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.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan3 who wrote (241460)	9/29/2007 2:01:58 PM
From: wbmw	Respond to of 275872

Re: Try reading the posts that detail the harm Intel has done and why its abusive monopoly powers should be curtailed. I've read many of the posts here, but so far I cannot identify any that compellingly argue that Intel is a harmful or abusive monopoly. Most of them simply try to argue that if AMD's lawsuit claims are indeed factual, then Intel should be punished. If your reasoning is that Intel is harmful to consumers because they are harmful to AMD, then I don't accept that. Larger competitors can certainly be harmful to smaller competitors if those smaller competitors are not nimble enough to survive. If AMD is failing through fault of their own, then they deserve to disappear and get replaced with someone better. I have argued before that the court case will determine if AMD's claims are factual. But so far, it does not seem that Intel has done anything harmful to consumers, which is what my point has been since the beginning. Harmful to AMD, maybe, but it's not clear today whether that is Intel's fault, or AMD's.