AMD predicts more Intel revelations
Summary
An AMD legal expert says, "this is the first time Intel has had to confront now publicly available facts of its illegal behavior and it won’t be the last."
Topics
Following the European Commission's publication on Monday of how Intel broke anticompetition laws, rival chipmaker AMD — the wronged party in this particular case — has predicted further revelations stemming from other cases.
"This is the first time Intel has had to confront now publicly available facts of its illegal behavior and it won’t be the last," AMD legal expert Tom McCoy said in a statement.
"The U.S. FTC and New York Attorney General's continuing investigations and AMD's civil case against Intel will provide other clear demonstrations of Intel breaking the law — the next steps toward bringing consumer choice to the marketplace."
Intel, meanwhile, had its own response to the publication of evidence showing precisely how it used illegal rebates and payments to dissuade PC manufacturers and retailers from stocking AMD products.
In a statement, Intel said it was "convinced that the Commission's conclusions regarding [Intel's] business practices are wrong, both factually and legally".
"Intel has appealed the Commission's decision," the company said. "We are committed to ethical business behavior and compliance with all applicable laws and regulations governing business practices. Intel has adhered to those standards and acted legally at all times in this matter."
This article was originally posted on ZDNet UK.
Talkback Most Recent of 12 Talkback(s)
-
AMD is what we run
AMD processors in blades are more efficient and more cost effective...
Christian_<><22nd Sep 2009 -
We are 100% AMD as well.
It has saved our company a lot of money and has cost it nothing. Unless pure performance is the goal, I can't find one reason to run Intel. And that is not to say that AMD's performance is lacking in any respect. In a business platform AMD's value is unbeatable. Spending money for the Intel brand is not good business. There is nothing a company can gain by buying Intel instead of AMD - nothing. It is wasting money.
bjbrock22nd Sep 2009 -
RE: AMD predicts more Intel revelations
Old News.
Socratesfoot22nd Sep 2009 -
For the little guy
All else being equal, I buy AMD every time I can. If nothing else I am trying to keep Intel honest. Of the PCs I have owned over the last 12 years, better than 50% have been AMD driven. I have only bought 1 Intel machine in the last 5 years, the rest were all recycled off the scrap heap so you take what you can get there.
trybble122nd Sep 2009 -
RE: AMD predicts more Intel revelations
No one touches my AMD Opterons! Ya' hea' me?
You'll have to pry them from my cold dead hands!
:))
majykmyschyf@...22nd Sep 2009 -
RE: AMD predicts more Intel revelations
"Old News"?
Funny, I don't remember reading those emails in the last 5 years. Maybe there will be more, makes for informative reading. Perhaps Intel should have just made out a check and swept it all under the rug!
bjterry6222nd Sep 2009 -
Cheque?
A cheque would have been their best move. The
kind of bully crap that they pull is best kept in the
dark. If they want to get into the mud slinging game
then don't forget who controls the media. Now it will
all come out in the light of day, and be another embarrassment to the US regulators with no kaunas
or teeth. A couple of wrist slaps for MS and one or
two for Intel. Then the EU throws the book at them
and slaps them both down to the ground, bringing up
the question into stark relief: who makes the laws in
the US, the elected representatives of the people, or
the corporations who have them in their pockets?
I have not had an Intel processor in my PCs since
back when the AMD processors were
interchangeable in the socket, and then Intel
changed the socket to that strip piece of crap for incompatibility reasons. I forget how long ago that
is, but probably close to 20 years.
bigpicture22nd Sep 2009 -
Corporate lobbyists being neutralized
That's mostly what the current U.S. health insurance debate is about. It's about special interests, i.e., for-profit health insurance companies, loosing their clout in Washington, D.C.
The U.S. Congress has all too often been in the pockets of corporate sponsored lobbyists. The other thing that is spun to the public is a perception that the U.S. is a big underdog when it comes to world trade. After the Republicans beat their drum about how the deficit is out of control, (Clinton administration turned over a balanced budget to the Bush regime), the next clamoring you hear is about the trade imbalance and the therefore degrading value of the U.S. dollar.
With Progressives in power, we should see some of the shadier business practices brought under closer scrutiny. Yes, I'm something of an idealist--Democrats seem closer to their actual constituencies and more likely to reflect their views. But it will take time. Deregulation began during the Nixon Administration in the 1970s, grew strong during the Reagan years and continued all the way up until the recent banking crisis that peaked in the past year. The Roosevelt New Deal was all but undone by those reactionaries.
Intel could be in a lot of trouble. There's the civil suit over patent cross-licensing with AMD going on also. If Intel loses, they could find themselves without the IP to continue manufacturing x86 CPUs. It's hard to imagine, but there is a possible scenario where we could see Intel forced out of business.
Intel's bluffs may get called. It looks to me like they're all in against AMD, the New York Attorney General, the EC with possibly even the U.S. FTC yet to rejoin the fray. If they all call the bluff, it could spell disaster for Intel.
djchandler22nd Sep 2009 -
Pie in the sky
Deregulation began during the Nixon Administration in the 1970s, grew strong during the Reagan years and continued all the way up until the recent banking crisis that peaked in the past year. The Roosevelt New Deal was all but undone by those reactionaries.
I'm no fan of all the deregulation that's gone on since then, but to go back to the over-regulated days of stagflation, inflation, Oil Embargoes and the "Misery Index" doesn't seem like a viable option to me either.
Intel could be in a lot of trouble. There's the civil suit over patent cross-licensing with AMD going on also. If Intel loses, they could find themselves without the IP to continue manufacturing x86 CPUs. It's hard to imagine, but there is a possible scenario where we could see Intel forced out of business.
Pie in the sky. Let's be realistic. The most they'll get is a big, fat hefty fine where they'll have to fork over a big chunk of change which they'll then pass on (the costs) to their customers. It's business as before. Business as usual. You know that.
Wintel BSOD24th Sep 2009 -
RE: AMD predicts more Intel revelations
Well, for me it's all about AMD, who has proven their
product to be better then Intel who seems to be in Bill
Gates pocket.
truckrdude195422nd Sep 2009 -
RE: AMD predicts more Intel revelations
AMD has been with me on at least half of all my computers for all the years Ive been building and playing. Shame that intel must think that they must resort to unlawful practices. AMD get them and make them pay cuase thats the only thing that will get them to stop. Money
joeroni@...24th Sep 2009 -
I don't like supporting inefficient companies
It's best to let amd die, if it can't make a profit, so a new company can start up who can actually make a profit.
katrillionaire@...26th Sep 2009
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
