Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th May 2009 08:46 UTC
Intel Microsoft isn't the only company in the technology industry with a monopoly. Its partner in crime, Intel, has often been accused of monopoly abuse as well, and is currently under scrutiny by the same European Commission who fined Microsoft. Sources have told eWeek (which generally has a good track record) that Intel will indeed be found guilty this week of abusing its monopoly position to stifle the competition.
Thread beginning with comment 362858
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by daedalus8
by Phloptical on Mon 11th May 2009 16:57 UTC in reply to "Comment by daedalus8"
Phloptical
Member since:
2006-10-10

IMO - AMD was left in the dust when Intel released the Core2, based on performance. That chip is why I switched to Intel. AMD was caught with their pants down, and until they stop playing catch-up, I will remain with Intel.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by daedalus8
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 11th May 2009 16:58 in reply to "RE: Comment by daedalus8"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

IMO - AMD was left in the dust when Intel released the Core2, based on performance. That chip is why I switched to Intel. AMD was caught with their pants down, and until they stop playing catch-up, I will remain with Intel.


AMD being t3h suck doesn't magically allow Intel to break the law.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by daedalus8
by Phloptical on Tue 12th May 2009 23:13 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by daedalus8"
Phloptical Member since:
2006-10-10

The EU saying Intel is a monopoly carries about as much weight as calling Microsoft one. No US corporation gives a furry rats behind what the EU says.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by daedalus8
by swtestuser on Wed 13th May 2009 04:33 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by daedalus8"
swtestuser Member since:
2009-05-13

When Athlon came out. It was kicking Intel's back big time; had Intel play fair AMD would have gotten much better market share and money to further compete better w ith Intel. Blocking sales of a better product by Intel against AMD was why we need to punish Intel big time

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by daedalus8
by adkilla on Mon 11th May 2009 18:11 in reply to "RE: Comment by daedalus8"
adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

Hardware virtualization (AMD-V), HyperTransport, 3DNow!, x86-64 (AMD64) are innovative technologies that AMD pioneered.

What did Intel bring to the table? SSE that was inferior to 3dNow? Nehalem QPI that is a copy of HyperTransport? AMD64 branded as EM64T? An AMD-V copy that is Intel-VT?

I would like to see Intel bring improvements to the x86 ISA than merely using and abusing AMD.

IMHO AMD has much better value for money:
http://blogs.amd.com/patmoorhead/2009/01/23/why-spore-may-look-so-p...

Raw CPU performance alone does not make an overall good platform. The question is are you really getting your moneys worth?

Well if you mainly do Folding@Home or SETI@Home then that might be a different story. ;-)

-Ad

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by daedalus8
by 0brad0 on Tue 12th May 2009 06:23 in reply to "RE: Comment by daedalus8"
0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05

IMO - AMD was left in the dust when Intel released the Core2, based on performance. That chip is why I switched to Intel. AMD was caught with their pants down, and until they stop playing catch-up, I will remain with Intel.


AMD still has the best bang for the buck by far. That's all I care about. I'm not paying a premium for the top 5% of the performance range.

Reply Parent Score: 1