Intel responds to EU action

EU got something against Jews?

What a load of crap from Intel. Stalling stallin till AMD sinks...

[...] and the performance of products, including ours, has improved exponentially.

is this a quote? exponentiall increase in performance? ... ohh dear!

AMD was created after Intel was forced to share X86 technology with somebody to have second source in US. Since AMD filed so many lawsuits in all parts of the world after they realized they cannot bring to market better than Intel product the x86 license should be recalled and given to somebody else. If you look for somebody’ sells product lower than production cost that is AMD. They have reported yesterday 7th quarter of “negative profits”. 

What is next in EU, - approving all prices in Brussels on USSR manner? Prohibiting bargain shopping, auctions, wholesale and any rebates? Think again. 

Don't die on us AMD! I for one am not willing to go back to getting a 10-33 mhz bump every year at the cost of what I could build an entire system now.

Why do US companies think they can bargain with the EU?
The EU can't be bought, put that in your BIG SKULL!
They simply check if you did wrong or not, if you did you will end up being hurt.

You did the crime, you do the time (well money in most cases).

Europe is not like the USA, money doesn't talk here when it comes to bad behaviour.

I hope the EU will hit Intel real hard, as Intel does persuade shops to keep AMD out of stock!
Proof is all over Intel is doing this.

Those idiots at Microsoft tried it too, only to be found more guilty then ever. 
You can buy the USA but not Europe and we are damn proud of that!

I'll answer your question with a question, What would the world be like if Intel had'nt invented the microprocessor? what would the world be like if Intel had not invented the X86 architecture? What the european commision would really like would be for Intel to be gagged and bound so their socially engineered and subsidized and wholly owned AMD can sell cpu's at whatever they like.

It sounds like you have forgotten something about the computer industry. There used to be many other processor companies that competed with Intel (Motorola/Freescale, Cyrix, Nvidia, Via, Transmeta and I'm sure many others). However, Intel has dominated all that have gone a few rounds. You wonder what the dividend would be if Intel had a lot of competition?.. The answer: 14 cents.

I can see many sides of this boxed. It is ironic that OEMs and Voles are suing graphics chipperies for colluding to keep high prices, and conversely the EU (in collusion with AMD?) is levying fines for a business competively lowering consumers' costs. The beast surely carries the genes of fourfathers. Now the neighborhood parents are trying it on about illegitimate bastid hookups? I believe that the government must stay out of people's boardrooms, or else be relegated to a wardrobe domain. People have relations. Prostitution is only illegal in the eyes of the immortals.
Follow me. Mark, I do hear the morning lark... step right up and have a pull of Robin Goodfellow's Lurve Juice! And, as I am an honest Puck,
If we have unearned luck
Now to 'scape the serpent's tongue,
We will make amends ere long;
Else the Puck a liar call.
And Geshlar 'as a William Tell.

I'm still curious as to when the EU is going to go after the companies that accepted these rebates/discounts/bribes/{insert characterization here]?

Surely the EU is going to go after these companies too for participating in these horrendous and vicious actions and ACCEPTING the money from Intel? The EU will get that back too and hand it to the poor souls who got ripped off by these low prices, no? 

Nevermind, I guess the companies who gladly accepted the rebate checks were just unwitting victims of Intel's anti-competitive actions.

You Intel know-it-alls are just arguing semantics, if Intel hadn’t come up with whole home computing thing some one else would have. Some one coming up with a great idea for a market trend has been done countless times; it’s all a matter of who beats who to the punch!

Let’s not forget what AMD did to give Intel a biggest hard kick up the ar** it’s had in years and now they are producing faster and better processors than ever and that’s only after being behind for 18 months or have all of you Intellian’s forgotten that?

The long and the short of it is that Intel has abused its dominant position and has boxed out many other competitors (no not just through its 'innovative' tech) and it’s not just on the processor market! The fact is Intel must be sued to keep a good competitive edge in the global market otherwise It’ll end up being the corporate slob it was before.

Do you really want that? Seriously are you really that stupid?!?

Isn't intel now selling chips for $1500 again?!


If you look any shopping mall or car dealership you will find “exclusivity” is widely used to keep better service and to maintain product quality, and as result to keep reputation high. Accordingly to EU “Ford”, “Mercedes”, “Levis” or other single brand name distributor should not be allowed. All such dealerships receive financial "rabates" from mothership.
The problem with computers is an extremely high complexity and therefore enormous resources’ needed to develop new – better and cheaper product. This is why company with limited resources has hard time to compete in such volatile market. 
If EU likes to keep competition going they should encourage investors and help companies to grow. Trying to dictate product price instead will be counterproductive and will bring stagnation instead. 

This is not because AMD is having trouble competing now - it is because AMD had trouble competing even when they had a vastly superior product. During that time, Intel kept AMD from even being a supplier to some of the world's largest computer makers. They did this by manipulating prices in their 80% share so that AMD would effectively need to charge less than zero for their processors. AMD even tried to give away processors to HP - and HP, because of agreements with Intel, could not take all of them.

Here's the math: Suppose you need 1million processors. AMD's are priced at $80 each. Intel's (at the time, slower) are priced at $100 each. But AMD, is unable to supply more than 50% of your required processors - so you are forced to deal with Intel. Now, Intel offers either 800,000 processors at $100 each.. or 900,000 processors at $90 each or 1,000,000 processors at $80 each. In this situation - that actually did happen while AMD had the better processor - AMD cannot compete at any price.

Now, Intel fanboys say there is no merit to AMD's claims and say AMD simply cannot compete - even though for nearly four years, AMD crushed Intel in processor performance. If AMD was allowed to compete fairly, AMD would have had a LOT more money to continue putting into R&D - and maybe their processors today would still be crushing Intel.

In this duopoly, it is clear that Intel was monopolistic when it could not beat AMD in performance.

Oh ya.. for the Core today, Intel had to take massive losses to put billions of dollars into R&D.

""If AMD was allowed to compete fairly..""
AMD IS competing, and competing fairly. Please take off "AMD-Fanboy" glasses off and look ads/angebote/shelves of all big PC retailers. You will find there almost 30-40% laptops and desktops labeled "AMD CPU..".
Old wisdom says: you can bring horse to the water but you cannot make horse to drink.