Slashdot Mirror


AMD Calls on Microsoft for Intel Antitrust Case

Rob writes "As part of its ongoing antitrust case against its chief rival Intel Corp, AMD said it had subpoenaed Microsoft Corp for documents pertaining to its case." From the article: "AMD filed subpoenas with 32 companies, asking them to retain and forward documentation that may pertain to the lawsuit, including computer companies, microprocessor distributors, and electronics retailers. Most of these companies agreed to comply with AMD's requests, including Acer, Gateway, Lenovo, NEC, Sony, Sun Microsystems, Tech Data Corp., and Circuit City. The only firm that refused to cooperate with AMD in any capacity was Toshiba, although others have been slow to respond."

10 of 84 comments (clear)

  1. Right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Microsoft has a bunch of reasons to give up any info they have to hurt Intel if possible. With Intel's recent gung-ho approach and partnering with RH and SuSE anything to hurt them would benefit MS in some small way. Don't be surprised if Ballmer hand delivers the documents himself.

  2. Payback Time by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Intel testified against Microsoft in their anti-trust trial. AMD testified in support of Microsoft's monopoly. I'm sure that Microsoft will be happy to return these favors.

    --
    Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
  3. And to complete the summary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA:

    "AMD may be requesting documents from Microsoft that show that Intel tried to convince the software company not to support x86 64-bit in Windows. This might be a tricky thing to prove, as Microsoft has offered 64 bit versions of Windows for both Itanium and x86 64-bit for some time now."

    And also, that Microsoft is complying with the request.

    I wish summaries are more complete. Only if wishes were horses....

  4. Yipee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    *looks at green badge around neck*.... I guess this is good.

    Personally I'm happy for AMDs courage of conviction not just because of where I work ... [hint hint] and not because it's morally superior but because it's good for the gander.

    Intel is not evil but they do have an awful stance of we're the best and there is no reason to consider anyone else. They demonstrate this by the way they package their kits (e.g. you need an Intel northbridge/southbridge) to the way they develop software (IPP is not friendly on AMD nor is ICC). They'll claim it's for superior performance but consider AMD.

    AMDs stance is they want as many people developing around AMD as possible. This is why VIA and Nvidia (to name two) are major developers of chipsets. AMD is partnered with development shops (won't say which) where the attitude is "be great on AMD but not at the expense of being great on Intel". Basically we want the best performance we can get so long as we don't create problems for the competition.

    I hope other companies can stand up and just admit for a change that competition is great, it's a good idea and furthermore the future of the computing industry demands it.

    Vive la choix!

    Tom

    1. Re:Yipee? by southpolesammy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Basically we want the best performance we can get so long as we don't create problems for the competition.

      Surely you mean end user?

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
  5. Do We Pay? by MudButt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FTFA"As the Intel-AMD lawsuit drags on, there's no telling what kind of picture the documents it brings to light will eventually paint about the computer industry."

    Every time I see these antitrust lawsuits "drag on" in the news, I wonder how much of the cost of these fights gets passed onto us, the consumer? It must cause a ripple effect when Company A sues Company B which impacts Companies C, D, etc. in terms of attorney fees, internal audit, research, and strategic analysis. Are we footing the bill?

  6. Re:Innovate or Sue? by vodkamattvt · · Score: 4, Insightful
    AMD has been doing just what you are saying for years. They *have* had the best CPUs for years now. If the playing field were even, AMD would already be in a position where this lawsuite would not even make sense.

    The playing field is *far* from even. Intel had such dominance for so long, and cuts deals to specifically hamper AMD that this lawsuite is needed.

    I dont see any stagnation in their drive for innovation. What they are doing is making sure their efforts are not wasted on a marketplace in which Intel has created barriers all over the place to stop AMD market penetration. Why would you continue to innovate just to sell chips in a market where you can never hope to compete with an Intel that violates anti-Trust and keeps you from competing in the marketplaces that you need.

  7. AMD still makes chips by kp2sushi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While an antitrust suit against intel is rather interesting, I'm more interested in seeing what cool new chips AMD comes up with next. It has since been AMD's style to come up with next big thing a whole quarter or more before intel brings it to the market. They aren't going to win market share with an antitrust suit, but they may (keyword: may) level the playing field with software and hardware manufacturers a bit. Linux users seem to be AMD's most avid fans; are we not always rooting for the underdog? AMD may not be the underdog for long as they continue to gain market share with their main feature: superior power and engineering at a lower pricepoint than their primary competitor.

    --
    Take the white suppository, and I'll show you how deep the rabbit hole goes...
  8. Re:Innovate or Sue? by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    AMD has been doing just what you are saying for years. They *have* had the best CPUs for years now. If the playing field were even, AMD would already be in a position where this lawsuite would not even make sense.

    "Best" is a blanket statement.

    Most industry analysts believe that Intel's costs are far below AMD's, which gives Intel much more negotiating room with major OEMs. That is, Intel can sell CPUs cheaper than AMD and still make money. This makes Intel's CPUs "best" for large OEMs like Dell even when AMD is cheaper in the retail market.

    Also, AMD has marketed itself as the "alternative for low-end cheap people", even when they had faster products on the market. This effectively cut them out of high-value segements of the market. It's only recently that AMD has been somewhat successful selling into the server and workstation markets.

    --
    Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
  9. Microsoft? by corellon13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Mod me how you will, but something has to be said. After reading these posts, I would have thought this was a fight between Microsoft and Intel. Many of the posts are from people trying to dive into the mind of Microsoft and speculate that this is payback for Intel testifying against them. I have to ask what would happen if Microsoft went along with Toshiba and refused to cooperate? Does the term damned if you do and damned if you don't come to mind?

    --
    Do what is right and let the consequence follow