicial business there not out to make you happy... they just wan't the best way to make the most money.

It is unfortunately far from just attrition.
Last week several in our mask design group were walked out unexpectedly--even a highly talented principal investigator/engineer was asked to disappear in the near future (for poor team playing--meaning he speaks up in meetings to get problems solved early before the habitual/yearly tape-out crunch-time that forces compromised solutions to the design flaws/misfitment difficulties that derive from extreme reluctance of the various engineer-design-etc groups to communicate along the way). The other folks were said to be lacking in facility with the newer tools and background to handle increasingly complex design needs. Except it is rather random whether you are given a new tool to troubleshoot (without any training) and then few managers who would bother to see that quantity of production needs to be factored by quality--shove it out to look good and cause many hours of redo for someone later--or follow the design rules, theory, and experience to make tight, functional components the first time and that dovetail efficiently with the surrounding components)
The groups were told when asked how would the already short staffing handle the work load---Oh, not to worry the positions will be filled soon. What they did not mention was those positions would be likely filled overseas (eg Penang, who incidently have been in-training for this work the last couple years).
You may need to recall that earlier in the year some 400 engineers were deleted, then surprise--surprise, approximately that number of Russian speaking engineers (on Russian ruple salaries) are walking the same halls!
A lot of the top engineers have left over the recent years and many went over to AMD--the folks who pressed for the 64 bit consumer cpu were drummed out, come to mind--some while before AMD took over the gaming world then more generalized public perception of superiority with that very tact (despite the lack of true consumer need and the fact that 64 was available in the server/enterprse market).
The steady erosive deterioration (top down--trickle down) (which seems to have coincided with the retiring of the old guard) of the remarkable small engineering firm esprit de corps and collegial atmosphere of creativity, (despite the perenial rather inelegant archetecture) has led to the more common corporate worst common denominator of fear, intimidation, resentment; managers who succeed to Peterly high rank by not making waves and glorifying pennies saved while frittering away the pounds.
It is rather sad really as the scientific joy has devolved into the prevailing pursuit of next quarter's numbers; oblivious to community responsibility and the facts that certain of the governments overseeing your overseas low wage developments are not too averse to the harvesting of technology, and very possibly allowing one of the few remainging domestic preeminent "industries" following other once mythically stalwart industries that have left desolation like the old steel towns (and then have Walmart rub their noses in the slag (re-imported for the ceremony))
At least we can still count on the Military-Industrial Complex; arms production is always a safe bet, though unfortunately not to worker-bee intensive; and not quite the same economic multiplication for capital invested--though it does work out splendidly for the "lucky" few. However, it is not too condusive to small start-up companies and I do not seeing a division for that at the Small Business Administration.

DrDon, I understand your frustration. I've seen lots of crappy decisions that were hard to explain. However, to expect any company to act on motives other than profit before acting on motives for profit is a recipe for disappointment.

Intel, as all companies, is concerned about making the most profit for the least expense. It's a simple arrangement. Companies, like Starbucks, appear to put philanthropic work above profit, but it's an illusion. Any industry/company that appears to put profit at any position other than #1 will assuredly have enormous profit margins, meaning they've already secured position #1 for profit without question, so they can now move on to motive #2 and make you think that's the new #1. Thus, they're using their profits as output for the input of PR. If you stripped Starbucks down to a thin profit margin, you would see that philanthropic work vanish. In other words its a luxury and evidence of over-burdening the consumer and/or a lack of competition. Definitely not the norm, and never the goal.

I'm sorry you've had a rough time, but you don't work in a government lab or a place where anything is guaranteed. Reality can sting a little when you get to comfortable, but that's life. We can only hope the people making the decisions are not total morons. But, rather than making these decisions yourself, your job (and mine) is to make sure you're marketable so, when this titanic sinks, you have a life jacket.

You are all right, and wrong.. Bottom line is Intel is trying to improve their margins. The only way to do that is to be dogmatic and make drastic changes so you can get more for less in reference to the market.

The activities inside are being done according to a mix of compentency.. Some manager really just want to get it over and have a guidebook to do that with so they appear brutal, many managers are doing this for the first time and are getting sick.

The result is it is not being rolled out uniformly.. different business units are getting treated differently almost like each one is a different company.

I work at Intel in IT and survived this cut.. but it is just like we stormed a beachhead and there are bodies everywhere and nobody knows who survived who didn't. We simply won't for a few weeks.

From Intel "inside" this measure of increasing margin is incredibly brutal if you are a bleed blue Intel employee.. If you aren't, it ain't so bad.. you just go get a different job.

The prevailence of pain and drama is sign of a medium to large sized corporation squeezing out the employees who simply have too much loyalty. But you can't blame them, they are just like you, only they got a chance to work at this amazing company, Intel. Now they realize they were mistaken. Ouch!

Intel's fate as an employer is set in motion, they will fall into place with all other mediocre companies now, such as Motorola, IBM, Tektronics, GE.. they were once great too, but then their visionary founders retired.. just like Intel's just did. ... think about it.

I'm a former employee, If you are dealing with Intel, it's almost always a Win-Win solution.

Resigned years ago. I wish I could comeback, excellent management.

You posters who are so hard-nosed and clear-eyed: Yeah, of course, it's business. So what? Try exercising your sympathy gland if it hasn't totally atrophied. Some of these guys let go will have been smart and hard workers but just in a bad spot on the org chart.

Big companies like Microsoft, Intel and IBM contribute the problem with h1b workers. They complain that there's not enough of them yet they don't invest of American workers who could've done the job. Instead, these cheap h1b workers got all the experience and American workers got nothing. Seriously, if they want to Americans to be competitive, invest on them and hire and train them and not use cheap h1b workers.

pug_str, I aggree w/ you. These US companies should invest time and money to equip/train US worker before their bottom line. This comes from a guy who got my GC thru labor cert.

Intel is really cleaning up its act. After so many years of little to no innovation, they have a clean & crisp product lineup with upgrades rolling in. I think AMD will be following them. Gone are the good days in technology where sloppy and kinda were good enough. As a regular dude, it's always a little unnerving to hear about more loss of jobs, especially as so many more people are involved in the international level.

I think that small bussiness is where it's at though. I can only imagine how much redundancy there is trying to sync 88,000 employees... and obviously they weren't doing such a great job for a while there. With the status Intel has right now, it's not half bad to leave with them on your resume either. You have to count your blessings, you're one of 88,000 leaving... but millions wanted that job to begin with.