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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (242058)	10/8/2007 2:12:47 PM
From: gvatty	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Intel and AMD are worldwide companies. They have to follow the law in all the jurisdictions that they want to do business in. I told you volume discounts are ok as long as the are to tied to an agreement with the oem to not use, reduce the use or delay entry of AMD chips. Intel has grown such much more than AMD because initially AMD was chosen as a second supplier to AMD. That gave Intel initially a greater opportunity. However, Intel has committed improper business practices for years. Intel didn't refute Japan's findings, they said ok no more improper rebates or market development funds. No research and development dollars does not equate to a successful product. Look at Itanium, Timna, Prescott etc. But I believe 100 billion or so so in additional research and development, more fabs, and marketing would have made AMD more successful and given consumers much better chips than Intel is currently providing. Even if the best AMD chip only performs at 75 or 80% as well as the corresponding Intel chip, Intel should be embarassed as hell. If the positions were reversed and AMD had the larger monopoly market share and committed the same predatory practices I would be defending Intel, but would you be defending AMD?