- Status
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
"Now if the situation were reversed, and it was AMD getting the shaft from a gov't agency, you'd be crying foul all over the place . "
Actually, it doesnt matter, if AMD had done it, theyd be every bit as guilty, and yes, Id be pissed people saying it didnt matter to what wouldve happened to Intel if AMD had pulled that crap, and Id want them to be paying thru the nose, and it going to Intel and not the government etc etc.
As to the other article, again, no mention of why it happened, no mention of Intels wrongdoing, its impact.
I think all these sites need to gather at least an idea of what Intel did as an impact, and include it, at least while Intels still paying the billuions, whadya think?
Or, should we just assume it either didnt have any impact, be naive, or, should we just assume people already know this? again being naive?
Look for the original dates for the NY fab. Ill give you a hint, it was during it was impossible due to Intels threats for AMD to be in Dells.
Or another hint, it was mear impossible for AMD to be in a HP because of Intels threats to HP.
Need more hints as to the time this all happened?
Actually, it doesnt matter, if AMD had done it, theyd be every bit as guilty, and yes, Id be pissed people saying it didnt matter to what wouldve happened to Intel if AMD had pulled that crap, and Id want them to be paying thru the nose, and it going to Intel and not the government etc etc.
As to the other article, again, no mention of why it happened, no mention of Intels wrongdoing, its impact.
I think all these sites need to gather at least an idea of what Intel did as an impact, and include it, at least while Intels still paying the billuions, whadya think?
Or, should we just assume it either didnt have any impact, be naive, or, should we just assume people already know this? again being naive?
Look for the original dates for the NY fab. Ill give you a hint, it was during it was impossible due to Intels threats for AMD to be in Dells.
Or another hint, it was mear impossible for AMD to be in a HP because of Intels threats to HP.
Need more hints as to the time this all happened?
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
Im betting its others that cant handle a drowning Intel, or a failing Intel, or whatever.
I brought out the LRB lies. Alot of so called more competent people ignored my posts as pertinent, and only argued, because they couldnt handle Intel failing.
I could give a rats rear.
Thats where Im different from most on here, and I mostly agree with Elmo, even by pointing out his "expecting" Intel to come thru right away on LRB, which was wrong to do, as each company can and does fail at times.
Some find fail and Intel cant go together, and thats where again I differ from them.
AMD failed with Phenom, no excuses nadda, just pure failure.
Also, if you know youre stuff about Intel then youll be able to pinpoint the dates I layed out, according to Intels lawbreaking at the time.
If thats hard to accept, or seems harsh, I feel sorry for those who actually feel that way.
I felt bad for the AMD fans watching Phenom 1 stink it up, and I feel bad for Intel fans that were sooo sold on LRB coming soon to end the gpu.
I brought out the LRB lies. Alot of so called more competent people ignored my posts as pertinent, and only argued, because they couldnt handle Intel failing.
I could give a rats rear.
Thats where Im different from most on here, and I mostly agree with Elmo, even by pointing out his "expecting" Intel to come thru right away on LRB, which was wrong to do, as each company can and does fail at times.
Some find fail and Intel cant go together, and thats where again I differ from them.
AMD failed with Phenom, no excuses nadda, just pure failure.
Also, if you know youre stuff about Intel then youll be able to pinpoint the dates I layed out, according to Intels lawbreaking at the time.
If thats hard to accept, or seems harsh, I feel sorry for those who actually feel that way.
I felt bad for the AMD fans watching Phenom 1 stink it up, and I feel bad for Intel fans that were sooo sold on LRB coming soon to end the gpu.
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
The Federal Trade Commission today sued Intel Corp
http://www.legitreviews.com/news/6983/
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AMD
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/12/intel.shtm
Having succeeded in slowing adoption of competing CPU chips over the past decade until it could catch up to competitors like Advanced Micro Devices, Intel allegedly once again finds itself falling behind the competition – this time in the critical market for graphics processing units, commonly known as GPUs, as well as some other related markets. These products have lessened the need for CPUs, and therefore pose a threat to Intel’s monopoly power.
Intel has responded to this competitive challenge by embarking on a similar anticompetitive strategy, which aims to preserve its CPU monopoly by smothering potential competition from GPU chips such as those made by Nvidia, the FTC complaint charges. As part of this latest campaign, Intel misled and deceived potential competitors in order to protect its monopoly. The complaint alleges that there also is a dangerous probability that Intel’s unfair methods of competition could allow it to extend its monopoly into the GPU chip markets.
Now, its obvious the cpu is losing its place in the market, tho some people denied this too to the end. Intels in deep here, period, and could be split up, shattered like a glass ball hitting the cement, or another fine, this one not so friendly, with severe limitations placed upon them.
Now, since the FTC obviously sees things differently than the writer of alot of so called fair minded sites, as they dont include what the FTC is including/alledging etc, I find those lil rewrites of history pumping up Intel as very false, and since Intel will NEVER be able to anywheres near this ability again, the writers may as well get used to it now, and come down off their high horse they have for Intel.
http://www.legitreviews.com/news/6983/
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AMD
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/12/intel.shtm
Having succeeded in slowing adoption of competing CPU chips over the past decade until it could catch up to competitors like Advanced Micro Devices, Intel allegedly once again finds itself falling behind the competition – this time in the critical market for graphics processing units, commonly known as GPUs, as well as some other related markets. These products have lessened the need for CPUs, and therefore pose a threat to Intel’s monopoly power.
Intel has responded to this competitive challenge by embarking on a similar anticompetitive strategy, which aims to preserve its CPU monopoly by smothering potential competition from GPU chips such as those made by Nvidia, the FTC complaint charges. As part of this latest campaign, Intel misled and deceived potential competitors in order to protect its monopoly. The complaint alleges that there also is a dangerous probability that Intel’s unfair methods of competition could allow it to extend its monopoly into the GPU chip markets.
Now, its obvious the cpu is losing its place in the market, tho some people denied this too to the end. Intels in deep here, period, and could be split up, shattered like a glass ball hitting the cement, or another fine, this one not so friendly, with severe limitations placed upon them.
Now, since the FTC obviously sees things differently than the writer of alot of so called fair minded sites, as they dont include what the FTC is including/alledging etc, I find those lil rewrites of history pumping up Intel as very false, and since Intel will NEVER be able to anywheres near this ability again, the writers may as well get used to it now, and come down off their high horse they have for Intel.
earl45
Distinguished
- Nov 10, 2009
- 434
- 0
- 18,780
It will take them writers about as long as it take you to come off your high horse for AMD, now just to tell you I've ben reading these posts
here for years, including the time you were preaching that Phenom 1 was just as good as Intels offering at the time.
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
I never said it was , ever. I may have hoped it was, as I also hoped i7 was faster too.
Got attacked for hoping and wanting more for both as well.
Ive already paid those debts, and as soon as P1 came out, I saw it was also P-U, and have said as much over and over again.
I still see people sticking up for the woeful P4, and therein lies the difference as well.
Since I qualify for knocking AMD and Intel for having crappy cpus, or a gpu as in LRB, unless anyone who attacks me for anything, or accuses me, let them first show their disdain for Intel/AMD
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
And your analysis neglects to explain how AMD came up with the $5.4B they used to buy ATI... So, AMD was too screwed over by Intel to afford to build out new/retool old fabs, but not so screwed over that they couldn't afford to pay 3X what ATI should have cost them??
Doesn't quite add up, IMO...
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
Hmm, didn't you just write a buttload of posts pointing out how Larrabee stunk up the place?? Since there's no Larrabee product out for the near future, I doubt that Intel is gonna be extending "its monopoly in the GPU chip market" anytime soon, unless it buys out nVidia or at least buys the rights to use its GPUs...
Personally I think the FTC action is just going to formalize the agreement Intel already made with AMD. There may be a fine involved, but I seriously doubt that your's & Jennyh's heartfelt wish for Intel to be broken up is going to occur, since that would further derail the US economy. Esp. given the fact that Intel is 100% American vs. AMD's being in the hip pocket of the UAE 😀 - that wouldn't fly too far with Congress...
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
First, AMD didnt buy ATI, they borrowed to buy, which is where their debt is currently, but they didnt have the multi billions Intel had/have, nor have they ever.
Youll soon see why buying ATI was paramount as to cpus futures, as itll be obvious.
As to the FTCS comments on cpus losing value space to gpus, thats their comments not mine, as well as their (Intels) monopolization of the silicon market, you can argue this too, just like their innocence, as Im sure Intel will as well, but nVidia hasnt had their day yet, as well as possibly ARM, if Intel isnt careful here.
Theyve cheated, bullied and pushed illegally their way to whatever they wanted to accomplish, whether their way was the best or not.
Meanwhile, we have idiots writing articles praising them without including their methods, their current position, and how thats now permanently changed forever, as theyll never achieve the pinnacle they had before, its heyday is over.
So, I sound like a Intel hater, I dont hate their products, I prefer them in many situations, but I hate Otellini, who somehow always gets praise as well, after overseeing all this illegal activity, and has to go IMHO.
I also belive Intel has anything and everything it has coming to it, and no, I dont blame the governments as the bullies here, and anyone that does without acknowledging Intels bullying are simply being hypocritical and have removed themselves from objectiveness thinking in the matter.
I dont care whether it gets broken up or not, thats not for me to decide, all Ive ever said, and of course people just want to add more to my words and meanings is, Intel faces this possibility, which was unheard of just a short while ago, and again, this is why I believe writers are doing a diservice to the tech industry without including what postition Intel is currently in, and not to praise them for things thats put them in this position.
No hating, just seeing it for what it is, except Otellini, who had brought this upon the US' possibly brightest companies
Youll soon see why buying ATI was paramount as to cpus futures, as itll be obvious.
As to the FTCS comments on cpus losing value space to gpus, thats their comments not mine, as well as their (Intels) monopolization of the silicon market, you can argue this too, just like their innocence, as Im sure Intel will as well, but nVidia hasnt had their day yet, as well as possibly ARM, if Intel isnt careful here.
Theyve cheated, bullied and pushed illegally their way to whatever they wanted to accomplish, whether their way was the best or not.
Meanwhile, we have idiots writing articles praising them without including their methods, their current position, and how thats now permanently changed forever, as theyll never achieve the pinnacle they had before, its heyday is over.
So, I sound like a Intel hater, I dont hate their products, I prefer them in many situations, but I hate Otellini, who somehow always gets praise as well, after overseeing all this illegal activity, and has to go IMHO.
I also belive Intel has anything and everything it has coming to it, and no, I dont blame the governments as the bullies here, and anyone that does without acknowledging Intels bullying are simply being hypocritical and have removed themselves from objectiveness thinking in the matter.
I dont care whether it gets broken up or not, thats not for me to decide, all Ive ever said, and of course people just want to add more to my words and meanings is, Intel faces this possibility, which was unheard of just a short while ago, and again, this is why I believe writers are doing a diservice to the tech industry without including what postition Intel is currently in, and not to praise them for things thats put them in this position.
No hating, just seeing it for what it is, except Otellini, who had brought this upon the US' possibly brightest companies
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
Borrowed or nutz, AMD elected to spend $5.4B on ATI and zilch on fab upgrades. Obviously AMD was at least thinking of spinning off their fabs as far back as 2005 which IIRC is when they first thought about buying ATI (and were making $$ too at the time).
So your argument that Intel's "cheating" caused AMD to not be able to afford new or rebuilt fabs just doesn't hold much water, as evidenced by their massive overpayment for a graphics company that was sliding fast & furious into the dustbin.
This is tantamount to a drunk whining that he is too poor to buy breakfast, but 30 minutes later he's in the liquor store buying a bottle of Mad Dog
.
Whether this was a "strategic" move on AMD's part remains to be seen, but certainly Hector & Co. could have waited a few months and gotten ATI for half or less.
Remember MS and the Yahoo buyout? Except MS lost interest & walked away from the deal. Too bad Hector wasn't nearly as astute a businessman...
So your argument that Intel's "cheating" caused AMD to not be able to afford new or rebuilt fabs just doesn't hold much water, as evidenced by their massive overpayment for a graphics company that was sliding fast & furious into the dustbin.
This is tantamount to a drunk whining that he is too poor to buy breakfast, but 30 minutes later he's in the liquor store buying a bottle of Mad Dog
.Whether this was a "strategic" move on AMD's part remains to be seen, but certainly Hector & Co. could have waited a few months and gotten ATI for half or less.
Remember MS and the Yahoo buyout? Except MS lost interest & walked away from the deal. Too bad Hector wasn't nearly as astute a businessman...
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
OK, had AMD been able to sell to Dell at all, or HP at all etc etc.
Always an excuse. Poor lil AMD just couldnt do this, especially even when they had by Intels own admission, the best cpu that was kicking Intels butt, but of course, its the fantastic uber marketing from great Intel right?
Not that at the time HP and Dell etc were off limits by Intels illegal activities, no no, it was because Intel could sell their chips to everyone because they were so : good ? wrong
:cheap? wrong
:superior in marketing? wrong again, wonder where Intel had this money?
:AMD wasnt allowed to compete? Hmmm, think this plays a huge role in all this, but of course, we could hold our heads in the sand and just keep on praising Intel, for the fantastic totally domi9nating P4s and their super marketing that somehow worked allllloll the way to the OEMs, it was soooooooooooooo good.
Oh, and yes, the gpu is dead, and no, you cant use anything like a gpu with our cpus, you think thisll play well after all this?
If nVidia proves a Atom by itself was more expensive than one SoC?
And do you think the courts will just sit this one out?
Intels done enough, theyve always had enough, but to some there at Intel, it wasntr enough, and they had to cheat.
Its time to pay, and the FTC is knocking at the door.
Its time for every writer to acknowledge whats been going on, and quit appeasing Intels bloated ego, as all you have to do is ask Michael Dell
Always an excuse. Poor lil AMD just couldnt do this, especially even when they had by Intels own admission, the best cpu that was kicking Intels butt, but of course, its the fantastic uber marketing from great Intel right?
Not that at the time HP and Dell etc were off limits by Intels illegal activities, no no, it was because Intel could sell their chips to everyone because they were so : good ? wrong
:cheap? wrong
:superior in marketing? wrong again, wonder where Intel had this money?
:AMD wasnt allowed to compete? Hmmm, think this plays a huge role in all this, but of course, we could hold our heads in the sand and just keep on praising Intel, for the fantastic totally domi9nating P4s and their super marketing that somehow worked allllloll the way to the OEMs, it was soooooooooooooo good.
Oh, and yes, the gpu is dead, and no, you cant use anything like a gpu with our cpus, you think thisll play well after all this?
If nVidia proves a Atom by itself was more expensive than one SoC?
And do you think the courts will just sit this one out?
Intels done enough, theyve always had enough, but to some there at Intel, it wasntr enough, and they had to cheat.
Its time to pay, and the FTC is knocking at the door.
Its time for every writer to acknowledge whats been going on, and quit appeasing Intels bloated ego, as all you have to do is ask Michael Dell
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
Sheesh, I haven't seen so much Intel hate since, I dunno - JennyH's last post 😀. And you are exaggerating considerably as well - the P4, while not nearly as good as the K8 of the time, wasn't that bad of a CPU either. Yes it was a power hog and hot and slow, but then so was P1 compared to Core2. At least Intel didn't send their VP's out to blab about "40% improvement across a wide variety of workloads"...
As I said, your case that AMD didn't have the bux to upgrade their fabs falls far short of being convincing, when they saw fit to spend $$ they didn't have to buy ATI.
Anyway, the FTC has stated that they are not going to pursue monetary damages, just changes in marketing procedures.
As for a "drowning Intel", you and JennyH just wish 😀... This will prove to be a minor setback, when all is said & done...
JAYDEEJOHN
Champion
- Aug 23, 2006
- 19,840
- 0
- 50,860
OK, ready for some more so called hate?
I could give less a damn about what AMD did, if they screwed up 3 times as badly. or worse even, it doesnt matter.
Its you trying to drag AMD into this, as I had to, because I was being painted as a AMD fan.
AMD did the pooch big time, hugely, lied, were fools etc etc
Whatever.
It doesnt matter, and this is whats killing alot of people here, it simply doesnt matter and make Intel innocent, better or Otelini worthy of running Intel
What Intels done is wrong, and will be paying for it for a long long time.
I know AMD didnt get compensated fairly, I know governments ended up with some money and its obvious Intels playing off of these facts, as if that too will make them innocent, or the fact the OEMs arent named as yet for any wrongdoing.
Maybe Intel needs to go after Dell and HP like they have nVidia, since theyre soooo damn innocent.
I guess now that Ive said this much about Intel, Id better inject some AMD bashing too, for the thin brained.
AMD said 40% on P1, as if, it was on like 1 or 2 synthetic tests, and alot of these same writers that praise Intel picked up on it and pushed it big time, and AMD did nothing to stop it.
OK, now, back to Intel
Since some are soo caught up in Intel, theres your balance LOL enjoy it will ya, and lets hope Intel repays every dime it illegally got from it activities
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
BTW, and off-topic, but I'm sorry to see JennyH got banned here. Yes she was incredibly annoying and tended to get personal in her posts, but she kept a lot of us Intel fanbois on our toes and also managed to come up with some interesting links occasionally.
Yeah I know a lot of those on the receiving end of her posts are probably glad, but IMO Tom's needs some balance, so I hope the ban is temporary. Esp. since I've seen a number of other posters stray pretty far into the ad hominem attack zone.
Yeah I know a lot of those on the receiving end of her posts are probably glad, but IMO Tom's needs some balance, so I hope the ban is temporary. Esp. since I've seen a number of other posters stray pretty far into the ad hominem attack zone.
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
The mods are in a better position to answer, but my feeling is that she got goaded into stepping over the personal attack line just once too often, after being warned about it. I know I used to blow smoke up her shorts, but that was mostly in fun and in a friendly sort of way, plus she could retaliate pretty well too 😛. "Failzers" - LOL! 😀
Anyway, her parting words can be found in THIS locked thread.
well that sucks. i didnt agree with a lot of things she had to say but she made some good points at times and her conviction was admirable. i never took anything she said as a personal attack so much as talking smack (which goes on a lot around here) but i guess some have thin skin.
fazers_on_stun
Splendid
- Aug 31, 2006
- 4,743
- 0
- 22,860
^ Agreed.
However, Jenny would probably say Intel's 'conviction' was pretty admirable as well 😀...
However, Jenny would probably say Intel's 'conviction' was pretty admirable as well 😀...
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question No POST on new AM5 build - - - and the CPU & DRAM lights are on ?
- Started by Uknownflowet
- Replies: 13
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram