ir0×0r

Well, on I go with the beating of the dead horse. Honestly, I don’t really think it’s dead yet and we haven’t really even begun to see the full impact.

I don’t want to take anything away from the accomplishments of Mr. Barrett and his position as Intel’s Chairman of the Board. He’s been around for a long, long, long time and anyone who can manage that deserves our respect and he certainly has mine.

However, his comments to the WSJ, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124242845507325429.html, boggle the imagination and makes one wonder if he has actually read any of the coverage or comments from the EC at all.

“Mr. Barrett shakes his head and says, “The antitrust rules and regulations seem designed for a different era. When you look at high-tech companies, with the high R&D budgets, specialization and market creation they need to hold their big market shares…”

In the case of CPU high-tech companies, there are apparently three now, AMD, Intel and the mouse in Intel’s pocket.

“And how do you reconcile European regulators, who don’t believe that any company should have more than 50% market share — even a market that company created — with the way we operate here? Of course, now it seems as if our Justice Department is preparing to march in lock-step behind Europe. In the end, all they are going to do is create barriers to companies growing, entering into new markets, and bringing new technologies into those markets. And when we stop being the land of opportunity, all of those smart immigrant kids getting their Ph.D.s here are going to start heading home after they graduate. Then watch what happens to our competitiveness.”

I’m truly at a loss for words. This has to the stupidest most uninformed thing I have ever heard anyone say. Mr. Barrett gets the stupidest person of the day award for that. It also qualifies him to be in the running for the stupidest person of the year- the winner to be chosen around Xmas time.

Think about this. He’s saying that having one giant company is better for smaller emerging companies than several large companies. WTF? It’s BECAUSE of the way Intel operates that the EC thinks things need to change and has nothing to do with Intel’s actual market share. As any first year law student could tell you, market share is simply a warning sign, not a definition of a monopoly.

It is specifically the actions of Intel which have retarded opportunity and he has the most impressive set of blinders I’ve ever seen to miss it.

The only thing I can think of is that Intel’s legal team thought it easier to just let him prattle on in what is obviously a delusional world simply because he’s leaving today.

The WSJ lays out Barrett’s Laws. These laws are fantastic and you should definitely read them for the sheer comedic value. Move over John Madden, http://budurl.com/e47g, Craig Barrett is on the scene and making you look like the next star rocket scientist for NASA. Sheesh.

My personal favorite is

“- When something works, don’t re-invent it, reproduce it . Perhaps Mr. Barrett’s greatest contribution to the semiconductor industry was the concept of “Copy Exactly,” the absolutely exact reproduction of successful existing practices and facilities in other locations.”

Yep, right from the top, no mistaking it, have to be blind to miss it and you heard it straight from the horse’s mouth. Intel has been copying AMD as directed by Craig Barrett. He actually got the idea from McDonald’s which explains why when Intel copies AMD you get the same thing but it hits the market like a sloppy turd.

Ok, that might be a bit much, the Core2 was very good. But hey, I like a McRib every now and then myself. I guess no one is perfect.

ir0x0r Uncategorized