2 posts • joined Thursday 24th September 2009 15:36 GMT
Article lacks some details
Just maybe it might have been useful to include the information that this was the original Judge who found Microsoft not guilty of infringement before trial. A higher court decided on appeal that he was wrong to do so, and it should have gone to a jury trial. He presides over said trial and then after the Jury finds Microsoft guilty, but the Judge sets aside verdict and finds Microsoft not guilty again.
Whether you think the jury verdict was wrong or not, there are some serious issues about who should and shouldn't be setting aside jury verdicts in a case where the Judge had already found in favour of 1 side or the other pre trial.
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.
- 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