AMD's top lawyer discusses AMD Intel disputes

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Snarks

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1.

Christ sake, is English your first language?

Please tell me it's not.

Even if it isn't, why are you making your intolerance a problem for the rest of us?

Could be English is not the first language, could be a disabled individual, could be a medicated individual, could be lots of reasons their posting style doesn't conform to your expectations.

Regardless the reason for their posting style, what's your excuse for not having manners or respect for them for being who they are?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well put . But I can handle my own short comings. It is strange I don't see others mistakes without it screwing up comprehension. But bad grammer spelling is bad. So I just a BAD ASS.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Phynaz
1. Monopolies are not illegal in the US.

Absolutely correct...what's your point? This all started because a monopoly must abide by different standards than a non-monopoly in anti-trust...

2. "If"

"what" "the" "Hell" see, I can do that too...🙂

3. Link?

I am tired...I have researched the rules and law for you, as well as found the precedent. Maybe you (or someone else) can actually try to Google something for a change...🙂

Edit OK...I know you won't research it (doesn't fit your agenda), so here goes (took me all of 24 seconds).
USDOJ

"The complaint narrowly tailors the relevant product market to the market for certain operating systems software for x86 microprocessors. The geographic market is not limited"

AMD's complaint is the same, and remember that Microsoft was convicted on this market. Just remove the words "operating systems software", and you have the wording...

Man Viditor your a little bull dog. But you do research well . I have my short comings. as do us all. Viditor your close to being a great poster . Good grammer / spelling . Its alright to be fanbois . Viditor . But try to be a bit more open minded. I see way to much hate . Tune that down to dislike and be more open minded . You well get way better results . Not that your doing bad now. I just saying you could be really good.

Viditor I have a ? . Now just suppose Intel does what I believe they will do will Haswell. Intel no longer carries X86 bagage. But can still do X86 programms than what is intel x86. As for your MS x86 analogy / Is Apple OSX x86. May I remind you intel cpus are running that CPU. To tie Intel to X86 is pure BS . As they can port to everthing except cuda. Legal like. So pinning X86 on Intel is not wisest thing to do .

In court of law intel will say hay we do OSX better than IBM did with RISC . Soits not as cut and dry as you think /

Larrabee its X86 right . Right . But is it something else? Its a 2 peice suite Viditor . It was 86 sse units , Now I won't say its a CiSc backend because i don't know . What I do know is the Vector unit also has a backend . I would bet that is not a cisc backend.

Haswell will take this all the way.

 

[kipliq]

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.

This is funny shit, keep it going....!

 

[Nemesis 1]

Viditor be careful . You know me. I laid trap.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Your right, But this kinda stuff is really only fun at AT forums. Better more civil replys in our wars. So it has fun built in.

An example of funny . Intel ported x86 to OSx. I can't believe the number of people who post Apple can switch to AMD any time . Yes they can . But only after AMD does there own porting . Good luck with that . Intels port to Apple osx is Intel property not apples. So AMD has to do its own port. You all think it was easy lol.

 

[Phynaz]

Who in the world told you Intel ported OS X?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Whosaid they didn't . I be first link please
Heres my starter link . I will hold the final link to just right time.😉

http://news.cnet.com/Apple-to-...00-1006_3-5716696.html

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Whosaid they didn't . I be first link please

Please don't affirm a negative.

If you have something to to post, post it. I really doubt the port to x86 hardware was so hard that Apple needed Intel's help.

 

[kipliq]

Stop trying to argue with Nemesis 1 he is a Platinum member so everything he says is gold!

 

[Nemesis 1]

Ya got money were that mouth is😀. Intel did the port .

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: kipliq
Stop trying to argue with Nemesis 1 he is a Platinum member so everything he says is gold!

Your kidding right. I been banned from here more times than you bath in a year LOL.

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Whosaid they didn't . I be first link please
Heres my starter link . I will hold the final link to just right time.😉

http://news.cnet.com/Apple-to-...00-1006_3-5716696.html

Steve Jobs, WWDC, June 6th 2005:

So today for the first time, I can confirm the rumors that every release of Mac OS X has been compiled for both PowerPC and Intel. This has been going on for the last five years

Mac OS X is cross-platform by design.

I don't need to link it, I was there.

You can download the entire keynote from iTunes if you wish.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: kipliq
Stop trying to argue with Nemesis 1 he is a Platinum member so everything he says is gold!

It is an exercise in futility.

I wish I could exorcise the futility.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Phynaz

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Whosaid they didn't . I be first link please
Heres my starter link . I will hold the final link to just right time.😉

http://news.cnet.com/Apple-to-...00-1006_3-5716696.html

Steve Jobs, WWDC, June 6th 2005:

So today for the first time, I can confirm the rumors that every release of Mac OS X has been compiled for both PowerPC and Intel. This has been going on for the last five years

Mac OS X is cross-platform by design.

I don't need to link it, I was there.

You can download the entire keynote from iTunes if you wish.

Please do a eritten link .

Heres another teaser

http://apple.slashdot.org/arti...l?sid=05/08/24/2114232

Your right Intel is officially crossplatiform so labeling it as X86 is by law not correct. It was Intels development tools to do porting . There is much more on this subject.

 

[Schmide]

Dude this Apple crap has nothing to do with this thread and enough with this 5 posts to get useless information. STAY ON TOPIC

Start a new thread PLEASE

 

[Phynaz]

Confirming the rumors, Jobs tells how Apple complied versions of Mac OS X for both PowerPC and Intel chips.

Now stop with the stupid games.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Phynaz
Confirming the rumors, Jobs tells how Apple complied versions of Mac OS X for both PowerPC and Intel chips.

Now stop with the stupid games.

Its not silly Jobs says much. It was intels tools that got job done sure there was Both apple and Intel people working on it . They are still working together on Snow and open CL. Intel have a tech agreement in place . Apple cann't just boot intel out and go AMD . Intel left opening for AMD for X86 once . They will never repeat that mistake again.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Schmide
Dude this Apple crap has nothing to do with this thread and enough with this 5 posts to get useless information. STAY ON TOPIC

Start a new thread PLEASE

Actually were on topic. The topic of x86 and is it intel monoply . I just pointing out intel cpus are more than X86. With intel compilers and tools . Alot more. You watch Larrabee recompile x86 for the vector unit. Than you watch Intel dump all the bagage in x86 chips.

I was just pointing out to Viditor proving intel is a monoply in the X86 segment not as easy said as done when intel can point to OSX and its wonderful work there. and cross platiform.

Snow OSX is being tuned for Intel all the way. Its not like MS, Having to play with all. Apple only has to play well with intel . Even tho Intel AMD both do x86 . Intels compilers are way differant than AMDs LOL. Tuning a OSx for intel 64bit. is going to be ground breaking. As Apple can tune specificly to intel compilers . Ya add in Grand and its going to get MS attention as MS can't tune to specific cpu without antitrust.

So intel X86 monoply doubtful . If Snow OSX turnes out to fabulios . It will bit into Market share hard. The Cpus that Apple buys cann't be counted as % for 86 chips as OSX isn't x86. As Apples share grows intels pertenage of X86 shrinks without losing market.

So ya see were it gets merky viditor . The courts going to have to do some real work on this one. By than intel will probably demo Sandy running Itanic software that hasn't been using EPIC just to show off.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Schmide
Dude this Apple crap has nothing to do with this thread and enough with this 5 posts to get useless information. STAY ON TOPIC

Start a new thread PLEASE

Actually were on topic. The topic of x86 and is it intel monoply . I just pointing out intel cpus are more than X86. With intel compilers and tools . Alot more. You watch Larrabee recompile x86 for the vector unit. Than you watch Intel dump all the bagage in x86 chips.

I was just pointing out to Viditor proving intel is a monoply in the X86 segment not as easy said as done when intel can point to OSX and its wonderful work there. and cross platiform.

If that's where you were going. I guess. Enough wit the pulling teeth though.

Companies can have diversified assets, cough cough GE*. Having a diversified portfolio does not exclude your ability to manipulate one of the markets you compete in.

* I am not inferring GE has ever used anti-competitive tactics, I'm using them as an example of a company that has a very diverse set of assets.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Schmide

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: Schmide
Dude this Apple crap has nothing to do with this thread and enough with this 5 posts to get useless information. STAY ON TOPIC

Start a new thread PLEASE

Actually were on topic. The topic of x86 and is it intel monoply . I just pointing out intel cpus are more than X86. With intel compilers and tools . Alot more. You watch Larrabee recompile x86 for the vector unit. Than you watch Intel dump all the bagage in x86 chips.

I was just pointing out to Viditor proving intel is a monoply in the X86 segment not as easy said as done when intel can point to OSX and its wonderful work there. and cross platiform.

If that's where you were going. I guess. Enough wit the pulling teeth though.

Companies can have diversified assets, cough cough GE*. Having a diversified portfolio does not exclude your ability to manipulate one of the markets you compete in.

* I am not inferring GE has ever used anti-competitive tactics, I'm using them as an example of a company that has a very diverse set of assets.

Here is what your saying so lets be clear . No matter whar Intel does .The persite that IBM made them take on with 8088 will never go away . YOU want to bet . As soon as the X86 recompile is done its over.

On GE lol read history . GE standard oil . Railroads these were not good people LOL .Read about GE and tesler . and how the smartest man in history was duked by GE. More how us consumers were duked . Had tesler had his way . The world be a better place today.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Here is what your saying so lets be clear . No matter whar Intel does .The persite that IBM made them take on with 8088 will never go away . YOU want to bet . As soon as the X86 recompile is done its over.

Straw man?

I'm not saying anything like that. Expanding on what I'm saying, The scope of this trial involves Intel and AMD's CPU sales in the x86 processor market.

Compiler technology, although related to the product, has little to do with this case other than the previous court ruling defining the Intel Compatible Personal Computer market.

 

[Nemesis 1]

No its not straw man . double negitive. Look for grammer cops. Everbody in the world wants to tie AMD to INTEL . Man that is so wrong. AMD is a persite nothing more.

In 2010 were going to see something that will awaken the world of processors. Its the second step. Larrabee being the first. Were going to see larrabee as game unit . But recompiles for X86 will beginn right away or have already . Ya say big deal right . You might be right,

But what happens when sandy AVX shows up . How will those recompiled Larrabee programs run on AVX. Than with Haswell . AVX goes away . 2 years of AVX or maybe it stays not sure but Haswell goes Vector processing that we know or its in road maps.With FMa with 4-5 operand. Don't ask about 5th operand cause that one has me confused

 

[Schmide]

Originally edited in by: Nemesis 1
On GE lol read history . GE standard oil . Railroads these were not good people LOL .Read about GE and tesler . and how the smartest man in history was duked by GE. More how us consumers were duked . Had tesler had his way . The world be a better place today.

Seriously. GE, Apple, Railroads Standard Oil, etc are not on trial here. I brought up GE because they have one of the most diverse portfolios out there, Consumer Products, Movie and TV, Insurance, Military and Aircraft, etc. If you want to relate a previous action or case to this one that's OK, but don't dig up old dirt on a unrelated company.

I have to bite on Tesla though. He was great - insane but great. He kind of dammed himself by trying to deliver energy through electro-magnetic-waves. Regardless of his monetary troubles he will always be considered the father of modern electricity.

 

[Schmide]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
No its not straw man . double negitive. Look for grammer cops. Everbody in the world wants to tie AMD to INTEL . Man that is so wrong. AMD is a persite nothing more.

You specifically said I said something and then tried to argue that. That by definition is a straw man argument. DUH

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
In 2010 were going to see something that will awaken the world of processors. Its the second step. Larrabee being the first. Were going to see larrabee as game unit . But recompiles for X86 will beginn right away or have already . Ya say big deal right . You might be right,

But what happens when sandy AVX shows up . How will those recompiled Larrabee programs run on AVX. Than with Haswell . AVX goes away . 2 years of AVX or maybe it stays not sure but Haswell goes Vector processing that we know or its in road maps.With FMa with 4-5 operand. Don't ask about 5th operand cause that one has me confused

Seriously - stop looking at the future. It has nothing to do with this case. If you want to talk about Intel's next generation or how AMD can't compete. START A NEW THREAD