>Ok kids
I'm most likely old enough to be your father, so i'll try and take this as a compliment 😉
>I'm sure Intel uses aggressive tactics but guess what,
>that's what a capitalist system is. If you want to make
>money and stay on top then you have to be aggressive.
No one is sueing Intel over being "aggressive".
>There mad that they can and they are suing.
>Great grand just what the U.S. court system needs, another
>frivolous lawsuit
Frivolous ? What on earth is frivolous about it ? Even disregarding its merrit and eventual outcome, I see nothing frivolous about it at all. And if you think AMD doesn't have a case, I suggest we wait until the evidence is brought forward. If AMD can support their allegations in court, I personally think they have a pretty strong case. But hey, you don't even seem to understand what this is about:
>AMD isn't going broke so they really don't need to sue
that has got to be the most ridiculous comment I ever read on this subject.
>I think the decision against Microsoft set a bad example.
>Microsoft got hosed. There is not a better alternative to
>Windows because no one has come up with one
And no one ever sued MS for selling windows, or being a monopoly, but again you just show you totally don't understand what this is about.
>In a way I hope AMD looses this battle, it's not right to
>use the courts to gain market share
LOL.. yeah, whatever. Just a question: imagine a court ruling in favour of AMD, just how do you think that would result in an increased market share for AMD ? It takes customers buying your products to increase your share, but to achieve that, you need customers having the *option* of buying your products. If AMDs claims are correct, oem's today simply don't have that choice, and therefore, we as and customers don't have it. I can honestly not see why you would be agaist a ruling that would give us more choice, unless you are an intel fanboy/stock holder/employee.
= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =