EPTTssk tssk Intel - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
F[5]aLaMaT
United States71 Posts
| ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
On May 14 2009 10:53 dybydx wrote: while intel has been a bad boy, AMD isnt doing so hot lately largely because of its own stupidity. their purchase of ATI didnt time well with the economic slow down. my friend works at AMD is worried that the company may go down or hand out pink slips. QFT, AMD's troubles recently is largely due to its own issues (missing out on mobile computing much?). Intel just has such excellent economy of scale among all other things that its been smacking opponents silly for over a decade. | ||
|
Dariush
Romania330 Posts
On May 13 2009 19:55 haduken wrote: Intel have such strong ties in distributor channels that i don't see how this will change anything. What exactly have Intel done to deserve this? Their products are just ... superior. Unlike microsoft who abuse the channel relationships, intel is actually worthy of their dominance. AMD had the superior product in the P4 era...that's the period intel was most dirty  | ||
|
itzme_petey
United States1400 Posts
| ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
On May 13 2009 19:40 s.Q.uelched wrote: Intel Fined Record $1.45 Billion in Antitrust Case By JAMES KANTER Published: May 13, 2009 BRUSSELS — The European Commission on Wednesday fined Intel a record €1.06 billion ($1.44 billion) for abusing its dominance in the market for computer chips to exclude Advanced Micro Devices, which is Intel’s only serious rival. The E.U. competition commissioner, Neelie Kroes, said the penalty against Intel, the world’s largest chip maker, was justified because the company had skewed competition and robbed consumers of choice. + Show Spoiler + for anyone that doesn't know what abusing its dominance means, it is the European version of Monopoly. Why they don't use the word instead of the stupid phrase is retarded and baffling. And I heard on NPR that the specific charges were that it was paying companies/distributors of computers to delay releases of competitors chips/systems among other things. | ||
JWD
United States12607 Posts
| ||
|
anTi_
United States499 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States44071 Posts
Sure it's not all that important in the grand scheme of things but it's the principle of the thing. They deserve to be fined. | ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
| ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
On May 13 2009 19:55 haduken wrote: Intel have such strong ties in distributor channels that i don't see how this will change anything. What exactly have Intel done to deserve this? Their products are just ... superior. Unlike microsoft who abuse the channel relationships, intel is actually worthy of their dominance. this | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
| ||
|
Xela
Canada203 Posts
On May 15 2009 09:02 travis wrote: Even if they are worthy of their dominance, and continue to pump out high qualidty products, a monopoly still is a bad thing. If they totally control the market then they get to set prices at whatever they want. /agree I don't know much about economy but I do know that a monopoly is the worst thing possible for the consumers in the long term. Even if Intel has better products, a monopoly will make them raise their price and lower the quality to make even more money, and small business trying to develop a new product would have no chance at all and eventually progress will completely stop for processors. | ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
On May 15 2009 12:05 Xela wrote: /agree I don't know much about economy but I do know that a monopoly is the worst thing possible for the consumers in the long term. Even if Intel has better products, a monopoly will make them raise their price and lower the quality to make even more money, and small business trying to develop a new product would have no chance at all and eventually progress will completely stop for processors. haduken and savio spoke truly. We are hardly looking at the nightmare scenario of a monopoly here, and even if we will look at one, it won't be because of Intel's business practices, it'll be due to an unrevised patent policy. | ||
|
snorlax
United States755 Posts
| ||
|
WindCalibur
Canada938 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + and wow my core i7 is pwnage /brag | ||
|
FreeZEternal
Korea (South)3396 Posts
| ||
|
Etherone
United States1898 Posts
On May 15 2009 12:31 WindCalibur wrote: Intel is surperior. People should realize that regardless of intel's intentions of monopoly or not, they will still pwn AMD really badly. + Show Spoiler + and wow my core i7 is pwnage /brag regardless of this being the current case, if intel has no competition the can sit down for the next 10 years on their core i7 and not develop a single processor, simply muscling every other company out of business. they deserve the fine. | ||
|
FreeZEternal
Korea (South)3396 Posts
| ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
On May 15 2009 12:40 Etherone wrote: regardless of this being the current case, if intel has no competition the can sit down for the next 10 years on their core i7 and not develop a single processor, simply muscling every other company out of business. they deserve the fine. If Intel tries to sit for 10 years on core i7, even their economy of scale and awesome distributor channels won't save them. People are exaggerating the effects of a monopoly. | ||
|
MadNeSs
Denmark1507 Posts
| ||
| ||
