>Although, not so clear now whether it means they're on another course to greatness...
This is the $64,000 question. Intel got out of the memory business when it was clear by 1985 that CPUs were its future. I didn't write x86 because Intel itself wasn't convinced of this; see iAPX 432, i860, Itanium, and StrongARM/Xscale. All failed to give Intel the backup/alternative to x86 that it has repeatedly sought.
It is not an exaggeration to say that Intel has failed, or at least failed to distinguish itself, in every single market it has entered since IBM chose the 8088 forty years ago. Besides the above alternative instructional sets/architectures and flash memory, antivirus (still perhaps the most mystifying move in Intel history), servers/motherboards, and GPUs come to mind. The most successful non-x86 business for Intel is ... Ethernet cards? Meanwhile, it's embarrassed itself with discrete GPUs at least three separate times. A few years ago buying Nvidia would have been a savvy move; now it can no longer do so, and it's not impossible to imagine Nvidia buying Intel in the future.
Even within the one market Intel does dominate, what saved the company 15 years ago amidst Itanic and Pentium 4 was 1) AMD Thunderbird being just as inefficient as Pentium 4 and, more importantly, 2) an Intel Israel skunk works project to improve on the Pentium 3. There is no such out-of-the-blue miracle this time.