• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD Anti-Trust Lawsuit: Chipzilla Strikes Back !!!

D

Dothan

Banned
considering how stupid and desperate AMD is currently

the latest example is their pathetic ' anti trust ' suit filed today

Chipzilla is reportedly prepared to revoke their cross-licensing agreement with AMD, effectively rendering AMD chips totally worthless. This means AMD would no longer be able to use MMX, SSE2, SSE3 and several other Intel inventions !!!

imagine what a big blow this would be !!!
 
Not to mention, AMD could simply ignore the declaration and wait for Intel to unsucessfully try to sue them in court. Intel would REALLY get in antitrust hot waters if they tried to do that.
 
Intel can't back out of that agreement, it would only solidify AMD's case.

You might be a fanboy when:
You have a pet name for your favorite company
 
You might be a fanboy when:
You spew fud like this around in a vain attempt to prove nothing.
 
Originally posted by: Markfw900
You might be a fanboy when:
You spew fud like this around in a vain attempt to prove nothing.
Click to expand...

Dothan's comment is not FUD...FUD must be at least intelligent enough to pass a 6th grade level or it can't inspire Fear Uncertainty and Doubt.
This is gibberish...
 
funny how the same 'gang' of amd trolls comes in to every thread !!!

daddy strikes back -- hard !!!

chipzilla forever !!!
 
Originally posted by: dev0lution
I'd like to see the license and the T+C's of the license before you start gloating that they can pull it.
Click to expand...

Don't even go there...he's an idiot. AMD holds just as many patents over Intel as Intel holds over AMD...

If you're interested, here's just the ones since 2001...732 of them anyway...
AMD Patents
 
Originally posted by: Dothan
funny how the same 'gang' of amd trolls comes in to every thread !!!

daddy strikes back -- hard !!!

chipzilla forever !!!
Click to expand...

i love huge conglomerate corporations who drive out competition and make higher prices for everyone!!! im an idiot!!!!!!
 
Some points for readers to take in.

1. There USED to be a monopoly on hardware. That hardware was required to run the world's main operation systems, Microsoft Windows. The hardware was x86 and win32 compatible CPU.

2. AMD in a point in time, decided to clone/emulate another company's product range. The Intel owned CPU and mobo chipset range. Later AMD added unique features that made their CPU's somewhat of a unique product, but still x86 compatible.

3. AMD still thinks they have to compete in this market which is rightfully Intel's, due to Intel inventing and designing the x86 chipset.

4. AMD in 1st Quarter of 2005 state they want 25% of Intel's x86 market. AMD announced they will travel to Taiwan to sweet-talk vendors.

5. AMD take out law suit to try to enforce in law or by punishment that more of Intel's market place to be AMD's.

--------------------------------------

Now the point I wanted to make is that times have changed.

The x86 standard is no longer a requirement to run Microsoft OS based applications, so therefore there no longer exists a monopoly on hardware.

AMD has no excuse to say it's required to stay with x86 based chipsets to sell computers that are market able. They can't say they need Intel's customers to enforce a breaking of a hardware monopoly.

The whole situation has changed since Microsoft released a software layered operating system language and framework that is independent of hardware! It's called MSIL/.Net framework and it doesn't need x86 based CPU's to run.

AMD is no longer competing in a mono product type market, so it's perfect to say they have no limits to who they sell to and the product types.

Intel continues to have a right to inspire and promote people to buy their inventions. It is not a monopoly. It is a fair marketplace, especially if AMD is willing to step out of Intel's own created product market and promote their own unique chips.

In my opinion, AMD doesn't have a case against Intel. AMD are free to mercantile. AMD are trying to smother Intel and it's bordering on criminal.

.
 
I wish the mods would grow a set of balls and review this annoyance....If they cant handle it then they can make me a mod. I am here enough and know who to take out....

I also want someone to tell me the website these fvckers come form again so I can go in there and annoy them as much as they annoy me
 
Originally posted by: BlindBartimaeus
LOL...they wouldn't be able to use AMD64...er EMT64...LOL...get bent fanboy
Click to expand...

I'm guessing from information I've noticed in past, but I don't think AMD has any rights to deny Intel from using EM64T. EM64T and AMD64 are both based on Intel's owned x86 specs/invention. Intel and AMD have an agreement to use each others' 64bit installment for the benefit of the customer base.

So I think you are wrong to say AMD holds any reigns on x64. x86-64 is a natural progression from x86-32, so there is nothing special about AMD using it, other than it forced Intel to remain with x86 compatibility in hardware.

.
 
Originally posted by: porkster
Some points for readers to take in.

1. There USED to be a monopoly on hardware. That hardware was required to run the world's main operation systems, Microsoft Windows. The hardware was x86 and win32 compatible CPU.

2. AMD in a point in time, decided to clone/emulate another company's product range. The Intel owned CPU and mobo chipset range. Later AMD added unique features that made their CPU's somewhat of a unique product, but still x86 compatible.

3. AMD still thinks they have to compete in this market which is rightfully Intel's, due to Intel inventing and designing the x86 chipset.

4. AMD in 1st Quarter of 2005 state they want 25% of Intel's x86 market. AMD announced they will travel to Taiwan to sweet-talk vendors.

5. AMD take out law suit to try to enforce in law or by punishment that more of Intel's market place to be AMD's.

--------------------------------------

Now the point I wanted to make is that times have changed.

The x86 standard is no longer a requirement to run Microsoft OS based applications, so therefore there no longer exists a monopoly on hardware.

AMD has no excuse to say it requires to stay with x86 based chipsets to sell computers that are market sellable. They can't say they need Intel's customers to enforce a breaking of a hardware monopoly.

The whole situation has changed since Microsoft released a software layered operating system language and framework that is independent of hardware! It's called MSIL/.Net framework and it doesn't need x86 based CPU's to run.

AMD is no longer competing in a mono product type market, so it's perfect to say they have no limits to who they sell to and the product types.

Intel continues to have a right to inspire and promote people to buy their product design. It is not a monopoly. It is a fair marketplace if AMD is willing to step out of Intel's own created product market.

In my opinion, AMD doesn't have a case against Intel. AMD are free to mercantile.

.
Click to expand...



But Porkster.....none of you points actually point out why AMD is filing this suit....90% of market share is pretty much a monopoly last time I checked, and no company has a 'right' to any one product, sure there are patents on some things but if things were like you would like prices would be INSANE.....i dunno what planet you are from but competition is a good thing and AMD is trying to compete, just as Intel is.....actually I'm not going to waste my breath any more cuz you are a flaming troll that needs to be banned....
 
Originally posted by: porkster
Originally posted by: BlindBartimaeus
LOL...they wouldn't be able to use AMD64...er EMT64...LOL...get bent fanboy
Click to expand...

I'm guessing from information I've noticed in past, but I don't think AMD has any rights to deny Intel from using EM64T. EM64T and AMD64 are both based on Intel's owned x86 specs/invention. Intel and AMD have an agreement to use each others' 64bit installment for the benefit of the customer base.
Click to expand...

It sounds like you're arguing that EMT64T or AMD64 are 'derrivative works' according to contract law and therefore rolled up into the original specification.

Problem with that logic, is that you could walk back the x86 instruction set to at least the 80286, maybe 8086. The entire x86 instruction set is a derrivative work by that definition.

Note that I do not believe the add-ons to the x86 set are derrivative works. That is, at best, a very large stretch of the definition of derrivative works.

I haven't looked up the specific patents, but I think Intel would be hurt more by revoking the cross-licensing agreement than AMD would. 64bit instruction set and on-chip memory controller are much more appealing features these days than SSE3. Plus AMD has a perfectly workable SMD-a-like solution in 3dNow!. Sure, it hasn't really been used since the AXP days, but that doesn't mean the functionality has been removed from the Microsoft Visual C++/C# compilers.
 
Just ignore the piggy troll, read his comments on TechReport if you need to see the "merits" of his comments. The forums could really use some help from the mods.
 
Originally posted by: DeathBUABut Porkster.....none of you points actually point out why AMD is filing this suit....90% of market share is pretty much a monopoly last time I checked, and no company has a 'right' to any one product...
Click to expand...

It's not 'anyone product'. AMD has all the opportunities in the world to make a new CPU that is zero Intel x86 compatible.

As an example. I make an imitation Rolex(AMD). Rolex(Intel) can tell jewellery shops not to buy the fake Rolex, even if the imitation Rolex is better. The fact is the maker of the fake Rolex can at anytime go clean and make a unique/new watch and market that. Rolex(Intel) would then be in trouble if they tried to force the other watch from being sold.

Other words the point I'm making is AMD isn't restricted in sales at all. They maybe restricted though in Intel's market and with it's customers.

AMD has all the rights to make a new chip and software that will run Microsoft's .NET framework applications. AMD no longer needs Intel's x86, so there is no excuse to demand Intel's customers and market.

.
 
Originally posted by: porkster
Originally posted by: DeathBUABut Porkster.....none of you points actually point out why AMD is filing this suit....90% of market share is pretty much a monopoly last time I checked, and no company has a 'right' to any one product...
Click to expand...

It's not 'anyone product'. AMD has all the opportunities in the world to make a new CPU that is zero Intel x86 compatible.

As an example. I make an imitation Rolex(AMD). Rolex(Intel) can tell jewellery shops not to buy the fake Rolex, even if the imitation Rolex is better. The fact is the maker of the fake Rolex can at anytime go clean and make a unique/new watch and market that. Rolex(Intel) would then be in trouble if they tried to force the other watch from being sold.

Other words the point I'm making is AMD isn't restricted in sales at all. They maybe restricted though in Intel's market and with it's customers.

AMD has all the rights to make a new chip and software that will run Microsoft's .NET framework applications. AMD no longer needs Intel's x86, so there is no excuse to demand Intel's customers and market.

.
Click to expand...

You are still so stupid it amazes me, if AMD creates a proc arch completely unique of x86(which has been the standard for how many years now??) If they did that they would essentially die as a company which I know would make you very happy as you'd pay 2,000 dollars for a POS, overheating Intel chip since they would monopolize the whole market......no programmers in there right mind would rewrite all there code just for AMD the cost would be enormous.....

I swear I've seen smarter rocks than you...
 
Intel doesn;t own x86. Transmeta, Cyrix, AMD, Intel, and others (winchip or something ??) all make CPU's that are x86 code compatable.

Go crawl back under your bridge Porkster, you troll.....
 
Originally posted by: TerryMathewsProblem with that logic, is that you could walk back the x86 instruction set to at least the 80286, maybe 8086. The entire x86 instruction set is a derrivative work by that definition...
Click to expand...

If you are aware of the x86 opcodes then you know they are all derivatives of the past set. The unique factor would be AMD's means to implement it in hardware.

Like I said I'm guessing as I haven't looked to what claims are out there by AMD and Intel, but I know that the x64 instructions aren't anything special. As an example x86-128bit implementation maybe as simple as replacing the R with a P for paragraph(128bit) on most instructions. The special part is getting the electronics to perform the instructions, not the instruction set wording, which is what AMD fans are saying AMD owns this time around.

.
 
Hmph. First time I've seen this Dothan guy, but I must already express my contempt for him. Dothan, little fanboi, you should realize that the Intel reaction you propose would likely only serve to get Intel in even more hot water. Not much chance of Intel winning a preliminary injunction, and a high probability that it would just serve to confirm AMD's claims in a court's eyes.

As for Porkster...hey Porkster, didn't you get tired of having your ass handed to you back at THG forums?*

(*)To everyone else: don't criticize me--or any other stranger you might meet--for being members of the THG forums. Most of us are just as disgusted with THG's current content as everybody else. :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top