Intel Accused of Giving Dell $6 Billion in Perks

[rooket]

Off topic but on topic for this web site. This huge castrol add is f***ing annoying and covers half the screen even when I don't scroll over it. I think castrol is getting thumbs down in my book already.

 

[itadakimasu]

is that why the optiplex 740 is the only AMD optiplex I can think of?

 

[bill gates is your daddy]

[citation][nom]presidenteody[/nom]well, i don't think offering rebates is a bad thing![/citation]

Inform yourself before speaking. This was not a rebate. This would be Newegg telling you that you can receive this discount but only if you promise to never purchase anything from Fry's Electronics again.

 

[socrates047]

support amd

 

[sqhacker]

to be honest with you as bad as their business practices are, intel still holds a strong chip, now if their plan was to take out AMD's knees from under them when they had superior chips thats kinda cheap but why doesnt anyone blame the huge orginazations for their sleezy dealings with intel as well? "hey dell here is 1.2 billion a year to go with us" i'da done it too...

 

[Herbert_HA]

I believe the problem is not that Intel was giving discounts, but that they were giving discounts IF the seller wouldn't sell AMD computers, keeping them out of the market.

 

[MiamiU]

[citation][nom]soky602[/nom]If only people would think of it as buy one get one or its 50% off a bundle deal on this item, it won't sound so bad.[/citation]
if only this, or if only that... think anyway you want it, but the fact is there was no sales discount or promotions for buying bulk. It was Intel buying of Dell and others (with "incentives")into selling Intel cpus exclusively.

How about "if only people would of it as" comparing this to how the oil industry pays companies to have new technology bared and have us hooked on high oil consumption.

 

[eyemaster]

[citation][nom]homrqt[/nom]Wait, I don't get it. One company can't use incentives to gain another company's business??[/citation]
Sure you can, but not when the strings attached mean you can't sell a competitor's products or you lose the kickbacks.

 

[DjEaZy]

... big news... [sarcasm]

 

[dextermat]

Wow paying a crappy company like Dell 6 bil. of dollars will surely tarnish their reputation.

I preferred intel over AMD but this is the kind of styuf that makes me wanna change ideas... unless we learn that AMD did that with toshiba or other sucking companies 😛

 

[ohim]

All the ppl don`t see the problems that go beyond the actualy period when the rebates were made , since Intel pumped a lot of monney in a period when AMD was over Intel in performance , AMD over time couldn`t recover from the investment that was done before that period and is still felt even today ... sice at that time AMD was clearly supposed to be very profitable and today maybe we would of still had an AMD CPU very competitive so that i7 965 woulnd`t be priced at 1000 $ ... thing is will all the harm done and with all those fines intel still "won" at this since AMD will recover very slow from this. and that`s if they`ll ever recover since developing a new powerfull CPU takes a lot of monney witch Intel took away from AMD. Take that Intel fan boys you`re suporting like fanatics the very own company that slowly will make you sell half of your house for a future enthusiast CPU.

 

[teeth_03]

Its really not a matter of "Dell likes Intel,so Dell mainly uses Intel Chips"

but rather,"Intel is PAYING Dell NOT to use AMD", theres a difference

Consider that a good percentage of Police cars are Crown Vics. It would be like Ford paying the Government to not buy Chevy Malibus
...of course,since the Government basically owns the car companies, they can do whatever the **** they want,lol

...anyway...

 

[dheadley]

There is no "buy one, get one free" or "buy so many and get X% discount in this. That 6 billion dollars or 1.2 billion per year is probably far more than what Dell was even paying for chips during that period.

So, that would make it more like Intel saying "if you don't use AMD we will give you back all the money you spent on chips for the quarter or year plus give you a substantial bonus sum on top of that just for making us your only supplier of CPU's"

This really is just the same as dropping your cost to zero on an item that has an actual value much higher than that just for the purpose of driving out competition. They are just playing it out over time to avoid being called out for blatant anti-competitive practices.

 

[Guest]

This is what AMD has been trying to sue Intel for...for years! Each time it was shot down in courts. This act is quite sad as Intel doesn't need to drive out competition for they make so many devices that people benefit from, AMD is just (mainly known for) their processors and graphics cards (they used to own Qualcomm). Intel has their (soon to be dedicated graphics right as they said they are entering the market?), integrated graphics, processors, SSD's, etc. Hopefully this sticks and Intel gets what they deserve for such acts.

 

[Guest]

Imagine what kind of R&D AMD could've done if Intel had paid them $6billion to only sell Intel CP.... Oh wait...

As techie people(nerds,if you will), we need to ensure that our non-computer-literate friends and family always buy AMD. I have an AMD Dragon desktop, and a Tigris laptop, but I've also forced those choices upon everybody who has consulted with me for computer purchasing advice.

This is the BEST way to counteract Intel's practices, if your Grandma walks into Bestbuy, 95% of the laptops have Intel Inside, because Intel bribes the OEMs. What are the odds that she'll even see AMD? Go to Bestbuy with her, and let her know that AMD is the "Smarter Choice"(tm).

 

[buwish]

Wait until the other states or even the feds get onboard- Intel will be broke as an a 63 Ford Falcon.

 

[thejerk]

[citation][nom]Herbert_HA[/nom]I believe the problem is not that Intel was giving discounts, but that they were giving discounts IF the seller wouldn't sell AMD computers, keeping them out of the market.[/citation]


Exactly, it was the fact that Dell got discounts. It was the HOW and WHY that makes the deal shady. And, IIRC, that's what the whole EU suit considered.

 

[Nexus52085]

[citation][nom]tipoo[/nom]Apple STILL uses exclusively Intel chips across their entire lineup. Whats with that?[/citation]
Because Apple's processors sucked compared to Intel's.

 

[killakenny]

AMD's Athlon forced intel to step their game & that's how Core 2 & i5/i7 came about. Sorry for off-topic

 

[climber]

When there was just the Pentium 4 series and it's xeon variants Intel did everything it could to try and prevent AMD from dominating with the Athlon. When Intel cam out with the Core architecture they kept it up so they could try and regain the performance crown and not give AMD the momentum to gain market share and capital to dedicate to R&D to continue to drive innovation at the rate to continue to accelerate past Intel and gain further market share. I can understand Intel's position, protecting it's own corporate interests, but it's sleazy.

 

[Guest]

Wait, you mean the more CPUs Dell purchased, the more money Intel gave as a rebate? And that money fluctuated with the types of CPUs Dell sold, where the more expensive CPUs give more expensive rebates? Thanks for saving America, Cuomo! Oh noes!

 

[eddieroolz]

Now that I think of it, it does seem true that Dell was taking huge cash to promote Intel only. Every time their flyer comes to my door all I see is "Dell recommends Intel Pentium 4" "Dell recommends Intel Core 2 Duo" yadda yadda. Hell, they even recommeneded the Pentium D for power users in spite of its inferiority against the Athlon X2.

Needless to say, I have no respect for Dell.

 

[anamaniac]

I'd think discounting their chips enough to the point of a accumulated $6,000,000,000.00 may have worked also...

 

[sonofliberty08]

they not just giving discount , they give sponsor to every intel-only computer shop , that's why i hate to work for the intel-only shop .

 

[cyberkuberiah]

intel FTW . FTW = Fucks the World 🙁