The EU has accumulated enough evidence to charge Intel with antitrust violations, according to the Wall Street Journal. Anonymous sources quoted by the paper claim that EU lawyers have prepared a draft of their case against the company, but are waiting to make it public until after an interior panel of legal experts meets to consider the arguments in the document.
I am curious as to what retailers were not allowed to sell AMD chips, as I have been able to buy them anywhere. As well, I am curious as to what the fact that Dell has begun selling AMD, as well the fact that HP has been selling in their systems for awhile now. I don;t see a case myself. I could see it if you were only able to buy systems from major vendors with only Intel chips, but that simply is not the case and has not been for some time.
Additionally, what happened if major OEMs decided on their own, without any “convincing” from Intel to use Intel chips? What if their reasoning was streamlined support, processing and manufacturing?
I’m living in germany since 2000 and it is really the case here that several supermarket banished AMD from their store. “Mediamarkt” and in “Saturn” both never sold AMD processors, even not when AMD had the performance crown. They are one of the most important stores here in germany.
If Intel really used some kind of anticompetitive practice, they should be punished for that. It matters: we suffer most from it!
One story that really sounds anticompetitive to me is that “call limitation” story from Skype.
It looks like Intel and Skype made some agreement to give an advantage to users of Intel processors: Each Intel user has the right to call 10 peoples simultaneously. Users of AMD processors are not allowed to call more as 5 users simultaneously.
By hacking skype, a programmer was able to remove that restriction, see http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=947 . I.e.: There are no technical limitations to restrict the user of an AMD to only 5 peoples.
Intel and Skype should at least be punished for that.
Wow! Now that skype story sounds _really_ evil.
For the record:
I live in Germany since 1985 (happens to be my birth year 😉 and have never walked into “Media Markt” or “Saturn” to buy anything more complex than batteries or pens.
But come to think about it I must say I cannot remember any AMD based “Volks Pc” from “Aldi”.
Hmm, so there _could_ be some illegal deal at work.
I always thought it was because most gamers use AMD and don’t walk into those stores anyway 😉
Oh, and sorry for the bold claims, maybe I’ve been in the wrong mood but if there’s one thing I cannot stand it’s protectionism.
And it somehow smelled because
a) AMD has a fab in Dresden
b) has lost the performance crown
– I hope they get it back soon *knocks on wood*
c) politicians (especially in Germany it seems) have not realized that they should not influence economy.
Someone says do xyz or we’ll fire 1000 people.
The politicians do xyz and 1000 people are fired nevertheless.
While I do like AMD this move just sucks.
Please stop competing in court and start competing in chipsets, performance/W and performance/$ again!
I mean, I can easily see why MS became the target but as DrillSgt and DittoBox have pointed out already, it’s really not difficult at all to obtain AMD stuff, plus AMD has signed quite a lot of intesting deals recently.
I can only hope the EU doesn’t get into protectionism too much…
Edited 2006-10-04 22:19
If they’ve done something illegal then court is the place to compete.
Please stop making naive blanket statements.
and what has Intel done that is illegal? I can buy AMD based computers in stores and online, I can buy AMD for less or the same cost as a competing Intel chip…
Just because they are successful does not give AMD a right to moan and complain and waste money in courts.
Now that MS has been convicted a precedence has been set in the UK…if you are losing in the marketplace you can sue your competitor for anti competitive behavior.
“if you are losing in the marketplace you can sue your competitor for anti competitive behavior”
I would say “if you have been breaking the law, the EU may take action against you.”. If there isn’t sufficient evidence of a crime being committed, I don’t see what any company could complain about. Unless someone here has evidence that the system is being abused in some way?
Certainly, the AMD are able to do business, but I suppose that they are arguing that their market share could be higher if it weren’t for some illegality which they allege that Intel have been engaged in. Sounds fair to me.
and what has Intel done that is illegal? I can buy AMD based computers in stores and online, I can buy AMD for less or the same cost as a competing Intel chip…
I can also easily buy alternatives to Windows, yet Microsoft is still seen as a monopoly.
I’m not saying Intel is a monopoly or that they did something wrong; I’m just pointing out your argument makes absolutely no sense at all.
It has less to do with what YOU can buy then what the average consumer will get in stores. Since most machines are Intel-based then most consumers will buy Intel and never have a chance to see waht makes an AMD differant/better for their needs…simple fact, no matter how small of a disadvantage it is it IS a disadvantage.
I can only hope the EU doesn’t get into protectionism too much…
The EU’s sole reason for existence is protectionism.
Three words: US steel tariffs.
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
I’m not the one alleging that the EU’s actions amount to protectionism. FYI, all the biggest computer companies (including processor companies, excluding ARM) are American, Japanese, or some sort of American-European or Japanese-European conglomerate (e.g. Fujitsu). So in this case there’s no motive for the EU to engage in it, and the only motive for saying there is, is xenophobia.
In my experience, cheap Chinese steel is worth about as much as it costs. Had some come into work one time, and it was that pitted as to be near useless for any real fabrication work.
As an aside more than anything.
Then let the market decide. After all, that’s what the US would say if it were winning.
100% agreeance my friend, 100% agreeance.
“In that case, AMD claimed that German retailer Media Markt signed an exclusive agreement with Intel in return for the proverbial wads of cash stuffed into briefcases.”
If claims like this turn out to be true Intel should face the charges in court. Monopolistic practices rarely benefit the consumer. Shame that the US authorities aren’t more aggressive when investigating the behavior of US based companies.
Why is it always the EU and why does it always SEEM to be US companies being targeted?
Probably because judging from the Microsoft DOJ case (and arguably the Enron case), the US has been somewhat lax about imposing penalties on companies that break US law. I’m not just talking about the way the present administration backed down on the penalties it asked for relative to the previous one, but also how long it took the previous one to get around to trying to solve a problem I could see in 1995. Not that I’m some sort of seer, mind you; just an industry-watcher.
“the US has been somewhat lax about imposing penalties on companies that break US law.”
US companies that break US law. I think that is the crucial point here.
No, you misunderstand: My point is that EU and US laws on competition are similar, but that the EU is somewhat more scrupulous in prosecuting firms that break them. Thus it’s the US government’s lack of appropriate action that makes it look like the EU Commission are such hounds.
Edited 2006-10-05 01:14
A fair point.
Is it more likely that the EU cases were brought to our attention because they involved US companies, and rather prominent ones (Microsoft and Intel)? I find it implausible that all the EU does is go after US companies.
Not too long ago, it was the EU debating software patents as an internal matter, remember.
Your real question ought to be why all the computing/internet powerhouses are in the United States.
Your real question ought to be why all the computing/internet powerhouses are in the United States.
Not all the computing powerhouses are in the United States. Most are, though, because historically, the US market system has been friendly to growing sectors such as technology.
The real question is, what heavy-handed governmental restrictions in socialist countries are responsible for discouraging the growth of computing powerhouses?
Not all the computing powerhouses are in the United States. Most are, though, because historically, the US market system has been friendly to growing sectors such as technology.
The real question is, what heavy-handed governmental restrictions in socialist countries are responsible for discouraging the growth of computing powerhouses?
Yep it’s all the evil socialists fault (*rolls eyes*)
Of course it has nothing to do with the billions which annually flow from the defence department into the pockets of technology companies for defence contracts.
Billions that led to small technological advanced like let’s see the internet (and packet switching etc).
Another example : Oracle – “There is, however, more to the word Oracle: used for the name of the database engine, and then later for the company itself. Larry Ellison and Bob Miner were working on a consulting project for the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency in USA) where the CIA wanted to use this new SQL language that IBM had written a white paper about. The code name for the project was Oracle.
The project eventually died (of sorts) but Larry and Bob saw the opportunity to take what they had started and market it. So they used that project’s codename of Oracle to name their new RDBMS engine. Funny thing is, that one of Oracle’s first customers was the CIA…” ( http://orafaq.com/faqora.htm )
It’s not hard to foster new technology when you’re sinking billions into it.
I hope you do know that AMD and others do the same. Exclusive agreements are not uncommon.
Aren’t AMD chips made at a plant in Dresden? I’m not claiming that it necessarily influences the EU’s decision, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if AMD somehow has gained some influence in the EU as a major manufacturer in Germany (probably minimal jobs and maybe even minimal tax revenue, but governments like to tout that they have leading tech industries located in their regions).
But I don’t really know the facts in this case–just throwing out the above thought. Who knows, maybe Intel also has research facilities or manufacturing in Europe as well?
US should fine SAP as much as EU does to MS and Intel. EU asshole die you motherf–king shit eaters….assholes….
For years AMD had superior products in terms of performance, heat, and scalability. Sure they have some market share, but doesn’t the fact they only have ~20% after having superior products for years indicate that something isn’t entirely right?
Even if Intel did nothing illegal (for the courts to decide) pure momentum kept them in front and AMD’s marketshare down, illustrating the dangers of (near)monopoly: Intel was able to stay on top with inferior products simply on momentum.
It affects the consumer too, Intel felt comfortable enough at the top to continue pushing Pentium 4 long after it was an obvious dead end, because people were happy to go with the ‘name.’
There were some shady exclusivity deals, but I’m not sure I’m on board with the EUs action here, but I still think Intel’s continued dominance on the back of an inferior product (until Core2) bears some looking at and some thought.
For years AMD had superior products in terms of performance, heat, and scalability. Sure they have some market share, but doesn’t the fact they only have ~20% after having superior products for years indicate that something isn’t entirely right?
And what did they start out with?
Would they have been able to supply to a 30% share?
Does AMD have compiler suites that targets their own CPU’s first and foremost?
There are many more variables to take into account than merely performance/heat/scalability.
And people do follow roadmaps. Which means they might be reluctant to go one way or the other depending on what they know are coming.
The German retailer Media Mark(e)t has a huge store down the street here in Rotterdam. For some reason it seems to be about the only place where people buy these days. I can confirm that to this day, (regularly visiting the place, checking things out) I have not seen a single PC or notebook computer with an AMD CPU in it on display. (They always display everything they have in boxes all over the place, ready to grab and go.) They do sell various brands of PC: HP, Toshiba, MSI, etc., all of them using AMD for quite a few of their PC/notebook configurations beside Intel.
Virtually all other PC stores (much smaller shops) down town sell at least a few Athlon64s,in both laptops and PCs, and do display them.
Edited 2006-10-05 08:52