Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 957 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s September 02 - 05:03am EDT 
Hardware Analysis
      
Forums Product Prices
  Contents 
 
 

  Latest Topics 
 

More >>
 

    
 
 

  You Are Here: 
 
/ Forums / Is AMD finally starting to lose its marbles?
 

  None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit 
 
 Author 
 Date Written 
 Tools 
Yousuf Khan Jul 21, 2005, 08:19pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List Replies: 9 - Views: 878
Despite all of this blather about how AMD can improve its marketing, it really misses the whole point about the reasons for the lawsuit. I'm sure you can find as many examples of something AMD is doing right marketing-wise, for every example of something it's doing wrong. Similarly, I'm sure you'll find plenty of examples of websites receiving free samples of processors to test from AMD, vs. those not getting them (ahem).

Intel has now had its business offices raided by anti-trust authorities on two separate continents, in five separate countries. In one of those countries, Japan, it has already resulted in a conviction. That's right, I said "conviction", not allegation nor accusation, it has been found *guilty*! Actually, it's even worse than that, Intel has admitted its guilt. It chose not to challenge the Japanese ruling, therefore accepting its guilt. Now of course, Intel spins it a little differently stating that it has chosen to accept the "recommendations" of the Japanese trade authorities, as if it was a completely voluntary thing; but you don't have your offices raided and be given only voluntary recommendations.

The Japanese raid occurred sometime last year, and resulted in enough evidence gathered to have a case prepared in only 9 months, and presented at the beginning of this year. The raids in the other countries happened only last week. They were all in Europe, where Intel's offices in Germany, UK, Spain, and Italy had been raided. One of the European observers said that the Europeans rarely go raiding company offices unless they're already sure that they'll find something.

So you think all AMD needs to do is market itself a little bit more? Well, among the allegations in AMD's lawsuit against Intel is that Intel even tries to interfere with AMD's own marketing efforts. In one example, Intel CEO Craig Barret personally flew to Taiwan to inform the CEO of Acer about "consequences" if it attended AMD's launch party for the Opteron when it was first introduced.

Still think AMD's fortunes will be improved by a bit more marketing? Giving out a few more free chips to hardware sites? Well, then you're simply applying Norman Rockwell ideals to a Tony Soprano world.


Want to enjoy fewer advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
Ninjawithagun Jul 21, 2005, 09:33pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Jul 21, 2005, 09:38pm EDT

 
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
AMD's lawsuit against Intel is "several-fold" and not just about any one topic in particular. Some points in the suit are made to be stronger than others, but the bottomline is simple - Intel is not playing by "the rules" of regular marketing. I personally agree that Intel has been playing dirty by making retailers buy minimum bulks of processors and blocking them from being able to even sponsor AMD's products at the same time. The list goes on and on. And AMD isn't the only one who has a problem with the way Intel is doing business. The European Union (EU) has begun official investigations into Intel's overseas offices along with other undisclosed probes into their business practices. Looks like Intel has let their ego grow a little too big and allowed their business practices become quite dirty. All for what? Money...wow, what a surprise.

Plain and simple --> AMD is technologically kicking Intel's butt right now. Intel is backpeddling and doesn't know what to do but play as dirty as they can so their share of the CPU market doesn't shrink. Well, more and more businesses are getting sick of the big bully on the block and are switching slowly to AMD. I can't blame them for two reasons: 1) Intel is playing dirty and should be punished by the law, and 2) AMD offers both a superior product and 64-bit architecture hands down. Why do you think Intel copied off of AMD's 64-bit architecture and just plastered their own label on it (EMT 64)?? What a bunch of crap! That is patent infringement plain and simple. I hope Intel loses big! GO AMD!! At least they have the courage to do what's right, even if they don't win this round.

Will Olson II Jul 21, 2005, 09:40pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
Sanders making a good point. Before AMD can go sue happy against Intel they need to TRY to market their products first.

MSI K7N2 DELTA ILSR
AthlonXP 2800+(barton)
eVGA nVIDIA 6800GS 256MB
Crucial 1.5GB DDR in Dual Channel

Yousuf Khan Jul 21, 2005, 11:09pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
Will Olsen, did you even read what I wrote about the case against Intel up above? If you had read it, you'd know that marketing is completely irrelevant here, because Intel will even interfere with your marketing efforts.

There is a well known story from a couple of years ago during a computer show in Taiwan where Intel had some toy balloons popped or cut-free from a stand because they had the VIA logo on it. VIA as you know is the Taiwanese chipset maker, who at that time was having a patent infringement fight against Intel (where Intel was the one which initiated this lawsuit actually). It sounds petty, childish, and unbelievable -- but unfortunately it's not beyond Intel to be like this.

Yousuf Khan Jul 21, 2005, 11:25pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
Ninjawithagun, whether or not AMD had the technological lead against Intel really doesn't matter. This sort of behaviour from Intel should not go unanswered, especially not with so much prima facie evidence against it.

If you've been harmed, then you should exercise your right to justice: it shouldn't matter what your relative strength against your opponent is. In fact, the whole purpose of a justice system is to resolve disputes between parties of unequal power. Otherwise, we resort to the law of the jungle where "might is always right".

Will Olson II Jul 21, 2005, 11:38pm EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
Oh no Intel is poping ballons at trade shows. They cant however refuse television stations to air AMD commericals. Because well they do not exisit. AMD hasnt even tried to do anyting yet. And are playing the poor pitiful me game. They should stick to using their money on R&D like always and just keep churning out great products. Theres no need to waste money on lawsuits when AMD is already making great products and people are buying them.

P.S. Olson not Olsen

MSI K7N2 DELTA ILSR
AthlonXP 2800+(barton)
eVGA nVIDIA 6800GS 256MB
Crucial 1.5GB DDR in Dual Channel

Yousuf Khan Jul 22, 2005, 08:13am EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
Will, I suggest you educate yourself on this lawsuit, because quite obviously you don't understand the seriousness of it. The problem is not going to be solved by your simplistic suggestion that they advertise on tv.

I won't even get into the fact that it's strange that Intel even advertises on tv in the first place. Except in the tiny percentage of cases where people build their own machines, Intel doesn't even sell anything directly to the public -- it's simply a components supplier to computer manufacturers. It's like an engine manufacturer advertising on tv instead of a car company.

I can't emphasize how serious this lawsuit is, and how drastically it's going to change the entire PC landscape at its conclusion. It's going to start changing the landscape even before its conclusion too. One analyst at Wells Fargo has calculated the odds at 75% that Intel will have to *pay* AMD around $10 billion or more! That is basically all of Intel's current cash balance in the bank. Also note, this is simply the odds of losing big ($10 billion+) is 75%, it stands to reason that the chances of losing vs. winning are much higher.

S Gold Jul 23, 2005, 07:43am EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List

Edited: Jul 23, 2005, 07:48am EDT

 
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
Yousuf is entirely correct. The allegation of AMD is that their marketing/sales eforts would be successful but for the monolpolistic and illegal practices of Intel. It has nothing to do with Sander, Anand, Tom, et al getting free samples to review. Read the complaint in the law suit to see what AMD alleges are the illegal practices of Intel. Does anyone think that more advertising or samples would overcome these? Here is the link to the complaint in AMD v. Intel:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAsset...plaint.pdf

brian pope Jul 23, 2005, 10:59am EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
Yes AMD needs to do some actual marketing & stop crying, sure there going to find some bad dealings Intel has done or is still doing. I'd be surprised if they didn't being a company of there size & with the layers of management they have.
So I'll take a closer look at the 6 points AMD is using as the basis for there complaint a little more closely & tell you what I think, can't let Sander have all the fun.

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. Like Standard Oil at the turn of the Nineteenth Century and Alcoa Aluminum during the Twentieth, Intel holds a monopoly in a market critical to our economy: microprocessors that run the Microsoft Windows and Linux families of operating systems (hereinafter the x86 Microprocessor Market). Although AMD competes with Intel in this global market, Intel possesses unmistakable and undeniable market power, its microprocessor revenues accounting for approximately 90% of the worldwide total (and 80% of the units).
--------
-Isn't the world built on monopoly's? everytime someone invents something or patents a product or idea, that in essence becomes a monopoly. That individual has full control over the use of it. Isn't it every companys goal to capture as much market share as possible, maybe we should file a lawsuite agains't Elvis, after all wasn't he the king, maybe the Beatles to, didn't they dominate the music world!
-"Market critical to our economy", what the hell kind of lame ass phrase is that, something thought up by fear mongers would be my guess. Yes the world will end if Intel continues to hold market dominance, just like Microsoft has ended the world.
--------

2. Just like Standard Oil and Alcoa before it, for over a decade Intel has unlawfully maintained its monopoly by engaging in a relentless, worldwide campaign to coerce customers to refrain from dealing with AMD. Among other things,
- Intel has forced major customers into exclusive or near-exclusive deals;
- it has conditioned rebates, allowances and market development funding on customersí agreement to severely limit or forego entirely purchases from AMD;
- it has established a system of discriminatory, retroactive, first-dollar rebates triggered by purchases at such high levels as to have the practical and intended effect of denying customers the freedom to purchase any significant volume of processors from AMD;
- it has threatened retaliation against customers introducing AMD computer platforms, particularly in strategic market segments;
- it has established and enforced quotas among key retailers effectively requiring them to stock overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, Intel-powered computers, thereby artificially limiting consumer choice;
- it has forced PC makers and technology partners to boycott AMD product launches and promotions;
- and it has abused its market power by forcing on the industry technical standards and products which have as their central purpose the handicapping of AMD in the marketplace.

--------
-Of course you try to sign your customers up to exclusive deals, it's done everyday in every area of business, but to suggest the customer is forced "give me a break"
-"conditioned rebates & allowances" this is common pratice for everyone, the 100's of MFG's my employer buys from all do this, this is nothing new. Maybe AMD should hire some people with business degrees instead of spending all there money on R&D!
-"denying customers the freedom to purchase any significant volume of processors from AMD" this is no different than Wal-Mart doing the price slashing thing, & it's a form of volume pricing, everybody does it, have you never got a flyer with specials on it.
-"threatened retaliation against customers introducing AMD" now this is close to being a valid complaint, however we live in a free society & MFG's have the right to sell to whomever they want.
-"artificially limiting consumer choice" I can think of two companys that are monopolys that do the same thing "Coke & Pepsi" they have exclusive agreements with grocery stores, that require the stores to use a percentage of shelf space for there products, just look at products in any store & you'll see a trend happening not just with pop but all products, it's very easy to see which MFG's are holding all the cards.
-"forced PC makers and technology partners to boycott AMD product launches and promotions" a 2nd possible valid complaint, we're on a roll, now they just need proof of the blackmail sort!
-"abused its market power by forcing on the industry technical standards and products which have as their central purpose the handicapping of AMD" It's going to be a tough one proving Intel's central is to handicap AMD, doesn't Sony do the same thing all the time, along with just about every other software vendor, proprietary software & components are common place in the computer world, oh wait did I hear someone say "Apple".
--------

3. Intelís economic coercion of customers extends to all levels - from large computer-makers like Hewlett-Packard and IBM to small system-builders to wholesale distributors to retailers such as Circuit City. All face the same choice: accept conditions that exclude AMD or suffer discriminatory pricing and competitively crippling treatment. In this way, Intel has avoided competition on the merits and deprived AMD of the opportunity to
stake its prices and quality against Intelís for every potential microprocessor sale.
--------
-1st off, is AMD even capable of providing the large corps like HP & IBM with the volumes they demand, NO!
2nd because of the volumes HP & IBM require, AMD likely couldn't come close to matching Intel pricing, so if your HP & IBM who both have bottom lines to think about which are you going to buy, Intel!
3rd do you really believe HP & IBM are coerced by Intel? if you do, you better go have a look at the market capitalization of all 3 companys have & then decide who's coercing who!
--------

4. Intelís conduct has become increasingly egregious over the past several years as AMD has achieved technological leadership in critical aspects of microprocessor architecture. In April 2003, AMD introduced its Opteron microprocessor, the first microprocessor to take x86 computing from 32 bits to 64 bits - an advance that allows computer applications to address exponentially more memory, thereby increasing performance and enabling features not possible with just 32 bits. Unlike Intelís 64-bit architecture of the time (Itanium), the AMD Opteron - as well as its subsequently-introduced desktop cousin, the AMD Athlon64 - offers backward compatibility, allowing PC users to continue using 32-bit software as, over time, they upgrade their hardware. Bested in a technology duel over which it long claimed leadership, Intel increased exploitation of its market power to pressure customers to refrain from migrating to AMDís superior, lower-cost microprocessors.
--------
-I'm not even sure what the point of this is, other than to say it would be nice if 64-bit had a purpose, like today....not 5yrs down the road. I'm still waiting for a use for, which is why I haven't bought a 64-bit AMD CPU yet.
--------

5. Intelís conduct has unfairly and artificially capped AMDís market share, and constrained it from expanding to reach the minimum efficient levels of scale necessary to compete with Intel as a predominant supplier to major customers. As a result, computer manufacturers continue to buy most of their requirements from Intel, continue to pay monopoly prices, continue to be exposed to Intelís economic coercion, and continue to submit to artificial limits Intel places on their purchases from AMD. With AMDís opportunity to compete thus constrained, the cycle continues, and Intelís monopoly profits continue to flow.
--------
-AMD has only themself's to blame, you have to come up with something better than that......try "advertising"
--------

6. Consumers ultimately foot this bill, in the form of inflated PC prices and the loss of freedom to purchase computer products that best fit their needs. Society is worse off for lack of innovation that only a truly competitive market can drive. The Japanese Government recognized these competitive harms when on March 8, 2005, its Fair Trade Commission (the
-JFTC-) recommended that Intel be sanctioned for its exclusionary misconduct directed at AMD. Intel chose not to contest the charges.
--------
-I see both Intel & AMD PC's listed on sites I frequent & flyers I get & the prices seem about equal all around, which makes me ask who's inflating the prices, if it's Intel shouldn't the AMD PC's be cheaper?
I didn't seem to have any trouble building my two AMD PC's, where's this loss of freedom AMD's talking about?
-Intel sanctioned, well that's nothing new, Microsoft keeps getting the same treatment, unjustly of course. Now if Intel & Microsoft owned some oil companys everything would be fine!
========

The European Union forced MS to release a version of XP that didn't contain the Windows Media player as part of there so called anti-trust deal, so now there's two versions of XP available. When the PC MFG's were polled they all said they would continue to buy the full original version of XP because that's what there customers expected. In the end what did the EU achieve...lots of taxpayer money flushed down the toilet.

Now some court somewhere is going to be wasting valuable time & resources (months of it at the least) just so AMD can say Intel's been bad & maybe get a few bucks, which they'll likely just spend on R&D. Because frankly as Sander has already pointed out nothing will change in the end.

Gabriel Ditu Aug 25, 2005, 09:30am EDT Reply - Quote - Report Abuse
Private Message - Add to Buddy List  
>> Re: None of this has anything to do with the lawsuit
Brian, perhaps you should read a little bit about antitrust and antitrust laws:

"By introducing antitrust legislation, consumers should benefit from reduced prices, better product diversity, and thus more choice. Furthermore, as the market power of large cartels is reduced, they are forced to pay more attention to the needs and wishes of individual customers.

Large companies with huge cash reserves and large lines of credit can stifle competition by engaging in predatory pricing; that is, by selling their products and services at a loss for a time, in order to force their smaller competitors out of business. With no competition, they are then free to consolidate control of the industry and charge whatever prices they wish. At this point, there is also little motivation for investing in further technological research, since there are no competitors left to gain an advantage over.

High barriers to entry such as large upfront investment requirements in infrastructure and exclusive agreements with distributors, customers, and wholesalers ensure that it will be difficult for any new competitors to enter the market, and that if any do, the trust will have ample advance warning and time in which to either buy the competitor out, or engage in its own research and return to predatory pricing long enough to force the competitor out of business."

Any of these look familiar? That's exactly what AMD is alleging...


Write a Reply >>


 

    
 
 

  Topic Tools 
 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates
 

  Related Articles 
 
 

  Newsletter 
 
A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.