AMD's former CEO Hector Ruiz has released a commentary that picks apart Intel's defense against the European Commission's €1.06bn fine for anticompetitve practices. Ruiz's scathing rebuke, published by MarketWatch, excoriates Chipzilla's efforts to wriggle out of responsibility for the actions that led to the fine - especially …
InHell has been caught
InHell has been caught and convicted. Denial isn't going to change reality. The only thing that monopolists understand is mega-Billion dollar fines that discourage the use of crime-for-profit schemes. Ruiz is being way too kind to the scum that is InHell.
Intel should be fined the equivalent of 10x their spend on Sales and Marketing activities over the period the abuse has taken place in addition to court/investigation costs. Half of this amount should be given to AMD to spend on Sales/Marketing.
Where is the European competition to Intel w.r.t. desktop/workstation processors ?
INTEL: Its not fair we have been fined.
EC: Yes, you you hurt consumers and other companies.
INTEL : But despite our best efforts we have failed to destroy AMD.
EC : Ah, but you did hurt them.
INTEL : Not as much as we wanted to. Anyway we are American, you can't do this to us you Euro trash
EC : Actually we can
INTEL : urrmmm...... We will appeal and post rubbish in the press.
EC : Go ahead. If you piss us off to much we will slap you with a adaily fine as well.
Just as they all should
It's not just Intel who need to wake up and smell the accountability, companies and governments the world over need this kind of punishment to keep them in check. When it comes to fining companies for their indiscretions I'd prefer they were forced to pay the fine from the quater-year profits it was levied in to make a more dramatic impact on it's financial standing, thus hurting the board, shareholders, investors more and compelling them to correct their practices.
Depending upon how long Intel have to cough up the total pay-out this won't have the effect a massive fine should have.
Only issue is that Intel's fine hasn't been big enough. They should have calculated how much AMD also lost and award that cash to them. That would bring balance back. Intel fined for monopolistic practices and AMD awarded lost profits because of those practices.
The western (global ?) society essentially revolves around its economy, where competition is supposed to be the key underlying principle. It is therefore a troubling observation that the companies that are supposed to do the actual competing are, in fact, hellbent not to (because, apparently, that's where the money is).
Intel is guilty!
Hi, they are guilty and they know it. To offering better Intel cpu pricing to manufacturers, distributors for not selling AMD cpu is an antitrust issue. When this lawsuit came up, everyone denied it but started selling AMD. This lawsuit helped level the playing field. AMD just announced HD5800 the first DirectX 11 video card. First to 32/64 bit, which Intel had to concede to due to demand. First integraded 4 core cpu, and the list goes on. And now the fastest desktop cpu Phenom II 965. When will people stop believing the marketing hype and compare the specs, speed and low power.
It seems that Antitrust law is being used by the losers to reel in their top competitors.
Intel is doing good right now because they're at the top of their game: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/common_cpus.html
AMD should stop whining and crank out better CPUs.
Loss of revenue impacts R&D
Surely you're not so naive to believe that Intel's behaviour has no effect on AMD's ability to direct money into R&D?
Companies can only afford to put a percentage of their earnings into R&D, if you can restrict your competitions revenue, eventually their R&D budget shrinks sufficiently that they can't keep up with their competitors technology.
AMD are "whining" because they know that they could have had much more significant resources to spend on R&D and not only be much closer to Intel in the current CPU technology, but given the advantage that they had previously, may have been able to stay ahead for much longer.
It's called big-business.
If you don't like sharks, don't swim in the waters.
Offering "incentives" to sell products is nothing new, and is done everywhere on all types of business levels.
Personally I am tired of all of these big corporations crying that their competition/opponents are outselling them. If they are outselling me, it MUST be anti-trust/monopolizing/evil-empire... waah waah waah
If I could get the gubbment to fine some big company and have them give me a $billion (that I didn't earn), why, I'd be able to do a lot of R&D with that cash as well...
Who loses? The little guy like you and me. Who do you think will pick up that $billion tab? Us, when we end up paying much higher prices for Intel processors.
Can you could comprehend what the EU are fining Intel for you would not be making a fool of yourself here.
It is because Intel have made reduced prices to computer firms on the condition that they DO NOT buy any AMD chips .
That is an illegal practice in the civilised world. Not sure if America is still part of the civilised world.
"It is because Intel have made reduced prices to computer firms on the condition that they DO NOT buy any AMD chips ." -- that's called exclusivity and it's a common type of agreement.
If Intel distribuitors felt they were getting a good deal, nobody has a right to force them (or Intel) out of it. Just because the EC may have been legislated such powers, does not make them right.
This is why...
...I don't buy Intel machines anymore. For years now, I have only purchased AMD computers, CPUs, and motherboards.
- Xmas Round-up Ghosts of Christmas Past: Ten tech treats from yesteryear
- Special Report How Britain could have invented the iPhone: And how the Quangocracy cocked it up
- Analysis Microsoft's licence riddles give Linux and pals a free ride to virtual domination
- Massive! Yahoo! Mail! outage! going! on! FOURTH! straight! day!
- Bring it on, stream biz Aereo tells TV barons – see you in Supreme Court