You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
IMO, strategy is important but execution and achieved goals on time are even more critical. If my memory is correct, about 15~20 years ago, tsmc studied how to compete with IDM model and used IBM as example then, it was found the in-house IPs were strong binding power and hard to be broken (get/port foundry orders). Then tsmc built and expanded the design service function to lower the barrier and were very successful. The same for advanced package technology investment. All of them were more than 10 years strategy and executions. How long the investor will give the time for intel?
I heard Dr. Morris Chang's autobiography part 2 will debut soon. Look forward to seeing the history at that time.
IMO, strategy is important but execution and achieved goals on time are even more critical. If my memory is correct, about 15~20 years ago, tsmc studied how to compete with IDM model and used IBM as example then, it was found the in-house IPs were strong binding power and hard to be broken (get/port foundry orders). Then tsmc built and expanded the design service function to lower the barrier and were very successful. The same for advanced package technology investment. All of them were more than 10 years strategy and executions. How long the investor will give the time for intel?
I heard Dr. Morris Chang's autobiography part 2 will debut soon. Look forward to seeing the history at that time.
Thanks. No one will tell you the whole story, but the parts he wants you to know. But if we can read between the lines, there are always lots of insights. I would rather think it positively.
