CCI completes probe into Intel malpractice [The Times of India]

[Khato]

And while not directly related, many will argue that Intel's monopoly power is negated by the fact that processors are durable, and so Intel has to "convince" consumers to purchase new ones. While this is true (Intel's monopoly power is attenuated by this fact), that does not prevent Intel from acting strategically to maximize its profits across time. Having no competitors gives them more flexible to do things like disable features on 'K' models, and use sub-optimal TIM.

This is definitely the heart of the matter. While Intel does have a lot of resources at its disposal, they are still finite and hence Intel has to make the best use of them that they can. All three of the previous points regarding Intel being 'complacent' fall into that category - Pentium 4 was a bad marketing idea while a large portion of Intel's resources were distracted with bringing the next big evolution in processing to market. (aka Itanium, which likely would have resulted in us having even better computers now if not for competition which forced Intel to move resources back to projects of immediate concern.) Then Atom wasn't really 'delayed', it was just an attempt to expand Intel's available markets which didn't pan out so well and hence wasn't given more resources to accelerate its schedule. And lastly the current state of desktop is just because the traditional desktop resources are focused on mobile - if Intel had more resources they could make a SKU for high performance desktop (different layout from mobile oriented). All comes down to resources and business strategy.

Anyway, I also tend to be of the opinion that Intel could have a 100% monopoly on all forms of processing and it wouldn't their pricing or rate of innovation much at all. (Hopefully it would affect their stock price, but I'm not convinced it would based on past behavior >.>) Pricing would stay reasonable because otherwise government oversight would step in, then rate of innovation would keep pace in order to keep selling more product. We'd likely actually see more revolutionary advancements is there'd be less need to constantly iterate on the status quo in order to keep ahead of the competition. (Well, that and Intel would almost certainly increase its available resources which also allows for such.)

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

My two cents. If you only had one company left, turns out they cannot charge infinite $ for their product. They have a couple things going against them. The first is that a monopoly can only make as much money to sustain a monopoly. So $1M per DDR4 stick is high enough that competitors will enter the market and make a product. The other is a substitution effect. If DDRx cost $1M, you bet your ass I wouldn't build another computer ever again. I would take my money that I spent on computers and replace it with other items that provide me similar utility.

So yeah, it's very possible that we'll be screwed in the short term, but at least we're not infinitely screwed.

I guess they can't charge way TOO much for DDR4, otherwise, almost everyone would stick with DDR3.
There may also be dangers of the company being accused of being a monopoly, and then lawfully/forcibly being split into smaller companies and/or huge fines or something.

 

[Pandamonia]

So you can link to the court rulings showing those guilty verdicts from a long time ago?

Google the 1bln it had to pay to AMD

 

[Khato]

Google the 1bln it had to pay to AMD

It's called risk management among other things. Similar to the settlement with NVIDIA. Neither included an admission of guilt.

 

[Pandamonia]

It's called risk management among other things. Similar to the settlement with NVIDIA. Neither included an admission of guilt.

No im pretty sure they were ordered to pay AMD 1bln for anti competitive behavior.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2009/05/13/idINIndia-39583220090513

EU ruled they were guilty.

End of.

 

[Idontcare]

You'd think they would have a high level summary on the first page or something.

I'd also think if it contained anything truly of a scandalous or litigable nature then it would have been put front and center of the viewer's eyes as well.

 

[Khato]

No im pretty sure they were ordered to pay AMD 1bln for anti competitive behavior.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2009/05/13/idINIndia-39583220090513

EU ruled they were guilty.

End of.

No. The European Commission fined Intel 1.06B Euro. Not a penny of that fine went to AMD - as the EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes said in a press conference on the matter, "well now they are the sponsors of the European taxpayer so to say." Also, please note that the European Commission is a purely political body... I know that I at least tend to be suspicious of anything a politician says when there's something in it for them. (And 1.06B Euro is quite a bit of 'revenue' in it for them.)

Another fun little point with respect to the European Commission's investigation into Intel's practices is that there's a question as to whether they ignored evidence which contradicted their desired result. The primary example of such being the complaint Intel registered with the EU Ombudsman in which no concrete conclusion could be reached because the European Commission conveniently had not kept proper records of the incidents in question. Hence all that the EU Ombudsman could do is conclude that the European Commission had committed an instance of maladministration.

On the bright side, should hopefully not be too much longer because the EU General Court rules on Intel's appeal.

 

[inf64]

I see nothing has changed on this forum. Same old posters in same old threads. Still amusing and entertaining. Carry on.

PS Factual article about event that really happened( investigation) caused so many topic reports. Very interesting (maybe not).

 

[SiliconWars]

What was the outcome of that investigation?

So your link equates to unfounded accusation.

No because the $1.25 billion Intel paid AMD in the 2009 settlement brought an end to all outstanding legal disputes between them.

 

[Pandamonia]

No. The European Commission fined Intel 1.06B Euro. Not a penny of that fine went to AMD - as the EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes said in a press conference on the matter, "well now they are the sponsors of the European taxpayer so to say." Also, please note that the European Commission is a purely political body... I know that I at least tend to be suspicious of anything a politician says when there's something in it for them. (And 1.06B Euro is quite a bit of 'revenue' in it for them.)

Another fun little point with respect to the European Commission's investigation into Intel's practices is that there's a question as to whether they ignored evidence which contradicted their desired result. The primary example of such being the complaint Intel registered with the EU Ombudsman in which no concrete conclusion could be reached because the European Commission conveniently had not kept proper records of the incidents in question. Hence all that the EU Ombudsman could do is conclude that the European Commission had committed an instance of maladministration.

On the bright side, should hopefully not be too much longer because the EU General Court rules on Intel's appeal.

Intel still paid 1.25 bln to AMD to settle the claims and also intel got fined by the EU.

Guilty as charged.

 

[sxr7171]

No because the $1.25 billion Intel paid AMD in the 2009 settlement brought an end to all outstanding legal disputes between them.

A real pittance for how systematically they crushed AMD with those OEM exclusivity deals.

Don't worry ARM will get 'em.


I say all this as an avid Intel user. Just not happy about how it seems enthusiasts are getting into the delidding business just to equal last gen performance.

 

[Pandamonia]

A real pittance for how systematically they crushed AMD with those OEM exclusivity deals.

Don't worry ARM will get 'em.


I say all this as an avid Intel user. Just not happy about how it seems enthusiasts are getting into the delidding business just to equal last gen performance.

Yes its disgusting really. Intel should have been broken up for what they did and forced to open their fabs to competitors.

 

[Blandge]

A real pittance for how systematically they crushed AMD with those OEM exclusivity deals.

Don't worry ARM will get 'em.


I say all this as an avid Intel user. Just not happy about how it seems enthusiasts are getting into the delidding business just to equal last gen performance.

AMD was supply constrained during the time that Athlon 64 was dominating P4, and instead of investing in more capacity, AMD decided to purchase ATI for $5B. Intel's exclusivity deals were unnecessary at that point because AMD was already selling every single chip they manufactured.

 

[SiliconWars]

AMD was supply constrained during the time that Athlon 64 was dominating P4, and instead of investing in more capacity, AMD decided to purchase ATI for $5B. Intel's exclusivity deals were unnecessary at that point because AMD was already selling every single chip they manufactured.

Yet somehow they were still able to give away a million chips to HP for free?

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

A real pittance for how systematically they crushed AMD with those OEM exclusivity deals.

Don't worry ARM will get 'em.


I say all this as an avid Intel user. Just not happy about how it seems enthusiasts are getting into the delidding business just to equal last gen performance.

Huge agreement, from me, +1.

The market place seems to be shifting to "reasonable" performance, rather than "give me the fastest possible", in terms of the bulk of the market.

That situation may actually help the likes of AMD and Arm-related-companies, since it is VERY difficult at the moment, to challenge Intels top chips, with AMD or Arm related stuff.

E.g. Hasswell-E 8-core early-release-prototype vs RasberryPI ?

At the moment, one would be a tiny, tiny (almost immeasurably) bit faster. (possible joke here).

But if all you want to do is listen to some MP3 music (or look at a straight forward web page), BOTH would do just fine, hence the "reasonable" market segments.

 

[galego]

Much of what you call "playing dirty" I call "good business sense". Why should Intel not write a compiler that works best on their CPUs? Why can't AMD write their own compilers if they feel it makes such a difference?

Playing dirty means breaking/ignoring the rules of the game. It is unimportant what you call to that. All players have to be bounded by the same rules. Moreover, you misunderstand completely the compiler issue. It was extensively covered in other threads.

They played dirty back in the past when AMD was a threat.

As shown in the links given in this thread Intel is being investigated by playing dirty again.

 

[Idontcare]

All players have to be bounded by the same rules.

If that were true then you would need a single world-government and identical laws and rules enforced in every single country regardless of national borders.

The world does not operate the way in which you feel it ought to.

I.e. there is reality, and then there are your philosophical ideals.

The two currently do not overlap.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

As shown in the links given in this thread Intel is being investigated by playing dirty again.

I would have thought that in the real long term, companies may be harming themselves, by "playing dirty".

E.g. Maybe Intel would have been better geared up to fight "Arm", if they had NOT played dirty.
This is because they used "business tricks" (dirty ones at that), to win sales, rather than genuine excellent products and marketing.

E.g. If Atoms had been significantly better, faster, cheaper, easier to use etc etc, than 'Arms', the small hand held device market place, may have looked completely different to what it looks now.

EDIT: My explanation, is not very good, or clear. I was trying to illustrate what they could have done better, 10 years ago, which was when they really needed to get their foot in the door, as regards 'Arm'.
Now, Intel may well be trying to close the barn door after the Horse has escaped, as they are VERY late to the market. Time will tell.

 

[aigomorla]

As shown in the links given in this thread Intel is being investigated by playing dirty again.

no it seems like india thinks it has power like the EU commission and is trying to bust intel for the same stuff US and EU already won at.

There trying to bust intel for practices in the past.

Personally again i think its india trying to be stupid and getting a piece of the pie during a harsh global economy.

India would regress back to the third world country they were before if intel said FINE.. go ahead and boycott all our stuff.

The whole tech industry which was booming til reciently would implode on itself without intel.

You cant punish a company that has u by the balls like that.
Its stupid politicians that think they can get a retirement fund from the settlements intel will bring out.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

You cant punish a company that has u by the balls like that.
Its stupid politicians that think they can get a retirement fund from the settlements intel will bring out.

It's sounding a bit like North Korea recently threatening larger countries with attack, for political points scoring (rumoured speculation at what was really going on).
Maybe it's Indian politics, more than anything else (my total knowledge about the intricacies, of the Indian political system, is being quoted here: '', in the gap between the 1st ', and the 2nd '). So political point scoring and maybe revenue as well.

 

[aigomorla]

India Financial Manager: Hey Prez i got a great idea to make 1 billion dollars.
Pres: How?
IFM: Sue Intel for malpractice... we can win.. EU won.. US won... we just need to put pressure.
Pres: But what if they dont pay?
IFM: Threaten them to boycott there products
Pres: Are you MAD! that would shut down our CS services world wide.
IFM: Nah intel wont take it that far... they use us for lvl1 customer service... Also Dell/HP/Almost every OEM, whose a large buyer of Intel... So dell wont let intel go to boycott.
Pres: Brilliant! OK lets sue intel... do u think i can get my vacation house from this?
IFM: And pretty french maids to tuck you in at night while at it.
Pres: Brilliant! go for it!


^ how i take india right now.

 

[SiliconWars]

I would have thought that in the real long term, companies may be harming themselves, by "playing dirty".

E.g. Maybe Intel would have been better geared up to fight "Arm", if they had NOT played dirty.
This is because they used "business tricks" (dirty ones at that), to win sales, rather than genuine excellent products and marketing.

E.g. If Atoms had been significantly better, faster, cheaper, easier to use etc etc, than 'Arms', the small hand held device market place, may have looked completely different to what it looks now.

EDIT: My explanation, is not very good, or clear. I was trying to illustrate what they could have done better, 10 years ago, which was when they really needed to get their foot in the door, as regards 'Arm'.
Now, Intel may well be trying to close the barn door after the Horse has escaped, as they are VERY late to the market. Time will tell.

This is why Microsoft is getting owned by Google and Apple. The situation for Intel was different though because of the high barrier to entry that chip making has.

Intel's problem won't be their ability to compete on hardware though - they are more than capable of that - but they are now up against the entire ARM ecosystem that frankly, doesn't want them there. It's a new kind of market they need to break into, and they need to do it on price. Intel needs to be better AND cheaper else nobody is going to be interested. They need to truly innovate, truly make a difference so that OEM's will switch to them. And their history of bad behaviour won't be doing them any favours.

 

[SiliconWars]

India Financial Manager: Hey Prez i got a great idea to make 1 billion dollars.
Pres: How?
IFM: Sue Intel for malpractice... we can win.. EU won.. US won... we just need to put pressure.
Pres: But what if they dont pay?
IFM: Threaten them to boycott there products
Pres: Are you MAD! that would shut down our CS services world wide.
IFM: Nah intel wont take it that far... they use us for lvl1 customer service... Also Dell/HP/Almost every OEM, whose a large buyer of Intel... So dell wont let intel go to boycott.
Pres: Brilliant! OK lets sue intel... do u think i can get my vacation house from this?
IFM: And pretty french maids to tuck you in at night while at it.
Pres: Brilliant! go for it!


^ how i take india right now.

You might want to educate yourself a bit more on certain countries finances before making any more comments like this.

India has a GDP of $2 trillion USD. This case will probably go on for 5 years or more, and Intel will probably be fined less than $50 million USD.

In terms of "making India money", it's about the same as changing to a slightly less luxurious make of toilet roll.

 

[Phynaz]

Intel still paid 1.25 bln to AMD to settle the claims and also intel got fined by the EU.

Guilty as charged.

Where in the agreement with AMD does it say Intel is guilty of anything?

Which European court ruled against Intel?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

As shown in the links given in this thread Intel is being investigated by playing dirty again.

And if and when they are found to have actually done anything, you'll have something new to crow about in your endless Intelophobic crusade. Until then, all you have is innuendo.

It's a new kind of market they need to break into, and they need to do it on price. Intel needs to be better AND cheaper else nobody is going to be interested.

This is true to a certain extent, but the wildcard is x86. It matters to a lot of people.