News Intel faces 'uphill battle' to overturn EU fine

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/05/21/intel-faces-uphill-battle-to-overturn-eu-fi/1

Intel's General Counsel has admitted that fighting the EU's £948m antitrust fine will be an uphill battle.

 

Good, the more they try and worm their way out the worse they look, which'll hopefully convince more people to consider AMD products.

 

I still hope they just say screw you, we raise the fine with 500 mio €. there are many places where I don't agree that EU are doing a good thing but places like this i were they show that EU has some huge advantages.

 

agreed

 

I think this is to do with marketing practices towards manufacturers and retailers rather than end users.

 

Nah, I'll still buy whatever gives me the better performance per price. And when I bought my q6600 that was intel. When it next comes time to upgrade, if AMD offers a product that gives better performance per price than what Intel has to offer I will buy AMD. But if Intel still offers a product that gives better performance per price then I will buy Intel again. I don’t let my decisions get influenced by who is suing who. And for whatever reason.

 

people are sue crazy and you can see why, almost a billion reasons.. the p4 I can understand- now if intel was selling more of those chips over amd's clearly superior chips at the time due to weasely ways, they deserve it.. it's when a company is giving the consumer what they want (and it's good service/product/fair prices) and they get sued, it makes you sick to see (patent trolls anyone)

I know monopolies aren't a good thing for the consumer.. but when a company is giving the consumers what they want and then are forced to fall in line because they are too elite for the competition- that's wrong.. if intel was selling p4's using underhanded slippy's, they should pay for the p4 if that's the case.. if it was just idiots buying into hype (they're everywhere)- then no

I wouldn't want to see intel milking it to avoid lawsuits, next thing you know the judge points at nvidia's ceo huang- you should take tips from that guy! were stuck with atom's for the next 10 years

 

1. intel is not a monopoly. you can buy amd. you can buy via. or any number of other chips. and have people forgotten about amd's success in the server sector.
2. so long as there is free competition, why are monopolies bad?
3. why hasn't amd done similar market practices to intel? it already has a price advantage - why not widen even further?
4. all this will do is increase prices and hurt the consumer. i want intel chips, not amd, now i will be forced to pay more.
5. the fine will not suddenly make amd a better competitor, and amd's products will not suddenly magically improve.

 

I totally agree with this. It's about what's best for the consumer at the time. AMD enjoyed large amounts of success with its Athlon 64s when they were trouncing P4s, and everyone knew they were better so even though Intel got up to "dirty work", AMDs were still so much more popular. I'll buy what is best for me when I want to upgrade, and this is just a legal fireworks display imo. Both companies innovate and have their pluses and minuses, but as long as there is choice (which there still was for all of us enthusiasts who build our own stuff), who cares??

 

1. Intel was apparently a monopoly enough for the EU to get involved. You can barely buy AMD anywhere, especially in Europe. I've never even heard of VIA or anyone else for that matter...
2. You can't have competition when there's a monopoly...Competition keeps prices realistic for consumers. Monopolies are capitalism at its worste. Economics?
3. Again, AMD didn't becuase their ILLEGAL practices. Illegal for a reason.
4. It wont hurt the consumer in the slightest. Intel's not a dumb company. They wont raise their prices just to be angry, or to get back some money they lost. If they do, then their retarded and will lose loads of buisness. 1.5bil is a heavty chunk but isn't a whole lot considering they make over $37bil a year. I'd imagine they'd keep their prices the same if not a bit lower now.
5. No, it probably wont. You're correct. But consumers may find that there are OTHER companies out their besides Intel. AMD and others will most likely start getting more consumers after seeing what Intel has done all these years. So far the AM3 chips are doing pretty well. Especially the X3 720.

 

" I've never even heard of VIA or anyone else for that matter..."

You are kidding,right?

 

EDIT:
1. Intel was apparently a monopoly enough for the EU to get involved. You can barely buy AMD anywhere - via computer selling companies(HP, DELL, etc), especially in Europe. I've never even heard of VIA or anyone else for that matter...

 

Uhh...No. The only two companies I can find anywhere in America is Intel and AMD. I just looked VIA up, never seen a product...

 

Intel is toasted, they have to try, but they are going to lose.
In other news, the OTHER monopolistic evil company Microsoft is getting hammered, see story on main page.

 

Must be something unique to your part of the world,there certainly isn't any shortage of AMD or VIA in the UK,or am i missing something (scratches chin)

 

I've never seen a computer which has a Via CPU. I have seen project logs where people have used VIA mini-ITX boards, but never one for sale in a shop.

 

"along with paying retailers and system builders to not sell products using AMD chips."

Read this bit and tell me you can't see what Intel did wrong.

 

Japan, Korea and Europe would beg to differ.

 

+1, my relatives in China and Vietnam are hard pressed to get something not-intel, in fact they don't even carry AMD processors over there.

 

nope, I built an AMD based rig for cost and am highly disappointed. Intel will be my primary CPU purchase for my future builds.