Intel "gives permission" for firms to buy AMD chips

Oh yeah


By Jock McFrock the bekilted Engineer: jeudi 14 juillet 2005, 11:53

AN INTERESTING snippet from the always entertaining Digitimes flies by the INQ office.
The wire claims that Intel has told its OEMs they "are now allowed" to buy AMD microprocessors.

Is this true? First it would imply that Intel told its OEMs they weren't allowed to buy AMD microprocessors in the first place, so making the whole antitrust legal cafuffle in the US redundant. And demonstrating a certain gutlessness on behalf of the OEMs.

Secondly, does "being allowed" to buy AMD CPUs mean OEMs are "allowed" to give Intel all of its cooperative marketing funds back?

Shorely shome mishtake. µ



http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24618

If true, take that Intel scum!

Intel is going to get raped in court.

<font color=red>"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
- Albert Einstein</font color=red>

Intel got pussed up

Let's see you daaance, sucka! You've got nothin' on me!
Let's see you...! Let's see you...!
Daaance, sucka!
<font color=orange><b>You got <i>served</i> by Wuzy!</b></font color=orange>

Well, if this is indeed true, then this should be all any court needs to find Intel guilty.

Seems a little too good to be true, though.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>

you're an idiot

i dont know why they are going to the trouble they are gonna buy the judge anyway when the time comes.

The know-most-of-it-all formally known as BOBSHACK

Yes we all know anti trust judges which is a panel of judges gets bought out all the time.

-Jeremy Dach

<font color=red>"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
- Albert Einstein</font color=red>

There is more than one way to buy judges. I expect Homeland Security will tell them we need Intel strong to keep the country strong, while the military tells them we need the best for our boys overseas. A special little note from the Bush-man may be needed as well.

Oh Christ give it up you guys are your conspiracy theories if there was wrong doing justice will be served.

Remember the US took WorldCom down they won’t stray from measly Intel.

-Jeremy Dach

lol....... not in america the government want to control all whil remain a "democratic" soscity and they do this by maniupitating(spelling) big companies and that i think they will probaibly go with intel cuz how big they are... i mean teh computer market is very important to the economy of a such advanced country where computer has become the daily routain of most people

That is the most intelligent thing you have ever said, by a long shot.

While it's possible something like judge corruption could happen, I personally see that stuff reserved for banana republics and what not. AMD can expect to get a fair trial in the u.s. and I expect they will.

What bugs me most,,, is criminal or egregious companies like Toshiba refusing to say they will cooperate. That is the biggest risk to AMD in this trial. Like AMD said sometimes silence says a lot.

Time will tell, will be interesting to watch this unfold.

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

Reminds me of an old song. " We all want justice, but you've got to have the money to buy it. You'd have to be some kind of fool to close your eyes and deny it"
But of course, in the states, justice is always done, just ask Michael J or OJ

Your comparison is grossly misleading but hey Europeans see only what they want to see. As well WorldCom was significantly larger than Intel and more important to boot, yet look at them.

-Jeremy Dach

>Remember the US took WorldCom down they won’t stray from
>measly Intel.

Ahem.. No. When the bubble finally burst, it simply went bankrupt, no help was needed from anyone: you can only play accounting tricks for so long. Pretty much the same happened with Enron BTW.

But I dont see any parallel with Intels antitrust case; I sort of doubt intel is playing comparable accounting tricks and/or is really heading towards bankrupcy. If your point is that "justice will be served", then keep in mind Worldcom/Enrons CxO's are only being trialed long after their companies went bankrupt and a gazillion people, among whom quite a few very influential ones, lost a fortune in the process.

Again I fail to see how this would have to reassure us that Intel will be trailed fairly (which doesn't mean I dont expect it, I just dont see the link). Quite on the contrary, a devils advocate could argue that a lot of influential people are directly or indirectly seriously vested into Intel, and would have nothing to gain from a conviction. Of course, if Paul Otellini one day runs off with a cargoship full of money hidden in a fradulent bookkeeping and intel goes bankrupt, those same people will make sure he is lynched alive. But as long as Otellintel makes them richer, why would they want his head on a platter ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

Blah blah and more blah your argument holds no merit either just hearsay and babble talk. You believe the US won't follow through so be it I won’t sit here and cater to your whimsical thoughts that the US is corrupt and Intel will get off Scott free.

They have been tried before for anti trust activities and have lost. I will take this whole situation at face value if Intel has done something illegal they will be charged accordingly otherwise you are speaking to the AMD quire on this one and frankly they want to see Intel fall simply because rooting for the underdog is fun.

-Jeremy Dach