Intel Accused of breaching European Anti-trust Rules

Your effort of going out of your way to search for every little piece of anti-Intel news should be applauded.... but your intention of finding them should not.

Yea, I guess now if you get accused you are guilty...

By the way, why bring this stuff up? Isn't AMD's superior performance, as you touted, enough?

Good laugh tho.. I guess you'll do til we get BM back.

Whats your point? the EU plays to the tune of everyone who's willing to pay.

Is thunderman some kind of troll bot sent from Azeroth.

Tsk, tsk. Let's treat Thunderman with courtesy and respect, even though his opinions are nothing but DELETED.

I agree...they should do the right thing and recall all Phenom cpu's and replace them with Intel Q6600

Heh - Just so long as *I* don't get stuck with the job of gluing all of those itty~bitty pins to the bottoms of the Q's.

Give me a break, there have been in the last month over a dozen posts about AMD sucks this and AMD sucks that yadda yadda yadda.....what you can dish it out but you can't take it?

I thought so

Nothing but a bunch of little kitty cats..........

obviously there should be a complementary x48 mobo as well..... *goes out and buys phantasy phenom*

Here is AMD's road map for 1998.

http://www.lri.fr/archi/mirror/CIC [...] map98.html

i will have you know the other section is the height of sophistication thank you very much.

oh and turpit, you are a little **** ****** ***** ****** god damn ******** *******

I have no respect for the European Union. They found MS guilty of anti-turst since they included WMP(Windows Media Player) and that was enough.

Last time I loaded a Linux/Unix based system they had a media player. I guess that they want MS to either a. have a blank nothing included OS or B. become an opensource OS which would basically mean MS wouldn't make any money.

Either way it seems that the European Union is trying to get any US based company in its crosshairs. I hear its going after Google next since it has the superior search engine.

the difference being that it ain't their media player, it is the one that they think suits people's needs and is most compatable. microsoft puts there own media player(which is good enough for me) with their operating system. their is a difference, with linux it is very easty to get another media player or any other software but they do not go out of their way to intergrate a specific one into it. also, linux ones support many more formats and options, you are not limited as much.

sorry, but your argument fails.

except intel

Is anyone realy supprised? I mean Intel has managed to shut down 2 major charity orgs that helped get PC/laptops into the hands of the lower class. Alot of that charity work was in Europe. The Euros are a bit pissed off atm. Then again all of these big biz do the same stuff. If they can grind out a penny from something they will. I dont doubt for a second AMD would not do the same.

Though maybe theoretically correct, given the timelines from R&D to market, and given AMD's relatively recent market shares of 30+% and brief burst of profitability, I'd bet they'd have a hard time proving that the current R&D and mfg predicaments they are in are anything other than poor corporate management...

I guess the lawyers will have to figure this one out since it'll likely only be a matter of time before AMD tries to litigate it's way out of another self-inflicted f-up...

I will agree that it may not be Linux's own media player but MS including WMP is not "anti-trust" breaking. It is originally set to play MP3s and WMA(WMA makes sense) but is not restricted to that. In XP you can set the default program that would want specific files to open with. This includes music files, video files, CDs/DVDs even certain files like DLLs and are not restricted to the programs that MS includes. Thats my point. You can download Real Player(why you would want to I don't know) and set it to open everything music/video wise.

Its like when people got mad that MS incorporated Internet Explorer as part of the Kernal in Windows 98+. They of course didn't see the benefit of it since it greatly increased the speed and responsiveness of the OS as compared to Windows 95 they just saw it as MS trying to push IE on them when you could install and use any browser you wanted. When I lived with my grandparents I used almost every browser out since we moved through internet providers a lot and used AOL(which blew), IE, Firefox, Netscape even Earthlinks browser. You are not restricted to IE its just there for those who want to use it.

I prefer WMP as it is easy to use, has a great library feature and you can download plugins for it with ease such as DivX for .avi playback. I see that MS includes IE, WMP and the other features like WMC (in Vista) for those who are not computer/software savvy which is probably roughly 90% of the mass majority. Those who are computer/software savvy have the option to buy other programs or download the free ones that they want.

What the EU wants for MS is for them to release their Kernal and their software so everyone can use it. When MS was developing Vista they decided to lock the Kernal and McAffe was mad since we all know that the anti-virus companies produce 90% of the viruses so they can sell their product and MS said no.

Its kinda like with Intel vs AMD. Even when AMD had roughly 33% of the market share they didn't have the power to mass produce the CPUs and outsell Intel. Where Intel could produce 1 million of a certain CPU family AMD could produce lets say 300k so Intel had more to sell and vendors needed CPUs for their PCs they sold especially to large corporations that would buy thousands at a time. I also see nothing wrong with a vendor being exclusive or getting rebates for buying bulk. The reason Wal Mart has lower prices than most other places is due to the fact that they buy everything in such large comodaties that they get discounts.

I just don't see how even when AMD is gaining market share can think that its only due to Intels exclusivity/discounts when the bulk of AMD not out selling Intel is due to the fact that they cannot manufacture as many CPUs as Intel. And now they seem to be getting in a worse state.

Think of this real quick. NVidia has more "exclusive" partners who make only their cards where as ATI makes their own and has a few who make their cards(some who make NVidia as well such as Asus). Due to this even when ATI would be the better card its probably possible that NVidia might have a superior manufacturing process. Would this make NVidia a monopoly or would it just mean that NVidia can make more GPUs and has more companies to throw those cards out? And I prefer ATI after my horrible experience with both NVidias cards and drivers. Just food for thought.

well no, AMD did tip them and asked a investigation but AMD isnt sueing them, only the commission is and the whole process is just in the beginning. And if Intel eventually gets fined all the money will just disappear in the bottomless pockets of the EU, AMD wont get a dime. (unless Intel is actually ruled to pay compensations aswell in addition to the fine, but I kind of doubt thats gonna happen)