ARM
Arm Holdings plc
stock NASDAQ ADR

I do think it's not comparable, sadly.
Purely the difference between x86 and ARM architectures completely redefines the useability of these devices, not to mention the handhelds' ecosystem contexts.
For most users, the switch is whatever they feel like it should be. The home console, or a handheld they play anywhere without a second's thought of using on a TV.
Compare that to this Xbox handheld, which isn't that. It's a system intended to be a "good enough" drop-in for a real console or PC, with likely a battery life, noise, and temperature discomfort level to match that.
The switch is the definitive experience, whereas this handheld is a niche.
I say that as someone who dislikes nintendo games, and thus have sold my switch, but the two handhelds aren't really even in the same market sadly. The sales numbers won't compare, and this is just Microsoft's way of trying to ensure parity with the convenience offerings of other platforms, namely SteamOS, so they don't lose too much market share in droves.

I'm trying to get out of everything ... I want a pile of cash available for the next sell off which is coming any day ... I'm stuck in ARM trade right now and on the sell off I will buy HOOD and VST and ride them back up which I traded last week and cashed out

I'm amazed you say google has fallen behind, when Intel has fallen behind for well over a decade.
They've lost to TSMC, not just in manufacturing capabilities, but in technology. They're quite far behind TSMC.
They're losing market share to AMD in CPUs.
They're losing in x86 to ARM. In terms of efficiencies.
They lost on mobile phones when Intel chips weren't on iPhones
They've missed out completely in the AI boom to Nvidia.
Their big bet on capturing customers with their foundry business is failing thus far.
I mean, what are they doing right *right now* compared to their competitors? Yes, they will still sell product, they won't go to 0 any time soon. But to outperform?
Google, on the other hand were very much caught off guard. But they've very much caught up and leading the AI models against OpenAI and Anthropic.
They're integrating Gemini into their products, a lot of which have +2Billion users. Google search has, I think 5 Billion users.
Search revenue continues to grow in double digits
YouTube continues to grow in double digits at around 13-14%
Google Cloud growing +29%
Waymo is scaling up exponentially, last earnings call was 250,000 weekly paid rides.
AI mode and AI Shopping for Google search rolling out as of the latest Google I/O in USA.
I just can't see how Intel could ever be compared favourably to Google.

> The 50% gross margin requirement is much more about Intel's product roadmap decisions than incentives. I suspect this is really the "No More Lunar Lakes" mandate.
While I largely agree that it is forward looking aspirational goal for future product lines I also think that this will include current product lines. You have to think about it from Lip-Bu Tans perspective.
He has two choices:
1. Continuing losing market share slowly while having low margins. I.e. same direction as before.
2. Making a decisive cut. Losing market share more quickly but with healthy margins.
\#1 is not much of a narrative he can sell as the new CEO. What even did change? Why was he necessary?
\#2 is a much better story. He can blame it on the mismanagement of the previous CEO. He can point to all the external forces of changing markets and competitors beyond AMD; ARM, HPC spend on AI-GPUs etc.
Intel needs to change anyway. The aforementioned rebates can not continue for ever. He is in charge now and the best time to end that is now.
Intel is going to transition like IBM did. IBMs fall from grace was hard but hardly anybody sees IBM as a failure now. They focused on their strengths and now have a healthy business. So what if it is not as massive anymore? The company is solid. Better than dragging on barely surviving sadly wishing for days gone by.

> The damage that LNL will do to their margins dwarfs their marketing incentives. I suspect it was designed as a low-margin, low-volume halo product. But Intel was forced to expand its use case as it's their only Copilot + PC part until 18A / PTL which makes me think that the PTL internal roadmap went astray. That ARL notebook does not meet this requirement despite launching in Jan 2025 also suggests to me that something went wrong with that part of the roadmap too.
That is good point. They mentioned that in the article. But it does not take away from the fact that every part of the business needs to become healthy or go on the chopping block.
I guess what do I know. But LBT is much less emotional about intel itself and I assume he has no issues pursuing healthy business strategies even if that means intel has to change.