European Union fines Intel a record US$1.44 billion for monopoly abuse

[Apokalipse]

If I were Intel or Microsoft, I would flat out respond to this constant EU barraging by refusing to sell products to them.

great, they can just leave the entire market for AMD and Via.
Intel: this fine is outrageous! let's respond by killing our own sales!

 

[wafflehammer]

Have people ever stopped to think that maybe they buy over intel > amd because it's more well known? Most prebuilts have options for both chip makers. So what if some prebuilts only use intel. You can't whine over it...it's their choice.

 

[Trotter]

But only of late. Before there was no choice as Intel threatened them with losing their CPUs.

 

[Apokalipse]

Have people ever stopped to think that maybe they buy over intel > amd because it's more well known?

It's much more than that, and there's plenty of supporting evidence.

Intel paid OEM's to not use AMD processors.
That's why AMD could only barely increase market share when AMD had better chips for less money.

On top of that, they made compilers to deliberately cripple competitors CPU's by creating unnecessarily slower alternate codepaths which only get executed on non-intel CPU's.
i.e. they made non-intel CPU's look slower than they are.

Most prebuilts have options for both chip makers. So what if some prebuilts only use intel. You can't whine over it...it's their choice.

right, they chose to use only Intel CPU's instead of paying more for them than the other OEM's, making their products uncompetitive.
That's as well as Intel withholding future product information, leaving them unable to plan their products.

Some choice. Oh that's right, they didn't have one. The OEM's couldn't not take those discounts, and they were forced to not sell AMD processors.

 

[wafflehammer]

Okay fine intel. Intel goes away. Now it's only AMD left. Is anyone going to complain that AMD has a monopoly? Most likely not.

 

[Apokalipse]

Okay fine intel. Intel goes away. Now it's only AMD left. Is anyone going to complain that AMD has a monopoly? Most likely not.

You're missing the point. They're not trying to kill Intel. They're just trying to stop Intel from forcing competitors out of the market.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Intel paid OEM's to not use AMD processors.
That's why AMD could only barely increase market share when AMD had better chips for less money.

That may not be the only reason. Consumers look for high clock speeds and brands they know and the Pentium 4 fit both of those requirements. Sure the Athlon 64 was better but that didn't mean anything to them.

On top of that, they made compilers to deliberately cripple competitors CPU's by creating unnecessarily slower alternate codepaths which only get executed on non-intel CPU's.i.e. they made non-intel CPU's look slower than they are.

That's really a matter of interpretation, it could also be seen as the compilers giving intel cpu's optimized codepaths allowing them to perform faster than they normaly would while otehr cpus are given generic ones. Besides it's a Intel compiler, would you expect it to favor competitors cpu's? There are plenty of other compilers anyways so it's not like the Intel ones are the only option.

I'm not saying Intel is innocent but at the same time people try to blame all of AMD's problems on Intel when AMD has made it's far share of bad decisions that have contributed to their current situation.

 

[Harper]

why do people **** their selves and act like the world is ending when pirate bay is fined but clap to the fact intel is being fined?

Pirate Bay is one thing. Intel is come thing completely different.

Have people ever stopped to think that maybe they buy over intel > amd because it's more well known? Most prebuilts have options for both chip makers. So what if some prebuilts only use intel. You can't whine over it...it's their choice.

Problem is that Intel has been know to go up to manufactures like Dell or HP and offer extremely good pricing on their chips provided that they do not produce any computers with Intel chip.

The other problem that I do see is that AMD method of marketing needs a lot to be desired. Where intel will gladly advertise on their one, AMD only seem to advertise along with other system builders / resellers.

 

[Apokalipse]

That may not be the only reason. Consumers look for high clock speeds and brands they know and the Pentium 4 fit both of those requirements. Sure the Athlon 64 was better but that didn't mean anything to them.

Marketing is irrelevant when the competitor's chips aren't even available to be sold.

That's really a matter of interpretation

It isn't subjective. It's computers, doing exactly what they do.

it could also be seen as the compilers giving intel cpu's optimized codepaths allowing them to perform faster than they normaly would while otehr cpus are given generic ones.

No, it isn't even that. Providing optimisations for your own CPU's is one thing.
What Intel did is create codepaths that take a lot more instructions than necessary to complete. And the examples that have been seen have no excuse (such as copying 4 bytes instead of 1 long, which takes 4 times as much time, and other highly superfluous instructions which any reasonable compiler would have made much shorter)

 

[Harper]

Okay fine intel. Intel goes away. Now it's only AMD left. Is anyone going to complain that AMD has a monopoly? Most likely not.

Lets not forget VIA. They are system making CPUs.

However i think intel will some how pull through.