"Intel dominates the market for chips that power desktop PCs." It has a bit over 85% market share, in a two-player market. Furthermore, because they didn't say CPU like they should have, they're technically inaccurate. Intel network PHYs don't "dominant" consumer boards, last I checked.
"demand for server chips is growing, propelled by the profusion of internet-connected gizmos, from smartphones to cars." Really? IoT is the catalyst?
"missed the arrival of the smartphone" Unfair and reductive. Intel didn't "miss" the smartphone: it saw it coming, didn't have a product that fit, looked at the margins, and didn't think it was worth investing. That probably wasn't a bad move in hindsight.
"GPUs, specialised chips designed for video-game graphics" That tortures the definition of a different microarchitecture.
"And its manufacturing technology, which used to advance with such metronomic regularity that Intel called its business plan “tick-tock”"
This was it for me. Intel literally moved to the tick-tock cadency because Moore's Law was slowing down. Before, it was just an unending stream of process shrinks. Tick-tock accepted that there was now time for an entire microarchitecture update between process shrinks.
"The firm’s latest generation of products, built on its “ten nanometre” manufacturing process" Also, since when do we air quote measurements?