Basic point seems sound, analysis slightly off.

> Interestingly, Intel still reached new highs for a decade after missing mobile before it all collapsed

That's because their problems weren't due to missing mobile but rather taking too much risk on a fab tech transition that they then fumbled. This put them permanently behind and they were unable to catch up.

> Amazon’s AWS is predicated on the idea of commoditized infrastructure at scale where price is the priority

Since when does AWS compete on price? AWS is predicated on the idea of many proprietary services running on commodity hardware, and charging high prices for the privilege of not spending time on sysadmin work.

▲

gmays 3 days ago | parent [-]

OP here, good points.

Your comment on Intel is correct, but it's also true that TSMC could invest billions into advanced fabs because Apple gave them a huge guaranteed demand base. Intel didn’t have the same economic flywheel since PCs/servers were flat or declinig.

That's a good clarification on Amazon, running on commodity hardware with competitive pricing != competing on price alone. It would have been better to clarify this difference when pointing out that they're trying the same commodity approach in AI.

	▲	carlhjerpe 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Amazon is doing exactly everything except competing on price and they don't run commodity hardware either. They're even developing their own chips. Sure they have "commodity" GPUs and CPUs in some lineups, but they also have Graviton. If you get something this mundane wrong from the start I don't know how I could trust anything else from the post either.