backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 132 comment(s) - last by Adonlude.. on May 15 at 5:35 PM

  (Source: Sevens Heaven)
AMD and Intel have filed in the area of 150 million pages in the legal battle so far

AMD filed a suit against Intel way back in 2005 alleging among other things that Intel had conspired with major PC OEMs to keep AMD out of the marketplace. The case is set to go to trial in 2009 and some new documents filed this month shed more light on AMD’s accusations against Intel.

EWeek reports that new documents submitted on May 1 by AMD include over 100 pages detailing the myriad of allegations AMD had against Intel. The document claims that Intel has used its market position with OEMs to dominate the market ever since IBM introduced the first personal computer using a version of the Intel 8086 processor.

Part of the allegations AMD has leveled against the chip giant is that Intel abused its dominant position in the market by offering deep discounts to OEMs and by punishing OEMS who considered using a second chipmaker.

In its defense, Intel filed a counterargument -- that is also over 100 pages -- where it claims that the chip market is competitive and that accusations from AMD are only an attempt to make up for years of producing inferior products.

In all somewhere between 150 million and 200 million pages of documents have been introduced by both AMD and Intel so far. The core allegation by AMD is that Intel used relationships with vendors like Dell, HP, IBM, Acer and Gateway to exclude AMD by offering the OEMs special treatment if they only bought Intel processors.

AMD cites an example of this practice in action when it claims Gateway suddenly phased out AMD in July of 1999 and cancelled the launch of a machine using the AMD Athlon Processor. The documents related to this action are heavily redacted to protect trade secrets and AMD alleges Intel has used the protection order to shield its practices from the public.

Intel spokesman Chuck Malloy said that the redactions are to protect Intel trade secrets and AMD is merely using the latest filing to drag more witnesses into the case. Naturally, Intel says that AMD has not been able to offer processors with the capabilities required by the top PC makers and its lack of market share is due to that fact alone.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
I think AMD has a case
By FITCamaro on 5/7/2008 11:35:48 AM , Rating: 5
Really if you look at the entire lifetime of the Athlon, Athlon XP, and Athlon X2 until the Core architecture, AMD had a product that was as fast or faster than Intel's. So Intel's counter argument that AMD's claim is due to them having an inferior product is baseless.

There's no denying that Intel's current Core 2 architecture is, in most instances(but not all), faster than AMDs. But this lawsuit isn't about the current situation, its about the situation in the past.




RE: I think AMD has a case
By SilthDraeth on 5/7/2008 11:54:45 AM , Rating: 5
True.

And playing the "What If" game:

Where would AMD be today if Intel didn't play dirty?


RE: I think AMD has a case
By omnicronx on 5/7/08, Rating: -1
RE: I think AMD has a case
By omnicronx on 5/7/08, Rating: -1
RE: I think AMD has a case
By Adonlude on 5/7/08, Rating: -1
RE: I think AMD has a case
By Ryanman on 5/7/2008 3:16:35 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Really if you look at the entire lifetime of the computer starting back in the 70's when Intel invented the first processors, yes, you will see a brief 5 year period there AMD was the performance leader.


Don't be ignorant. These mere "five years" are the exact period of time that this entire case has to do with. How can you NOT find it incredibly suspicious that, faced with a better performing and value-minded product, almost none of these OEM's bought and sold AMD chips? It's similar to a lot of the witch hunt accusations in buisness nowadays about sexual and racial discrimination. Why would any company, focused on profit and performance, choose anything but the best bang for their buck?
The answer is there must have been something to nullify that loss of profit. You could argue that the non-techincally literate give Intel more brand recognition, but that's not signifiant enough to explain the complete shunning of all these OEM's toward AMD.

Don't get me wrong, Intel's made major steps and if I were to build a high-end machine these days I'd go core2 all the way. But I have no doubt in my mind that there is something very suspicious about this whole situation.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By omnicronx on 5/7/2008 3:35:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Don't get me wrong, Intel's made major steps and if I were to build a high-end machine these days I'd go core2 all the way. But I have no doubt in my mind that there is something very suspicious about this whole situation.
Thank you, nicely put, Intel owns the performance crown right now and with good reason, they have a better product, but I too find the entire situation very suspicious indeed.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By Adonlude on 5/7/08, Rating: 0
RE: I think AMD has a case
By xti on 5/7/2008 4:18:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This case is not about just those 5 years. Reading comprehension is your friend.


And the case isn't about the 30-40 calendar years either. Those 5 years represented many more figuratively as far as competition goes, and what happened across those 30-40 years will probably be shown to have been extra active in those 5 years.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By omnicronx on 5/7/2008 4:43:16 PM , Rating: 2
Also by going back as far as 30 years, AMD can claim that this is not a new mentality for Intel, and that they have had hostile business practices since their inception. This would be no different than a prosecutor in a murder trial putting up a witness to show that in the past the defendent had engaged in violent behavior.. Most of AMD's suit has to do with practices within the past 5-6 years before the suit (i.e 1999-2005)


RE: I think AMD has a case
By Adonlude on 5/7/2008 8:08:06 PM , Rating: 1
Gotta love the downrating when commenting on Intel VS AMD articles.

It is obvious that the rating system simply becomes a measure of the ratio of AMD to Intel supporters reading the article.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By spluurfg on 5/8/2008 4:26:22 AM , Rating: 3
It happens on Apple threads to the extreme.

I think people use the rating system to voice their agreement/disagreement, rather than judging on relevance/appropriateness/etc. I think if you disagree, a reply with your reasoning would be most helpful -- it's a discussion after all: there will be people who don't agree with you and even people who are honestly mistaken.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By BarkHumbug on 5/8/2008 8:28:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It is obvious that the rating system simply becomes a measure of the ratio of AMD to Intel supporters reading the article.


Or it could be that you're just posting crap. If AMD as a subcontractor thought they could improve and do a better job than Intel at designing the x86 processors I would think less of them if they didn't try and make it on their own. It's just good business sense.

Just for the record, I have nothing against Intel. I'm currently looking to build my next computer with an Intel C2D processor and I'm loving the fact that they are dirt cheap because of COMPETITION.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By Adonlude on 5/15/2008 5:35:46 PM , Rating: 2
So if you invent something you think it is ok for someone else to come along and use your intellectual property to make money at your expense? Thats a load of BS.

Just for the record, my Intel stock is up $1 today. I'm loving the fact that I am making money for lack of AMD's COMPETITION.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By Phynaz on 5/7/2008 5:02:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How can you NOT find it incredibly suspicious that, faced with a better performing and value-minded product, almost none of these OEM's bought and sold AMD chips?


Because AMD was capacity constrained and couldn't produce the chips to meet demand?


RE: I think AMD has a case
By Sahrin on 5/7/2008 7:46:31 PM , Rating: 2
This would drive up prices; which it didn't. (Until A64, AMD has never had price parity with Intel).


RE: I think AMD has a case
By seamonkey79 on 5/7/2008 8:09:39 PM , Rating: 2
Capacity constraint only raises prices when you cannot go elsewhere to get the product. AMD's problem is that they not only cannot provide the chips, they also cannot make people pay more for them, which keeps them (AMD) from being able to build new/larger fabs with which to produce more CPUs so that they can provide the chips.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By Sahrin on 5/8/2008 8:10:30 AM , Rating: 2
If you can go somewhere else to get it, then it's by definition not a supply issue.

If AMD makes the top performing chip and can't supply enough, you can't go to Intel to get parts because Intel's chips don't perform at the same level.

Think about it like the Prius when it came out. Toyota never actually raised prices, they made the same cut the whole time - and you could go to any dealer in the world to get one. The catch is, that because supply was constrained, dealers raised prices. Not Toyota. But the market itself (that is, the buyers and sellers) agreed on a higher price due to the increased demand and limited supply.

Law of supply works ceteris paribus; which isn't how the world works, I understand. But when we are talking about tens of millions of units being sold, other factors are quashed by the basic laws of economics - because at those scales the basic rules are the only ones that have any effect.


RE: I think AMD has a case
By Sahrin on 5/7/2008 7:51:36 PM , Rating: 5
You've got a pretty warped impression of how AMD began. I'm pretty sure that Intel and AMD settled the x86 patent case-series out