Slashdot Mirror

a Silicon Valley-made electric car with a 0-60 acceleration rate that's faster than a Ferrari Spider and a Porsche Carrera.

Any engineer worth his salt can tell you that electric motors put out a hell of a lot more torque than gasoline engines. Gasoline engines are restricted by the tolerances of their mechanical parts, even if the engine is capable of producing more horsepower under load. That's why raw horsepower figures are often a poor indicator of a vehicle's acceleration.

Diesel Locomotives were making use of this fact long before the electric sports car showed up. By transferring the power from the Diesel Engine to an electric transmission, modern locomotives are able to smoothly apply power curves of well over 300KW without any of the slippage or rough starts associated with the Steam Engine.

Honestly, this entire story isn't anything new. The TZero was trouncing expensive sports cars long before the X-1 was introduced. The only difference I can see here is that the owner of the X-1 appears to be looking to build a replacement for Formula-1's rather than creating a slightly more practical Porche type of vehicle.

More info on TZero (The article has links to the TZero outaccelerating several fancy sports cars.)

Odd analogy, but I guess it kind of makes a little sense maybe... http://www.forbes.com/2006/05/04/sun-microsystems- schwartz-cz_ec_0504schwartz.html?partner=yahootix In shwartz's words...

Forbes:

You're trying to woo customers with free hardware. How do you make them paying customers? You haven't monetized Java proportional to what's out there.
JShwartz:

That's a misnomer. Largely an American misnomer. Nearing 1 billion Java handsets.

Forbes:

So what's your Java revenue?

JS:

Close to $13 billion.

F:

That's not money in Sun's pocket, though.

JS:

It's like asking a company that produces generators how much of their demand comes from people using electricity. It's 100 percent.

F:

But it's about how many customers are paying you for the privilege of using Java.

S:

And I'll point out that a billion handsets fuels an enormous market in the telecommunications industry. Java running on Sun's Java Enterprise system, whether it's at American Express or General Electric or Vodafone, is fueling Sun's overall revenue. Asking us how much money we make on Java is like asking Verizon Communications how much money they make on handsets. The fact is that they lose a fortune on handsets, but they make a fortune in subscribers.

F:

So are you going to convert Java users to subscription service for Sun?

S:

Partially, we're already doing that. American Express runs on the Java Enterprise system. That's per employee subscription for core middleware for Sun. My broader point is that Java ensures Sun has access to an open market. Java allows us to reach out to customers who don't run on Sun hardware and ensure we can serve them wherever they may be--whether it's on a Dell box or HP box or in an IBM customer base.

Again, it's hard to explain to people. Here's an analogy. With the advent of electricity, Thomas Edison tried to patent a lightbulb so that you would have to use his lightbulbs if you used his dynamo. That strategy obviously failed. And what emerged was the standard plug. Asking Sun the value of Java is like asking GE--which is, I think, the largest manufacturer of power turbines in the world--what the value of the standard plug is. It ensures they can serve a global marketplace. So if you asked them what's the value of the plug, how would they respond?

Here are some stats on Java: There are more than 1 billion Java cards in the marketplace, securing everything from set-top boxes to handsets. There are more than a billion Java handsets, all driving demand for network infrastructure. There are nearly 1,000 members of the Java community process, who collectively contribute to the standard called "Java." It is the default standard for set-top boxes in Brazil. So what will the infrastructure opportunity be in Brazil to serve 100 million Java-enabled set-top boxes? I promise you it will be enormous, and Sun will be among many participants that can serve that demand.

I don't believe there to be any hard evidence that prisoners are mistreated at Guantanamo

You don't believe your own government? Well that is very understandable.

Cash on hand. (This Forbes article was the latest numbers I could find, from 2005.)

There were actually two companies with that dumb business model -- Kozmo.com

the majority of my american coworkers . . . eat a kilo of steak every day

of course this is not representative, might be strange co-workers here

If this insn't hyperbole, then yes, they are not representative. Please tell me they don't do it in a single sitting.

If you eat that much steak (1 kg/day), you're not gonna feel too good.

[I] noticed something the last time i was in new york when i watched TV ads: i have never travelled to a country where there are dozens of tv ads every hour for products to reduce heartburn

US pharmaceuticals manufacturers are locked in an arms race of advertising. See this article in Forbes, e.g.:http://www.forbes.com/business/forbes/2006/05 08/094a.html?_requestid=1078 (free reg. or BugMeNot required).

Your Tube, Whose Dime?

They're burning through a lot of money but being cautious with ads. It's understandable that they don't want to smother the user with ads; they have to find the intersection of what the users will tolerate and profit. With all the traffic, though, I'm sure they'll find a way rather than just disappear.

Wow! I bet they have a lot of terrorists to show for all that work. Right...?

You mean like these recent convictions, arrests, or indictments? Hamid Hayat, Abu Ali, and Sayed Ahmed, Shahawar Matin Siraj, Ehsanul Islam Sadequee, and these 19?

Maybe your memory is fading, or you don't pay attention, but there have been plenty of others over the last few years.

From the link:

I wouldn't be surprised if Sun has produced more technical people who have gone on to lead other companies than any other technical company based in the valley. Nobody gives Sun credit for that and we should--Sun's contribution to this industry is bigger than Sun itself.

Businessweek http://yahoo.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_ 19/b3983043.htm and this guy had a bit in forbes... http://www.forbes.com/2006/04/27/sun-mcneely-mcvoy -cx_lmcv_0426mcvoy.html?partner=yahootix but I am sorry, I am sure 'Maximum Linux' has a much better op ed describing the situation.

Bear in mind that $150 dollars probably means a lot more in the Chinese economy than it does here in the U.S.

Indeed it does. The average working Chinese is much poorer than he should be. The Chinese government sets the exchange rates relative to other currencies artificially low, to encourage exports and employment. This is blatant currency manipulation and is against WTO rules. The Japanese public has been similarly willing to be screwed for decades as well. We in America are enjoying the free lunch they provide. But the behavior hurts the working class in the United States and should be curbed. Economic competition would work better without market distortion.

Real Networks stock is up 38% since February. Rhapsody's subscription and download service is doing quite well, thank you very much, in a market dominated by iTunes.

Results for the first quarter of 2006 will be released next week, but right now, things are looking pretty damn good for Real.

RealNetworks Benefiting From Video Offerings

This would provide the most amazing trolling database ever. Can you imagine the glee within the govt at being able to freely scan every file "owned" by every member of the public.

The EU bureaucrats (a highly unelected and unaccountable bunch) don't like strong American companies on their turf. In their eyes it's basically another form of "American hegemony". They're busy doing the same kind of thing as they're doing to Microsoft to American-based credit card companies (see, for example, this article as well as Forbes), accusing them of making too much money, even though, with the exception of Visa, their margins are all running under 8%. Google's, by way of comparison, is like 25%.

So, the EU crowd runs around rattling sabers at American companies, demanding that the companies basically lie down and give away product or service to competitors, "levelling the playing field," or suggesting that there needs to be a properly "European" (an adjective that is a very recent invention in itself) counterpart to every American business. As if having a myriad of credit card companies or document formats or software platforms would really benefit consumers.

Microsoft shouldn't be judged solely because they're trying to be competitive in their markets. (How many Linux distros could be accused of bundling too much software?) Unless you're a communist (like some prominent figures in organizations with recursive acronyms), how can one demand that source code be given to competitors?

The irony is that until BitTorrent, broadband was having a hell of a time getting people to sign up--because, after all, what would they need it for? And now that there's actually a "killer app," people are signing up so fast and using so much that it's causing a "backslash" (heh heh). Either feast or famine, nothing in-between.

Come on now, there has been plenty of bandwidth sucking software apps out there for quite some time now. FTP(among other types of servers) servers hosting large files have been out there forever. Putting that aside, there have been many P2P file sharing apps(Napster,Morpheous,BearShare,DC,etc...) out there for years that predate BitTorrent. And for about the same number of years, Broadband providers have been successfully advertising about the advantages of broadband for downloading music and movies(even before there were legal services like iTunes).

BitTorrent hasn't done anything for selling broadband outside of what has already been done. In fact, there is data out there suggesting that broadband growth is, at least in the US, leveling off. If you look for the data out there, price and lack of neccessity(e.g. only need internet service for email) seem to be the sticking issues for many people not adopting broadband. The significance of BitTorrent regarding bandwidth usage is that requires a large chain of people downloading and uploading at the same time, often for hours or even days depending on the file. It's not that a ton of people are adopting the program in mass. It's that the protocol requires a lot of bandwidth for it to be successful.

From http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id =0100000094LG [sci-tech-today.com] :
 
  Watching too much violent TV and playing too many violent video games takes a toll on children's social and physical development, researchers report.
"We found that the more TV they watch, the less time they spend with their friends," says researcher David S. Bickham, a research scientist at the Center on Media and Child Health at the Harvard School of Public Health. However, "this relationship really only holds true for violent TV," he adds.
 
Another study found that violent video games appear to instill poor attitudes in children when it comes to their own health, while promoting risky behaviors. A third report found that mature-rated video games often include explicit sexual imagery and language content not included on warning labels
 
  http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/health/feeds/hscou t/2006/04/03/hscout531930.html [forbes.com]
 
  TV and Video-Game Violence Harms Kids
 
MONDAY, April 3 (HealthDay News) -- Watching too much violent TV and playing too many violent video games takes a toll on children's social and physical development, researchers report.
 
 
  http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/loca l/14256547.htm [kansascity.com]
 
  Studies link media to modern ills
By ALAN BAVLEY
The Kansas City Star
 
Media and Children | Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association
 
"We are conducting an ongoing, uncontrolled experiment on this generation in terms of media exposure and potential future behavioral and physical consequences, and it seems unopposed by the media industry and most parents."
-- Donald Shifrin, American Academy of Pediatrics
 

"After 9/11 the gov. should've just let the US economy go through a recession"

But wait ... we did, didn't we? I distinctly remember the Democrats telling us that George Bush was presiding over the worst economy since Herbert Hoover.

DEMOCRATIC POLICY COMMITTEE: "The Bush Economy in 2005: Middle-Class Squeezed, Future Prospects Undermined"
http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_na me=sr-109-2-1

FORBES: "Kerry's uses 'misery index' to hit Bush on economy"
http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswire/2004/04/11/ rtr1328567.html

Surely it must have been true, right? I saw it on TV!

  - AJ

(Oblig Disclaimer: Economically, I think both parties suck.)

That's at least as much of a corporate governance issue as it is a federal tax issue. Having no idea of how these quiet benefits compare to salary, it's tough to say much. If they are 1%, who cares, otherwise maybe they need to be taxed as non-monetary compensation. The tax doesn't need to be levied against the corporation for that to work. Upgrade the radar, so to speak. That would even help governance, as shareholders would have a clearer picture of the various executive compensation packages.

As far as helping small businesses, they are often incorporated; eliminating corporate taxes would help them. It might not help the small businessmen...

The harm done by raising corporate taxes needs to be weighed against the benefit you espouse. Forbe's claims that small businesses under-report income by 43%:

http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneurs/entrelaw/2006/ 03/01/entrepreneurs-irs-taxes-cz_jn_0301beltway.ht ml

so that benefit isn't as clear cut as you are making it, but perhaps they are under reporting because of their poor tax situation, etc. The harm in corporate taxes comes, primarily, on two fronts: Income is taxed twice and compliance. They go hand in hand, the compliance is done each time the money is taxed. Corporate tax accounting is a 100 billion dollar industry. That money is spent making sure that taxes are either avoided or paid correctly. If corporations didn't have to foot that bill, they would either pass more income through to their owners or invest in growth, both good things.

A side issue with corporate income taxes is that the corporation just treats the tax as an additional cost of doing business and passes it along to a customer. This is horribly inefficient(the customer pays more, the corporation profits less).

I'm fine with taxing the money somewhere along the way, government does lots of good things. The taxes just need to be in the right places. For clarity's sake, I am talking about corporate income taxes, regulatory taxes often have a sound basis.

All things to all markets? The entire "software and services" sector is tiny.

http://www.forbes.com/2006/03/30/largest-public-co mpanies_06f2k_cz_sk_0331forbes2000intro.html

Money talks indeed.

My primary concern is how it will begin talking from the other side of the table. Case in point, intellectual property. Now, I'm no fan of the state of our patent system but this discussion was interesting because not a single person brought up the issue of legality. Now, Ballmer recently hinted that Microsoft are putting together an IP war against Linux.

I work for a pretty large company so management is very conservative (side note, I do realize that those aren't mutual - its just the norm). One of the big items on the agenda is the outcome of the SCO/IBM litigation. Simply, management have pinned their decision to implement Linux *bigtime* on the outcome of this case. If SCO loses, then Linux gets a big customer. If SCO wins, then Microsoft maintains their existing customer. I would imagine that many other large businesses fall into this same boat.

If SCO loses, I'll bet that Microsoft will unleash a war on Linux. If this happens, I would like to see the ducks in a row. How much would it cost me to *buy* a version of Ubuntu with complete support for MP3, video, flash and all that other crap? The only reason that I use Linux at all is because EasyUbuntu makes it painless. Yes - I realize that I could go buy Mandrake or Suse but neither of those appeals to me like Ubuntu.

Yes - it seems easy enough to uncomment a few lines and claim that I'm a local resident of Catalunya, but it would be nice to see someone putting money into this side of the equation.

But now you are saying that if talented people ever become management then the company will start spitting out poor quality products. ... I think it is absurd to think that a company should keep their best people in low level coding positions and only let "management types" with no knowledge of what your company is producing make all of the decisions.

Forcing people into management roles because they've excelled as coders is what is absurd. Have you ever heard of the Peter Principle? Look it up. Companies should really try filling management level positions with people who are both technically experienced and who want to be in those positions. By taking people who are happy with their jobs and excel at them, and putting them into positions where they are supposedly at a "higher level", you end up with a severely incompetent management team.

I applaud IBM for expecting their best people to have good management and people skills.

Of course, every developer should have top-notch management skills. Because when the real manager fails to do his/her job (perhaps they were too busy with meetings), it's the developers duty to step in and clean up the mess. And the developer can't neglect his/her development responsibilities either. So in between managing the people that the real manager should have been managing, the features still need to be delivered. Yup. Sounds like a recipe for a real successful company.

I'm not saying "people skills" are a bad thing to have. But you need technical competence as well. People skills and the ability to talk-the-talk is not a substitute for technical skill. Unfortunately, too many management types within IBM, because they lack technical skill themselves, end up assuming it is a valid substitute.

You may not like the products that IBM produces, but they dont seam to be going bankrupt from what I can tell.

But to be fair that was nearly three years ago.

But this is what it is really like after people leave his office. He turns down the lights and pushes a button to bring up his tri-monitor master control center for the company, imagining himself at the helm (ok, he is at the helm I guess) while making notes in his captain's log.

I guess that's because Paul Allen bought Kirk's chair first.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/03/07/06billionai res_worlds-richest-people_land.html

1 William Gates
2 Warren Buffett
3 Carlos Slim Helú
4 Ingvar Kamprad
5 Lakshmi Mittal
6 Paul Allen
7 Bernard Arnault
8 Prince Alwaleed
9 Kenneth Thomson
10 Li Ka-shing

The light-activation of neurons would only work in outdoor, very-bright light. But still it's pretty cool. Forbes had a write up on this too.

Very good points.

The judgement not only goes against common sense, it is contradicted by the latest scientific research:

From http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id =0100000094LG :

Watching too much violent TV and playing too many violent video games takes a toll on children's social and physical development, researchers report.
"We found that the more TV they watch, the less time they spend with their friends," says researcher David S. Bickham, a research scientist at the Center on Media and Child Health at the Harvard School of Public Health. However, "this relationship really only holds true for violent TV," he adds.

Another study found that violent video games appear to instill poor attitudes in children when it comes to their own health, while promoting risky behaviors. A third report found that mature-rated video games often include explicit sexual imagery and language content not included on warning labels

http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/health/feeds/hscou t/2006/04/03/hscout531930.html

TV and Video-Game Violence Harms Kids

MONDAY, April 3 (HealthDay News) -- Watching too much violent TV and playing too many violent video games takes a toll on children's social and physical development, researchers report.


http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/loca l/14256547.htm

Studies link media to modern ills
By ALAN BAVLEY
The Kansas City Star

Media and Children | Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association

"We are conducting an ongoing, uncontrolled experiment on this generation in terms of media exposure and potential future behavioral and physical consequences, and it seems unopposed by the media industry and most parents."
-- Donald Shifrin, American Academy of Pediatrics

Microsoft Vista: Not 'People Ready'

Your idea is solid, but your downplaying of digital projectors is a mistake. IMAX is a huge supporter of digital projection and has been for a long time. Digital is the future, even for IMAX.

Actually, at least in the case of the Japanese researchers at NTT, you don't recall correctly. They are passing DC currents directly through their subjects, not exposing them to magnetic fields or RF radiation; see, for example, this article at Forbes. I think anyone that's been shocked can argue that yes, you can detect currents flowing through your body.

This sounds very similar to a situation with old PointCast, one of the early purveyors of "push" content. They had a similar hubris. Let's see if Facebook ends up in the same pile with PointCast.

"PointCast turned into a case study for how not to run a business. In 1997, when push fever was at its peak, the company turned down a $450 million buyout offer from Rupert Murdoch. It subsequently tried to go public, but by that time push had gone sour, and the IPO had to be pulled at the last minute. Finally PointCast was sold last May for a paltry $7 million to LaunchPad Technologies, one of the companies that came out of Bill Gross' Idealab."

That's correct. Intel expert Steven Aftergood called this an attempt by the right wing to find "a retrospective justification for the war in Iraq." The bloggers have made some interesting finds, it's true, but so far the ONDI's warning that "amateur translators won't find any major surprises, such as proof Hussein hid stockpiles of chemical weapons" has turned out to be true. They have also given us some bizarre misinterpretation too, such as some bloggers' belief that one document (CMPC-2003-006430.pdf) is a manual for the Mukhabarat even though it is clearly a printout of a webpage by the Federation of American Scientists from 1997 (complete with FAS logo!). Another supposed "smoking gun" was a document that had pictures of Zarqawi, cited as "proof" that Saddam trained him -- when in fact the documents clearly show that the Saddam regime is on the lookout for Zarqawi and his group, and, according to Associated Press, "Attached were three responses in which agents said there was no evidence al-Zarqawi or the other man were in Iraq." There is a lot more misreading and jumping to conclusions from this document dump. It's interesting, and I think it is good to have these documents made public, for historical reasons mostly, but the idea that these documents are where we should look for justification of Bush's war effort just shows how desperate Pete Hoekstra and other Republicans who pushed forcefully for this move really are.

Look at the huge blue screen behind Balmer's head: http://images.forbes.com/media/lifestyle/2005/08/0 5/ballmer_162.jpg :(

I'd imagine that quite a lot of that money is going to support the sinking ship that is Vivendi.

http://www.forbes.com/2006/03/01/vivendi-universal -earnings-cx_po_0301autofacescan01.html

While I agree with you, wasn't Vista orginally due to ship in 2003? 4 years of delays, what the...?

Microsoft are making some really bad mistakes.

1. Software + Services: Position for the next wave of innovation relative to our vision for Windows Live. Ray Ozzie and I continue to work closely to advance the Live vision announced last November. End-to-end scenarios that enable seamless experiences across client, server, and services are critical for all customers, and Windows Vista + Windows Live begins to address this vision. Utilizing services as a distribution vehicle for user experiences enables us to embrace the concept of software + service and deliver innovation to market faster. Doing this requires us to think about the Windows Live platform as a key to the value proposition we deliver to developers. These changes provide clear connections with Ray and his team to help shape the Live platform, Live experiences and the marketing that supports Windows Live.

... of bashing Microsoft and promoting Apple.

He also isn't a big fan of Linux.

This guy is widely considered a hack.

I've been using Vista build 5308 for almost a month now as my primary "home" machine. At first I was a little taken back by some of the UI changes, but overall I really do like it. In fact, when I move back to XP it really hurts because of things I miss from Vista.

This guy's critcisms of Vista are so vague it's hard to even know what parts of Vista he is talking about.

"The new programs are phenomenally complex, with scores of buttons and pull-down menus and myriad connections among various applications."

Huh? Which new applications? In most case, Microsoft has decreased, not increased, the number of UI elements.

... of bashing Microsoft and promoting Apple.

He also isn't a big fan of Linux.

This guy is widely considered a hack.

I've been using Vista build 5308 for almost a month now as my primary "home" machine. At first I was a little taken back by some of the UI changes, but overall I really do like it. In fact, when I move back to XP it really hurts because of things I miss from Vista.

This guy's critcisms of Vista are so vague it's hard to even know what parts of Vista he is talking about.

"The new programs are phenomenally complex, with scores of buttons and pull-down menus and myriad connections among various applications."

Huh? Which new applications? In most case, Microsoft has decreased, not increased, the number of UI elements.

Why not at least switch to an Apple Computer (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) Mac? Apple's new operating system is stable, reliable and easy to use. The applications are simple, gorgeous and work well together. And they're here. Today. Steve Jobs must be waking up a happy man this morning.

Why not at least switch to an Apple Computer (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) Mac? Apple's new operating system is stable, reliable and easy to use. The applications are simple, gorgeous and work well together. And they're here. Today. Steve Jobs must be waking up a happy man this morning.

Why not at least switch to an Apple Computer (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) Mac? Apple's new operating system is stable, reliable and easy to use. The applications are simple, gorgeous and work well together. And they're here. Today. Steve Jobs must be waking up a happy man this morning.

Why not at least switch to an Apple Computer (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) Mac? Apple's new operating system is stable, reliable and easy to use. The applications are simple, gorgeous and work well together. And they're here. Today. Steve Jobs must be waking up a happy man this morning.

Linux is for loosers interview Slashdot Interview Various emails from when he was kicked off the NetBSD project The world doesn't need any more BSD v Linux wars, and I never though I would see BSD v BSD wars until I heard of him. Theo is basically a complete dick and has no tolerance for anything other than his narrow ideals. It shouldn't be vary hard to see why both companies and users are less than enthusiastic about funding him.

LOL. And this is different how from what's published by the real deal MS Press? It's never ceased to amaze me how, at their most technical, most all publications read like advertising copy. As to the article, Bill describe his place in the era of live software with

Make no mistake, Windows Live is our strategic bet to change the game and win, while we grow and drive revenue with MSN.com

But on a somewhat related note, a Goldman Sachs analyst discussing Google's acquisition of Writely says:

We disagree with Microsoft's approach of ignoring the consumer market for a hosted solution and leaving the door wide open for Google to come in and establish a presence in the consumer or potentially the small business market... Strategically, it seems like Microsoft should have been more proactive in leveraging its strengths ..."

They might care... I don't know if they'd want to lose their spots at #26 and 27 on Forbes' World's Richest People list. Of course, I think a hair under $13bn each should keep them covered. That is net worth and not banked funds, but still... Eric Schmidt and Steve Jobs combined still have about $4bn less than either of them (on page 6 of that list).

It is a bit difficult to show a medicine bottle through the Internet, but you may take a look at this article. And no, the word used is "race" as opposed to "ancestry" - and by the way the two concepts are intertwined more often than not.

All they were found to be doing was paying the workers for the work they do

Unfortunately, the reality of the exploitation does not match your rhetoric. They were purposely leading them to public assistance, rather than providing them basic benefits.

For the World's biggest retailer, how can you not think that this is wrong?

Wal-Mart was found out to be exploiting the US taxpayer by not providing adequate health benefits to its employees. How did they do this? They simply printed out instructions (in Spanish and English) to direct their employees to the nearest free clinic in the area.

Illegal? Maybe. Unethical?

Now that you know how they dodge their health costs, you can enjoy an article about the richest Americans. Five of the Richest Americans are Wal-Mart's owners and relatives of owners.
Maybe we should ask the Waltons how they feel about exploiting US Taxpayers?
Blogs that just repeat Wal-Mart PR, are not blogs, they are PR for Wal-Mart. This is done order to help continue their ways of exploiting their workers and the system.

Sonoma Levee Break Floods Calif. Highway

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/03/06/ap2 573236.html

You know what this means, right?

George Bush doesn't care about white people.

You're wrong when you say AT&T Wireless ("ATTWS") was "100% owned by AT&T" when it was bought by Cingular. At that time, ATTWS was NOT part of AT&T. AT&T spun off ATTWS in 2001, after which point it might as well have been called 'Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Wireless'—it had no ownership connection with AT&T after that.

ATTWS simply retained the exclusive right to use the AT&T name in the wireless space, simply for branding reasons. Also, ATTWS had a partnership with AT&T to cross-sell wireless and local phone service, which was very similar to the partnership between DISH Network and SBC (ahem, at&t)--they cross-sold "bundles" because they had no competing services with one another. Partnership != ownership though.

The problem there is that it doesn't require 100% market share and no competitors to be a Monopoly.

You fall afoul of the Monopoly/Anti-Trust laws when you use your market share to bully another company out of the market. The best example of this would be Microsoft requiring OEM's to sell Windows with every PC they shipped or they would be charged higher rates for Windows.

With the Intel/Skype issue, I don't think it's so much that Intel said "We'll pay you to make a version that does 10 lines on ours only" as it is how they advertised it. According to everything I've read, (Including this.) it's not a "Intel is partnering with Skype to bring you 10-way Conference Calls, only on Intel D!", it's a "Intel is the only CPU powerful enough to power this!" which should fall afoul of truth-in-marketing laws, not anti-trust. But with the anti-trust suit already pending, it seems silly to start a seperate suit.