By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Darc Requiem on 13 May 2009
Edit Thread
ssj12 said:
NJ5 said:
heruamon said:
nojustno said:
Wow that must burn a hole in their finances

This is going to be a fight at the WTO...because this smacks of a set of countries shaking down some foreign companies.

How can this be such a big deal if California with its 35 million population has fined Microsoft for $1.1 billion, nearly the same amount? It's like a fifth of Intel's annual profit.

More to the point, I don't understand what "shaking down some foreign companies" could possibly accomplish here, other than the openly stated objective of making the "free market" be a reality unaffected by Intel's monopolisation attempts.

It's not like AMD is a European company. There isn't even a single significant European company competing in this market.

 

I'm still not to sure Intel has tried to monopolize anything. I thinks its because Intel has just been around for a while and had great products across the spectrum that they got so big.

If AMD really wanted to compete they would try to develop their own technologies rather than base their their entire line of CPUs off technologies owned by the competitor.

Unlike the Microsoft case I have a feeling Intel might be close to innocent here. They might have offered incentives but companies could have easily said no to them. In the end why isn't the manufacturers who took the incentives/bribes in trouble?

Correct me if I'm wrong but where Intel and AMD apart of the same company originally? Also given the amount of legacy code support required for the PC platform, wouldn't coming up with a completely different architecture cause compatibility issues?