Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (86150)	1/9/2000 4:55:00 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573344

Re: You are just flat out wrong and you are making the same ignorant statement Raza did, which only reinforces the point... Hi Elmer, Here's Raza'a quote: A fundamental part of the PC platform standard and it's been distributed under nondisclosure! Why? This is a violation of every antitrust law! Here's another. After Intel licensed MMX to AMD, they went and told ISV's not to work with AMD because they had signed non-disclosures. We had a license, an open license, a legal license from Intel on MMX. We had the right to work with ISV's, but ISV's said: "Intel lawyers told us we can't work with anybody because we signed this nondisclosure." Somebody call the NSA quick - word has leaked out about the Top Secret MMX extensions. Somebody'd better wind up spending time making big rocks into little rocks over that one :-) Intel is a huge company and I'm sure it does some defense work, but the kind of stuff Raza was referring to is what's in standard desktop PCs. That's why my leading suggestion was that you may have been mistaking one component for another. But I say again - your comment about "under ultra tight security imposed by a government agency which must remain unnamed" regarding a PC chipset, cpu, or other motherboard component (which is what Raza was referring to) was silly. Dan

To: Elmer who wrote (86150)	1/9/2000 10:56:00 PM
From: Petz	Respond to of 1573344

Elmer, I have worked in government secure programs my whole life and your explanation is all wet. Companies do not use NDA's to hide classified information. NDA's are only useful for company proprietary, not classified information. Even where subcontractors are involved, NDA's are NOT USED. The point of that section of my post techstocks.com was not to open up the anti-trust argument per se, but to point out that Jerry Sanders does not make his decisions based on an irrational hate-Intel point of view. It appears that his President and COO was urging more anti-trust action against Intel and the Sanders resisted this, probably because he thought it would be poor publicity for AMD. Petz