Print 62 comment(s) - last by JackPack.. on Mar 2 at 2:02 PM

Skype's decision to release Intel-only features on its newest software refresh may have been a poor idea

Last month we wrote a small piece about the upcoming Skype 2.0 features that are only enabled for Intel processors.  AMD is hoping to add another spear to its ranks by demanding Skype documents that prove or disprove Intel provided incentives to Skype for this favor.  Intel denies the allegations

A Skype executive declined to comment earlier this month when asked whether the company had tested the performance of its software on both Intel's and AMD's dual-core chips. An Intel representative confirmed that there are no instructions that specifically enhance the performance of voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) software like Skype's in Intel's dual-core chips.

This is not the first time this year for an AMD-Intel legal battle.  AMD has been building anti-trust cases against Intel in Japan, the US and Korea for over a year, claiming that Intel leverages its buyers and distributors to not carry AMD products.  Of course, AMD's 21.4% marketshare is looking pretty good to the company right now, monopoly or not. 

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Companies...
By SunAngel on 3/1/2006 11:53:46 AM , Rating: 3
You made a solid response ... "why would Skype exclude 20% of the market?" That is one reason why I can not see this as being an anti-trust issue (but I may be wrong though). Is Intel's 80% enough of a monopolistic percentage to effectly create harm to AMD. Some would say 20% is enough to influence the market, maybe not change the market but nevertheless influence it. If Intel was to effective sew-up Vonage and the others from developing for AMD and as a result AMD's marketshare never improved or declined and at the same time the Sony/IBM "Cell" was to swipe marketshare from both Intel, AMD, Via and the others you have to conclude AMD is not competing effectively. But it doesnt seem to me AMD is doing a bad job. Over a decade they went from 0 marketshare to 20+%. Intel's mission should be to contain the damage and repair. AMD's job is to continue to bust the market wide open. So, in other words, both are doing excellent jobs in their respect endeavors. New companies will be the ones claim anti-trust because they can't enter the market. However, we all know the Sony/IBM venture will not have such issue. :)

RE: Companies...
By masher2 on 3/1/2006 12:16:26 PM , Rating: 2
But it doesnt seem to me AMD is doing a bad job. Over a decade they went from 0 marketshare to 20+%

Err, not true. When AMD released the K7, their market share briefly hit 23%. They're still not back up to that level yet.

"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki