AMD : Legal action against Intel(Goliath)

[Alndln]

AMD plans legal proceedings against Intel.About time. http://www.amd.com/us-en/Weblets/0,,7832_12670_12684,00.html?redir=CORBF03 This comes on the heels of Japan's action http://www.custompc.co.uk/custompc/news/70129/intel-found-guilty-of-anticompetitive-behaviour-in-japan.html and more recently AMD's Japan division http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3205 as a result of actions like these (posted from a thread at AMDZONE with links) http://www.amdzone.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=6034&sid=8b066d7183acadbdb16e6fdc64dcee46

HP. In 2002, when AMD set out to earn a place in HPs commercial desktop product roadmap, HP demanded a $25 million quarterly fund to compensate it for Intels expected retaliation. Eager to break into the commercial market, and to earn a place in HPs successful Evo product line, AMD agreed instead to provide HP with the first million microprocessors for free in an effort to overcome Intels financial hold over HP. On the eve of the launch, HP disclosed its plan to Intel, which told HP it considered AMDs entry into HPs commercial line a Richter 10 event. It immediately pressured HP into (1) withdrawing the AMD offering from its premier Evo brand and (2) withholding the AMD-powered computer

from HPs network of independent value-added resellers, the HPs principal point of access to small business users for whom the computer was designed in the first place. Intel went so far as to pressure HPs senior management to consider firing the HP executive who spearheaded the AMD commercial desktop proposal. As a result of Intels coercion, the HP-AMD desktop offering was dead on arrival. HP ended up taking only 160,000 of the million microprocessors AMD offered for free. As of today, HP s AMD-equipped commercial desktops remain channel-restricted, and AMDs share of this business remains insignificant.

 

Intel also purchased HPs exclusivity for its most popular notebook line. HP

captured 15% of the U.S. retail market last Christmas with an Intel-powered 14.1 display notebook (the DV 1000) with a popular power saving feature called Quick Play. When AMD sought to convince HP to carry a similar AMD-powered notebook, HP declined. It explained that Intel had paid between $3 and $4 million to lock up this product line for at least

one year.

and these

Gateway. After Gateways 2004 merger with eMachines, AMD attempted to

revive the relationship it had enjoyed with Gateway until 2001, but experienced extremely limited success. While Gateway built one AMD-powered desktop model at the request of

Circuit City, AMD remains locked out entirely of Gateway's direct internet sales, its commercial offerings and its server line. According to Gateway executives, their Company has paid a high price for even its limited AMD dealings. They claim that Intel has beaten them into guacamole in retaliation

and these

IBM. AMD and IBM began negotiations in August 2000 over a proposed

commercial PC business partnership. After seven months and with a deal nearing completion,Intel approached IBM with an incentive-based program under which Intel would become IBMs preferred supplier for processors in commercial products. Preferred meant exclusive. IBM accepted Intels proposal and terminated discussions with AMD. In return for that exclusivity, according to IBM executive Ed Thum, Intel paid IBM millions of dollars in market development funds.

 

Intel also acted to thwart AMD efforts to partner with IBM on servers. Although IBM joined AMD as a launch partner when it introduced its Opteron 64-bit server chip in April 2003 signaling to the industry and IT professionals its confidence in the product Intel soon dissuaded IBM from aggressively marketing Opteron servers. After investing heavily in its design, IBM consigned its one Opteron computer model to a single target market segment (High Performance and Technical Computing). This was done, according to an industry report (confirmed by an IBM executive), because Intel paid IBM to shelve any further Opteron development. IBM also took Intel money in 2004 to scrap plans for a multiple-microprocessor Opteron server it had already designed and previewed with customers.

 

Intel has also purchased IBM exclusivity in its ThinkCentre line of commercial desktops. When AMD pressed IBM to add an Athlon 64 model to its ThinkCentre roadmap, IBM executives explained that the move would cost them important Intel subsidies, and they declined.

and these

Fujitsu. In 2002, Fujitsu and AMD formed an alliance to develop a low-power commercial notebook (FMV Lifebook MG Series) scheduled to go to market in the first quarter of 2003, which AMD spent over 20 million yen designing. Shortly before the launch, Fujitsu told AMD that Intel would not allow it to launch an AMD-powered commercial notebook, and the project died. To this day, AMD remains locked out of Fujitsus commercial notebook lines. Intels exclusionary conduct with Fujitsu extends beyond commercial notebooks. In the consumer space, for example, Intel purchased total exclusivity for Fujitsus FM-Biblo NB consumer notebook line. When AMD tried to break Intels lock on Fujitsu notebooks by offering to match any Intel discount, Fujitsu made clear that there was no price AMD could pay because Intel simply would not allow it. To this day, AMD remains locked out of Fujitsus Biblo line.

and these

Dell. In its history, Dell has not purchased a single AMD x86 microprocessor despite acknowledging Intel shortcomings and customer clamor for AMD solutions, principally in the server sector. As Dells President and CEO, Kevin Rollins, said publicly last February:

Whenever one of our partners slips on either the economics or

technology, that causes us great concern. . . . For a while, Intel

admittedly slipped technologically and AMD had made a step

forward. We were seeing that in customer response and requests.

 

Nonetheless, Dell has been and remains Intel-exclusive. According to industry reports, Intel has bought Dells exclusivity with outright payments and favorable discriminatory pricing and service. In discussions about buying from AMD, Dell executives have frankly conceded that they must financially account for Intel retribution in negotiating pricing from AMD.

You can draw your own conclusions about this company,but Iv'e drawn mine long ago.