Intel Monopoly Rocked By Official FTC Investigation

[geokilla]

From DailyTech

Finally Intel's going to get investigated by the FTC in USA. We've got some interesting times up ahead.

[bmaverick]

Thats some news. will it help AMD in the overall picture of things?

[DX]

Maybe a little but i doubt it. AMD has to really get something spectacular out there that will turn it around. So far nothing I have read is going to break Intel's dominance.

[Methious]

Intel still has the better processor, I bought a couple of E2180s from their 800mhz FSB line for testing cpu coolers and stuff and they out do my old x2 6400 in over clocking and performance. I've clocked them up to 3.2 easily and their still under the max vcore their rated for.

I don't see an anti trust law suit changing their dominance in the market. But paying a company not to use AMD processors that's just wrong and IMO they should have to pay AMD for the lost sales and receive a meaningful fine. By meaningful I mean in proportion to their income, no whimpy little 25 million dollar fine some govt agency will frit away.

Reduce the cost of their processors by 10% for a given period of time so the people hurt by their deceptions will benefit instead of Govt or lawyers.

[unfaithfulsfan]

By meaningful I mean in proportion to their income, no whimpy little 25 million dollar fine some govt agency will frit away

Right, how about 25% of their world-wide revenue? That would make an impression, imho

I know the Intel vs AMD feud has been going on for a long time and the recent performance numbers show clearly that Intel <hack, cough> is better. How despicable is it to resort to bribery to increase an already dominant market share? then the US government has been hem-hawing away not doing a damn thing. South Korea has to step up and at least try to punish Intel.

Sorry, but I'm just really disgusted.

[martini161]

i dont see why intel should have to play nice with amd. Intel has better products, so whats wrong with them having market dominance? If amd wants a slice of their market back, then its quite simple really, MAKE A BETTER PRODUCT! You would think the people working there would have figured that out by now

[geokilla]

i dont see why intel should have to play nice with amd. Intel has better products, so whats wrong with them having market dominance? If amd wants a slice of their market back, then its quite simple really, MAKE A BETTER PRODUCT! You would think the people working there would have figured that out by now

Even though Intel has better products, they paid companies such as Samsung, Dell and them to NOT USE AMD processors, even though the AMD processors were way faster than Intel's processors. I'm talking about 3 years ago when Dell computers used Pentium D processors while Dell didn't have a single AMD computer. That's outright wrong.

Imagine you owning a company and then your competition pays both their and your customers to purchase from them instead of you and vice versa. Even though your company's products are clearly better than theirs, your customers are purchasing from them instead because they were paid to do so. That's not fair for you because the competition is buying its customers. They're not winning the customers with their products.

[martini161]

i dont see why intel should have to play nice with amd. Intel has better products, so whats wrong with them having market dominance? If amd wants a slice of their market back, then its quite simple really, MAKE A BETTER PRODUCT! You would think the people working there would have figured that out by now

Even though Intel has better products, they paid companies such as Samsung, Dell and them to NOT USE AMD processors, even though the AMD processors were way faster than Intel's processors. I'm talking about 3 years ago when Dell computers used Pentium D processors while Dell didn't have a single AMD computer. That's outright wrong.

Imagine you owning a company and then your competition pays both their and your customers to purchase from them instead of you and vice versa. Even though your company's products are clearly better than theirs, your customers are purchasing from them instead because they were paid to do so. That's not fair for you because the competition is buying its customers. They're not winning the customers with their products.

if the my companies products are so much better, then how come im not making enough profit to out bribe the competitor? IMHO all's fair in love and war

[unfaithfulsfan]

if the my companies products are so much better, then how come im not making enough profit to out bribe the competitor? IMHO all's fair in love and war

While that may be true, there still should be adherence to ETHICS, which IMHO is the Geneva Convention of the business war. We only have to look at gas prices and oil company windfall profits to see what happens when ethics fly out the window.
Jack

[XstollieX]

Yes companies should adhere to ethics. It should also be painful to be an idiot (maybe thats why I always have headaches ). Unfortunately neither is true. Companies do it all the time. The latest example i can think of is Visa and the Olympics. Visa is the Only card accepted there. Tire companies have been paying the car companies to use tires as well, should they all be investigated? Im gonna go take some more asprin