I think this is kind of ridiculous... You're gonna fine a company for being successful? That's just stupid... So what if Intel was offering rebates to companies for buying their product? Why didn't AMD do the same thing? Maybe they did, but Intel had the better deal and the better product... From 2002 until about 2006 AMD had better CPUs... Intel already had the majority of the market at this time... BUT AMD made a lot of ground in this time. But then Intel launched Conroe and ever since then AMD couldn't compete. I don't know about you, but i've never even seen an AMD commercial... I see intel all the time. When I was selling PCs at Circuit City, a lot of people had never even HEARD of AMD. They wanted intel because they knew the name. I had to explain to people how the AMD chips were better. And still they didn't quite get it because they saw 3Ghz P4s vs 2Ghz Athlon64s and they didn't understand how something with a lower clock speed was faster lol. It's AMDs own fault for not marketing their products well enough. Not everyone is going to go out and get their own facts about a product like the folks here. You can't punish Intel because AMD didn't have a good enough business plan.
Core i7 920|EVGA X58|GTX 660 TI & 460se for PHYSX|2x30GB Vertex RAID0|5x1.5TB RAID5
-- Certifications --
CompTIA A+; CompTIA Network+ ; CompTIA Security+; Microsoft Certified Professional(MCP); Microsoft Certified Systems Administrator(MCSA); Microsoft Certified Sysems Engineer(MCSE); Certified Wireless Network Administrator (CWNA); Certified Wireless Security Professional (CWSP); Aruba Certified Mobility Associate (ACMA);
That's is some stupid lawsuit =\
Basically they're fining Intel for offering better products for lower prices. Ugh, hey guys from the EU, ever heard of COMPETITION? Marketing? Business? AMD could do the exact same thing that Intel did, compete with them in the price range and try to compete product-wise.
Thing is they didn't, Intel, in the past few years, just did much, much better than AMD and for much more reasonable prices lately. AMD was once the cheap but clever, and ultimately better bang-for-the-buck competitor. If they complained to the EU that Intel are unfair in the aspect of their marketing, then that just shows us that they simply can't compete any more.
I would very much like to see Intel appeal and win.
This isn't stupid at all - do some investigation beyond Intel's side of the story.
Basically put, they abused their majority share to force other companies out of the stores. "We make up 95% of your business sales. Quit selling systems with AMD processors, or we'll start charging you more for Intel processors AND Intel motherboards - while you try to compete with the store down the street getting our discounts."
It wasn't just AMD that got pissed of and started the investigation: It was the vendors that Intel was strong-arming too. Gateway, for instance, said that Intel has "beaten them into 'guacamole" in retaliation for offering AMD chips.
And, despite what Intel is quoted as saying in TFA, the European Commision did find that Intel charged below-cost for server processors. That's the game you play when you're much wealthier than the little guy and you want to see who runs out of money first. That's not "competition", that's abuse of market position.
The EC's not the first to call Intel out on this either. Japan slapped them down for the same thing about 4 years ago, and Intel only changed their practices in that country.
Anyone who's familiar with my views knows that I'm no AMD fanboy (my two latest systems use Intel processors), but having continually read of Intel's practices over the last 7 or so years I agree this was fully warranted.
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
Could it be possible that AMD had some legitimate complaints afterall?
SPAM-posters beware! ®
Speaking of such practices... what about Wal Mart? lol Those guys are total douche bags from what i've heard.
The EU I think goes a tad overboard sometimes.... If they keep this up not many Big companies will want to sell items there..
"Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window."
Z77 GIGABYTE G1.SNIPER
G.Skill Ripjaws X 16gb PC2133
Asus Blu-ray burner
Seasonic X650 PSU
Patriot Pyro 128gb SSD
If this award stands it would seem that Intel has a new 'tax': The Intel Dirty-Deeds Tax. I wonder who is going to pay this new tax! If you are struggling to figure this all out, take a look HERE. Unfair trade practices affect all of us consumers!
Dave... the answer to this question is the same as the answer to your question the other day about their advertising... lol
Well if the Tax bothers you so much, just buy AMD. TBH this ruleing is good in several ways, it makes intel admit to what they have done and they are being held financially responsible because of it. What they have done in the past has hurt consumers, cut out competition, and allowed Intel to maintain dominance, even when its Pentum 4's and Pentium D chips were getting the snot kicked out of them by Athlon 64 and X2 chips.
Did you guys forget that Dell was found guilty of accepting Intel's offers to only get intel chips, and the US gov forced Dell to at least sell and offer AMD based computers since Dell had become so big they were practically a monopoly in the computing segment and since that was the case with them only offering one chip from one manufacturer it killed competition. Not only did Dell get nice big breaks on paying for Intel chips, but they did not pass those savings onto the consumer, they just sucked in pure profit.
Intel has many guns on it for monopoly practices in many different countries around the world. I hope this is just the start of the beating Intel needs to recieve. Really without AMD and their Athlon, and Athlon 64 and Athlon 64 X2 chips, Intel never would have had to gotten off their *** to make the Core2 series of chips. Without competition, stuff stagnates, just look at Nvidia, still using cards based on the G92 chip that has been around for 3 years cause their competitor cannot even come close to holding the performance crown. The thing that Nvidia is doing right is that they are still inovating and making new gfx stuff, even if they are just refreshes and little tweaks on some things, but on others they are innovating, while it took AMD kicking Intel's butt for them to attempt a comeback.
A+ Certified PC Repair Technician Associates Degree in Computer ScienceBachelors Degree in Computer Information Systems
DFI Lanparty UT NF3 250GB Dead.......Replacement Abit KV-85Learn more about Comp TIA A+ Certification.
Today's LA Times mentions that the ramifications of this judgement may soon cross the Atlantic and spur the US to take similar sanctions (read HERE). Could this double The Intel Dirty-Deeds Tax?
I think the EU can go far sometimes, but I feel that Intel deserves this.
Let's see: $1,450,000,000 + the unknown lawyer's fees (X) divided by the number of CPU's to be sold (Y) over an unknown period of time (Z) = The Intel Dirty-Deeds Tax. Any mathematicians out there? The equation I arrived at is:
While you may choose to pay this tax, let's not forget about the folks that unknowingly got soaked in the past! Now we know why Dell didn't offer AMD processors during those years! Thanks, Intel.
Intel is a dirty dirty company. Why do you think when AMD was kicking Intels buts with the Athlon 64 and x2s vs Pentium 4 and Pentium Ds AMD hardly gained any market share. If they are left unmarked then there will only be Intel CPUs and that is not good for anyone, but Intel.
They harm the PC industry more than help in some cases. Look at the GPU market. You could hardly find a PC under $1000 with anything other than a Intel GPU in it for years. How much has that hurt the PC gaming market?
NEWS TIPS |
This site is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. The contents are the views and opinion of the author and/or hisassociates. All products and trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All content and graphical elements areCopyright © 1999 - 2013 David Altavilla and HotHardware.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy and Terms