Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Intel Exec Pat Gelsinger Leaves for EMC

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 15 comments

Reports today say Intel Executive Paul Gelsinger will leave the company amid a massive reorganization of management.

NYT today reports that changes in management at Intel will see senior vice president and co-general manager of the company's Digital Enterprise Group, Pat Gelsinger, depart following 30 years of service.

Despite being one of the longest-serving execs at Intel, what's interesting is not what he's leaving but what's he's leaving for. ComputerWorld reports that Gelsinger is heading for storage vendor EMC. An anonymous EMC spokesperson said that he would fill the position of president and chief operating officer for the company's information infrastructure product portfolio.

Sources also said that head of sales and marketing Sean Maloney is said to be taking on a larger role, taking control of all of Intel’s major chip businesses, including its PC, graphics and server chips.

Read more here.

Discuss
Display all 15 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 1 Hide
    doomtomb , September 14, 2009 4:35 PM
    Ok, cool, I guess. I'd be lying if I said I knew who this guy was or really cared where he works.
  • 1 Hide
    FlayerSlayer , September 14, 2009 4:37 PM
    I think the point is more that an Intel exec is leaving for EMC, rather than who he actually is. But I'm afraid I don't really have any strong feelings for this.
  • 3 Hide
    Andraxxus , September 14, 2009 4:38 PM
    Let's hope Maloney ain't full of baloney.
  • 0 Hide
    7amood , September 14, 2009 4:48 PM
    how much do you think his salary was as a 10-years Intel executive??
    i wonder/hope it was worth his 10 years of service.
  • 0 Hide
    endif , September 14, 2009 5:29 PM
    EMC sucks. Dell's Equallogic is a much better SAN. Hopefully he will make some improvements over there.
  • 0 Hide
    virtualban , September 14, 2009 5:29 PM
    He was not caught with Arm based netbook or something, was he?
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , September 14, 2009 5:37 PM
    While other people work twice as hard as him,with less then a tenth of his wage!
  • 0 Hide
    hellwig , September 14, 2009 5:40 PM
    Moves like this will only strengthen Wall Street's argument that excessive and unconditional executive bonuses are necessary to keep top executive talent. Obviously Intel couldn't offer up enough incentive to keep this man. However, I also heard the regional head-honcho in Rio Rancho, NM has a cube on the main floor with other average employees, so I don't think Intel is too big on perks to begin with.
  • 3 Hide
    Anonymous , September 14, 2009 5:41 PM
    I'm dismayed that one of our best engineering-focused managers is leaving so that Intel can continue to be run by sales and marketing folks and that an accountant is taking over the manufacturing. You can't save your way to success, and you can't market your way to success if the products aren't there.
  • 0 Hide
    ailgatrat , September 14, 2009 6:45 PM
    7amoodhow much do you think his salary was as a 10-years Intel executive??i wonder/hope it was worth his 10 years of service.


    I think the article said 30 years. Kind of sucks that Intel decided that 30 years of dedication weren't worth keeping around. But then, he now has the chance to run things, "his way". That sounds like a much better reason to move on to me.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , September 14, 2009 7:26 PM
    Hellwig: Stop being such a fascist. The year Reagan took office, the average CEO salary was 40x the average employee salary at the same company, now it's about 500x the average employee salary. It's not "necessary", the general population is just being looted.

    Case in point: The banks were bailed out between Bush/Obama with about $200,000 per taxpayer. Now, they're still in deep shit, and so are the taxpayers. Since the majority of taxpayers DON'T ACTUALLY OWE $200,O00, had it just been given directly to us, we could've payed off all of our personal debt, and went out and bought a brand new American car, and otherwise stimulated the fuck out of the economy, but the fascists and their supporters(like Hellwig) feel that's wrong. Idiots.
  • 0 Hide
    JohnnyLucky , September 14, 2009 7:38 PM
    With 30 years of service I wonder if he had some sort of retirement program or investments program at Intel and took advantage of it.
  • -1 Hide
    idisarmu , September 14, 2009 8:51 PM
    truth_genius_Hellwig: Stop being such a fascist. The year Reagan took office, the average CEO salary was 40x the average employee salary at the same company, now it's about 500x the average employee salary. It's not "necessary", the general population is just being looted.Case in point: The banks were bailed out between Bush/Obama with about $200,000 per taxpayer. Now, they're still in deep shit, and so are the taxpayers. Since the majority of taxpayers DON'T ACTUALLY OWE $200,O00, had it just been given directly to us, we could've payed off all of our personal debt, and went out and bought a brand new American car, and otherwise stimulated the fuck out of the economy, but the fascists and their supporters(like Hellwig) feel that's wrong. Idiots.


    So you are saying that Americans on average owe less than 200k and that the bank wasted >50k per taxpayer- leaving the taxpayers and banks still in deep sh1t? I don't buy that argument for some reason.

    I don't know if you were against or for high CEO salaries, but it makes perfect sense to me to have high CEO salaries. Many CEOs gave up their entire lives in order to advance in the company. They may be rich... but they probably neglected their family and friends and thus don't have very good relations with them- that wouldn't be fun to deal with I'm guessing.
  • 0 Hide
    flinxsl , September 19, 2009 4:00 AM
    hmm, working for intel looking less and less attractive
  • 0 Hide
    flinxsl , September 19, 2009 4:00 AM
    hmm, working for intel now looking less and less attractive