**thread name change* Nvidia and AMD moral and immoral business practices

[SlowSpyder]

Using Fuddy as "evidence" is an own goal.
Huddy has been chaugth lying about PhysX severals times...about multithreading/x87.

Remember Fuddy is PR...not an engineer.

Incase you didn't see it: http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30531653&postcount=277

 

[Idontcare]

Do we think that a thread like "Nvidia and AMD moral and immoral business practices" deserves its own thread? I think it does. A number of people have a lot to say about that, and perhaps we can put the halos in place, or bury them as is necessary after a topic like that.

As moderator I would allow for such a thread so long as the posters handled themselves with respect and civility, kept the personal mudslinging and trash-talk out of it, and the rhetoric plus hyperbole level was minimal (preferably non-existent).

In other words, give it shot and we'll see how it goes.

An openly public discussion, handled professionally, will only better serve the community but I don't want to hear people whining that it is too heavily moderated because I will be monitoring such a thread for member call-outs and derogatory/condescending posting behavior.

Let's see if the community is mature enough to have such a conversation. I'm hopeful.

Moderator Idontcare

(pm me if/when you make such a thread so I can add a mod-disclaimer to your OP stating as much)

 

[Dribble]

Really? Could you please share with us the proof you are basing your accusation on? Because I would think that a Focus Group member would want to be very careful when accusing his sponsor's competitor of wrongdoing without some sort of concrete evidence.

AMD have Charlie - he quite clearly shows massive bias against nvidia, well bias isn't strong enough, he shows hate, and is quite clearly paid by AMD via adverts on his site. If AMD were above board they wouldn't sponsor Charlie.

Charlie is known to be on many forums, always uses another alias and mostly doesn't reveal who he really is, he is almost certainly present here. However to even use Charlie in any nvidia vs ati thread is viral marketing by AMD in action and working.

AMD also hit low with their various anti nvidia adverts (e.g. that nvidia dinosaur youtube one). Clear viral marketing. Anyone who posted a link to that on here is doing viral marketing for AMD on this forum.

 

[SlowSpyder]

AMD have Charlie - he quite clearly shows massive bias against nvidia, well bias isn't strong enough, he shows hate, and is quite clearly paid by AMD via adverts on his site. If AMD were above board they wouldn't sponsor Charlie.

Charlie is known to be on many forums, and always uses another alias, he is almost certainly present here. However to even use Charlie in any nvidia vs ati thread is viral marketing by AMD in action and working.

I just went to his site, I see Sapphire and Gigabyte ads. I think that it's been suggested that AMD might be involved with him, but I haven't ever seen anything that could be considered proof or really even evidence. Sapphire uses AMD GPU's exclusively. The Gigabyte ad is for motherboards, but they also build AMD and Nvidia based cards. Anyway, I'm not saying there isn't a connection, but I have yet to see anything that would make me believe that there is.

 

[Dribble]

I just went to his site, I see Sapphire and Gigabyte ads. I think that it's been suggested that AMD might be involved with him, but I haven't ever seen anything that could be considered proof or really even evidence. Sapphire uses AMD GPU's exclusively. The Gigabyte ad is for motherboards, but they also build AMD and Nvidia based cards. Anyway, I'm not saying there isn't a connection, but I have yet to see anything that would make me believe that there is.

Last time I went there it was plastered with ati adverts, have to admit I haven't been there recently on principle as he gets paid every time I click.

 

[blastingcap]

I think it was unreasonable to phrase NV's "offer" and AMD's rejection the way you did and explained why. You retorted that I was slinging FUD (not very civil) and gave a brief opinion in which you said AMD could be at the mercy of NV, INTC, or SONY and said it should have picked NV. I was perplexed why that would have been the best choice. You later offered a more detailed explanation of your initial post. We continue to disagree. That's fine but I don't appreciate your using the term FUD on me, because FUD is something marketers do, and I am not a marketer, viral or otherwise.

I think you have my position mixed up with those of others; for the second time, I never said "boycott NV" though I have indeed voiced an opinion on their relative evilness, so to speak.

You are now saying I'm "getting too carried away" and are implying I am biased, aggressive, and attacked you. I'm sorry you felt attacked, but I don't think it's "attacking" you to ask you to justify the logic behind your initial post about NV's "offer." Keep in mind how brief and one-sided your initial post was:

They actually wanted to support AMD with implementing their own back-end for PhysX.
Problem is, AMD refused.
Apparently the only thing AMD wants is for nVidia to do ALL the work for them, and make an OpenCL implementation.
AMD doesn't want to do anything, they just want a free ride.

If nobody had objected to your phrasing, the casual passerby could have come away with an impression that NV was some sort of nice guy offering AMD a helping hand, while that lazy slob AMD refused and wanted NV to do all the work for them. Hence why I objected to your phrasing--not because I am AMD-biased as you claim. I'm not sure why you couldn't have phrased it in a more neutral manner.

I don't think the wording is 'interesting', just that it is the only correct wording that I know of.
After all, ATi was caught in this instance. This may not have been the first time that ATi was cheating. ATi may not have been the only one cheating... ATi may not have been the first one that was cheating. We don't know any of these things for certain.
We only know that they got caught first.
And stop making this NV or ATi. Back then, there were more than just two players.
I know one of the earliest examples of cheating in benchmarks was S3 'magically' enabling their texture compression in applications. I also know that other vendors, after adopting their texture compression technology, also started to apply this cheat.

What is there to comment on? What is understood does not need to be discussed.
And I'm not really interested in trying to 'determine' which company is 'most evil'.
I'm just saying that buying AMD because 'nVidia does nasty things' is silly, in the light of all the nasty things that AMD has done.
I think we should end it here, because you're getting too carried away. You're coming off as too pro-AMD for my liking, and you're being too aggressive, trying to attack me because you think I'm pro-nVidia. I am nothing of the sort.
You've reiterated that you don't like how I phrased things about 5 times now. I understood that the first time. I'm not going to change my words to please you. You should have figured it out by now. I have my integrity. I choose my words carefully, and I stick by them. I said what I wanted to say, how I wanted to say it. Now it is up to you to learn how to deal with that.

 

[blastingcap]

Do what exactly? You're "trying" to make it sound like I'm promoting Nvidia, (this is your intent, yes? ) when what I'm really doing, is demonstrating to blastingcap (who brought up viral marketing in the first place) that while he accuses Nvidia of this type of marketing, he should be made aware that AMD does this. And that's only from two companys we know of. High Road, and Danger Reactor. There may be more, but these are the only two made public. You can try to turn this into something it's not, but I'm confident that most can see through that.

Keys what the heck? I didn't bring it up and even expressed surprise when someone else brought it up earlier in the thread. Please don't make these assumptions without having actually read the thread.

I believe it's necessary when those who try to bash Nvidia for it at the same time claim that AMD/ATI is an angel company. Or a saint. All things blastingcap listed above can be attributed to both companies, with the exception of bump issue. The problem is that he, and those like him, doesn't think AMD/ATI/Intel/OCZ/Samsung/Hitachi ad infinitum does the same. Or at least AMD/ATI.
As more time goes by, it seems that the more acts that were commited are denied they ever happened or tried to explain away somehow.
Whatever the case, both companies practice this, and the reason this needs to be mentioned is because it looks like a lot of AMD fans think otherwise.
Emphasis on the word "think".
Now you know why. You choose to think it is a defense for Nvidia. It isn't.
It's just keeping it real and a casting a little light on the subject.

If you take issue with other forum posters' opinions okay but don't drag me into it. If it pleases you I will say here that AMD/ATI are not saints or angels. They are relatively benign compared to what NV has done, though. (I did say "if that's the worse they've done" then they are "angels/saints" compared to NV. I was not comparing to other companies like Samsung or whatever.) Driver thing wasn't great, true, I had forgotten about that one. But as for the rest? Bumpgate is NOT the only separator. NV has done the things AMD/ATI has done, true, but NV went farther: into price-fixing and bumpgate territory, in addition to viral marketing on this board apparently. And re: price fixing, NV was the one who approached AMD to price-fix--please read the article before excusing NV by saying that "it takes two to price fix." You are implying that AMD sent viral marketers who have not ID'd themselves as such, to boards like AT. Where is the proof of this? Otherwise, I find your post here to be offensive in tone and not accurate: http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30531374&postcount=268

Umm, it takes at least two entities to price fix. Who do you think the other was?
AMD uses viral marketing and was made public a few years ago. Known as High Road Communications. And yes, to think they aren't on this board is the stuff of pure fairytales. So, who's out in front now in the "dubious corporate behavior" race? Give me a break dude. You can't really be serious with this stuff at this point. No offense, but it's starting to become a little funny that you might actually really believe what your typing at this point.

 

[SirPauly]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/...ion_to_Settle_Price_Fixing_Legal_Dispute.html

 

[n0x1ous]

so it looks like ati was being shady here as well? would they have agreed to pay half the settlement if they could prove nv was the instigator and only offendor?

 

[SirPauly]

BlastingCap,

Your ninja edits keep changing their tune.

 

[blastingcap]

BlastingCap,

Your ninja edits keep changing their tune.

I don't mean to ninja edit but I like to be accurate so sometimes I will add disclaimers or tone it down a bit or fix typos or add links. The edits I made to the previous post in this thread were mainly to add quotes and links, and also to respond to one of the (many) separate things keys wrote... trying to consolidate it into one post rather than 2+.

I don't think I like what you are implying, though. I don't do 180-degree turns in my posts unless it's a situation like a typo or something where I write an extra "not" which flips the entire meaning around.

 

[blastingcap]

Granted you did say apparent, but all we saw was one supposed email from nv to ati. if they were in discussions about price fixing and they both were questioned by the government certainly ati could have been just as guilty here. all we have is one snippet of an email. What was Orton's response and how far along were their discussions? Just sayin that Ati could be just as guilty here, we simply dont have much info.

This is technically true but what we know for sure is that NV started it.

 

[SirPauly]

I don't mean to ninja edit but I like to be accurate so sometimes I will add disclaimers or tone it down a bit or fix typos or add links. The edits I made to the previous post in this thread were mainly to add quotes and links, and also to respond to one of the (many) separate things keys wrote... trying to consolidate it into one post rather than 2+.

I don't think I like what you are implying, though. I don't do 180-degree turns in my posts unless it's a situation like a typo or something where I write an extra "not" which flips the entire meaning around.

Thank you for taking the time, very much appreciated!

 

[n0x1ous]

This is technically true but what we know for sure is that NV started it.

I may be wrong, but I didn't see anything that confirmed that Nv started it, but if you have something I would like to see it as I may be wrong like I said.

Anyway, judging by SirPauly's Xbit link, it looks like ATI probably was guilty here as well.....

 

[Kenmitch]

This seems like pretty old news. I tried looking thru this thread for when it was first brought up to compare the time frames. But couldn't find it.

Anybody know what the post # was. These long threads are hard to keep track of.

 

[Scali]

You retorted that I was slinging FUD (not very civil)

I call 'em as I see 'em. You were trying to bring in completely unrelated topics to somehow 'demonstrate' how 'evil' nVidia is.
At the very least that's a fallacy (slippery slope?). I consider FUD a decent synonym.

If nobody had objected to your phrasing, the casual passerby could have come away with an impression that NV was some sort of nice guy offering AMD a helping hand, while that lazy slob AMD refused and wanted NV to do all the work for them.

Really now, have you been reading any threads in the video forum lately?
We are CONSTANTLY being reminded of how evil nVidia is... So much so that it seems to have turned around 180 degrees, and a lot of people actually have gotten the wrong idea that because nVidia is so evil, AMD must be a saint.

Which is why I remind people of AMD's actions every now and then.
If you mean what you say, you should be on my side 100%, to try and stop this pro-AMD bias.

 

[Scali]

so it looks like ati was being shady here as well? would they have agreed to pay half the settlement if they could prove nv was the instigator and only offendor?

Ofcourse ATi was equally guilty. In case you didn't notice, video card prices indeed WERE fixed for a long time.
But the fact that it seems to surprise people only strengthens my claims that things have become very pro-AMD/ATi because of the constant nVidia-bashing.

 

[n0x1ous]

Ofcourse ATi was equally guilty. In case you didn't notice, video card prices indeed WERE fixed for a long time.
But the fact that it seems to surprise people only strengthens my claims that things have become very pro-AMD/ATi because of the constant nVidia-bashing.

the questions were rhetorical. Bolded = agreed

 

[Janooo]

I call 'em as I see 'em. You were trying to bring in completely unrelated topics to somehow 'demonstrate' how 'evil' nVidia is.
At the very least that's a fallacy (slippery slope?). I consider FUD a decent synonym.



Really now, have you been reading any threads in the video forum lately?
We are CONSTANTLY being reminded of how evil nVidia is... So much so that it seems to have turned around 180 degrees, and a lot of people actually have gotten the wrong idea that because nVidia is so evil, AMD must be a saint.

Which is why I remind people of AMD's actions every now and then.
If you mean what you say, you should be on my side 100%, to try and stop this pro-AMD bias.

Both companies are bad. Which one is worse though?

 

[Scali]

Both companies are bad. Which one is worse though?

I really couldn't care less.
I just look at the products they offer, and buy the one that suits my needs and budget the best.

 

[Janooo]

Ofcourse ATi was equally guilty. In case you didn't notice, video card prices indeed WERE fixed for a long time.
But the fact that it seems to surprise people only strengthens my claims that things have become very pro-AMD/ATi because of the constant nVidia-bashing.

Is there more NV bashing? Is it justified?

 

[Scali]

Is there more NV bashing? Is it justified?

As I already stated, I think things are very much biased pro-AMD/ATi.
AMD/ATi is usually excused rather than bashed, when something shady comes up (like a settlement regarding price-fixing, involving both ATi and nVidia, and somehow people only 'remember' that nVidia was involved).
With nVidia, things are generally blown way out of proportion, with a lot of misinformation and innuendo thrown around for good measure (like David Kanter's article on PhysX for example).

 

[happy medium]

Do we think that a thread like "Nvidia and AMD moral and immoral business practices" deserves its own thread? I think it does. A number of people have a lot to say about that, and perhaps we can put the halos in place, or bury them as is necessary after a topic like that.

I think thats a great idea, this is a great discussion.
I changed the name of the thread to keep it rolling.
I'm sure IDC will keep the guys under controll.

Keep it going guys ,great thread.

 

[Janooo]

As I already stated, I think things are very much biased pro-AMD/ATi.
AMD/ATi is usually excused rather than bashed, when something shady comes up (like a settlement regarding price-fixing, involving both ATi and nVidia, and somehow people only 'remember' that nVidia was involved).
With nVidia, things are generally blown way out of proportion, with a lot of misinformation and innuendo thrown around for good measure (like David Kanter's article on PhysX for example).

It appears that NV is getting more bad reputation since AMD took over ATI in the last 3-4 years.
The bumpgate is the biggest one and quite fresh.

 

[Idontcare]

I think thats a great idea, this is a great discussion.
I changed the name of the thread to keep it rolling.
I'm sure IDC will keep the guys under controll.

Keep it going guys ,great thread.

I edited your OP to add the mod caveat to it as agreed.

Moderator Idontcare