Buy Intel

[DavidOdden]

In the past, I've supported AMD because they do make good products (sometimes better that the Intel product), are cheap, and in general I want to do what I can to encourage competition in the marketplace. AMD disagrees with the latter principle, and has initiated the use of force against Intel. Disgusting.

[gags]

I see nothing wrong with the Intel anti-competitive actions listed by Mr. Ruiz. It's a shame, but businessmen who are true capitalists are few and far between.

[Praxus]

I see nothing wrong with the Intel anti-competitive actions listed by Mr. Ruiz.  It's a shame, but businessmen who are true capitalists are few and far between.

A real competiter to Intel claiming Intel is a monopoly. How Ironic.

[softwareNerd]

The sad thing is that AMD has a good chance of succeeding in its action.

It is a commonly-held misconception that Intel is a "monopoly".

The lawyers will probably get their hands on some internal email where a manager says he wants to "crush" or "pummel" AMD. In our politically-correct world, that's oh so evil!

The lawyers will find a device manufactrer who considered buying AMD chips for a new device and was told by an Intel rep. that if he did so, they'd have to take back the price breaks he was getting on the other chips he bought from Intel.

And so on.

[DavidV]

I’ve been an AMD fan for many years – first because of the lower prices, and later because they make better hardware. It’s really depressing to see their anti-trust website talk about how great competition is (which is true), how their products are superior (which is also true) and then demand that Intel be punished for their “illegal” activities.

Tell AMD what you think: [email protected]

[Yes]

That's a good idea, David.

Perhaps I'd like to take a look at AMD's allegations:

Forcing major customers to accept exclusive deals

First, the plaintiff must prove his allegations beyond a reasonable doubt.

How do you force a major customer to accept an exclusive deal? I am aware of instances that in contracts a seller contracts to a buyer that he will use his products exclusively in their equipment. So AMD will have to prove that Intel forced their customers to use Intel chips exclusively in their computers, and that the use of AMD chips is a violation of such contract.

I wish AMD good luck in trying to prove this allegation.

Withholding rebates and marketing subsidies as a means of punishing customers who buy more than prescribed quantities of processors from AMD

This allegation assumes that the buyers of Intel chips have no choice but to use Intel chips. Also, it is Intel's right to offer rebates and other incentives to whomever it pleases.

This allegation seems weak. Very weak.

Threatening retaliation against customers doing business with AMD

Does AMD have solid proof of this?

Establishing quotas keeping retailers from selling the computers they want, and

Easy to defend against this allegation. Again, AMD will have to furnish proof of this- difficult to do as they will have to prove that Intel established such quotas.

Forcing PC makers to boycott AMD product launches.

Can they furnish correspondence to back up their claims?

No contracting entity has the right to use force against another- that is a basic concept of fair trade.

But the burden of proof is on AMD.

[DavidOdden]

First, the plaintiff must prove his allegations beyond a reasonable doubt.

Well, no. If this does actually go to court as a civil matter, AMD has to shoulder the lesser "preponderance of evidence" burden of proof. Since the term "monopolize" is undefined, it's hard to defend yourself against the accusation. And you don't have to actually monopolize: see 15 USC 2 "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize..".

[Yes]

Well, no. If this does actually go to court as a civil matter, AMD has to shoulder the lesser "preponderance of evidence" burden of proof. Since the term "monopolize" is undefined, it's hard to defend yourself against the accusation. And you don't have to actually monopolize: see 15 USC 2 "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize..".

I partly agree with you, but for different reasons.

Many times cases like this get to court and they get settled out of court.

"Monopoly" may be less of an issue here than the alleged abuses. But in disputes, many times pragmatism takes hold, and it comes down to the big companies paying off the smaller plaintiffs to go away.

[studentofobjectivism]

If AMD's products are so much cheaper and so much superior, why don't they sell as much as Intel's? (Maybe the same reason that Rearden Metal didn't sell much?)

Edited July 1, 2005 by studentofobjectivism

[pvtmorriscsa]

These complaints seem very similar to the complaints leveled against Microsoft, by Netscape, and later the Federal Government. Whining and sniveling from a perceived underdog, against a perceived bully.

My current machine has an AMD chip, which I am very happy with. It was faster for the money than an equivalently priced Intel machine.

Too bad we don’t live in a capitalist country, with a capitalist economy where this fight could be carried out in the market instead of the courtroom.

I guess my next machine is going to have to be a Mac.

[DavidV]

If AMD's products are so much cheaper and so much superior, why don't they sell as much as Intel's? (Maybe the same reason that Rearden Metal didn't sell much?)

I am no expert, but I think the conservatism of pc makers has much to do with it. AMD’s processors also tend to be more on the bleeding edge, which scares of vendors looking for proven technology.

[LaVache]

AMD’s processors also tend to be more on the bleeding edge, which scares of vendors looking for proven technology.

The huge overheating problem of early AMD chips probably also has something to do with things. Even though they have fixed the problem, I still have some friends who visibly cringe at the mention of AMD, and I'm sure some of the vendors feel the same way.

[Toolboxnj]

Perhaps we'll hear from Gary Hull on this piece of news. Anyone interested in the issue of monopoly should read his new book, The Abolition of Antitrust.

[scottkursk]

The huge overheating problem of early AMD chips probably also has something to do with things.  Even though they have fixed the problem, I still have some friends who visibly cringe at the mention of AMD, and I'm sure some of the vendors feel the same way.

I still have friends that are convinced my Powerbook is going to explode any moment now because of the massive recall the 5300's had back in the 90's seeminglys secongs after they hit the market. First impressions can be hard to come back from.