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 : AMD:News, Press Releases and Information Only! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ed Sammons who wrote (6028)	5/7/1998 2:20:00 PM
From: Francis Chow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6843

YOU'RE THE NEXT TARGET, INTEL When Intel CEO Andrew S. Grove hands over the reins to Craig R. Barrett in May, he may pass on something Intel had hoped to avoid: a federal antitrust action. BUSINESS WEEK has learned that as early as June, Federal Trade Commission staffers are aiming to present to the commissioners a proposed action charging Intel Corp. with illegally using monopoly power to harm rivals and punish customers who cross the chip giant. The agency is also probing whether Intel unlawfully uses its chip dominance to muscle into new markets--an inquiry that could result in a separate action further down the road. The Intel inquiry has many parallels to the Justice Dept.'s case against Microsoft Corp., the other half of the ''Wintel'' duopoly that dominates computerdom. As in the Microsoft case, there will most likely be a quick surgical strike to halt anticompetitive behavior. Meanwhile, investigators probably will pursue a wide-ranging probe of alleged monopoly abuses. ''You need to streamline. Otherwise you're heading off into a Vietnam,'' says Stephen Calkins, a former FTC general counsel who teaches at Wayne State University law school. Intel won't comment on the potential case. But the investigation differs in one major way from the Microsoft probe: The FTC isn't under the deadline that the launch of Windows 98 placed on Justice. So FTC lawyers are taking their time to ensure they have enough evidence to build a strong case. Sources familiar with the FTC's investigation say it is initially zeroing in on charges that Intel retaliated against two customers that sued the company in patent disputes. After the companies--Digital Equipment Corp. and Intergraph Corp.--filed separate suits, Intel cut off chip supplies and technical information. That didn't sit well with U.S. District Judge Edwin L. Nelson, who on Apr. 10 slapped an injunction on Intel to stop such behavior toward Intergraph. Industry executives say the FTC probe is looking at how Intel uses such intellectual-property ''blackmail'' to keep customers in line. PRIX FIXE? The FTC also is sifting through complaints that Intel discourages computer makers who buy processors from rivals. The company's most obvious weapon here is the famous Intel Inside marketing program. The chipmaker paid out an estimated $1 billion in rebates last year to PC companies that use Intel chips exclusively. Rivals call this practice exclusive dealing and charge that it freezes out competitive products and allows price-fixing. Industry execs who have worked with the FTC say it is also taking a careful look at Intel's growing control over the basic design of PCs. Parts of the PC that used to be based on ''open'' standards are increasingly getting superceded by Intel technologies, which the chipmaker usually has licensed for free to all comers. But details about the latest innovation, the patented connector used in the Pentium II, are being kept secret. That could shut out rivals like Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and National Semiconductor Corp. if, as expected, motherboards designed for Pentium IIs become ubiquitous in PCs. Another FTC concern: efforts by Intel to leverage its processor monopoly into other chip markets. Intel's share in chipsets--the companion chips that work with the microprocessor--shot from 8% in 1993 to more than 75% last year, while rivals such as VLSI Technology Inc. were driven out. Now, Intel is moving into graphics and networking chips. Industry execs says Intel can force PC makers to buy these other chips by bundling them with processors on Intel motherboards. The FTC might label that monopoly leveraging. If the FTC decides to go ahead and pursue Intel, how will it fare? The agency isn't pushing any far-out legal principles, and it has had a good track record lately with actions such as its blocking of the Staples-Office Depot merger. Indeed, competitors claim its case may be stronger than Justice's Microsoft action. That's not exactly the sort of kickoff that Intel's Barrett was anticipating. By Andy Reinhardt in New York and Susan B. Garland in Washington

To: Ed Sammons who wrote (6028)	5/8/1998 12:04:00 AM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6843

<However, there is no man so blind as one who refuses to see.> Ed I tried twice to drop this but if you insist...perhaps you have trouble with the English language. I asked someone for a benchmark showing the Celeron performing worse than a Pentium 200, as that person claimed. He was unable or unwilling to produce one. So be it. You posted one showing it to be exactly equal to a 233mhz Pentium MMX. In our language, "exactly equal to a 233mhz Pentium MMX" does not mean worse than a 200mhz Pentium. You posted another showing it to be 91% of a 233mhz Pentium MMX. A 200mhz Pentium runs at 85% the speed of a 233mhz Pentium so this doesn not constitute a benchmark showing it running worse than a 200mhz P. You posted another quote saying "it could barely keep up with a 200mhz Pentium. In our language "it could barely keep up" means it could keep up, just barely. It does not mean that it was worse. All I wanted to do was see if that person could back up what they were claiming. I expected them to be able to but apparently they can't. Can we drop this now? EP