Fabless scenario will not happen, ever.
One simple reason that similarly to aeronautics chip manufactures are critical industries for US.
US government will not let either one die.
One simple reason that similarly to aeronautics chip manufactures are critical industries for US.
US government will not let either one die.
This isn’t Intel’s shareholders’ problem. Split the businesses. If the U.S. wants to bail out Intel’s fabs, let them. (Though a better strategy would be a general subsidy for anyone building fabs in America, which should be a thing.)
Splitting out the fab business and letting it run into the red however could incentivize the government to save the fabs and the jobs with billions of bailout money while the other Intel continues to rake in money with TSMC chips.
The level of computerization and networking is going up in the military so the needs will only increase. Intel's CONUS fabs are a national security concern.
> We don't need small nodes for military/aero chips. It would suffice to keep some old fabs running to secure supply.
What? How do you think the military works, via smoke signals? They need computer, a LOT of computers to operate day to day. And that PCs for just boring clerk work. Not to mention the idea that old chips would somehow be good enough to keep up technologically, both military and economically.
> The US needs fabs but they don't need Intel as a company.
Oh yeah? They will just a walk a engineer corps to a fab and have them press big red manufacture button few million times to make enough chips right? Can't be more difficult than that...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_...
So there won't be any electronics manufacturing to ban at all, but it leaves the US in the same place.