Replies to post #84773 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[chipguy]

AMD never had a chance to properly manage its business, with Intel's thumb constantly pressing down on them.

What part of Intel's anatomy pressed AMD into paying $6B
for ATI or completely mess up several K8 follow-on uarchs?

The global brand value of Intel is typically ranked in the
top ten of all multinationals year after year while AMD is
a nobody. How does that fact play into your little black
and white world view of Intel keeping AMD down?

[Elmer Phud]

And yet, Dell was looking at bringing AMD in throughout 2002-2006, and the only reason they didn't was because Intel paid them not to.

So the cherry picked emails seem to say but fortunately Intel will be able to ask Dell under oath if that was the case.

HP themselves were bullied into keeping AMD at 5% MSS and as far away from business sales as possible

That's the story the cherry picked emails seem to imply but why not ask HP? I don't think you're going to like what the say.

AMD was not just superior price-wise during 2002-2006, but technically as well.

Not true at all. They did have a technical lead at one point but certainly not for 4 years. Another thing that would never occur to you is that having a superior datasheet doesn't mean you can supply your product reliably, on time and in the volumes required by your customers. Customers don't buy datasheets, only AMD pumpers and clueless bureaucrats do.

Eventually you'll have to face the fact that the judge or jury is going to hear the whole story, not just the cut & paste case contrived by the accusers and so eagerly embraced by you.