Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [dvHW] AMD expands charges against Intel
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[dvHW] AMD expands charges against Intel - Page 6

post #51 of 81
It is not my intention to start a flame war or anything but In the cut throat business of technology development, this doesn't surprise me. Actually I wouldn't be suprised If this was happening across the board In all fields.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 @ 3.8Ghz / E8600 @ 4.8Ghz 24/7! DFI X48 DK HD 4870 + (4870x2) 4gb Crucial Ballistix Tracer @1100 4.4.4.12 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
3 x 250GB Sata II in raid 0 LG Dual Layer Burner XP pro sp2 / Vista Ultimate 22 Inch BenQ / 24 Inch Samsung 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G 11 Silverstone Strider 850w Modular Antec 900 Razer Copperhead 
Mouse Pad
Nova Microoptic 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 @ 3.8Ghz / E8600 @ 4.8Ghz 24/7! DFI X48 DK HD 4870 + (4870x2) 4gb Crucial Ballistix Tracer @1100 4.4.4.12 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
3 x 250GB Sata II in raid 0 LG Dual Layer Burner XP pro sp2 / Vista Ultimate 22 Inch BenQ / 24 Inch Samsung 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G 11 Silverstone Strider 850w Modular Antec 900 Razer Copperhead 
Mouse Pad
Nova Microoptic 
  hide details  
Reply
post #52 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by psik0.k1m View Post
since when is a p3/p4/c2d/ 1200+ brand new chips to 2008 ?

Not taking dude's side.... just maybe pay attention to what your saying before you say it ?
I'm not even sure I know what you mean? Everyone was saying that people are buying intel cause the c2d's kick butt and amd is not the fastest, I was saying that this lawsuit was from 2005 when the athlon64 was WAAAY faster than the P4's and that at the time you could not buy a dell or gateway or whatever with an AMD cpu because they didn't make them. What are you on about? Maybe you should pay attention to what you're saying, lol.
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570k ASRock Z77 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 980ti Superclock 4x4GB Samsung 1600mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD840 2xMaxtor 200gb RAID0 Customer water cooling with '77 Bonneville rad Windows 10 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
27" Korean 1440p Razor mechanical Corsair TH850W CM Stacker 810 
MouseMouse Pad
Razor Lachesis generic 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570k ASRock Z77 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 980ti Superclock 4x4GB Samsung 1600mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD840 2xMaxtor 200gb RAID0 Customer water cooling with '77 Bonneville rad Windows 10 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
27" Korean 1440p Razor mechanical Corsair TH850W CM Stacker 810 
MouseMouse Pad
Razor Lachesis generic 
  hide details  
Reply
post #53 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by dralb View Post
Thats just it, though, they don't. Don't confuse a few enthusiasts with the general public who make up 95% of the market. They want what they are told is the best and feel comfortable with.


edit: Thats why this issue has such large implications. Dell using an AMD could have driven up their sales by quite a bit, regardless of the performance. Do you eat at McDonalds because it is the best burger you can get for your money?
No.. you eat a McDonald's burger because it "tastes good" (if that is what your taste buds are telling you...) Some folks like Coke, others like Pepsi, but you can't buy Pepsi at McDonalds or Burger King as they have made negotiations to serve Coke products. Do you now sue Coke because of that decision? In most cases, Pepsi sells its product elsewhere... and obviously stays profitable and viable despite not being sold at McDonalds or Burger King.

Everyone has choices... however I do remember Dell making a statement a long time ago about it not being under contract to sell Intel chips only.. but that they found that Intel was the choice product desired by its customers. At some point in time they did start offering "low cost" PCs featuring AMDs... yet and still, Intel was their favored platform and continues to be.

Either way, older AMDs had all kinds of "compatibility" and heat issues (remember the "fried chicken".. i.e. Thunderbird) that have for most the most part been worked out now. To "enthusiasts" who were willing to tackle those issues back then, AMD was sought after as a cheaper powerful contender, yet Intel always had a strangle hold as the "market leader" especially in regards to compatibility and mainstream support. This has alot to do with how "comfortable" mainstream PC buyers were with making a decision to go with Intel over AMD.

I guess AMD just never found other mass distribution networks to promote its product... Does that mean that Dell, Gateway, and HP should be blamed for that? If it is proven that Intel did in fact collude with these distributors to prevent AMD from being competitive, then pretty much they are gonna get the smack down laid on them. However, honestly, the decision to buy AMD is a choice influenced by marketing and to the mainstream consumer I just don't think AMD did enough marketing to convince them that their product was superior (back then... because now, that just isn't the case as has been stated at length in this thread.)
Darkside of Fury
(13 items)
 
Fast and Furious
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel I7 930 MSI X58 Pro-E XFX Radeon 5850 Black Edition 6GB Kingston HyperX 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ 128GB Vertex 2 SSD Samsung 223L Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit Asus 26" LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Enermax Revolution 85+ CoolerMaster ATCS 840 Logitech G9 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i3/i5/i7 Z77 MPower (MS-7751) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 G-Skill 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Vertex 4 Lite-on DVD Corsair H100 Windows 7 Ultimate 
PowerCaseMouse
CoolerMaster Silent Pro 1050 CoolerMaster 690 II Advanced Cyborg MMO 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Darkside of Fury
(13 items)
 
Fast and Furious
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel I7 930 MSI X58 Pro-E XFX Radeon 5850 Black Edition 6GB Kingston HyperX 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ 128GB Vertex 2 SSD Samsung 223L Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit Asus 26" LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Enermax Revolution 85+ CoolerMaster ATCS 840 Logitech G9 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i3/i5/i7 Z77 MPower (MS-7751) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 G-Skill 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Vertex 4 Lite-on DVD Corsair H100 Windows 7 Ultimate 
PowerCaseMouse
CoolerMaster Silent Pro 1050 CoolerMaster 690 II Advanced Cyborg MMO 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #54 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkFury View Post
No.. you eat a McDonald's burger because it "tastes good" (if that is what your taste buds are telling you...) Some folks like Coke, others like Pepsi, but you can't buy Pepsi at McDonalds or Burger King as they have made negotiations to serve Coke products. Do you now sue Coke because of that decision? In most cases, Pepsi sells its product elsewhere... and obviously stays profitable and viable despite not being sold at McDonalds or Burger King.

Everyone has choices... however I do remember Dell making a statement a long time ago about it not being under contract to sell Intel chips only.. but that they found that Intel was the choice product desired by its customers. At some point in time they did start offering "low cost" PCs featuring AMDs... yet and still, Intel was their favored platform and continues to be.

Either way, older AMDs had all kinds of "compatibility" and heat issues (remember the "fried chicken".. i.e. Thunderbird) that have for most the most part been worked out now. To "enthusiasts" who were willing to tackle those issues back then, AMD was sought after as a cheaper powerful contender, yet Intel always had a strangle hold as the "market leader" especially in regards to compatibility and mainstream support. This has alot to do with how "comfortable" mainstream PC buyers were with making a decision to go with Intel over AMD.

I guess AMD just never found other mass distribution networks to promote its product... Does that mean that Dell, Gateway, and HP should be blamed for that? If it is proven that Intel did in fact collude with these distributors to prevent AMD from being competitive, then pretty much they are gonna get the smack down laid on them. However, honestly, the decision to buy AMD is a choice influenced by marketing and to the mainstream consumer I just don't think AMD did enough marketing to convince them that their product was superior (back then... because now, that just isn't the case as has been stated at length in this thread.)
I understand what you're trying to say, this situation is a bit different. It's kinda like Coke telling McD's that if they try to go with a competitor's drink, then Coke will go out of it's way to make sure no one goes to McD's.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-2500K Biostar TP67B+ XFX HD5750 1GB 2x4GB DDR3 Corsair 1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
60GB OCZ SSD, 2x160GB HDD RAID0, 500GB+500GB+1.5TB Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster 930B Antec SmartPower 450w 
Case
Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #55 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkFury View Post
No.. you eat a McDonald's burger because it "tastes good" (if that is what your taste buds are telling you...) Some folks like Coke, others like Pepsi, but you can't buy Pepsi at McDonalds or Burger King as they have made negotiations to serve Coke products. Do you now sue Coke because of that decision? In most cases, Pepsi sells its product elsewhere... and obviously stays profitable and viable despite not being sold at McDonalds or Burger King.

Everyone has choices... however I do remember Dell making a statement a long time ago about it not being under contract to sell Intel chips only.. but that they found that Intel was the choice product desired by its customers. At some point in time they did start offering "low cost" PCs featuring AMDs... yet and still, Intel was their favored platform and continues to be.

Either way, older AMDs had all kinds of "compatibility" and heat issues (remember the "fried chicken".. i.e. Thunderbird) that have for most the most part been worked out now. To "enthusiasts" who were willing to tackle those issues back then, AMD was sought after as a cheaper powerful contender, yet Intel always had a strangle hold as the "market leader" especially in regards to compatibility and mainstream support. This has alot to do with how "comfortable" mainstream PC buyers were with making a decision to go with Intel over AMD.

I guess AMD just never found other mass distribution networks to promote its product... Does that mean that Dell, Gateway, and HP should be blamed for that? If it is proven that Intel did in fact collude with these distributors to prevent AMD from being competitive, then pretty much they are gonna get the smack down laid on them. However, honestly, the decision to buy AMD is a choice influenced by marketing and to the mainstream consumer I just don't think AMD did enough marketing to convince them that their product was superior (back then... because now, that just isn't the case as has been stated at length in this thread.)
I see what you're saying but this is a little different. It's one thing for a company to sign an exclusive contract with coke or pepsi, it's another thing when there is no contract and pepsi pays the other guy bribe money not to sell coke. That is illigal, AMD would not still have a lawsuit in the court if what they were accusing intel of was not illigal. And the thunderbird era is not when this sort of thing became a problem, it was when the athlon64's were outperforming the P4's, and intel had the problems (remember prescHOT?). Trust me, if intel is proved to have done what AMD says they did they will be in some very serious legal trouble.


Edit: Looks like GuylaDouche beat me to the post while I was typing, but you see what we mean.
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570k ASRock Z77 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 980ti Superclock 4x4GB Samsung 1600mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD840 2xMaxtor 200gb RAID0 Customer water cooling with '77 Bonneville rad Windows 10 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
27" Korean 1440p Razor mechanical Corsair TH850W CM Stacker 810 
MouseMouse Pad
Razor Lachesis generic 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570k ASRock Z77 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 980ti Superclock 4x4GB Samsung 1600mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD840 2xMaxtor 200gb RAID0 Customer water cooling with '77 Bonneville rad Windows 10 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
27" Korean 1440p Razor mechanical Corsair TH850W CM Stacker 810 
MouseMouse Pad
Razor Lachesis generic 
  hide details  
Reply
post #56 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkFury View Post
No.. you eat a McDonald's burger because it "tastes good" (if that is what your taste buds are telling you...) Some folks like Coke, others like Pepsi, but you can't buy Pepsi at McDonalds or Burger King as they have made negotiations to serve Coke products. Do you now sue Coke because of that decision? In most cases, Pepsi sells its product elsewhere... and obviously stays profitable and viable despite not being sold at McDonalds or Burger King.

Everyone has choices... however I do remember Dell making a statement a long time ago about it not being under contract to sell Intel chips only.. but that they found that Intel was the choice product desired by its customers. At some point in time they did start offering "low cost" PCs featuring AMDs... yet and still, Intel was their favored platform and continues to be.

Either way, older AMDs had all kinds of "compatibility" and heat issues (remember the "fried chicken".. i.e. Thunderbird) that have for most the most part been worked out now. To "enthusiasts" who were willing to tackle those issues back then, AMD was sought after as a cheaper powerful contender, yet Intel always had a strangle hold as the "market leader" especially in regards to compatibility and mainstream support. This has alot to do with how "comfortable" mainstream PC buyers were with making a decision to go with Intel over AMD.

I guess AMD just never found other mass distribution networks to promote its product... Does that mean that Dell, Gateway, and HP should be blamed for that? If it is proven that Intel did in fact collude with these distributors to prevent AMD from being competitive, then pretty much they are gonna get the smack down laid on them. However, honestly, the decision to buy AMD is a choice influenced by marketing and to the mainstream consumer I just don't think AMD did enough marketing to convince them that their product was superior (back then... because now, that just isn't the case as has been stated at length in this thread.)

As others have already stated, it isn't the fact that McD's sells one product over the other, it is how they go about choosing that product. Also, I highly doubt most people eat McD's due to the taste. It is usually due to the fact that they are on every corner and people are bombarded with advertising, so it is usually the first thing that comes to mind. The same can be true for OEM's and Intel. Dell can state that Intel is what their customers prefer, but that may only be due to the fact that thats what Dell was pushing to its customers.

People are very suseptable to marketing and very rarely purchase a product on that products merits. Look at Tylenol. Why do people want to buy it? Well, it is the brand Docotrs choose most. Do they ever say that that is due to them selling it to hospitals the cheapest? No, it is assumed that it is a superior product. The industry creates the better product.

I am trying to say, is that the implications of one company choosing to support one brand over another can have huge implications to the success of that product. It really doesn't matter what is better, it is what is more popular.


Now, if Dell etc. had a legit contract with Intel, so be it. If Intel was conspiring illegally with them, well, I think it is important to see the overall effect this could have had on AMD. AMD could very well still be in the position it is in whether this happened or not, but it was a key moment in time for this rivalry. If the OEM's had pushed AMD more then, I would think the name would be better known now and that would effect sales from the home PC owner.
Current
(3 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphics
i5 6600k MSI Z170-A Pro RX-480 
  hide details  
Reply
Current
(3 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphics
i5 6600k MSI Z170-A Pro RX-480 
  hide details  
Reply
post #57 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyladouche View Post
I understand what you're trying to say, this situation is a bit different. It's kinda like Coke telling McD's that if they try to go with a competitor's drink, then Coke will go out of it's way to make sure no one goes to McD's.
I can understand that... but by Dell's own admission, this wasn't the case.

Are you insinuating that computer distributors like Dell was lying back then? This is what needs to be proven. If the distributors voluntarily agreed to not sell AMDs, then Intel shouldn't be solely faulted for that.

Back in the day, Burger King did in fact sell Pepsi... but when Pepsi started buying up KFC, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell directly competing in the food industry, BK decided... "Oh no... well we'll sell Coke then if you want to do that". They made a concious decision to sell one over the other. I'm sure by law most restaurants could sell both products (just like you can buy both products at various convenience stores) however this might not be the most profitable strategy in doing so plus it would require extra inventory and distribution lines to keep both products in stock at all times.

Sometimes companies just go with the "simple" solution that covers their profit goals... and that being the case, they make a decision based on what they think they can sell at the greatest profit reward point. If alot of customers had complained back then that they wanted more AMD units, I'm sure that Dell and other companies would have been more than happy to stock more of those units, but as such... they didn't. (not saying that there wasn't ANY demand... just that the demand probably wasn't great enough to convince them to open up another supply line for AMD processors)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urufu_Shinjiro View Post
I see what you're saying but this is a little different. It's one thing for a company to sign an exclusive contract with coke or pepsi, it's another thing when there is no contract and pepsi pays the other guy bribe money not to sell coke. That is illigal, AMD would not still have a lawsuit in the court if what they were accusing intel of was not illigal. And the thunderbird era is not when this sort of thing became a problem, it was when the athlon64's were outperforming the P4's, and intel had the problems (remember prescHOT?). Trust me, if intel is proved to have done what AMD says they did they will be in some very serious legal trouble.


Edit: Looks like GuylaDouche beat me to the post while I was typing, but you see what we mean.
EDIT: Yes, Prescotts ran hot, but they still were compatible chipsets with most mainstream apps out there. A mainstream user wasn't overclocking them... and the heat was not so much as to make them shut down and stop working. It was us "overclockers" who were adversely affected by the heat... but we are not the "mainstream" that buys Dell's... therefore its a moot point.

AMD back then was still an "enthusiast" chip... if you had the skills to buy the specialty components to make them work great... then you did that, but for most mainstream folks... they just kept it simple and went with the "Intel safe bet".


Quote:
Originally Posted by dralb View Post
As others have already stated, it isn't the fact that McD's sells one product over the other, it is how they go about choosing that product. Also, I highly doubt most people eat McD's due to the taste. It is usually due to the fact that they are on every corner and people are bombarded with advertising, so it is usually the first thing that comes to mind. The same can be true for OEM's and Intel. Dell can state that Intel is what their customers prefer, but that may only be due to the fact that thats what Dell was pushing to its customers.

People are very suseptable to marketing and very rarely purchase a product on that products merits. Look at Tylenol. Why do people want to buy it? Well, it is the brand Docotrs choose most. Do they ever say that that is due to them selling it to hospitals the cheapest? No, it is assumed that it is a superior product. The industry creates the better product.

I am trying to say, is that the implications of one company choosing to support one brand over another can have huge implications to the success of that product. It really doesn't matter what is better, it is what is more popular.


Now, if Dell etc. had a legit contract with Intel, so be it. If Intel was conspiring illegally with them, well, I think it is important to see the overall effect this could have had on AMD. AMD could very well still be in the position it is in whether this happened or not, but it was a key moment in time for this rivalry. If the OEM's had pushed AMD more then, I would think the name would be better known now and that would effect sales from the home PC owner.
EDIT: Well of course... advertising does matter. That's part of the business strategy of selling your product.. This is no different in any other industry per your post.


BTW... on a side note, I in fact LIKE the taste of the Big Mac and the regular hamburger and double cheeseburger at McDonald's as well as their french fries. They don't have to advertise those items to me as I like them anyway. So "advertising" only goes so far when it comes to buyer preferences. (it's called "Brand Loyalty"... and alot of mainstream consumers have that.)
Darkside of Fury
(13 items)
 
Fast and Furious
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel I7 930 MSI X58 Pro-E XFX Radeon 5850 Black Edition 6GB Kingston HyperX 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ 128GB Vertex 2 SSD Samsung 223L Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit Asus 26" LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Enermax Revolution 85+ CoolerMaster ATCS 840 Logitech G9 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i3/i5/i7 Z77 MPower (MS-7751) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 G-Skill 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Vertex 4 Lite-on DVD Corsair H100 Windows 7 Ultimate 
PowerCaseMouse
CoolerMaster Silent Pro 1050 CoolerMaster 690 II Advanced Cyborg MMO 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Darkside of Fury
(13 items)
 
Fast and Furious
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel I7 930 MSI X58 Pro-E XFX Radeon 5850 Black Edition 6GB Kingston HyperX 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
OCZ 128GB Vertex 2 SSD Samsung 223L Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit Asus 26" LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Enermax Revolution 85+ CoolerMaster ATCS 840 Logitech G9 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i3/i5/i7 Z77 MPower (MS-7751) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 G-Skill 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Vertex 4 Lite-on DVD Corsair H100 Windows 7 Ultimate 
PowerCaseMouse
CoolerMaster Silent Pro 1050 CoolerMaster 690 II Advanced Cyborg MMO 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #58 of 81
Well of course dell would deny they took part in illigal market manipulation. And of course that is what needs to be proven, thats why it's in court. Those of us that are discussing this aren't neccessarily saying that it will be proven in AMD's favor (though I do think it will), we're just refuting the silly notion some people are posting that if intel did do this that they did nothing wrong. And back to the coke v. pepsi thing, there's a difference between Pepsi buying Taco Bell and Pepsi buying off Taco Bell.
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570k ASRock Z77 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 980ti Superclock 4x4GB Samsung 1600mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD840 2xMaxtor 200gb RAID0 Customer water cooling with '77 Bonneville rad Windows 10 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
27" Korean 1440p Razor mechanical Corsair TH850W CM Stacker 810 
MouseMouse Pad
Razor Lachesis generic 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570k ASRock Z77 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 980ti Superclock 4x4GB Samsung 1600mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SSD840 2xMaxtor 200gb RAID0 Customer water cooling with '77 Bonneville rad Windows 10 Professional 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
27" Korean 1440p Razor mechanical Corsair TH850W CM Stacker 810 
MouseMouse Pad
Razor Lachesis generic 
  hide details  
Reply
post #59 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkFury View Post
I can understand that... but by Dell's own admission, this wasn't the case.

Are you insinuating that computer distributors like Dell was lying back then? This is what needs to be proven. If the distributors voluntarily agreed to not sell AMDs, then Intel shouldn't be solely faulted for that.

Back in the day, Burger King did in fact sell Pepsi... but when Pepsi started buying up KFC, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell directly competing in the food industry, BK decided... "Oh no... well we'll sell Coke then if you want to do that". They made a concious decision to sell one over the other. I'm sure by law most restaurants could sell both products (just like you can buy both products at various convenience stores) however this might not be the most profitable strategy in doing so plus it would require extra inventory and distribution lines to keep both products in stock at all times.

Sometimes companies just go with the "simple" solution that covers their profit goals... and that being the case, they make a decision based on what they think they can sell at the greatest profit reward point. If alot of customers had complained back then that they wanted more AMD units, I'm sure that Dell and other companies would have been more than happy to stock more of those units, but as such... they didn't. (not saying that there wasn't ANY demand... just that the demand probably wasn't great enough to convince them to open up another supply line for AMD processors)


BTW... on a side note, I in fact LIKE the taste of the Big Mac and the regular hamburger and double cheeseburger at McDonald's as well as their french fries. They don't have to advertise those items to me as I like them anyway. So "advertising" only goes so far when it comes to buyer preferences.

I agree, but the whole basis of the case is that it was a choice that was made due to illegally distributed influences. (ie: money) While Dell etc. have every right to choose the product they support, it is a different case entirely when they are being paid by one company to inhibit the other. Its not like Dell would come out and say "We support intel because they are a better company." they will support whoever makes them the most money. That can be via legitimate means or fraudulantly, as seems to be the case. In case you hadn't noticed, it is Intel that is being sued, not Dell etc.


The whole argument is whether Intel used legit practices when soliciting their products to OEM. NOT that the OEM choose one over the other, but the motives for doing so. There are a million reasons why any company chooses to support one product over the other, but it always boils down to money. The CEO's of said companies may very well be happy collecting directly without having to wait for sales to go up and collect profits.

Also, I like the taste as well, but be honest, the general public usually does what it is told.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Urufu_Shinjiro View Post
Well of course dell would deny they took part in illigal market manipulation. And of course that is what needs to be proven, thats why it's in court. Those of us that are discussing this aren't neccessarily saying that it will be proven in AMD's favor (though I do think it will), we're just refuting the silly notion some people are posting that if intel did do this that they did nothing wrong. And back to the coke v. pepsi thing, there's a difference between Pepsi buying Taco Bell and Pepsi buying off Taco Bell.
QFT I am curious as to whether any of the involved OEM's will be next in line if this case is proven to be true.
Current
(3 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphics
i5 6600k MSI Z170-A Pro RX-480 
  hide details  
Reply
Current
(3 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphics
i5 6600k MSI Z170-A Pro RX-480 
  hide details  
Reply
post #60 of 81
100% of all dell and gateway PC's are Intel only. HP at least offers AMD processors but like as it has been said before Non computer savvy people have no idea what or who AMD is and would be like "Oh I know what Intel is, I see commercials all the time on TV for them, They must be good." And that's how a decision is made for most people. So having that said, How many mainstream PC do Dell and gateway sell yearly that are all Intel? Multiplied by 3 years? That's a big chunk of change and none of that was available for AMD because of "pressure" by Intel. You'd have to be as dirty as those executives if you didn't believe this was wrong.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 6700k Asus Sabertooth Mark 1 z170 XFX Radeon R9 390 16 GB G. Skill Ripjaw 4 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 X64 27" X-STAR DP2710 LED + 24" Acer P241W Razer BlackWidow Chroma Antec True Power New 750Watt 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
HAF 932 Logitech G500 Steelseries Swan M10's and Sennheiser 598 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 6700k Asus Sabertooth Mark 1 z170 XFX Radeon R9 390 16 GB G. Skill Ripjaw 4 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 X64 27" X-STAR DP2710 LED + 24" Acer P241W Razer BlackWidow Chroma Antec True Power New 750Watt 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
HAF 932 Logitech G500 Steelseries Swan M10's and Sennheiser 598 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [dvHW] AMD expands charges against Intel