Intel Corporation (INTC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)

INTC 40.56

+10.2%

Nov 28 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Logos who wrote (56174)	5/28/1998 10:07:00 PM
From: Mo Chips	Read Replies (1) of 186894

<<So it's pretty easy to see that both Intel and Microsoft are at least vulnerable to legal action, whether by the government or by other companies.>> Agreed, however I see a fundamental difference between the actions and how they affect the end user. If an intel product were to entail someone else's technology, obtained legally or illegally, the end result is the consumer still may get the product. Same story with Microsoft. This is simply a patent or trademark infringement issue, not a monopoly or anti-trust issue. I believe the current legal activities boil down to product tying or predatory pricing. If intel were to withhold the sale of cpus to a boxmaker (in which intel has a near monoply market position) unless they also purchased intel's graphic chips (in which intel does not have a monopoly position) then this would be an illegal practice. Same thing for MS with their stance of not selling windows (monopoly product) unless IE is also included (not a monopoly product). MS has also priced their monopoly products in an illegal way by charging boxmakers for every machine shipped, even if the product is not included on the machine. Dumping is another antitrust problem. Intel to my best recollection, on the other hand, does not dump (see their nice margins) nor tie product sales through bundling or pricing. I recall hearing on NPR a commentary by Robert Reich about his opinion on Microsoft. I agree with his idea that any monopoly product that is essentially not the reason for the purchase of the product (just like people don't buy a PC to use windows or a toaster over to use the plug) that these products should be free and open to the world. Microsoft should be forced to give away windows and permitted to dominate (if possible) the applications business. They should make the source code open and available to the world. Now before everyone says that this is an unachievable end, I acknowledge that this is far from a easy and practical thing to do. Somewhere inbetween is the truth. Mo

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next