Looks like I should pay more attention to the dates, still a good read. I fully expected something like this from INTC given the test Tom has been running. Should have read the whole article first. It still doesn't change my view of INTC. They may be more subtle about things now but it's still the same old game.
Well, I read that rambling grammatically ambiguous dissertation all the way through and still can't tell what the hell he is talking about in terms of Intel "strong arm" tactics.
Did they warn another publication to be careful not to publish falsehoods and they call him to verify the testing?