Tweet
I don't know where management stands here.
But it would seem rather vacant.
"Attitude reflects leadership"
I personally do not believe that management that looks at the bottom line and drives it to the floor at all costs will end up just that....at the floor. The whole business goes down the tubes if you're not in it for more than just money.
And management that's in it just for money is useless management. All they accomplish is driving costs down, and not driving profits up.
The reason nVidia is the ultralith that it is now is because of the upper managerial vision that it retained up until recently.
I at one point contributed to their drivers for a summer, and I heard over and over "We're about 30 minutes from going bankrupt". This was when they were designing the original GeForce architecture. 30 minutes, 30 minutes, 30 MINUTES from BEING GONE.
The attitude was, ok the deadline is up, it's time to ship. Here's what we got, we wanted this, but that's just too bad we're going to ship it now and fix it in the next core or our 30 minutes will be up.
Now, they enjoy over half of the entire graphics marketshare and console penetration. Now ATI has the same "ship it now it's what we got" attitude and look where it's taking them....
Now look at Parhelia. "We need a focused ion beam to help with prototype cores" "no it costs too much"
wtf? nVidia had a focused ion beam right before they got TNT out the door...back in the RIVA 128 days!!! It cost them about %20 of their capital that year, but they were able to execute releases about 2x as fast because of it. They were spending money on equipment that Matrox did not have, BACK WHEN MATROX HAD A LARGER MARKETSHARE.
Let's take this philosophy to 3dfx, who had the same attitude. One engineer I had spoken to said his requests for additional computing power were met with "when we get a lead on the revenues we'll get that"
I'm saying, the bottom line is NOT WHAT BUSINESS IS ABOUT. I don't care what anyone says, they're WRONG. You need to get in step with your employees and trust what they say.
Ahh heck, by now probably the Pitou is thrown out the door. Not that anyone in Matrox is going to speak out, but has Matrox ever taken the time to determine block failure rate on Parhelia? nVidia and ATI do, 3dfx never did I know that for a fact. I wonder how much of basic chipmaking practice Matrox even HAS GOING right now. Obviously they are missing quite a bit of it.
Matrox Parhelia has been a qualifiable failure. It is so disgusting to see a design that was concocted ahead of nVidia's by over a year end up in the toilet.
But it would seem rather vacant.
"Attitude reflects leadership"
I personally do not believe that management that looks at the bottom line and drives it to the floor at all costs will end up just that....at the floor. The whole business goes down the tubes if you're not in it for more than just money.
And management that's in it just for money is useless management. All they accomplish is driving costs down, and not driving profits up.
The reason nVidia is the ultralith that it is now is because of the upper managerial vision that it retained up until recently.
I at one point contributed to their drivers for a summer, and I heard over and over "We're about 30 minutes from going bankrupt". This was when they were designing the original GeForce architecture. 30 minutes, 30 minutes, 30 MINUTES from BEING GONE.
The attitude was, ok the deadline is up, it's time to ship. Here's what we got, we wanted this, but that's just too bad we're going to ship it now and fix it in the next core or our 30 minutes will be up.
Now, they enjoy over half of the entire graphics marketshare and console penetration. Now ATI has the same "ship it now it's what we got" attitude and look where it's taking them....
Now look at Parhelia. "We need a focused ion beam to help with prototype cores" "no it costs too much"
wtf? nVidia had a focused ion beam right before they got TNT out the door...back in the RIVA 128 days!!! It cost them about %20 of their capital that year, but they were able to execute releases about 2x as fast because of it. They were spending money on equipment that Matrox did not have, BACK WHEN MATROX HAD A LARGER MARKETSHARE.
Let's take this philosophy to 3dfx, who had the same attitude. One engineer I had spoken to said his requests for additional computing power were met with "when we get a lead on the revenues we'll get that"
I'm saying, the bottom line is NOT WHAT BUSINESS IS ABOUT. I don't care what anyone says, they're WRONG. You need to get in step with your employees and trust what they say.
Ahh heck, by now probably the Pitou is thrown out the door. Not that anyone in Matrox is going to speak out, but has Matrox ever taken the time to determine block failure rate on Parhelia? nVidia and ATI do, 3dfx never did I know that for a fact. I wonder how much of basic chipmaking practice Matrox even HAS GOING right now. Obviously they are missing quite a bit of it.
Matrox Parhelia has been a qualifiable failure. It is so disgusting to see a design that was concocted ahead of nVidia's by over a year end up in the toilet.
EMPLOYEE
Comment