Intel

[Gianni]

Legal challenges mount for Intel

Ciao
Gianni

[Toasty]

Re: Intel

I'm really hoping AMD FUBAR's so bad someday they shrivel up and blow away.

OMG! They're making money and we're not! In a capitalist society nonetheless! OMG !!

ROFLMAO @ AMD!

[Topcat]

Re: Intel

Leave it to Obama..... Intel didn't get where they are by making junk hardware. Remember back in the K5 and K6 days, the comperable Intel CPU was rock solid, while its AMD counterpart (k5 and K6) were flaky and miserably unstable.... AMD made leaps and bounds with the K7 and newer CPU's, actually giving Intel a run for their money.....which forced Intel to improve their CPU bases and design new products. No, I don't want AMD to wither away and die. Had it not been for AMD, Intel would have been happy with is all running 233MMX CPU's and charging a premium for them, we need AMD if for nothing more than a competitor to keep Intel on their toes..... I dont see where the anti-trust is coming from, software today will function on both AMD and Intel platforms (unlike the MS anti-trust suit). MS's anti-trust suit was primarily over internet explorer versus netscape, where MS was found to be deliberately creating porting issues which made netscape not run on windows properly, and embedding IE into the OS in a non-removable way.

The Intel anti-trust is frivolous....I'm ashamed my tax dollars are paying for this..... I guess it's one more step to socialism, Obama has already taken over GM, and now they're after Intel...

[dood]

Re: Intel

I'm really hoping AMD FUBAR's so bad someday they shrivel up and blow away.

OMG! They're making money and we're not! In a capitalist society nonetheless! OMG !!

ROFLMAO @ AMD!

But I suppose you supported the lawsuits against Microsoft?

[Toasty]

Re: Intel

Which one(s)?

Yes, I agree on competition being healthy, and AMD does provide that. It just seems they are the whiny kid who has gone to Dad to get the big brother punished because he won't share his toys. They're going to tie Intel up in legal and political strategizing for a year or more. Then we'll all be crying because the next several series of chips costs 15% more. We'll never really see the cost increase and happily go on paying the fare. The suit will not benefit us, the consumer. It will benefits the corporations.

It reeks of the tobacco suit and its outcome. Yes tobacco lied. Yes the health people got their judgment. Yes tobacco had/has to pay billion$ because of that. But guess what. Beer went up 3% a can. As did cheese and pretzels and whatever else the blind/hidden parents of the tobacco companies produce. Nobody looks at that. Just run around saying "That'll teach them to lie to us!". Yeah. Okay. MORONS

I'd really like to see what the underlying basis is for this suit. What have they done that TI, HP, GE, GM, or any of the mega corporations not done in some way before?

[370forlife]

Re: Intel

If I recall, Intel has brought many frivolous lawsuits against AMD too.

[ratdude747]

Re: Intel

what im pissed about is how microshit made a reqriurement for xp ulcpc being INTEL atom. not AMD geode, INTEL only. i bet thats what this was about; using power to to sign a deal with another leader to make one giant monopoly. since all the netbooks i saw were intel other than the OLPC XO-1 and XO-2.

if thats the reasoning, then AMD has a case. And if so, then i think AMD can win, its obvious.

[linuxguru]

Re: Intel

It's great to have AMD around and applying competitive pressure on Intel - we'd never have got quad-core 2+ GHz CPUs below $100 in an Intel-only ecosystem, for sure. I don't know if anybody remembers the days of the Intel P200/MMX at $800 or so for the CPU alone.

Intel *has* been anti-competitive, especially in handing out special rebates and promotional dollars to companies that use only Intel CPUs. As long they provided the rebates to *any* customer who met their purchase thresholds, there's no case. However, if they insist on exclusive purchases to qualify for rebates, they're liable under the Sherman Antitrust Act for damages.

The provisions of the Antitrust Act itself are open to debate, but as long as it exists on the statutes, Intel and everybody else (IBM in the past, AT&T, Micro$oft, ...) is bound to follow it in letter and spirit, with no exceptions.

Intel has also engaged in frivolous IP litigation against AMD, Via and others, most of which were thrown out. Thay also got spanked by Fairchild, Transmeta and recently by the University of Wisconsin for unlawfully stealing IP that they used in various products, including the Core 2 line of CPUs, and have been ordered to pay damages. Karma is a bitch, ain't it?

[gonzo0815]

Re: Intel

We should be greatful to AMD for not giving up their business. If AMD werent there, we would now are facing 2.4ghz P4 systems burning 120w+ with 128MB RDRAM for a premium price tag.
So no DDR RAM, no DDR2 RAM, no DDR3 RAM for cheap, but expensive RDRAM to lets put even more money to Intel (well, they cleverly bought some shares from RDRAM patent before going public with it). Not to speak abouth integrated memory controlers......now with I7 after several years intel does it. Not to speak abouth core2d, the whole new low frequency cpu series....nothing would be there. It was K7 then K8 wich forced Intel do get creative again.

I do neither love Intel nor AMD, VIA etc. and neither do they love you or want give you anything more for the bucks then competition forces them to do so; but they all played a role in giving me as informed consumer the choices.

And honestly, i made use of this choic. I always informed me and bought, what i thought would be the most interesting platform. And i got them all stable.
But as usual, most people are lazy, whining bitches and do not want to inform and learn abouth the products they where offered. The one thing they are afraid is going of the mainstream wich i think is ASUS, INTEL, WIndows for many so called profesional.
Today may be INTEL, DELL WINDOWS.

It is normal, for any businessmen to try to get a oligopol if not an monopol. It was even with VIA, then Nvidia with the Nforce k7 chips wich supressed motherboard producer from using more inovative chip sets like ULI and SIS (for the AMD platforms at that time...)when they where clearly the better option.

And for sure, Intel has always tried to eliminate any competition in the same way as MS has done it with any competing OS. When a business is getting in the milion and billion $ range, it simply gets dirty.
If you sell your soul to a vendor, the marketing proaganda war has got you. There is no honesty nor any moral in information & desinformation war called marketing.
I do flipflop my decision with each new system and buy what gives me the best bang for the bucks. And that is the only way, to kepp a healthy economic with good competition. But it is not the lazy`s "fanboy" way of live.

[Gianni]

Re: Intel

Here another interesting article about Intel and AMD.

Ciao
Gianni

[Agent24]

Re: Intel

I only buy AMD.

Sure they aren't the fastest (currently) but they are a truckload of money cheaper.

That and they're not Intel.

[weirdlookinguy]

Re: Intel

Intel is tits (typing from a C2D machine).

Also, ratdude, really? Do you have an article or some sort of proof for your claims that MS required netbooks to have Intel processors or did you just go to Fry's and go "oh lolz look all these netbooks have Intel processors AND XP, therefore Microsoft is clearly a piece of shit and trying to monopolize"?

[ratdude747]

Re: Intel

http://pcworld.about.com/od/xp/Micro...-Through-2.htm

thats where i read it.

[washu]

Re: Intel

There are netbooks with Via CPUs and legal XP on them. The Lenovo IdeaPad S12 is an example. So an Intel CPU is not required by MS for netbooks.

AMD has the Sempron 200U for netbooks, but I haven't seen any with that CPU yet.

[toastygoodness]

Re: Intel

Intel is tits (typing from a C2D machine).

Also, ratdude, really? Do you have an article or some sort of proof for your claims that MS required netbooks to have Intel processors or did you just go to Fry's and go "oh lolz look all these netbooks have Intel processors AND XP, therefore Microsoft is clearly a piece of shit and trying to monopolize"?

its not normal XP. its XP for ulcpc. completely different.

[larrymoencurly]

Re: Intel

I'm biased in favor of our locally made CPUs, many which are falsely labelled as being from overseas (the label indicates the country of the packaging, not the silicon).

[Per Hansson]

Re: Intel

Later model AMD CPU's do have written on them "Diffused in Germany"
I guess they didn't want to give the guys in Malaysia all the credit for "just" assembling them

[linuxguru]

Re: Intel

Breaking news, Intel has agreed to pay $1.25B and settle with AMD. AMD has agreed to drop all pending complaints and litigation, and a fresh 5-year cross-licensing agreement is expected to be signed. Great news for consumers and the industry - both companies can focus on innovation now.

BTW, Intel has agreed to abide by some fair-business practices in the future, which indicates that everything wasn't kosher earlier.

[Toasty]

Re: Intel

>>Great news for consumers and the industry - both companies can focus on innovation now.<<

Where's my BS flag....???

You mean WE get to PAY that $1,250,000,000 don't you? Most likely at 4 to 6 times that amount.

All this has done is cost every one of us money somewhere down the road.

Nobody -wins- these settlements.

Toast

[ratdude747]

Re: Intel

>>Great news for consumers and the industry - both companies can focus on innovation now.<<

Where's my BS flag....???

You mean WE get to PAY that $1,250,000,000 don't you? Most likely at 4 to 6 times that amount.

All this has done is cost every one of us money somewhere down the road.

Nobody -wins- these settlements.

Toast

i agree. nobody wins.