• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

FTC's Strategy: Kick 'Em When They're Down

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Larry Downes, from the Stanford Law School Center for Internet & Society, wrote a guest column today over at C|Net on the subject of the FTC’s lawsuit against Intel. He basically says that, while there are a handful of people crying about “illegal tactics” being used, AMD has made nice with Intel and finding evidence of “harm to consumers” will be extremely difficult.

And while the FTC complaint duly invokes "harm to consumers" 31 times in its complaint, evidence of any real damage will be hard to come by. Thanks to Moore's Law--Intel founder Gordon Moore's promise that semiconductors will continue to get faster, smaller, and cheaper every 12 to 18 months--the price of raw computing power has fallen dramatically and consistently since Intel was founded. Consumers are not being tricked or misled into buying computers with Intel processors.
Click to expand...
 
lol everyone was slagging off the EU before and now everyone else joins in
 
Well they need to get money for health care and saving the earth from ourselves somehow.
 
Kick 'em while they're down? Really now? Intel is hardly on the down and out. In fact, they've done rather swimmingly this year all things considered. The simple matter of it all is that Intel brought this upon themselves and the FTC isn't asking for monetary compensation but a change in practices to ensure the illicit activities cease as well as an independent board to be made to ensure that end.
 
Monkey God said:
Well they need to get money for health care and saving the earth from ourselves somehow.
Click to expand...

I say introduce CPUs that require more murcury and lead in them to make them faster just to piss off the EPA. Hell if you're going to have one governmental agency jump your shit no matter what, might as well get them all on board.
 
I had both an Athlon XP and an Athlon 64, and now I am on a Core i5 w/ Intel SSD. I am not brand loyal, and I only want the best for my money.

But seriously, you did not have to be very attentive to notice that some (or a lot of, depending on how good you were paying attention) incredibly shady business decisions were being made by Intel. They reminded me of how Microsoft was back during the first browser war - strong handed and very cut throat.

All the brass at Intel should be rotting in prison for the scams they pulled off, so extensive that even Joe Consumer such as myself could sense that something was not right. They bring shame to the rest of the company that actually has some of the best engineers and technologists in the world.
 
blitzkommando said:
Kick 'em while they're down? Really now? Intel is hardly on the down and out. In fact, they've done rather swimmingly this year all things considered. The simple matter of it all is that Intel brought this upon themselves and the FTC isn't asking for monetary compensation but a change in practices to ensure the illicit activities cease as well as an independent board to be made to ensure that end.
Click to expand...

Actually the FTC is basically asking to run Intel and to keep Intel from any sort of market strategy, even the same market strategies that Intel's competitors currently use. It is completely absurd when you read over everything the FTC says and wants to do. Almost their entire solution will hurt the consumer and the industry as a whole.

Intel already has paid compensation for many things and allowed AMD to do things that were against the licensing agreement. Already Intel licenses their product to other companies, companies they were basically forced to allow to product competing products in the past which was contrary to every other chip design and chipset being made back then. The funny thing about this all is the fact that the companies that are competing with Intel and that the FTC is crying foul over, blatantly violated copyright and patent laws in the past by stealing Intel's designs and technologies and making the exact same kind of processors and chipsets. They also changed the chipsets even after licensing, violating license agreements.

It is just funny how everyone hates the big guy, regardless of where legality stands.
 
They paid AMD, and they have stopped the behavior. It's time to move on.

Though it could be argued that they stopped their bad behavior because they no longer needed to continue the behavior once Core, and Core based Xenons launched.

The P4 was hot, and performed like shit. The Itanic, well, lets not even talk about that. The P3s and early P4s were having a hard time with Thunderbirds. Intel started cranking the P4's clock speed and pulled out ahead. Then AMD launched the Athlon64 and it was over til Core came along. Intel's behavior went bad after the Athlon's launch. They really did not need to bother to be honest. Even with their behavior, AMD had a hard time keeping up with demand. With the orginal slot A and socket A Athlons, they sold them as fast as they could produce them. They lacked the production capacity to make any believable supply guarantees to the likes of Dell. Which prolly had as much to do with keeping them out of many OEMs as Intel's behavior did til that point. After they built the new fab, their production issues lessened greatly. So for the Athlon64, Intel's behavior was likely the predominate reason many OEM's shut them out.
 
They should leave Intel alone really. If it was actually doing something wrong I might support more regulation of them. I really don't know why they keep getting victimized by governments for marketing practices.

How about they start regulating what the financial sector has been doing a little more. The things that caused the recession still are not fixed.
 
Well another pro-Intel diatribe against proper business practices. Oh course, if I got the best Intel hardware for free I'd be pro-Intel as well. Just as any bought and paid for politician would. Lest we forget, 5 years ago AMD produced a superior CPU which Intel with its massive cash and market share proceeded to quash. If they had succeeded in driving AMD out of business which for the last couple years seemed likely then we would have all suffered in increased prices and decreased innovation. Not good for a computer hardware enthusiast's site is it Steve? Want some cream and sugar with that Intel shill..
 
I'm not sure whether posting a news article is enough evidence to point towards being pro or anti intel. As a review site, they receive samples of a lot of hardware. Now, we're all aware of Intel's past, though that holds absolutely no relevance to the posting of an article and a short summary of said article.

TLDR: Say wut?
 
Heaven forbid laws are enforced. How is Intel "down"? They have a huge market share and all the fines so far combined are roughly on par with one quarter's profit. The horror. :rolleyes:

Intel's tactics likely net them far more then they've paid out, why the hell should they be given a free pass of broken laws?
 
This author Downes, just got a new haircut and it says "Kick Me". This article writes like a senior 12 grader with a grudge and he needs to vent.
 
Keep in mind a lot of this appears to have to do with the GPU side and driving NVidia out of the chipset business. Check out Anand for an actual analysis of the suit.
 
Are we supposed to feel sorry for Nvidia now? If Intel did drive them out of the chipset business,they'd be doing us a favor! The FTC getting involved in this will not make things better,it's in the nature of government agencies to invariably screw things up.
 
The reason Nvidia was forced out of the chipset business is because it produced a low quality product excluding: 9300, 9400, Ion platform. Now it was unfair what they did to the ION platform. But it is still allowed under US law, its just really immoral.
 
karoc said:
Keep in mind a lot of this appears to have to do with the GPU side and driving NVidia out of the chipset business. Check out Anand for an actual analysis of the suit.
Click to expand...

Nvidia got into the Intel chip set business because Intel wanted to support SLI, and that was the only way Nv was going to allow Intel processors to have a platform that supported it. There was no technical reason it, it was a forced lockout of hardware lacking the Nv SLI badge. A pure obstruction of interoperability. It is hard to feel bad for Nv when they had to twist Intel's arm to get into the Intel chip set business in the first place.
 
NV tried keeping SLI to themselves. It failed once they produced shitty mobo's & chipsets. Now they are crying about it.
 
I can't really take this professor seriously, when the lawsuit is more about NVIDIA than AMD. and Intel is in deep s###. what they did to Nvidia is textbook anti competitive pratice. I am sure privately they are scared, because the remedy should really be splitting the company and seperating the chipset side from the cpu side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top