Elmer, that's the rub, now isn't it? A whole generation of physicists went to their graves disbelieving Einstein's Relativity (which didn't become accepted physics until the late 1920s, when the younger generation took over). Even after there was the powerful evidence of starlight bending around the Sun in an eclipse, they still wouldn't believe. They considered Einstein's work to be irresponsible claims expecting to be believed in the absence of credible evidence, but their belief systems wouldn't let them acknowlege the evidence when it was presented.
(Of course, Einstein similarly had a belief problem with Heisenberg...)
Extraordinary claims do require extraordinary proof, although the question of a dominant company testing the limits of how far they can legally manipulate the market does not seem that extraordinary to me. In fact, it seems quite commonplace.
No, I propose that the extraordinary thing would be if Intel would de facto play on an even playing field - exerting only the quality of their product and living with the results. They won't, AMD doesn't expect it, and I don't expect it. For me to think that they would not abuse their market position would take extraordinary evidence!
No excuses. Just tough business. AMD must counter it by putting out a better product at a competitive price - when they do, they prosper, when they don't, they won't.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
