Talk:Intel Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Intel Corporation has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

	This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

This article is part of WikiProject Oregon, a comprehensive WikiProject dedicated to articles about topics related to the U.S. state of Oregon. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or join by visiting the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.

[edit] Ramdom Links

Im not sure if there should be so many links to Crap like Evil inside and whatnot.. Looks kinda Stupid -Jman888

[edit] Vacuum Tubes?

Does anyone know if Intel used to produce vacuum tubes? I found an Intel tube in one of my radio's and I wonder if it really was Intel or some other company called Intel. The logo looks like inTel. Maybe it could be added to the article. http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/570/intel12gz.jpg http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/8229/intel26ju.jpg Ikkejw 16:12, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. I'd say all the letters are upper-case, just that the top stroke of the 'T' is above the other letters and runs the whole length of the word. A quick Google search doesn't turn up much except pages about electronics history timelines and a few reviews of those motherboards using tubes to amplify the on-board audio. I'm no historian, but 1968 is just a little late to found a company producing vacuum tubes. And one of the co-founders is the co-inventor of the integrated circuit. I'd put my money on it being a different company.

Imroy 17:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I already thought it was a bit strange, because the radio is from 1956 and Intel was founded in 1968. But still, the original tube could have been replaced by an Intel one. All other tubes are from Philips, there's only one Intel tube. Ikkejw 17:30, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Intel's New Logo

Someone should place Intel's new logo on wikipedia, i'm unsure how or where to get it from though.

It's not their new logo until next week. It's been uploaded to Image:Intel 2006.gif for when they announce the branding change next week.

[edit] Paul Otelinni and IBM x86 win

Someone just added the claim that Paul Otellini was responsible for the original IBM x86 design win. I have never heard that, and I was at Intel for a long time. Certainly Dave House and others were involved? I would say this needs some verification, but I'm not going to delete it for now. Comments? -- Gnetwerker 05:28, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, my wife used to work at Intel and she said Otelinni was a jerk, but she never said anything about him being responsible for winning the IBM x86 design. In fact, I just thought IBM selected off-the-shelf parts to design the PC—I never heard they went to different companies and entertained different designs. — Frecklefoot | Talk 13:49, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Well, not that it matters, but I worked with Paul and in comparison to (e.g.) Craig Barrett, Paul was a nice guy. However, the campaign that resulted in the IBM PC design win was called "Crush" -- this caused some anti-trust worries years later. Bill Pohlman was the engineering manager on the 8086, I believe. This was before my time at Intel (I started in 1985), but I heard the stories. Paul may have been in marketing at the time, but giving him credit is probably not accurate. At some point -- either during this period or later -- Paul was Andy's TA. Don't know whether that is relevant or not. -- Gnetwerker 16:02, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

I work for Intel now, and I know Otellini is the first Intel CEO to not have an engineering background. I believe he has an MBA. So no, I don't think he's responsible for any design wins. That should be edited out.

[edit] Misc

The Intel page is very focused on the x86 CPUs, but what about the different lines in their history such as the i860 etc? -- Bjorn Elenfors

History of Intel from http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa092998.htm#intel
Jay 01:14 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Earl Whetstone was the Sales Engineer that helped get the original IBM deal won for Intel. I believe there would have been a number of senior managers invloved in getting the "design win" as part of the Crush program. So it is hard to know what Paul's role might have been.

[edit] stock price?!

The current stock price should be taken off. Has no real importance, and becomes outdated in literally 2 hours. So why even have it? Maybe the worth of the company in billions might be interesting/useful/more static, but I would say wikipedia is not a listing of Stock Prices.

--Windfinder 15:04, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Intel740?

Where would the Intel740 fit? It's an orphan node right now, I think. If it doesn't fit anywhere, how should we link to it?

See also? It's so tiny, though, it should probably just be deleted. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:17, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Political Content

Deleted inapropriate political content that relates only vaguely to Intel, and from a completely one sided view.

[edit] POV addition

I deleted the below addition by an anon user:

As a christmas gift one year, the staff recieved a box of plasters and a t-shirt, Intel have a very strange policy regarding promotion, when one is doing their current job and want to go to a higher position, they do their new job, but they still recieve their previous salary but only after a period of 1 year will Intel decide if their worth any more money for the new position. The nature of bullying can vary but normaly it's of a shouting and being yelled at kind. A typical scenario is being 2 minutes late, and the manager thinks he/she can shout at the person in front of the rest of the team. www.faceintel.com

It's not backed up by any verifiable information, was inserted in the wrong section, is anecdotable and incredibly poorly written. Disagree? Discuss here. — Frecklefoot | Talk 01:40, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Completely agree. What are 'plasters'? Also, Intel doesn't give Christmas gifts anyway, and has only "holiday" parties (remember lots of staff are of non-Christian religions). Intel does have a confrontive culture (n.b. Constructive Confrontation classes), and I would not call it (historically, at least) family-friendly, but the faceintel.com drivel is just that. -- Gnetwerker 02:14, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Photo of BMW Racing Car

That photo of the car is pretty pointless, also copyrighted, and it interferes with the layout. I suggest that it be removed. -- Gnetwerker 07:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I strongly agree with this. The bit about the Sauber contract should also go. Rather petty bit of information. - Ray 3 February 2006

I also agree and removed it. Denis C. 00:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Antitrust

Isn't that anti-trust stuff repeated twice? Someone should clean that up. P-unit 05:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Espionage

An anon added this para:

"An interesting case of industrial espionage arose in 1995 that involved both Intel and AMD. An Argentine national formerly employed at Intel's plant in Chandler, Arizona was arrested and charged with attempting to sell proprietary secrets to AMD and to certain foreign powers."

I tagged this with {{citeneeded}}, but if we don't get a source quickly, I am inclined to remove it. It doesn't have dates, names, or any details, as well as being unsourced. -- Gnetwerker 21:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

206.114.20.121 22:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, it is obviously for real. Do you have any more recent citations about how the case was disposed? -- Gnetwerker 22:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Nothing really. Apparently, he pleaded guilty, served his time (33 months in federal prison), then fled the country. I find no references to him later than 1996. 206.114.20.121 22:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article Evaluation of Intel

This evaluation was done on this version of Intel at time 6:00 PM PST on April 1, 2006. The evaluation was done by the book.

Criteria:

Well-written: While grammar is not perfect, no spelling errors were observed. Wikilinks appear for the most part to be relevant. The article is nowhere near the level of "brilliant prose," but it is certainly at a level where the writing is clear and readable. There are a few spots ("Like so: 'Intel Core Duo Inside'," "(Note: Intel is usually given credit with Texas Instruments for the almost-simultaneous invention of the microprocessor.)"), but for the most part, the article is written at a good level. A rewrite should not be out of the question.
Factually accurate: The article is not blatantly incorrect, and appears solid in its facts. As always, more references will improve the article's standing in this criterion, but the current revision is at a passing level for Good Article Status. This is not an excuse — more references would be appreciated.
Broad: The article is focused mainly on the history and development of Intel, but also looks at Intel's presence in the world. Although it could certainly use expansion, and is by no means comprehensive, it is decently broad.
Neutrally written: The article has a fair share of weasel words, which is not uncommon for corporation articles. As well, some sentences appear slanted towards an anti-Intel stance ("an attractive target for litigation," "leading to the ability to access wireless internet from a laptop becoming linked in consumers minds to Intel chips"). The section "Diversity" does not read well in its neutrality — it appears to strongly display Intel as supporting diversity through an affirmative action-style initiative.
Stable: Comparing the last 15 edits, no rounding, differences observed center almost entirely around inserting references into the article, disambiguating links, and updating statistics. No major edits or changes to structure are evident. There were two reverts of vandalism in the last 15 edits.
Well-referenced: All references appear reputable. A good number of them are from corporate entities (Apple, Intel), but they do not appear damaging to the NPOV of the article.
Images: All images are tagged. Most are fair use. One, Image:Intel-logo.svg, is marked for copyvio, although I don't see any such problem as the file is correctly tagged. If Featured Article status is pursued, that image's fair use rationale should be reexamined.

Summary:

Well-written: Pass
Factually accurate: Pass
Broad: Pass
Neutrally written: Fail
Stable: Pass
Well-referenced: Pass
Images: Pass

Congratulations. - CorbinSimpson 02:07, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion for an edit

The antitrust section is divided in two... if one were to edit this, that's the best place to start.

[edit] Traitorous Eight

No one of the Traitorous Eight was involved in founding AMD. The "Traitorous Eight" left Shockley and went to Fairchild around 1957. AMD was, however, one of the Fairchildren, like National Semiconductor, which were founded about ten years later, in the late '60s.

[edit] More antitrust

Intel has not "refuted" AMD's antitrust claims. To me that implies that they have successfully proved that they are false. A better word would be "rebuffed". The veracity of the claims will be determined in a trial.

[edit] Competition and Antitrust

Does anyone have a source for the sentence "The only major competitor to Intel on the x86 processor market is Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), with which Intel has had full cross-licensing agreements since 1976: each partner can use the other's patented technological innovations without charge.". The only agreement I'm aware of is the one from 2001, which supercedes older agreements: http://contracts.corporate.findlaw.com/agreements/amd/intel.license.2001.01.01.html

There is some talk of royalties in the agreement, so it's hardly without charge. I have some recollection of an older ageement which only covers x86 extensions and is royalty-free, but I don't have a source so I'm wondering if anyone knows of the agreement I'm talking about. -85.157.199.19 13:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Intel and the IBM PC2

Anybody notice how every sentence ends in an exclaimation mark in the part "# # 1.4 Intel and the IBM PC2"? They aren't necessary and they're annoying to look at.

Removed. Probably vandalism that nobody bothered to fix. — Aluvus ^t/c 23:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Early Pentium models with math errors.

Why isn't there any mention of the models which apparently had problems computing answers with long decimal answers? These were in the early Pentium 1 timeframe, though I don't know the model designation details.

No doubt the actual effect was overplayed in the exuberant web forums of the time, but I cannot recall any other computer models that had demonstrable serious basic math errors.

If I recall the public perception correctly, it intersected with the (proven successful) Intel Inside campaign to humorous effect. ( "Skulls & CrossBones inside, How many Pentium Engineers does it take to change a lightbulb? 6.99167")

Examples of humor of the day: http://www.samurajdata.se/~cj/funny/html/pentium.html

This appears to give the detail hungry types a place to start: http://boole.stanford.edu/pub/PENTIUM/bugs

Now this has been identified, it stands as an Error of Omission, which currently artificially bolsters the company's reputation by omitting what may be their single largest mistake. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TaoPhoenix (talk • contribs).

I took a stab at it. Feel free to improve. -- Gnetwerker 23:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] In External Links

The link titled "Intel Corp Company Profile and News Archive" Should be removed, it adds nothing more to what is provided in the yahoo link, and it is for a paid service, if there is agreement i can go ahead and remove it. Geneticflyer 14:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC) Geneticflyer

Looks like linkspam, kill it with fire. — Aluvus ^t/c 23:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I have now removed both that link and the "Asus Reviews" link above it. Since this article is not about Asus, and the link wouldn't have been a good inclusion even if it were. — Aluvus ^t/c 15:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] bias in opening paragraph

i think that the opening paragraph reads like PR from intel's site. i can't come up with anything to replace it at the moment, but i hope someone can come up with something better --Scott w 23:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The article in general is a POS, from both a coverage and a writing perspective. And I say that given that I've done a good bit of the writing. Nonetheless, I took a stab at the lead, which was, as you pointed out, both glossy and uninformative. See if you like my take better. -- Gnetwerker 06:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I made an attempt at improving the lead, and hopefully the changes were good ones. I felt that the phrase "advanced chip design capability with a leading-edge manufacturing capability" was particularly suspect. Fedallah 07:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not changing it back, but with respect, I think your edit makes things worse rather than better. Whatever one feels about Intel, it is both one of the most advanced designers of semiconductors, and one of the most advanced manufacturers of them, regularly advancing the state of the art in both fields. To not say so is, in my opinion, POV by omission, and is like calling Starbucks "a coffee shop in Seattle" -- true but misleading. On a more petty note, I made an effort to not start the second sentence with "Intel". Having a para in which every sentence starts with the name of the subject is both pointless and bad style. I'll let others hack at this for a while, and come back and tackle it another time, if no one else does in the meantime. -- Gnetwerker 07:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

True, and I can agree with that. I'll revert it. I had similar concerns while editing but wanted to see what everyone else thought. Agreed on the subject/pronoun usage, too.Fedallah 07:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I should also be clear: my prose (though that section was cut-n-pasted from before) is not sacrosanct, or even good. That sentence is defintely weak. I may have been too harsh above -- please feel free to rewrite, I just think the point needs to be made. -- Gnetwerker 07:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inside Motto

I have had several relatives that have worked for these copyright infrigers, apperently ther inside motto is "Steal with Pride." HHS.student

[edit] Location Section

As Intel has major locations in multiple locations, mostly around the US and Israel to my knowledge, I think a relevant section noting major locations is in order. I have not done a lot of work on this article, so I will not intervene. If anyone is up for it, I support the edit. --יהושועEric 09:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Something like the Advanced Micro Devices#Production and fabrication section for AMD? I actually read an article in BBC indicating that Intel has major factories in China. [1] Intel opened a new $2.5 billion factory, increasing the total to $4 billion. Not sure about the investment in other countries. Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 06:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The article should say 'most personal computers'

x86-processors are used in almost every personal computer you can buy on todays market, so I really think it should say 'most personal computers', not 'many'. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.217.201.78 (talk) 20:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

I concur. Even Apple has ditched PowerPC and has gone over to the wild and crazy Intel architecture (I still find it amazing that even the most advanced Intel chips wake up thinking they're a 8086 until protected mode is activated). The vast majority of deployed personal computers are on the Intel x86 architecture. --Coolcaesar 01:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Importance of Quote?

The quotes section (added 5 April 2007 by 207.255.199.187) mentioning visas seems to be an unimportant, irrelevant political statement. I think it should be removed, but I don't know what to do (as I would like to assume good faith in accordance with Help:Reverting and WP:AGF). Nightspark 03:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where are the factories?

The article should mention where Intel manufactures. Do they use their own factories or do they contract out the manufacturing? AxelBoldt 07:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../i/n/t/Talk%7EIntel_Corporation_df4d.html"