Glesinger is laying off the sales and R&D force he envisioned.
To your questions:
-Are they on track? From everything I've read they're behind and the clock is running out quickly. Intel can't even build a stable product right now and they're about to try and sweep it under the rug. But the concern is meeting some hand-wavy marketing goal?
- The US needs US foundry because of national security interests. That's why the money is there. If foundry isn't/wasn't a strategy Intel has pursued then we're way too far down this path than compared to the node unicorn.
We already know the answers to these questions, because Intel has fallen flat on its face for the last 3 years. I'll give Gelsinger some level of time to make changes, but he didn't put Intel on the right path after his first year: which is more than enough time. And if it's not, then Intel is a failure not worth chasing because it's all rot at the core.
Look at what Gelsinger did at VMware. Nothing other than create, as Sir Topham Hatt says: "Confusion and delay!". They brought about and chased dumpster fire product lines for years and Gelsinger put them on the path to stagnate and get swept up into Broadcom's financial shell game.
You're giving Gelsinger a lot of credit for making zero notable improvements in Intel. And they are where they are right now because of the choices Gelsinger made while he's been in the seat. I'm sorry but sunk cost fallacy isn't a great strategy for Intel right now.