Adrian (a.delete@this.acm.org) on June 14, 2022 12:06 pm wrote:
> The best companies publish post-mortems after their great failures. Those are in fact very good PR for a company.
> It is useless to pretend that the failures did not happen, as the customers are already well aware of them.
> On the contrary a detailed post-mortem analysis, explaining all the details of the causes of the failures is
> the best method to restore the confidence of the customers that such failures will not happen again.

Agreed.

> Unfortunately it seems very unlikely that Intel will ever release an explanation of the causes
> of their inability to predict the performance characteristics of their 10 nm process.

You would think that by now a coherent story should have emerged.

It seemingly hasn't.

What does that tell us?

That Intel is good at keeping it private? Strikes me as unlikely.

So the story might be complex. All we see is what looks like noise?

Or could it be so complex that, well, it is beyond comprehension?

As in "mistakes were made, and locally they were evident, and even
at global scale it was evident that 'something huge was wrong', but
regardless of how hard people tried, it was a lost cause" or such?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AOutside_Context_Problem

You know, like "We are Intel, the undisputed leader. What gives?"

Maybe we'll at least get a few business books, trying to explain...