|
|
AMD weighs in on EU ruling against Intel
Author: Tim SmalleyPublished: 13th May 2009
Not surprisingly, AMD has weighed in with its own thoughts on the European Commission's ruling against Intel.
AMD CEO Dirk Meyer said: "Today's ruling is an important step toward establishing a truly competitive market. AMD has consistently been a technology innovation leader and we are looking forward to the move from a world in which Intel ruled, to one which is ruled by customers."
Meyer wasn't the only AMD exec to weigh in though, as Tom McCoy, Executive Vice President for Legal Affairs at AMD, also added his two penneth. "After an exhaustive investigation, the EU came to one conclusion - Intel broke the law and consumers were hurt. With this ruling, the industry will benefit from an end to Intel's monopoly-inflated pricing and European consumers will enjoy greater choice, value and innovation."
The EU's ruling all but confirms the findings of similar investigations in Japan and Korea from 2005 and 2008 respectively and don't expect this to be the last ruling against Intel, as both the Federal Trade Commission and New York State are still investigating Intel's business practices. However, there's no sign of a date when we can expect these investigations to finish.
We also briefly managed to catch up with Nigel Dessau, AMD's Chief Marketing Officer, and Patrick Moorhead, Vice President of Advanced Marketing at AMD. Dessau said: "Our experience to date has been that when investigators look at the facts, Intel loses," while Moorhead reckons that with Intel being found guilty of antitrust in Korea, Japan and now Europe, "should help highlight Intel's anti-competitive practices to US authorities."
Taking both of these comments into account, it's fair to say that AMD expects similar results in the two US-based investigations and it is now even more confident that it will prevail in its own lawsuit against its arch rival.
Join the ongoing discussion.
Related
Comments (107)- Site Links:
- About
- Email Editor
- Newsletter
- Privacy
- RSS
- Score Guide
- Our Other Websites:
- Auto Express
- Channel Pro
- Computer Buyer
- Computer Shopper
- Den of Geek
All content © bit-tech.net 2000-2010
© Copyright Dennis Publishing Limited licensed by Felden
That is one big fine.
however relatively speaking is that really a major dent in their income considering how much they make in a year ?
Also, it's a bit of a bad time to get fined that much.
True, but their net income for Q4 2008 was $234 million. If they continue through 2009 as they did at the end of 2008, the fine wipes out their income for over five quarters. Not a good time to be Intel at any rate.
...That's an even bigger number.
Well, comparatively speaking that's not that much, really. Ahwell.
Given that they're already planning to appeal the decision, I expect it will go down, probably by a lot, and if it doesn't, then I doubt there'll be an order to pay it one lump sum.
Not sure if appealing will help to be honest, the EU have excellent form in this sort of thing and their cases are often watertight. What you may see is Intel offering to meet some of the antitrust requirements early or even withdrawing from certain ongoing negotiations to the advantage of AMD, VIA, etc. Only then would the fine possibly be reduced.
Either way it's going to hit Intel rather hard but to be honest it's about time.
I think they are getting off easy. The charges are severe, basically they were holding the entire market hostage: OEMs, retailers, competitors, customers, everyone. And they have been doing so for a good number of years. The maximum fine that the EU can give is 10% of yearly turnover, so the nuber could have been almost four times higher. And even then, they are only counting the turnover for one year, not every year that this has been going on...
Anyway, 1B pounds is a good enough kick in the nuts for now i suppose. Now let's see how much damages AMD will claim after this.
In addition with the fluctuations in the money market that are currently occurring Intel could save themselves a large chunk of cash by paying when the dollar to euro rate is at it's most preferable.
That's how Microsoft got their fine reduced, they released versions of XP without things like WMP and IE bundled in. I doubt Intel will just say "can we make it lower please?" and the EU going "Ok" without them meeting them halfway.
AMD filed a complaint with the authorities, and the authorities stop the behaviour per a fine (this one).
Now that the fine has been given (and the behaviour documented), AMD can file a claim at a civil court to retreive damages.
Intel has responded with a statement from CEO Paul Otellini
Also, is not most of that statement completely irrelevant, other than the fairly weak defence in the third and fourth paragraphs.
"Intel takes strong exception to this decision. We believe the decision is wrong and ignores the reality of a highly competitive microprocessor marketplace...There has been absolutely zero harm to consumers. Intel will appeal."
Just because there's no harm to consumers doesn't mean that harm isn't done?
LoL!
Whatever intel says, there must have been some shady deals going on back in P4 age. I've seen so many crappy P4 based PCs at schools, offices etc. despite AMD was offering cheaper or faster CPUs(but OEM's were selling AMD based PC's for unreasonable higher prices)
I thought the EC was saying that Intel didn't just force customers to avoid AMD if they wanted a discount, I thought they were saying Intel wouldn't sell to them at all.
Either way, it's not the most water-tight of defences is it? Intel can't just turn around and say "The EC is wrong!". They must have done something to incur a billion pound fine.
Just to quote wikipedia :
In July 2007, the European Commission accused Intel of anti-competitive practices, mostly against AMD.[71] The allegations, going back to 2003, include giving preferential prices to computer makers buying most or all of its chips from Intel, paying computer makers to delay or cancel the launch of products using AMD chips, and providing chips at below cost to governments and educational institutions.
His argument against this ruling seems to be in the form of two points -
1. "AMD 'appears' to be doing well financially. No Harm No Foul, right...right?"
2. "The economy is in the toilet, so you shouldn't be fining us..." Seriously? Everyone is feeling the crunch so this should allow rules to be ignored/broken?
Out of curiosity has AMD filed a complaint in the US or any other territories? If so has there been any significant outcome?
In my opinion (a layman with no legal training) this case seems far, far more serious than the EU judgement against Microsoft and I'm glad the fine also reflects this.
As to the question about filing in the USA, let's remember that the last 8 years the show was run by people who held the Rule of Law in contempt AND tried to justify torture.
It will be interesting to see if, under the new administration, corporations will have to actually abide by the many American anti-trust laws on the books.
Yours in EU Plasma,
Star¤Dagger
I very much hope Intel's appeal will fail and AMD will be able to charge Intel with some mighty big compensation.
I believe there is multiple lawsuits and investigations going on in the US-Federal, Delaware and NY at least.
EDIT:
DO you mean enhanced interrogation?:|
They need to pay something for all of those shitty late P4 boxes around the world because consumers couldn't buy anything else easily.
(I think the further, but you can never be sure about that with Americans ... )
If any of the OEM manufacturers had the balls to tell Intel where to stick it and went with AMD, Intel wouldn't have been able to get away with it.
There's no point pointing (¬_¬) the finger at big bad Intel when companies actively let them get away with it in the first place.
It's a bit like saying a bank robber is bad and demanding he repay what he stole when the bank manager left the safe and doors unlocked, rang the police and told them them to ignore any robbery.
IMHO, with this case and Microsoft's, it appear the EU's ego has gone to it's head. It's helping David beat Goliath, even though it knows that David will be just as bad and naughty.
I just hope that the juge simply dubles the fine, or just says 10 of the 37 bill in turnover. 3,7 billions now that would give them some serious problems.
So yes, that's why we are talking about big bad Intel and not about big bad HP/IBM/Dell/whatever.
If an OEM is required to fulfill an order of x chips, but AMD can't manage to supply enough, how do you think that OEM can stay in business? Its clients would just go to a different OEM which deals with Intel and which can supply what's demanded.
They're victims as well... because Intel "threatened" to entirely cut supplies to the OEMs that don't abide by Intel's law! Competitive, my ass!
Not surprisingly, AMD now weighs in on the ruling...
/me grabs a martini and sits back...
That was more of a joke, I don't petty Intel regardless of the fine, I trust the EU court. and true it would not make the market better.
But honestly, have them to "behave" sorry but i have a hard time seeing this happening, it is mentioned that they are still using elligal methods at the present day, and if they didn't stop doing it when the case first startet, I don't see a reason to stop now. It is like a drug dealer that still deals drugs even when he is allready in court, not sorry for s***t.
Intel has proberly calculated that it is worth the fine, if they hadn't done it they may not have had this big a market share today, a share big enough to be worth about 1 bill.
BUT it won't stop any company [not even Intel] to just go and do the same thing over and over again. This is part of the free market we love so much!
Intel would've never done that if that hadn't gotten away with it before. Someone did that before on a smaller scheme, then someone else or the same company went for more and it's my honest belief there is no big company that wouldn't use their domination of a market to their advantage.
I don't say it's right because it isn't... but let's face it, Intel did it, MS did it, many oil companies did it, hell, even Rockefeller did it! There are others doing it right now and they won't stop just because 1/1000 gets caught and told off.
Sad but true.
That's AMDs problem then, and it makes perfect business sense for Intel to capitalise on AMDs lack of supply.
Hence why I didn't say a single OEM was at fault, rather that all of them were for allowing this to happen in the first place.
HP/DELL etc can chose to stock any company's products, there is no legal requirement for them to do otherwise. However in the medium-term, allowing one company to monopolise the market, and thus dictate prices is not very smart corporate governance.
Were you high all this time?... to what has happened during the P4 era has just been given a verdict: 1.06 billion fine!
And I was always wondering why there are so few OEM options on AthlonXP's or even the newer AMD64's... everywhere I looked, only Intel!
First, the talk was about the OEM's being fair or not... not about Intel capitalizing on AMD's lack of supply! BTW, use a spellchecker... as simple as it might be, it helps!
Second, no OEM should be hindered at buying from a manufacturer... and no manufacturer can limit an OEM's options of buying from another manufacturer. That's why your point of view on perfect business sense is far from Intel's.
Classic, you fail to realise that the P4's failure inspired Intel to create the Core architecture, a pretty successful product by any benchmark. Their dubious sales strategy, has nothing to do with their R&D triumphs. My point was, and it should be clear to anyone who has not been smoking ketamine, is that AMD must concentrate hard on the competitiveness of the next-gen platforms, as Intel will aim for the jugular.
If AMD cannot match or exceed Intel's next-gen products, and given their much weaker financial status, they will not survive, a situation no objective tech enthusiast would enjoy.
lol..definitely make urself, yes, i spelled it urself, smarter because u use a spell checker. congrats...too bad they don't have a really good punctuation checker. then you'd look super intelligent.
this is like so many things in life. lot of "must haves" and "probably did's". if i cared enough i would probably dig into it more to see whether (thank god i used the spell checker there, i almost spelled it 'whther') there was proof to these allegations or not, although i am "sure there is". i like to believe there is a cosmic balance to life. you do wrong, it will be returned. maybe...
Was i not being transparent enough? (see...the new president is having an effect)
Gee, I would like to see the equation they used to determine that no harm has been done to the consumers...
/grabs a linguine, martini, bikini..
The fine should be alot more harsh IMHO.
I think this would be a faux pas honestly. They are sleezy, they have hurt the market, and they nearly ruined AMD. --BUT-- they have made many many advances in the CPU industry. Advances that I don't think would have happened without trying to beat other companies in the ground and advances other companies wouldn't have made themselves if Intel hadn't existed.
If Intel was to get fined hard enough that they essentially belly-up, then that leaves AMD as pretty much the only maker IMO. AMD has not done shady practices as far as I know, but if they are the only CPU maker that matters with Intel gone, then you can not tell me in honesty and good faith that they would keep their prices as low as they could be.
Every company is out to make money. Every single one. If Intel dissolves and AMD steps up, it will be just the same as when Intel was paying off companies. Sure, AMD will be legit, maybe their products will have a higher quality (maybe not?) but at the end of the day if they are the only one in the market, they can charge whatever they want.
'Course maybe i'm way out in left field when the ball was a line drive to the right.
Ensuring that bananas conform to EU directive 12798342875963762886 and other useful stuff
The whole story is about Intel's past doing and you rant about some lame progress that Intel needed badly so it wouldn't lose market share! Even if they created a new P III, they only succeeded by not letting AMD to compete in a fair matter! AMD64 was superior, but, as it was, without cash there was no significant progress! Where do you think AMD's cash comes from? Sitting around?
Looking intelligent has nothing to do with this... it's about character. There are people that like to do things the proper way and there are people that just don't give a f. Kinda like you... tell me if I'm wrong. You also like Bush!
If you like to write like a 10 year old kid, that's fine with me! Bush didn't mind to talk like one either and YouTube is full of that to back it up... but don't get all whiny on me for disagreeing. And there's nothing wrong with using a spellchecker... technology is made to help up do things faster and better. My punctuation is just fine... if you don't know what an ellipsis is, I suggest to look it up... oh, wait... you don't give a f. Then why did you reply to my post? To whine? You shouldn't have because I don't give a f. And this is one of the situations where it's actually required not to!
BTW, COSMIC BALANCE?!?!... since Bush got away, guess not!
Yeah... right
lol...wow. your punctuation is just as bad as his spelling was my point. as to the rest of your rant/calling people fags...show a little maturity. wtf are you talking about? and i didn't vote for bush, but that really isn't what this topic is about, is it? but hey, thanks for your contributions to the forum...
EDIT: Didnt see which forum this was in.
edit: thought id add in what they actually are meant to have done:
Intel awarded major computer manufacturers rebates on condition that they purchased all or almost all of their supplies, at least in certain defined segments, from Intel:
* Intel gave rebates to computer manufacturer A from December 2002 to December 2005 conditional on this manufacturer purchasing exclusively Intel CPUs
* Intel gave rebates to computer manufacturer B from November 2002 to May 2005 conditional on this manufacturer purchasing no less than 95% of its CPU needs for its business desktop computers from Intel (the remaining 5% that computer manufacturer B could purchase from rival chip maker AMD was then subject to further restrictive conditions set out below)
* Intel gave rebates to computer manufacturer C from October 2002 to November 2005 conditional on this manufacturer purchasing no less than 80% of its CPU needs for its desktop and notebook computers from Intel
* Intel gave rebates to computer manufacturer D in 2007 conditional on this manufacturer purchasing its CPU needs for its notebook computers exclusively from Intel.
Furthermore, Intel made payments to major retailer Media Saturn Holding from October 2002 to December 2007 on condition that it exclusively sold Intel-based PCs in all countries in which Media Saturn Holding is active.
I personally don't think they will win a full appeal i.e. no fine, but it will go down a lot i.e. $100m.
So what? It's wrong and EVIL but as everybody does it this fine won't change much. Sadly...
Given Intel's profits that is a remarkably cheap price to pay for taking out their primary competitor out at the knees. If AMD survives the recession, I hope for the sake of competition, the worst case for Intel is that they will hold the lions share of the market for at least 5-10 years and all the profits that come with it. I'm not knocking AMD's ability Intel has a tech lead for the time being. That fine is chump change.
If Intel were allowed to get away with this you would pay more. Look at the recent Intel price drops, from the goodness of Intel's heart, NO, it's AMD with a competitive product, yes I know it's not high end, putting the squeeze on Intel's cash crop the mid to low market. The high end is bragging rights, not for profit.
actually hes right, look at the History of AMD, they have made more technological break throughs then Intel, Intel simply sits back sees what AMD is doing and then copies it for themselves however I will admit that sometimes they do improve upon what AMD came up with but ya for the most they have made far more break through then intel has and thats simply fact despite how much you argue it. Of course Im speaking of the CPU market, not joint projects, when it comes to joint project Intel tries to get a hand in just about everything so they can take a little bit of credit of it.
Wow. The EU regulators are doing their JOBS. You can see quite clearly what happens in banking when there is not enough oversight, you get a recession and almost a meltdown.
Regulation by the people's representatives (in this case antitrust commmissions) is not only a good thing, it is a required thing.
Capitalism works on the idea of competition (exclusion), whereas democracy works on the concept of inclusion and protecting the rights of all of its citizenry. Without government to step in and slap down the largest abuses, the corporate world would run amuck and take the rest of society with it. Frankly I hope the banking melt down will lead to a new round of measured regulation in the US as has already been the case in the EU countries.
On a related topic. It was almost 2000 years ago that Cicero stated "Salus Populi Suprema Lex Est" "The Welfare of the People is the Supreme Law". This quote should be used in ALL affairs regarding governance, if a law, regulation or idea can not pass this simple test then it should be dismissed. I daresay that 99% of the laws passed for the welfare of corporations would not have been passed.
Yours in the People Plasma,
Star¤Dagger
The reason that the OEMs weren't prosecuted as well is because they were surely victims of Intel pressure as well. Agree, or no product. No CPUs, no chipsets, no networking devices.
And there was never a choice to go along. AMD could never have made enough CPUs to supply all of a large OEMs needs. Look what happened with the Dell deal from a while back. Retail K8 AMD CPUs started to dry up as Dell soaked up supply. No matter how superior an AMD chip is, Intel will always hold the majority of box sales. That is why there are so many craptacular P4 monstrosities out there.
People all talk about the K8/A64 generation of competitive AMD CPUs, but AMD has had competitive or superior CPUs since before the 486 days. Intel Overdrives topped out at 100MHz with AMD belting along at 120MHz and 133MHz with the 5x86
386/486/5x86 - K6 (thanks NexGen! <wink>) - K7 - K8 (the only hiccup was the K5 dog).
And these are the generations covered by the Intel "rebates" (or "coercive bribes" as they should be known) that stifled competition at a time when AMD should have been able to grow their market and manufacturing capacity.
Just to clarify a few questions and comments.
* This is an EU fine for illegal practices. None of the money goes to AMD. AMD is seeking monetary damages through a civil action.
* As I understand the process, Intel MUST pay the money within three months. If an appeal is successful, they get the money back from the EU. Although this is what is supposed to happen, how Microsoft got away with their stalls I can't explain.
Frankly, the EU could have done better. It is not EU regulators you have to worry about. Iceland and the UK are excellent examples of individual member banking regulators either being too cosy with the banks (Iceland) or too deregulated (UK).
Almost two years ago:
http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=136997
You are very wrong about the 3 months, if they appeal then the fine will be suspended until the end of the trial.
Personally I believe that AMD should be fined for the fact that their original competitor to Intel was actually a reverse engineered clone of the pentium!
Recently AMD processors suck when compared to intel! So Intel should be infront, so in the end it has benifited the consumer!
(shut up fan boys)
what every union does, line their pockets and then dance around saying we are even richer now yay....
Normally I'd bow to greater knowledge since I have little expertise of this area, but your next two points show so little grasp of reality that it throws ALL your knowledge/opinions into doubt.
I assume you are talking about the K5, the abortion that almost killed AMD until the NexGen crew saved their backside? Although socket compatible with the Pentium, they are significantly different internally. The K5 was a wholly AMD design, which is probably why it sucked so bad.
But you could be clueless enough to be talking about the 286/386/486 processors, although they aren't Pentiums, but AMD had a licence to produce and develop them, and they developed them better than Intel did.
The K6 was a design AMD got when they bought NexGen, and again although socket compatible with the Pentium MMX, it was again totally different internally.
If you had it, logic should tell you something.
If AMD processors were clones they should perform the same as Intel processors at a given clock speed and benchmark, just like they did in the 286/386/486 era.
By your reasoning, Intel should also be fined for cloning the Phenom to produce the i7!
I have a headache just reading that.
So...
I can see how it has all worked out for the best then!
Never mind the fact that a stronger, healthier AMD might have made processors even cheaper or more powerful or use less energy at less cost both now and in the future.
Did you even think that a reason why AMD processors may "suck" at the moment might be because of Intel's illegal practices?
No I dont agree, Intel are ace and my core 2 rocks.
As did my P4 when I bought it, which by the way was created before the Athlon XP range which didn't IMO beat the P4 but I don't game which I believe is where they perform better.
In the end the P4 beat the Athlon XP although the next generation of AMD chips were slightly better but cost more than the P4.
Then came of course the Core2 which completely raped AMD who managed to produce a load of faulty chips to compete that cost more and performed worse.
Every manufacturer offers discounts to customers who buy a bulk load of that product. This is what commercialism is all about, making a cheaper product and selling a whole bulk load of it.
I believe in a legal system where a company is innocent till proven guilty, so I will await the verdict of the appeal before I pass judgement.
Misprediction: When the wrong instruction is called. When you've got a 20 stage pipeline and it mispredicts in one stage, it takes abso-****ing-lutely ages to restart that line.
Stalling: When the information is not in the cache for what ever reason and has to be drawn from RAM. This is MUCH slower when the pipeline is longer.
The reason Intel went with such a large pipeline was because it gave them the ability to crank up da gigahurtz lol!
The AMD XP on the other hand was running an 11 stage pipeline, which means any problems in the line and it recovers much quicker. Combine with that the more refined architecture of the AMD XP processor and bam...THE P4 WAS A MASSIVE FAILURE, GET OVER IT.
ya it wasnt until the release of Core 2 Duo series that Intel FINALLY had something that could properly beat what AMD had to offer but now that AMD has the Phenom II/AM3 line out they are regaing ground fast with a price to performance ratio that reasonably cant be beat.
I quite like how it is now with AMD being pretty much on the same level as Intel and both have to compete over the price.
The only that might hurt AMD badly is if Intel's i5 is an awesome performer AND overclocker for an amazingly low price. And we all know Intel will fail on one of those 3 points.
Then again, I wouldn't mind another mind blower from the blue ones that puts AMD under pressure as they seem to respond well whereas they failed last time they had the lead.
At the end of the day you are a bunch of fanboys who cant stand to see someone bash your beloved AMD even though they suck.
I did use an Athlon XP and found my P4 prescott a hell of a lot faster, it also overclocked a lot better too. This seems to contradict all of your points. I do use an Athlon XP on my machine at work but it has no hope of multitasking, it just about runs my embeded development tools.
This is from personal experience not reading Wikipedia and 'AMD monthly' like you guys seem to read.
I bet you all love Microsoft too, bollox to that FOSS for the win!
Intel support the open source world in so many ways but AMD lack behind in all aspects of that place.
oh look a fanboi trying to justify the money hes wasted over the years, ehh each to their own. I have owned both AMD and Intel, but I must say bottomline they each have their ups and down but in the end it is AMD who pushes the forefront of CPU development, lets see the only thing I have seen Intel beat AMD to the punch on was DDR3 with Triple Channel, other then that they tend to lag behind but that makes since too, let a different company put their neck out there so if it fails you dont lose anything but if it succeeds quickly copy it and then release it as some wonder of a product... Im sorry but its clear to see that Intel business practice has always been dirty, I dont deny the quality of their product but my main argument is how manipulating they are to the public and how easy it is to convince the general public as this person has demonstrated. Pretty much how Mac fanbois are soo brain washed and have to fight to convince themselves that the money they wasted was actually for something lol.
Mac invented the graphical personal computer so you shouldn't really slate them. Their systems are better than windows systems although you cant run your precious computer games on them so you are upset :'(.
The IBM power PC processors the older macs used to use (604e era) were a lot better than both the PC processors of the time and are the basis for the cell processor being used in the PS3 now.
Oh and no I don't run a Mac any-more, I had a mac before I ran windows so around 1994.
I notice that you didn't contradict my argument of the I7 kicking the crap out of the Phenom but still believe the AMD processor is better. Is that how a structured argument works? I think not.
Go back to school funboy!
lol ur argument was originally P4 but when you started loosing that argument you switched to the i7 which yes I still believe at this time is a waste of money and FYI if you want to do the whole wage thing which by the way you remarked about it ties in with your ego/self worth, my daily wage well actually less then 4hrs of my daily wage could purchase such processors easy as well but again I dont believe in wasting money on items that have next to no upgrade path.
As for Mac oh I dont have a problem with their OS or their designs, its really the opposite, I dont care for the companies business practices, charging nearly on average 600+ for the same hardware thats found in a windows based system. Besides whats special about the OS, it can be effected in the same ways a windows based OS can be, I mean if you think I am only using windows for gaming your wrong, I have yet to come across anything that a mac could do that I couldnt do on a PC, in fact I find what you can do on a MAC to be pretty limiting so thats a mute point.
So again as for arguing your point in i7 against phenom sure but i7 did come after Phenom so thats not much of an argument either, again its just Intel finally catching up to what AMD has already done for many years, like integrated memory controller and a native multi-core die.
So please before opening your virtual mouth come up with something a bit more intelligent to go in your pointless arguments.
But seriously, you registered to tell us THIS? Where does all the anger come from?
To delve into your arguments, first of all... how can this be a PC vs MAC thing all of a sudden? "we" like AMD, so we must like Microsoft too? And yes, i use windows because games run on it. They dont run on a mac, so i dont use macs. I'm not saying windows is better, it just works for me, so i use it. I'm deeply sorry if that offends you.
About the I7... great piece of horsepower on that platform, i'm just not going to buy into it, because the roadmap is very unclear at the moment. I've upgraded on 775 (yes i run Intel) about as far as it can go, and i wont need an upgrade for a while. When and if i need an upgrade, i'll seriously concider AM3 too.
Having said that, this thread is not about the better processor or the better fanboy. It's about Intel getting caught with their hand in the cookiejar. They have been very naughty, and for that alone i'm inclined to concider not buying any more silicon from them for a while. I'm just really glad there's an alternative now :)
True that. ;)
You're nothing more than a blithering troll trying to amuse your self.
Actually you really should get your facts a little more precise first.
For starters - the i7 is not a direct competitor to the Phenom II, the Core 2 quads are. AMD has priced them accordingly and they are competitive.
With regards to the PS3. It contains a single Power PC core CPU that was developed independently to the SPE processors co-designed by IBM, but mostly by Toshiba and Sony. They are fast, efficient but linear in-order cores, however these are not expressly "Power PC" by definition.
You do get rather riled up against others, which is really quite funny, so I left your posts alone.
I had to snip your quote, but thanks for your insightful comments and opinion, Dags. I'll be sure to find you when I need an education on semi-conductor history and design processes.
However, given the current economic climate, for now I'm going to try and not continue feeding free-loaders who sulk under bridges.
I'd love to debate your points, but there are no sensible arguments to be found in your posts. There were glimmers, but then you pasted on all that nonsensical rambling, bouncing from one processor to another, from one point to another, that in the end it all came spewing up like a morning after.
Anyway, welcome to Bit-Tech, trolls enter from the side door, and remember to clean up after yourself.
It just depends on how big a fish you are. Intel, the big fish slapped around AMD, the minnow.
Then along comes an even bigger fish and slaps around Intel. Unfortunatly for Intel there
have been, and are, lots of really big fish just waiting to slap Intel around some more. :) It's not just the EU. Japan and South Korea have also had a shot and the US courts will soon be bending Intel over as well. :o
I wouldn't feel too sorry for em. They will still make good CPU's and they will still make lot's
and lot's of money. :D
Is that simply because "American Money" is flowing into EU pockets?
They broke local laws, they pay the penalty. At least the EU has balls big enough to call them out on it, and cant be bought by lobbists. The EU is a politically middle system, compared to America's "everyone can do what the **** they like". ;)
Do you actually understand what Intel did?
It's not "unfortunate". I've seen first hand Intel's some of tactics for years, but couldn't say anything because a) it wouldn't change anything and b) it was all completely off the record and those people that did show it to me would have lost their jobs and their businesses suffered.
Anyway, completely agreed with the "cant be bought by lobbyists" comment.
Oh, and dag...
Thank you for attacking me when all I said was, that AMD is quite a good position and on par with Intel yet I still hope for more innovations.
I like you. You're cute. Can I keep him, Bindi?
He's like an overprotective brother or dog. :D
hmm okay I like that description :)
I do not understand why we still have these silly quibbles on forums these days...? SO what? He made a few spelling mistakes - he may have been rushed to type and short of time or he may have other (better) things to do then just sit on a forum all day (not saying this is a bad thing necessarily :p ) and make sure every word he types is spelled right.
Oh...one more thing....can someone actually point out the spelling mistake that FatMikel made? I read his posts and didn't see a single one, except a few missing words in his typing which obviously shows he was in a rush.....?
That sadly may be true for some time to come unfortunately.....lets hope their new fab divison is able to rack up some profits that'll help them build a few extra fabs.
This as you may have read further on is obviously not the case.
Same here. Didn't expect this to happen at all.
Perhaps - but the free market also has the other side of the coin. Your free to do whatever you can to thrive, but push too much and you have to pay the price for the consequences......all the mentioned above have done so, and more are likely being investigated.
That's perfect business sense - shame they couldn't go about it in a legal manner.
Good point. I wonder how many OEMs were involved in all this.....the question would also need to be asked - did they even know that the other companies were being offered these things? If so, then why didn't they have the balls to stand up?
I don't think these jokes are at all appropriate.
No we don't (or at least I don't anyway). BUT, the fine they were charged is no where near enough to barely even dent them. They will appeal - why not = no company wishes to lose £1bill without at least a fight. This will hopefully get them to pull their dirty socks off and try and keep the new ones clean. It probably won't stop them completely and others from doing the same - but they need to know that they are being watched and that they need to play fair - playing fair is the only thing that will benefit us, as consumers. AMD will hopefully get a chance to develop and push forward future developments and put the petition back into competition.
That is a fact that I've observed over the last decade or so. I've always been frustrated as to why the Athlons didn't do much much better than they did - Athlon 64 was one of the best platforms of the time. Despite it doing well, it didn't do well enough imo.
And Danwood76 unless you try and put up an un-biased balanced and a logical well-thought out argument that actually supports what you're saying and refutes the evidences against it, you will lose your arguments exactly as you have so far in this thread.
Anyway - nice to be back in the UK! :)