- Related Stories
-
Why $100 computers are on the way
April 26, 2005 -
Intel to abide by Japan FTC recommendations
March 31, 2005 -
Tackling Intel: Mission impossible?
March 17, 2005 -
Japan antitrust watchdog bites Intel
March 8, 2005 -
EU takes aim at Intel--again
October 13, 2004 -
Intel to pay in chip patent dispute
April 15, 2002
(continued from previous page)
dealings. The claim at the time was that Intel has "beaten them into 'guacamole'" in retaliation, the complaint states.
AMD has launched a Web site that details the new complaint.
Handicapping the case
One obstacle AMD could face is getting original equipment manufacturers and Intel customers to testify against the chip giant, according to some.
"If an OEM is reluctant to help, you can subpoena them to get the information, but they might not put it in the best light to help your case, or help get the facts assembled the way you want," said an antitrust attorney who asked not to be named.
AMD, however, says it doesn't expect to have difficulty getting its customers to respond.
"Privately, we've had many people in the industry tell us it would be great if they were forced to tell the truth," Simonoff said. When under oath, they'll be in that position, he said.
AMD may find a favorable audience at the U.S. District Court in Delaware, some antitrust attorneys said.
The same court recently ruled in favor of a company accused of antitrust violations, but the court's decision was later overturned by an appeals court. As a result, according to one school of thought, the district court, not eager to see another decision overturned, may be more sensitive to companies bringing antitrust complaints.
In the previous case, Dentsply International had been accused of requiring distributors of its dentures to forgo carrying competitors' products in order to receive discounts on pricing. The district court ruled in favor of Dentsply, but that ruling was reversed when the U.S. Department of Justice appealed.
One lawyer noted that courts sometimes have divergent views on how discounts should be used.
"Some courts view discounts as a normal course of competition, and other courts look at discounts as excluding competition," said Howard Morse, an antitrust and high-tech attorney with Drinker, Biddle & Reath.
Although the European Commission continues to review its case against Intel, antitrust attorneys said AMD's lawsuit may not have any bearing there.
 | ||||
|
| | ||
|
Related story Intel to abide by Japan FTC ruling Chipmaker agrees to halt practice of requiring PC makers to limit use of competitors' chips in exchange for rebates. |
| ||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
They note that, in general, government antitrust regulators with a case under way are usually not swayed by cases brought by private parties.
But in certain circumstances, it can make a difference, said the antitrust attorney who requested anonymity.
"If the plaintiff loses during summary judgment because the question of liability does not hold up, the government will notice and take that into consideration for their own case," the attorney said.
The public nature of a lawsuit also may put more pressure on government regulators to expedite their case, he added.
Reuters contributed to this report.
See more CNET content tagged:
AMD,
Intergraph Corp.,
antitrust,
Intel,
Intel x86
Ask our friends in Japan and Europe. Go AMD!
I think a Turion based PowerBook would be very appealing and would be my next computer purchase if it becomes available. Can anyone who knows hardware tell me if Athlon or Turion would be a good fit with the Mac?
So I really don't want to use Intel-based MAC. The day Apple start selling AMD-based MAC, I'll buy it regardless of money.
Sorry, but AMD is much more mainstream (and in demand) than that.
Obviously Intel is giving them something (or threatening them) to prevent even limited AMD CPU purchases.
And why wouldn't AMD fight? Of course they have to fight - they're the underdog. With a better product, yes - but still only 25% to Intel's 75%. Of course they have to be feisty and hope that "something will stick". They'd be foolish and cowardly not to.
Matthew
Why is Dell adamantly sticking to Intel instead of branching out to AMD?
That's a simple answer to figure out: Price, Price, AND Price.
1) Dell is one of Intel's LARGEST customers, and as such, would most likely get a sizeable volume discount.
2) Dell needs to keep support costs DOWN. Supporting two platforms will double the cost of engineering and technical support for Dell - something they don't want to do.
3) Dell's Just-In-Time inventory control is very demanding, and that kind of demand is probably something AMD cannot match at the present time.
4) Or, maybe Dell is an Intel subsidiary! <Gasp!> BTW, this is a joke for you conspiracy theorists.
Conclusion: The fact that Dell is still making tons of cash, compared to HP (who sells a lot of AMD systems), is proof positive that the first three points made above are contributing factors to why Dell has decided to stay with Intel - for the time being. No consipracy theories, or illegal monopolistic activities here! Just plain business sense.
As to why Apple went with Intel.
1) It may surprise many people posting here, but it was Intel, NOT AMD who courted Apple all these years to switch to Intel chips.
2) It was Intel, NOT AMD who built the relationships, and the deals that swayed Apple over, not AMD. Read it on any internet publication and you well see that Intel had been courting Apple for YEARS.
3) Any technological transition is fraught with perils. The transition from a PowerPC architecture to an Intel EMT64 x86 architect is hard enough to do - without throwing a lot more variables into the mix. So, it makes sense that Apple chose an exclusive chip vendor.
4) Apple is soon to be bought out by Intel <Gasp!>, so they must use Intel chips. BTW, this is ALSO a joke.
Conclusion: Unlike the welfare system, Intel EARNED the Apple contract by offering them a compelling product line, volume-discounts, technological assistance, as well as many other intangibles that made a great deal of sense to both parties.
All of these facts are available in the net for verification - you just have to read the articles objectively.
www.anandtech.com
www.news.com
www.theregister.co.uk
etc. etc. etc.
Jack
In Tucson
Also, CPUs are extremely delicate components. You must have figured that out by now. An Intel CPU would fare no better either.
I have to admit your logic is a lot flawed. But, hey, stay with Intel. Both are perfectly good procs. Two very good companies, one just likes to give away money to beat the competition because the can't compete with performance and cooling anymore.
2. On the other hand I have built at least 10 AMD based systems and the only proceesor I've had fail was when I accidently dropped the cooling fan on it and it cracked the chip.
3. If you would check out the recent articals on P-4 developement you would quickly learn that Intel has hit the wall and is unable to compete as their power consumption (heat), pipeline length have resulted in less efficiency as they try to continue to go to higher clock frequencies.
4. If you think back a bit you might have noticed that while Japan (Honda etc.) and the Europeans were busy building the cars with high tech features we all wanted the Detroit bunch sat back cashing in on their old designs misreading the trends which has lost them a lot of market share.
5. So now you have Microsoft desperately clinging to a boat full of holes (Win XP)developing faster than they can plug them. They have made a lot of security mistakes and their only hope is that they can write a security based operating system and then get us all to buy it.
6. Intel is in the same boat. Only difference is that they have coersed the majors into supporting their massive market share. Paying them off.
I have 2 Intels and 8 AMD's. It started that way because Intel Inside was way overpriced.
The idea that something that is said in japan or europe can be used in court in this country against a taxpaying American Co. is ridiculous and unpatriotic!
I know you didn't say anything about their products, but I just want to say anybody who thinks Intel is winning in 'who build the best proc' category isn't keeping up with technology. AMD is leading, just not in sales. Sales doesn't equal best product, just best marketing.
decent chip
that works well with "all" applications not just some applications.
Business is tough get into the game or get out. their customer
service stinks too, At least Apple and Intel build a better brand
and stories like this make me dislike the AMD brand even more.
There is a reason AMD is the #1 choice for high end gaming systems, stability, cooling, price, availability. A system like that still works well as a server or pretty much anything else you want to use your PC for.
Perhaps not the high end server/cluster market but those don't use desktop chips.
AMD is the leader in the 64bit architecture?
AMD CPUs are cheaper and yet they are far more efficient?
AMD CPUs run EVERYTHING that Intel CPUs can?
"Business is tough"
Sure, you wouldn't say that if you weren't on the monopolistic side. Read the damn lawsuit. I know you haven't.
Todays AMD processors are, MIPS per watt/dollar, better performers than Intels and that's a fact.
Intel hit a wall with their "more Mhz is better" campaign where AMD took the route of optimizing their processors and now guess who is following who.
AMD is better, Intel is better. I know this comes as a suprise, but both are good, but at this moment AMD is leading in performance. That doesn't mean they win every benchmark it just means they win the majority of them. Truth be told though the margin between the two companies is slight, so even that is a moot point. I have been buying AMD because they are cheeper, cooler, and perform on par with or better than Intel. If you guys don't believe me go to any hardware review site and see for yourself. Even tomshardware.com is saying that AMD is better. I have always thought tomshardware.com was paid off by Intel because their benchmarks always seam to favor Intel when everybody elses favored AMD.
-
by oroblram
July 16, 2008 9:18 AM PDT
- Caveat emptor : It's no laughing matter when companies are subject to anti-trust suits from the European Anti-Trust Commission. MSFT was recently fined $1.4 billion last February after a prolonged hearing and it's still going on with daily fines; even a Japanese zipper company was fined $250 million couple of years ago when the Euro was weaker. By virtue of Intel's massive share of the market, the EATC may favor AMD's complaint. An amber warning for shareholders, while AMD for now is having the upper-hand on the matter.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 28 Comments >>