Intel *guilty* of anti-trust practices

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Here's something that many of us were predicting would eventually
happen to Intel eventually, if it let its guard down. Apparently in
Japan, Intel simply wasn't careful enough.

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20050305wo11.htm

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 4 Mar 2005 13:18:52 -0800, "YKhan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:

>Here's something that many of us were predicting would eventually
>happen to Intel eventually, if it let its guard down. Apparently in
>Japan, Intel simply wasn't careful enough.
>
>http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20050305wo11.htm
>
> Yousuf Khan

Scumbags get what they deserve eventually.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

nobody@nowhere.net wrote:
> Looks pretty much like a slap on the wrist. When the name of
monopoly
> was MSFT, everybody raved about the whole 9 yards of measures, from
> multibillion fines to forced partition of the company. Not this time
> around with INTC...

Yeah, it does look like a slap on the wrist, which indicates to me that
they still don't have anything concrete on Intel yet. But the Japanese
ministry is concerned enough about the smoke to think that there is a
fire nearby.

Yousuf Khan

 

[mygarbage2000]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 4 Mar 2005 13:18:52 -0800, "YKhan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:

>Here's something that many of us were predicting would eventually
>happen to Intel eventually, if it let its guard down. Apparently in
>Japan, Intel simply wasn't careful enough.
>
>http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20050305wo11.htm
>
> Yousuf Khan
Looks pretty much like a slap on the wrist. When the name of monopoly
was MSFT, everybody raved about the whole 9 yards of measures, from
multibillion fines to forced partition of the company. Not this time
around with INTC...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Looks like AMD is suggesting that Intel lost its Irish subsidy because
the EU is getting ready to prosecute Intel as well.

AMD says EU probe will shine light on Intel
"He said that the decision by the Irish government last week to
withdraw funds from Intel for its Leixlip fab should be seen in the
light of its manufacturing model."
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21667

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 8 Mar 2005 08:54:11 -0800, "YKhan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:

>Looks like AMD is suggesting that Intel lost its Irish subsidy because
>the EU is getting ready to prosecute Intel as well.
>
>AMD says EU probe will shine light on Intel
>"He said that the decision by the Irish government last week to
>withdraw funds from Intel for its Leixlip fab should be seen in the
>light of its manufacturing model."
>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21667

I believe that the Irish situation has more to do with the fact that EU
countries are allowed to subsidize "new" industry, i.e. there has to be
some R&D involved to stay within EU guidelines... the suggestion being that
Intel just uses its cookie-cutter FAB model so there is no local design
content.

Ireland has also used up a lot of its credits in that respect and its
economy is now considered stimulated enough to bring it up to par
industrially with other EU countries... and it now has to compete on even
terms with the others. It used to be that England had a population of
"Irish navvies" who did a lot of the dirty work; apparently that situation
has been reversed and there's been a migration of English unskilled labor
to Eire looking for work.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald