-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
EU slam Intel with a big fine
- Thread starter braveheart
- Start date
Dunno why you guys are so happy, we are the ones who are going to pay that fine in the long run.
Dont for a second think that intel would be like "ok my bad, here is the fine" and not do something to the prices, or how quickly they improve the chips, etc. There are hundreds of ways to get their money back and blame it on the economy or whatever they want.
The EU is more corrupt than microsoft and intel put together, its all just a sham to get easy money.
Dont for a second think that intel would be like "ok my bad, here is the fine" and not do something to the prices, or how quickly they improve the chips, etc. There are hundreds of ways to get their money back and blame it on the economy or whatever they want.
The EU is more corrupt than microsoft and intel put together, its all just a sham to get easy money.
Last edited:
To be fair to Intel this all happened during the era of the Athlon XP and 64... whilst Intel only had the Pentium 4. It was the most competitive AMD had ever been and for around 3 to 4 years they had several market segments pretty much all to themselves. What was Intel supposed to do? It's a pretty standard salesman tactic... asking for exclusivity in order to get a lower bulk purchase price.
The billion dollar fine is laughable quite frankly. I wonder how on earth the EU managed to determine that figure.
The billion dollar fine is laughable quite frankly. I wonder how on earth the EU managed to determine that figure.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Nov 2008
- Posts
- 5,060
- Location
- In the ether
The money will go to the EU and distributed amongst EU nations (unfortunately probably not evenly!).
Personally I think the EU are right on this one, in a market with few competitors it's against fair competition to make agreements with the market leading customers to only use their products. They where trying to protect a virtual monopoly - and for that they have to pay now. It's only fair.
Personally I think the EU are right on this one, in a market with few competitors it's against fair competition to make agreements with the market leading customers to only use their products. They where trying to protect a virtual monopoly - and for that they have to pay now. It's only fair.
LOL yeah right because we have seen a nice sum from the money MS paid us in UK have to pay to be apart of EU which is a joke.
EU are lame they don't have a clue what Intel did is not wrong at all it's a part of any business if it was so wrong why are they not after Sony over Blu-ray they paid of people to make that number 1.
Another is ipod it forces people to use itunes so thats a monopoly but no EU don't look at that.
Intel appealing is waste of time EU never will change it when MS did this i made it worse for them and if I was Intel I would tell EU to go screw themselves.
That's completely different to what Intel did though. They went to manufacturers and said things like "we'll give you a better price if you don't sell and AMD machines, otherwise we'll charge you full price and you'll not be as competitive".
Apple, on the other hand, just say "well, we designed the features of the iPod and iTunes to work together. If someone wants to use different software that's their problem, because we've no idea what'll go wrong".
Intel essentially gave backhanders for excluding AMD. Apple just designed two things to work together.
It's not different at all Sony went to studios and said we will give you this money to take Blu-ray over HD DVD so thats worse then what Intel did, Sony did it to store also offering them Money to sell only Blu-ray.
What You can't use ipod with any other software not even real player or media player so they are holding a monopoly forcing people to use there software and buy tracks from them it has nothing to do with designed to work together if that was the case people would be open to offer support for the player but there not allowed.
How does that insolve intel of their crime? it just means sony should be investigated as well
Ituines and ipod do not block you and yes you can use other software. Winamp for one via a plugin. How are they forcing you to buy tracks from itunes. You can upload any mop3's you want to an ipod.
And do you have a source/evidence for that? At the start the studios were split over BR and HD, some even used both. Sony had a much better PR department than Toshiba though, plus the stronger DRM in BR attracted the studios. If they did offer money up front that is anti-competitive but to be honest I doubt they did.
They don't force people to use their software at all: you could use iTunes, or this, this or even this. Or, you could just buy somebody elses hardware. They don't have to support open software interactions, and more importantly they took over the market using sheer marketing and innovation, not by bribing other companies not to stock competitors.
LOL you clearly know nothing of the hddvd blu-ray war so it's not worth even going into it.
ipod when you first purchase it you still have to use itunes after then yes you can go and use some free solutions but they are very buggy and when you purchase tracks you have to go through itunes to transfer them due to drm.
You need to look up Apples history there are lot of legal issues been going on with them most are iphone related and they didn't even invent the ipod they stole it.
If they do, it's AMD all the way for me.
No offence, but if you're not even going to back up your own points when challenged there really isn't much point in making them.
Or, you could avoid the iTunes music service and get it from other legal sources which don't use DRM. If you don't like a feature then vote with your wallet.
If you're talking about Kane Kramer, his patent for it expired in the 80's and it went into the public domain. That's hardly stealing.
Anyway, more on topic: if Apple/Sony/anyone was guilty of anti-competitive behaviour on the level of Intel then they'd be taken down for it. As that hasn't happened, they either aren't or someone is sitting on evidence that they should take to the relevant people. It wouldn't make what Intel did any less illegal.
Last edited:
So? Like I said, it wouldn't make Intel any less guilty. Point is, Apple haven't given people backhanders for not selling Zunes/Zens/etc., or if they have someone isn't coming forwards and saying it. With no evidence for it it's unfair to compare Apple to Intel like that.
Last edited: