2. Unless we have actual knowledge from the inside of intels economics division, none of us are qualified to conclude how intel can maximize profits from a product line. given supply & demand, intels share of that cake plus future estimates may well paint a picture where it is profitable to postpone the next 'great thing'.
Point is, we do not know!
We don't know specifics but we do know generalities.
Just because we don't know precisely how the climate and weather works doesn't mean we can't talk about the summer months being warmer than the winter months.
Some things can be spoken to, and about, despite the long list of known unknowns we can catalogue on the subject topic. Economic policy is one of those, along with the weather.
Consider that in a matter of speaking what you say has always been true.
Why is node cadence on a 2 yr pace instead of a 2 month pace? It isn't because of technology barriers, purely economic. Given the cost to develop a new node, it must be left in production running the bulk of your chip volume for at least 2yrs in order for it to make financial sense to develop the node in the first place.
Anything that has a non-zero timeline could be said to be "delayed to increase profitability".
You aren't really saying anything new in your post, it goes without saying that timelines exist based on an effort to minimize cost and enhance profitability.
But IB-E's timeline really has nothing to do with the desktop demand, it depends entirely on server demand. If IB-E is being delayed it is only because the IB-based Xeons are being delayed.
But in a manner of speaking each and every delay that has ever occurred in the history of mankind's business ventures can be said to have occurred for financial reasons, because someone somewhere decided to not spend a billion dollars to fix it in a day when they surmised they could spend $10m and fix it in 90 or 100 days.
Companies that operate with good sense tend to be profitable for a reason, financial smarts.
Facebook
Twitter