SI
SI
discoversearch

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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Duke of URL© who wrote (127240)2/12/2001 4:11:06 PM
From: Jim McMannis  Respond to of 186894
 
RE:"The litigation was over whether AMD could use the name "MMX", and it settled by Intel allowing AMD use of the term/name only; There were no royalties paid for the technology, itself. FWIW"

I thought AMD just ended up buying an MMX license and Cyrix was the one that developed their own extensions?

Jim



To: The Duke of URL© who wrote (127240)2/12/2001 4:27:01 PM
From: Elmer  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 186894
 
Re: "If memory serves, AMD developed their own extensions"

As I recall Cyrix developed their own extensions but AMD licensed MMX from Intel after Intel threatened to sue. Maybe it was just the name "MMX" but AMD paid(s) a fee nonetheless.

EP


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News