Slashdot Mirror
EU Officials Raid Intel Offices
Eukariote writes "As part of the ongoing antitrust investigations, EU officials have raided Intel offices as well as offices of a number of IT firms manufacturing or selling computers. This follows the recent ruling by Japan's Fair Trade Commission declaring Intel's exclusionary practices illegal as well as the lawsuit filed by AMD."
Here's my story submission, which provides some more info, that didn't make the cut:
starrsoft writes, "Apparently AMD's lawsuit isn't just just a PR stunt, as some have suggested. In related news to today's earlier story about AMD's claims concerning Intel compilers discriminating against AMD, EU regulators raided several of Intel's European offices regarding 'an ongoing competition case.' From the article: 'European antitrust regulators raided Intel Corp. offices Tuesday, two weeks after rival U.S. chip-maker Advanced Micro Devices filed a lawsuit claiming Intel used its market dominance to bully computer makers away from using AMD chips... For more than four years, the EU has been investigating claims that Intel used unfair business practices to persuade clients to buy its microprocessors to the exclusion of rivals' chips.In March, the bloc said it was continuing its probe after a Japanese investigation found that Intel had violated antitrust rules there. The EU cooperated with the Japanese regulators.'
Read my blog: HansMast.com
I wonder if they are going to pick up a copy of the source for the compilers. That could be a nice boost for AMD's claims.
Voice your opinion!
Looks like we are going to see another Microsoft antitrust style case in Europe?
this.showSig(false)
Even though the wording of the last sentence in the blurb is misleading as it seems to mean that AMD's lawsuit was ruled illegal by the JFTC:
Bruce Sewell, vice president and general counsel for Intel, said: "One of the core principles of competition policy is the notion that such policies should be based on sound economics. There is a broad consensus that competition regulators should only intervene where there is evidence of harm to consumers. It is apparent the JFTC's Recommendation did not sufficiently weigh these important principles."
So, chips that *could* be faster (if companies were not using Intel compilers), less expensive, and have other better qualities (heat, size, etc), isn't good for consumers? Sorry to say Bruce, but obviously no one believes you.
Anticompetitive strongarming via financial kickbacks is probably only good for Intel's market position and the companies that are selling Intel-based machines regardless of what your and your company's spin is. Unless you can, without a shred of doubt or lies, prove otherwise, I really suggest you just shutup and comply.
Personally, I want to see Intel give back to consumers directly. Anyone who has purchased an Intel machine since AMD's introduction to the market should be given a large rebate and I'm not talking about settlements like $13.55 check or shipping mass quantities of unwanted product to schools. I don't want to see AMD get any money out of this as it will do little for the market's consumers who had to deal with the anti-competitive behavior just as much as AMD did (if not more).
This is wonderful news. Any move that causes the free market to gain more force in this world should be heralded with joy.
Especially if you want 120 more FPS by Christmas 2006.
Does anyone else wonder if the whole AMD lawsuit and allegations of intel code biased against AMD hardware is just a front to keep boosting prices? I mean, they gotta fund the legal battle, right?
Bah, who am I to complain, my favorite application is a nice MUD client written circa 1998. If anything it works too fast.
Trying to use sarcasm in text-based forums does not work.
What kind of RAID was it? 1, 2, 5...
Free XBox, PS2
Read that they found something as opposed to reading they "have raided". The headline makes one believe something will be found.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
Are you kiddding me? The truth is much more important than national boundaries!
And why should I care any more about people working in CA versus Canada? They have about the same impact on my economic standing.
Why? Because I think it would result in lower prices to me. While regulated monopolies (phone, electric, gas, etc.) may be necessary in order to only build a single service infrastructure, I have yet to see a market monopoly declare: Now that we've eliminated the competition, let's lower prices and improve our service!
Different code being generated. Did they really think someone wouldn't figure this out?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
The offices that were raided were located in Europe.
So you're saying that an EU office of Intel being raided by EU police will cause intel to move jobs away from the united states and into EU?
SearchIRC - Now with live chat directory!
It seems quite clear that most European police officers massively read Slashdot while on the job.
I bet Intel is already bracing for another raid when the dupe is posted...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
every time i see the words "raid offices" i think of that scene from boiler room.
I wonder how this lawsuit will affect Apple's decision do use Intel Chips? True, a case like this could stretch for years, but developing and integrating new chips into your product line could do the same. If Intel actually recieves a relevant anti-trust court decision, or greater, gets broken up, would this be better for apple (perhaps buy up the company) or might any instability hinder Apple's decision to use Intel?
AMD just raised its prices recently on its top processors. Go search MSNBC or google news for the article. AMD doesn't care about giving you a price break and weakening Intel won't help you out there. For there to be innovation, two companies must compete. AMD has a nice product but they can't simply employ the courts to earn a solid reputation. If anything, AMD and what is happening to Intel is starting to sound tired much like the SCO case. I have no doubt this case will linger in the courts for years and maybe you can come back to this post and see how wrong you were. AMD is a corporation interested in profits and NOT you saving a dollar here or there. When will you slashbots understand this?
As for different code being generated. It's time to do a simple test. Is the code being generated for AMD processors the same as Cyrix processors or Transmeta processors with the same capabilities? I've ran the test here and the binaries generated are exactly the same for comprable processors that don't happen to be Intel Pentium 4's. Please, conduct your own tests before rattling off another slashdot poster's comments.
Ya go ahead, mod me into oblivion for saying what had to be said.
Back in '98, a friend of mine was an intern for
a summer at Intel. He described a curious
practice. They would evidently hold practice
raids on employees. The legal staff would ask
the employee to drop what they were working on,
and step outside. The legal staff would rifle
through the office, looking for anything that
would help an antitrust suit. (E.g., even
memos that said "We dominate the chip fab
market...") They would then confiscate and
edit the documents that looked like they would
help an opponent in a suit. (E.g., rewrite to
"We are competitive in the chip fag market...")
So, I think the EU Intel offices are well
prepared for this raid.
...or can Intel's x86 chips take advantage of compiler tricks that are not baked into the output for AMD processors because Intel would not be privey to what AMD is up to inside their processors?
And is there not an AMD x86 compiler set -- and if not, whose fault is that? This sounds like sour grapes to me.
"a company based mainly in the United States and employs our people."
Posting from Indonesia, are we?
What are they going to break Intel up into? A Pentium vs. Xeon company? Give me a break.
What?!? Haven't you ever heard of "truth, justice, and the American Way?" It's not about jobs, or even us vs them -- it's about doing the right thing.
"He who throws mud, loses ground." - proverb
Last I checked, AMD is an American company too. So, your point is what exactly?
Oh well, what the hell...
Why is Intel getting slapped so hard with anti trust when Microsoft seems to get away with it.
Intel does have competition. AMD, Sun, and IBM all make chips that compete with Intel in the server market.
MIPs, AMD, TI, and many more have chips that compete in the Embedded space.
And AMD seems to be doing a pretty good job competing in the PC market. Is anyone shocked that the Intel compiler wouldn't have "If SSE2 and Intel use SSE2 else use emulation in the code generator?" Intel is not the only compiler in the X86 market, you have VC and GCC as options. What Intel has done while nasty is no where as anti competitive as Microsoft's tactics.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Espionage is the ultimate way to discover what your competitors are up to. It's risky. It takes careful planning. You need flawless execution. There's a certain art to it.
Too many companies see a competitor and then lower prices or try to outperform them. Tossing morals aside, propaganda and sabotage are much more efficient.
It takes balls. Big ones. Intel has proven that they will do what it takes to maintain market dominance. When someone has a better idea, they will buy it or steal it. Either way, the consumer benefits.
Some may argue that the consumer is hurt by anti-competitive behavior. That's true, but the opposite can be true as well.
"Anti" competitive behavior is actually the most competitive kind there is.
A bit overzealous term.
They walked in, asked for documents they had called about. Intel's lawyers were there waiting because they had been notified, and handed over everything they asked for.
So it wasn't a swat team breaking down doors catching barret with has pants down in front of a goat while grove was cramming confidential documents into his mouth.
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
You know, those Intel automatic doors? They'd been programmed to open real slow if someone involved with AMD is trying to get in.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Yes, and please don't consider the jobs of those working at companies that buy Intel parts. It's okay for an American company to gouge people because it's good for Americans, even if Americans are the one being gouged. That makes tons of sense.
The enemies of Democracy are
What ever happened to old-fashioned wiretaps as the feds used to use on the Mafia? Understandably, Intel probably doesn't have gun-toting thugs at their entrances, but I doubt that I'm the only one noticing a (recent?) trend of police organizations worldwide who like to conduct this "raid" thing.
I'm just glad there is no one on the Intel EU Board of Trustees with the surname Koresh.
TransMeta!? I'm still pissed about Alpha!
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Here's the settlement for patent infringement, as DEC was going out of business: http://www.techlawjournal.com/atr/80427intc.htm There was a heap of pending litigation over theft of technology before and up to this time. Keep in mind, that by 1998, it was already over. Intel had crushed DEC.
Will Apple now go to AMD?
Only RAID1 is redundant. RAID0 is not. This was incorrectly mod'd. :p
-J
Silly Rabbit: tricks are for kids.
After reading the headline, all I can picture are a bunch of special ops dressed in black crashing through the windows of the corporate headquarters throwing flashbangs and ripping computers out of the wall.
Couldn't this claim be solved easily by either subpoenaing their compiler source code or disassembling it my hand?
Laziness, check. Impatience, check. Hubris, double check!
So, will you admire me when I break into your house, steal all your valuables, trophies, diplomas off the walls and defecate on your kids' beds? After all, it would be risky, and require careful planning and flawless execution, which clearly you seem to hold in higher regard than your own dignity.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
European regulators are also looking at Intel, following complaints from AMD. ®
And now we need someone to take AMD's example to tackle the Microsoft tax.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Well.. we all see where this leads..
:D
If indeed intel made such practices then their arse is on the line, not necessarily a Anti-trust case similar as was with M$ (coz' the case brought up elsewhere than the US), obviously intel is gonna suffer with a non favorable ruling.
I think the source code for icc is not needed as many of you already now that when using it on a AMD processor you need to pass the option to, let's say, "skip microprocessor detection".
I'll like to see intel making good products and really competing , and, believe me, i don't like intel, but AMD is far beyond them right now, and if intel steps a lot behind (be it for any reason whatsoever), AMD will still make good products and maybe slow down innovation, and thats not good for either side.
Maybe im totally wrong, who knows?, but AFAIK it's evident that intel will need to address their marketing (And PR) practices, coz' they have the money to really make good products, and really compete the right way.
On a side note, i would like to see a ad where the blue man group get's smashed with a building scaffolding with some buckets of green paint on it.
lol.
If companies didn't play like Intel, then we wouldn't have the laws to protect us against people like them. You can't have competition without anti-competitive people drawing the line.
I think of it similar to computer viruses, which I wholly support. Without them, computer security would remain an after thought. Viruses expose the holes that would-be attackers could exploit in secrecy otherwise... for much worse intentions.
? What . .
,upstanding and ethical way have nothing to worry about ,Criminals have (if they are found innocent then I'm sure reparations will be paid).
The EU did not do a violent raid , they sent some bureaucratic law officials round to collect some papers on behalf of the courts , which had sanctioned the confiscation of these papers on evidence presented by the lawyers on behalf of the plaintiff
Companies who conduct business in a moral
This is not self destructive , its very much productive , Europe is a massive market and im fairly glad our governance are willing to actually do things about our laws
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Justice should no know bounds and no borders. We are but one human race and we should act together to protect each others interests , Enough with the xenophobic talk.
This is one American corporation Vs another American Corporation it just so happens the battle field encompasses planet earth.
IF Intel are guilty , then let the company be subject to the law and let them be prosecuted and sentenced as such , if they are innocent then they are fine and will be reprised
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
Somewhere in the distance, Steve Jobs can be heard crying "Noooooooooo!"
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
They're not checking for feature existence, they're checking for manufacturer. If a processor reports that it supports a particular feature, the compiler should use that feature. Their compiler is generating code that does not check feature flags, it checks for the manufacturer.
Maybe you'd like the even more business friendly policy of mugging people on the streets and handing the money over to the monopolists?
For this very reason it seems somewhat more practical to induce sanctions of some sort against Intel than it was against Microsoft; there still IS competition, both in the chip market at large, and within x86. With Microsoft, governments hands were tied as far as penalties, because there is truly NO competition for Joe User (Linux & co. arent quite there for the average user, OS X is close but only runs on Apple hardware), so restrictions are impractical. Here, Intel's dominance can be challanged driectly wihout serously changing the market.
It's still completely over my head. I heard a really emphatic "woosh", though.
Obviously expecting there main competitor to build their main complier is a flawed concept...
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Considering that the code is picking the worst possible mode (8-bit) for things in it's runtime lib, etc. it's not that it's "optimized" for Intel, it's de-optimized for AMD machines. Not acceptable. And, before you say anything to try to play apologist here for Intel, I will point out that they DO know that their compiler is doing this, they've been handed superior code that rocks on all x86 platforms, is 50% faster and is somewhat smaller and a hell of a lot simpler- with the understanding that they were welcome to the code with no rights reserved on it to improve the compiler. They weren't interested in fixing the situation save to improve Pentium 2/3 performance.
I have a PROBLEM with this attitude and action. To be honest, everyone should.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
You are thinking the wrong RAID Try This one.
Apparently Intel had a termite problem in their offices, and the EU had to step in before the problem spread to other companies in the area.
Wow man, what a troll. AFAIK the Pentium was developed in Haifa Israel. They modelled the whole thing with FPGAs. No stolen schtuff there.
Oh well, what the hell...
They (Intel) shouldn't be expected to make a main compiler for AMD's CPU's, no. But that's NOT what AMD's contending. What AMD's contending is that Intel's compiler isn't just optimized for Intel CPUs, it's de-optimized for AMD CPUs- as in, it picks the worst possible instructions for code when it knows that an AMD is being executed against. Technically, it shouldn't care about what CPU so long as the same runs x86 architechture CPU- it should be peak speed, etc. on a P3 or P4 or whatever Intel CPU, but shouldn't be running utterly crippled on other brands of the same architechture. What is happening with the Intel C++ compiler is that they're picking 8-bit instructions and the like in as many cases as they can get away with. This means you're doing memory copies in the form of byte copies instead of word copies, etc. That is a degredation of performance on the order of 20-75% (or more!) for those sets of instructions and I can guarantee that if they're doing 8-bit stuff (And this has been confirmed by alternate sources, by the way...), it explains why it's NOT happy on an AMD64 machine- 8-bit would choke the CPU hard because it eschews the 8-bit modes to accomplish 64-bitness... I've encountered some drivers for Windows XP in some of my porting work that BARFED on my AMD64 machine (the only machine I typically run XP on since it's my reference machine for Linux game porting, etc...)- when it was installed on an Intel machine and an VIA machine, it ran just fine.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
The question is: Mod this troll or funny?
Read my blog: HansMast.com
There were 10 patent violations alleged in the FTC filings by DEC... all of which, Intel settled on and were already implemented in the Alpha. This was no Rambus lawsuit. It had merit.
// II.
Yes, Intel developed the Pentium. There was still a lot of work on their end, but without DEC's technology, the chip would have been very different. Intel made the perfect hybrid, in many ways, with the Pentium Pro
It wasn't just a money grab by Digital. There is merit to many of the claims, each of which we could discuss in mind numbing detail.
The DVD CCA, the people who license out the magic keys, etc. for region coding and CSS unpacking, claimed that it was a trade secret during their trial. Their lawyers were stupid enough to submit decss.c as evidence in the trial- which abrogated the trade secret status themselves...
For someone who was using breach of contract and trade secret violation claims to stifle and suppress a program to allow region coding to be unlocked- it was the stupidest thing to do. All court submissions are public domain unless the Judge orders them sealed- and Judges typically don't seal things unless they have a very good reason; and screwing yourself up like that isn't one of them.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
"We are competitive in the chip fag market..."
Is a competitive chip fag that jerk who bogarts the Fritos?
More music, fewer hits
AFAIK the Pentium was developed in Hillsboro, Oregon, USA. Don't know where you get you information from...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I don't believe AMD raised the price on any existing processors, as your statement implies.
Instead I believe they brought out new, faster, and dual-core processors at higher prices than the already-on-the-market existing processor's prices. That is not "raising prices".
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
They did. It's called AMD64, and Intel copied it.
Besides, your argument fails because once upon a time AMD and Intel signed a broad cross-licensing agreement to provide for a second source, which was once necessary to sucessfully sell in this industry. That agreement entitled each of them to the other's intellectual property. So the question of who came up with x86 chips is moot once you know the history.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Microsoft's influence in high places allowed them to avoid punishment, despite being found guilty in the DOJ case.
That same influence is now being targetted _against_ Intel.
As you point out, AMD is doing quite well these days. They are close buddies with Microsoft, they have their own CPU designs which are competitive with Intel's, and AMD CPUs have been selected by various large buyers, such as Sun.
So for AMD to fight Intel in court right now is a risky move that makes little sense. AMD could end up pulling a SCO.
And the analogy to SCO runs deeper, because, in both cases, you find Microsoft pulling the strings.
While it makes little sense for AMD to fight Intel right now, it makes perfect sense for Microsoft to push AMD (and the government) to do it.
That's because Intel has become a threat to Microsoft. Not only has Intel been supporting Linux, but Intel is taking their hardware in directions that Microsoft is incapable of following (such as the Itanium, which depends on compiler optimizations to perform well). If this trend continues, then Linux is going to be running on some very powerful and popular PCs that won't run Windows.
AMD, on the other hand, has been catering to Microsoft's inabilities, and optimizing their CPUs just for Windows. AMD is counting on Microsoft to help them increase marketshare.
This situation has been building for some time now. For example, there was this quote from the DOJ Findings of Fact:
> In February 1997, one of Intel's competitors, called AMD, solicited support from Microsoft for its "3DX" technology, which provided sophisticated multimedia support for games. Microsoft's Allchin asked Gates whether Microsoft should support 3DX, despite the fact that Intel would oppose it. Gates responded: "If Intel has a real problem with us supporting this then they will have to stop supporting Java Multimedia the way they are. I would gladly give up supporting this if they would back off from their work on JAVA which is terrible for Intel."
Plus, just a little after that is another quote that shows how Microsoft uses its friends to attack its enemies (just like SCO):
> Near the end of March, Allchin sent another message to Gates and Maritz. In it he wrote, "I am positive that we must do a direct attack on Sun (and probably Oracle).... Between ourselves and our partners, we can certainly hurt their (certainly Sun's) revenue base.... We need to get Intel to help us. Today, they are not."
So there you have it. History tells us that this court case is most likely just another anti-competitive move by Microsoft.
By the way, did you ever notice how the regulatory bodies used to scrutinize every partnership and purchase AOL made, yet those same regulators never lifted a finger as Microsoft bought up more and more Internet companies?
And don't let anyone try to tell you that the government is getting involved to help consumers, or the industry. After all, those same government officials have allowed the world's most expensive denial-of-service attack to continue to this day. I am speaking, of course, of Microsoft's pollution of the Java market with incompatible Java clients. To this day, companies still can't trust the compatibility of Internet Java clients enough to build the interactive e-commerce sites that they were planning to build five years ago. This DOS attack by Microsoft has been costing the U.S. economy $billions per year.
So, no, it's not about protecting consumers or industry. This is about Microsoft using its influence in government to try to remove any threats to its monopoly. In other words, just follow the money.
Smart business move? Yes. Consequence free actions are generally good ones. Until a slap on the wrist becomes substantial, they can do whatever they want.s p s ettlement-from-microsoft_0701058182.htm
Depends on the outcome of the lawsuit. While government-initiated antitrust cases tend to be settled for symbolic fines (remember Microsoft?), damages in lawsuits between companies are sometimes pretty high. When googling for an example, I found some old news about the settlement between Sun and Microsoft:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1560909,00.a
Quote:
The settlement, which stems from a lawsuit Sun filed in 2002, will include Microsoft continuing to support Sun's Java Virtual Machine, as well as Microsoft paying $700 million to Sun to resolve pending antitrust issues and $900 million more to resolve patent issues.
700 million on the antitrust part of this settlement. Won't kill a company like Intel but it is not exactly cheap.
Another one is
http://www.webhosting.info/news/1/ibm-wins-$850m-
where Microsoft pays $775m plus some free software to IBM.
C - the footgun of programming languages
The contributions of the grammer nazi are always welcome.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Wintel is having to deal with the consequences of their anticompetitive behavior. Of course, odds are they'll just receive a token punishment like Microsoft.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I don't doubt that Intel is strongarming customers in Japan, but Japan calling exclusionary practices illegal is like the pot calling the kettle an illegal color. If these same charges were leveled against Hitachi they'd vanish without a trace.
This is not my sandwich.
The same thing is happening with intel/amd. AMD has a competitive product in terms of price, performance, and partnership... there's no reason some tier one vendor shouldn't be taking a chance on them... but WAIT.. serious applications written for intel might not work.. even though AMD has full legal cross-license to use the Intel special functions! They're designed specifically to be compatible with Intel compilers!!! Anybody seen talking to AMD gets the "call" from Intel and soon stops returning AMD's phone calls... sound familliar? AMD has had a good 5-year record of reliability and performance success.. They have a good 15%+ of the over-all chip market, but only 0-5% of the OEM market??? there's no LEGAL financial or techincal reason that at least 1 tier-one PC producer shouldn't be jumping ship right now... unless Intel is throwing the field by using illegal tactics to keep the customers tied to intel.
I don't want to see AMD get any money out of this
If you buy AMD stock now, then you get a share of whatever money AMD gets.
Some may argue that the consumer is hurt by anti-competitive behavior. That's true, but the opposite can be true as well.
Yes, but said opposite is true in the same fashion that theoretically all the air molecules to one side of you could whack you at the same time that all the air molecules on the other side of you happen to be leaving the vicinity, thus knocking you through a wall. It's not that it's inconceivable -- it's just that it hasn't happened before and doesn't seem very likely to ever happen.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Not because Intel is getting sued and scrutinized rather heavily, but this paves the way to Microsoft getting nailed, too. Plus, if (and I'll say BIG if, but still possible) MS goes down, other companies might think twice... or they'll lobby for new legislation. Though that makes me wonder how much they'll take up their ass without lube before they finally realize that the laws they're making are screwing them as well?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.