Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD'S LAWYERS ON SKYPE

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 2, 2006 12:26:31 AM

It's a shame that skype is kissing Intel's @ss just for a few bucks.
They deserve a subpoena for such an unethical behaviour, but what else can you expect from Intel's influence??

Once a time, my grandmother told me the following:
Once you go among the dog, you catch his fleas 8)

http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-6044365.html?part=rss&tag=6044365&subj=news

More about : amd lawyers skype

a b à CPUs
March 2, 2006 12:58:26 AM

skype makes there software better for intels because intels are better, more cache equals more performance and higher mhz is faster!

yeah thats totally bs with skype - should make a patition here - sign here is you think the skype/intel "deal" should be trashed
March 2, 2006 1:03:23 AM

Wow... I always knew my Intel processors were better... Now I have proof! Aw shoot... I don't have a dual core yet :cry: 
Related resources
March 2, 2006 1:37:45 AM

Quote:
Wow... I always knew my Intel processors were better... Now I have proof! Aw shoot... I don't have a dual core yet :cry: 


Dude, your 18GHz CPU is pwnage man, where can I get one?

I think that Skype is just another company to jump into bed with Intel. Futuremark + SiSoftware + Skype + Intel = Wedding Made In Technology Hell.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 2:22:35 AM

Thank you Jesus! I'm glad AMD is going to bring this up in the anti-trust case. I personally believe this deal Intel signed with Skype/eBay is just going to damned far.

-mpjesse
March 2, 2006 2:35:54 AM

Couldn't agree with you more. I much as I like both processor manufacturers, I don't agree at all with what Intel is doing to push their products.
a b à CPUs
March 2, 2006 5:13:37 AM

Quote:
Wow... I always knew my Intel processors were better... Now I have proof! Aw shoot... I don't have a dual core yet :cry: 


Dude, your 18GHz CPU is pwnage man, where can I get one?

I think that Skype is just another company to jump into bed with Intel. Futuremark + SiSoftware + Skype + Intel = Wedding Made In Technology Hell.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Isnt it funny when AMD wins in an intel optimised benchmark

on the otherhand, years ago amd aparently was doing the same thing as intel
March 2, 2006 6:09:32 PM

Apache, I don't care that Intel is doing shoddy business tactics, but they're promoting a CPU Architecture that is inferior to something by their competitor, and that is just R-Tarded.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 6:19:55 PM

i hope that ebay gets it up the ass for this :twisted:
March 2, 2006 6:53:55 PM

Poo AMD. :roll:
Well that's what you get for being the SECOND greatest chip manufacteurer! :lol: 
BTW AMD is wasting time with the law suit.
March 2, 2006 6:55:29 PM

Quote:
Poo AMD. :roll:
Well that's what you get for being the SECOND greatest chip manufacteurer! :lol: 
BTW AMD is wasting time with the law suit.


BTW, you're wasting time posting your Intel Fanboy Propaganda, thanks fanboy newb, go have a popsicle and watch cartoons.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 6:55:48 PM

I don't! I sell too much crap on eBay. Don't need any more higher selling fees...

Besides, this isn't a lawsuit against Skype. All they've done is subpoenaed the details of the Intel/Skype deal to help build their case. No one (including AMD) is contending this deal broke a law. However, it could be argued that what INTEL is doing is anticompetitive which would lend to the anti-trust lawsuit. Does that make sense? I'm not so sure myself...
March 2, 2006 7:08:44 PM

i third that arguement :D  damn intel fanboy
March 2, 2006 7:22:11 PM

But seriously now there is some truth in my post. AMD is fighting in an unfair battle so i must admit it's a miracle they've survived this long. Remember what experts said about AMD a few years ago? They said that it would be out of the market in a couple of years. And i as many others believed that. In fact if it weren't for Net Burst AMD might not be in its current position.
Intel is still x times bigger and still has a major influence and can come up with unresistable bargain prices.
But no one said that the market world was fair nor that it should be.
As long as Intel is holding the monopoly this won't change. Win by faul play? If it's necesary yes! If you can kill competition,do it! I think Intel's actions are quite understandable. If you can't kill him with rocks,use knives instead.
March 2, 2006 7:31:02 PM

Quote:
But seriously now there is some truth in my post. AMD is fighting in an unfair battle so i must admit it's a miracle they've survived this long. Remember what experts said about AMD a few years ago? They said that it would be out of the market in a couple of years. And i as many others believed that. In fact if it weren't for Net Burst AMD might not be in its current position.
Intel is still x times bigger and still has a major influence and can come up with unresistable bargain prices.
But no one said that the market world was fair nor that it should be.
As long as Intel is holding the monopoly this won't change. Win by faul play? If it's necesary yes! If you can kill competition,do it! I think Intel's actions are quite understandable. If you can kill him with rocks,use knives instead.


Jeez...Fanboy...

Once AMD wins this lawsuit, Intel won't have it's grasp it once did, and the tables will turn. Intel started back in 1986 to throw tantrums, when IBM required 2 sources for CPU's and AMD was under license from Intel for a little while than Intel decided to cancel the deal. That lead to AMD winning $1 Billion from the Supreme Court in 1991 for Intel's Premature ending of the contract. In 1991 as well, after the litigation hold up by Intel, the AMD Am386 Processor was released, clocked 7Mhz above the 386's 33MHz. AMD has almost always been ahead of Intel in price/performance, and if it wasn't for Intel making that mistake back in 1986, AMD and Intel could have become 2 great companies making great chips together, but instead it's 1 company trying to kill the other because they are mad.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 7:37:09 PM

1. i disagree with you
2.intel has been making crap now cause they can with their superior marketing!
March 2, 2006 7:45:48 PM

I agree with that. The thing is, Intel is so used to having strong marketing while their products have been rather less than on par.

Now, Intel is faced with having to produce products that not only catch up to AMDs current performance, but surpass it by such a margin that will put them ahead of AMD. Intel is already ahead technology wise but that's pretty much it. Although you can OC them to death, not everybody wants to OC and you should be able to at least buy a chip that comes close to its rival.

Even today, Intel still thinks like they always have. Market their products to death and talk alot about how much more they deliver. Well, we simply won't know how they will deliver until Conroe gets here but I gotta feeling, its either going to catapault them way ahead of AMD or it will be disaster.

I myself am rather surprised AMD is still in existence only because of Intels tactics. I'm glad they did survive too.
March 2, 2006 7:47:16 PM

Quote:
But seriously now there is some truth in my post. AMD is fighting in an unfair battle so i must admit it's a miracle they've survived this long. Remember what experts said about AMD a few years ago? They said that it would be out of the market in a couple of years. And i as many others believed that. In fact if it weren't for Net Burst AMD might not be in its current position.
Intel is still x times bigger and still has a major influence and can come up with unresistable bargain prices.
But no one said that the market world was fair nor that it should be.
As long as Intel is holding the monopoly this won't change. Win by faul play? If it's necesary yes! If you can kill competition,do it! I think Intel's actions are quite understandable. If you can't kill him with rocks,use knives instead.


Ok, now your just an idiot. Your basic premise is eliminate the competition any way possible. Thats the LAST thing any smart consumer wants. By eliminating competition, you eliminate innovation, and nothing ever gets better.

BTW, if you ever wrote a post that wasn't dripping with Intel, I would be utterly shocked. Grow up and open your eyes.
March 2, 2006 7:56:25 PM

Quote:

BTW, if you ever wrote a post that wasn't dripping with Intel, I would be utterly shocked. Grow up and open your eyes.
you know i think hes on intel's payroll
March 2, 2006 7:57:10 PM

Quote:

BTW, if you ever wrote a post that wasn't dripping with Intel, I would be utterly shocked. Grow up and open your eyes.
you know i think hes on intel's payroll

And are you on AMD's? ;) 

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 8:01:13 PM

Quote:
You gotta admit tha Intel has very good marketing, but it's most filled with crap. But afterall, all marketing is like that.


Marketing only sells the product, it doesn't make it better. The problem I have is that Intel Fanboy's try to believe the Marketing and say their Intel P4's are "pwnage", which they have to know is BS, but than again, most Intel Fanboy's have never used a AMD CPU or just an old one. A friend of mine was comparing a K6 600MHz to his 1.5GHz Pentium M and was reluctant to switch to AMD. I ended up drawing a diagram and descriptions comparing Pentium D to Athlon X2, and now he is the proud owner of a 3800+ X2 :) .

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 8:04:33 PM

i wish i was on amds payroll then i would be making better opty for all of you to oc that take 50 watts and 1.2 volts :D  AT LOAD ON 90NM SOI :D 
March 2, 2006 8:10:05 PM

Quote:
i wish i was on amds payroll then i would be making better opty for all of you to oc that take 50 watts and 1.2 volts :D  AT LOAD ON 90NM SOI :D 


LOL. That was funny. There is no way you could do that, since the CPU's (most single core) operate on 60 Amps, 60 * 1.4v = 84 Watts, which is about the standard for A64 and O64CPU's. Dual-Core runs on 80 Amps, which increases it 112 watts. But Intel is claiming with their 2010+ Xeon's, to get it down to .1v, which I find to be freakin' hillarious!

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 8:19:32 PM

First both national and international law says the market should be fair. Second, unless you own a boatload of Intel stock, why would you want them to have a monopoly, especially if you buy their product? If Intel ever became a monopoly, I seriously doubt that tellling them you're fanboy will get you a 50% or$70% discount.
March 2, 2006 8:20:07 PM

its possible just you have to be really smart to do it
March 2, 2006 8:23:59 PM

You do have a good point and face the fact intel or amd Fanboy. If one Company drops what is left? Cpu that are the same as they where as today. For the company dont have to upgrad them as fast to beat each other.
March 2, 2006 8:24:05 PM

Quote:
its possible just you have to be really smart to do it


Don't say stupid things.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 8:24:15 PM

Quote:
First both national and international law says the market should be fair. Second, unless you own a boatload of Intel stock, why would you want them to have a monopoly, especially if you buy their product? If Intel ever became a monopoly, I seriously doubt that tellling them you're fanboy will get you a 50% or$70% discount.
lol gpaw so true i wonder if intel gives discounts to its biggest and dummest fanboys lol :lol: 
March 2, 2006 8:25:50 PM

Quote:
its possible just you have to be really smart to do it


Don't say stupid things.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time what mike its possible if you decrease the amps and lower the fsb
March 2, 2006 8:28:36 PM

If you reduce power to the chip, it will reduce performance/stability, which is just stupid.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 8:32:22 PM

ok man what if you decrease just the fsb? i heard that its a part of the power issue too
March 2, 2006 8:50:58 PM

Again, reducing performance to save power is called EIST or AMD Power Now!, and that is stupid to reduce the FSB, because all you can do is reduce the number of times it's sent per cycle or reduce the entire CPU speed itself, because the FSB and CPU Crystal are THE SAME THING.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
March 2, 2006 8:58:39 PM

Thx man now i know and knowing is half the battle THANKS J.O.E. GO J.O.E. REALLY WHATS THE OTHER HALF OF THE BATTLE WHY BEATING THE S**T OUT OF THOSE COMMIE BASTARDS GO JOE!
March 2, 2006 10:41:10 PM

I know what the government will do... Make Intel split their product line. Itanic goes on it's own!!!! :lol:  Course, that would just make Intel stronger...
March 2, 2006 11:46:59 PM

wey hey. Now my 3.2 GHz northwood will outperform all you stupid AMD fanboys with your super new tech
(before i get any hate-mail - just joking)
March 2, 2006 11:50:53 PM

good thing you were jokin cause i would've well i cant say it
March 3, 2006 12:01:11 AM

I guess we are all in agreement here except CompGeek.

Semper Fi Carry^H^H^H^H^H Linux on! :D 
March 3, 2006 12:03:03 AM

This is what you resort to when you can't beat them fair and square. When you have money you buy the rule book and change the rules as you go.

The amazing part is that they still are dragging their feet about integrating the memory controller. They say that they may integrate it by the end of the decade. Their so arrogant that they don't want to adopt an idea of a competitors to improve their product even when AMD made the HTT bus open source.
!