In the good-old-days, if a corporation felt it had been infringed upon or held back in some way, a team of lawyers, some damning evidence, and an attitude of righteous fury would be combined to get some "justice," and that would be that. But times have changed, and nowadays things tend to get a
little more personal -- especially when it comes to
Intel and
AMD. The latest round of jabs traded between the two chip-makers comes from the
beleaguered AMD camp, which has launched an
entire website (using the unsubtle name "Break Free") dedicated to smack-talking Intel and its business practices. In particular, the site excitedly covers the recent antitrust charges
brought against the company by the European Commission, and reiterates the popular AMD claim that Intel stifles competition and innovation by monopolizing the market. The website also details how the diabolical chip-manufacturer steals babies in the night, was responsible for the JFK assassination, and spits in your food when you're not looking.
[Via
EETimes]
posted August 8th 2007 4:05PM
...not to mention the atrocities Intel committed by developing better processors.
AMD needs to stop crying and start delivering good chips. I was once a big AMD fan but can't say that now-a-days.
True dat!
Time and time again we've seen that consumers have limited brand loyalty- it's all about price and performance. AMD needs to stop thinking this marketing is doing anything for their sales and put the funding towards making better chips.
I guess the chips aren't the only things that are full of hot air over at AMD...
Funny how all that stuff didn't bother AMD much when the Athlon was god emporer of the CPU world...
(And this is being said by a loyal AMD customer who is holding off replacing his primary PC (4.5 year old Barton core Athlon 2800+) just to wait for the Phenoms to drop)
Exactly how does a media smear campaign help AMD move fwd? They would best focus on their own product rollouts and competitiveness.
Yuck... that type of mudslinging is a real turn-off and makes AMD look extremely desperate. Win on your own merits AMD, this is technology obtain technical leadership like you had in 2005 and early 2006 - it's a much better selling point.
I think when you aren't doing so well, you start blaming other people.....
-----------
http://www.webyaa.com/category/technology
Seriously, this is pathetic.
Did they really need a whole web-site for this stuff? Whatever happened to just starting a blog? It'd at least be easy to navigate, and could have a more interesting layout.
I personally love AMD, but product loyalty in the technology market doesn't make sense. I can't wait to see what they're going to do with ATI integration, but they're going to have to actually finish doing that before I can buy another product of theirs again.
True dat!
Yeah, if AMD were actually better than Intel they wouldn't have to stoop so low, and Intel wouldn't have to resort to mudslinging if AMD took over the top spot, they would just make better chips.
2 words for you AMD: Boo Hoo
When AMD chips were good i bought AMD even if they were hard to get ... now that Intel Chips have had a little headway i went for that.
Get the chips right and smart users will buy and ask for them.
I think theyre bitching that they cant squeeze no-good low end chips on everything like intel :P
Oh no here comes the flame war again...
EE Times got it wrong. This AMD website has been up and running since AMD launched its lawsuit in the US against Intel, i.e. at least since 2005. It's not a new website.
Considering they now are partnered with both Dell and Toshiba, along with the rest of the top leading oems in the world like HP, Gateway, Compaq, Acer etc. And all of those companies are selling systems based on AMD chips, you'd think they would find some other excuse as to why they are doing poorly.
They pretty much hit the wall with performance when they started using DDR2 and failed to get the speed increase the technology really offers. Some of the early benchmarks showed little to no improvement in memory bandwith performance justified in upgrading to the AM2 platform. The only innovation they have done since then is releasing the Turion 64 X2 which isn't all that impressive. It should be interesting to see what happens with their DDR3 platform nVidia is working on to see if they will actually catch up or continue to fail and fall further behind the tech race.
Godda admit, I'm still happily entrenched in the AMD camp in both laptop and desktop. But I really can't see this exercise achieving anything positive.
AMD needs to stop complaining, let justice do its part if they're right. What a waste of time and resources to even promote that stuff when the mainstream media can do it for them for free.
The next major innovation AMD needs to be working on is getting a unified chipset with killer ATI video and AMD processor harmoniously working on one motherboard together. Before Intel does!
lol - I wonder if Toyota will be doing the same thing once domestics start hitting back... At least 2 of them, I mean.
Toyota makes way too good cars compared to American domestic and they have been on that path for a long time.
They're crying foul of business practices? In a capitalist country where the dollar reigns supreme? Good luck with that...
Corporations, evil though they may be, are there for the sole purpose of making a dollar, nothing more.
Actually they are just reporting on the business practices that Intel uses in Europe. No dollar there. It even says so in the screenshot. The European Commission has taken action against Intel - not AMD.
I don't see why everyone is whining about AMD's complaint. It may seem a bit tactless, but the site is ultimately aiming for business decision makers and people who enjoy competitiveness in the computer industry.
Only recently have major computer manufacturers started offering AMD in their lineup (i.e. Dell), but if you look at the systems with these processors, they aren't the best they could be. Yet the Intel systems can be configured to have all of the best parts!
After the Pentium 4 screw ups (slower than Pentium 3 speeds and far too much heat and power consumption) and the miserable attempt at dual core chips with the D series of Pentiums and Celerons, I don't understand why anyone would want to limit their offering of systems to a single chip maker. This is the main reason why I have built all of my own computers from retail parts using AMD since 2000.
I think that these lawsuits, and the site, will have an affect on companies. Retailers, system builders, etc. will be more likely to consider offering more AMD products in the wake of consumer awareness.
In response to mrF1xIT, a new socket type is not a reason to upgrade. If buying a new computer, the AM2 socket would have given you the ability to buy a 'green' chip that uses as little as 65W at full capacity. It also gave you the ability to use DDR2 at exceptional bus speeds, though you are correct that this does not truly affect performance. However, the power consumption is nearly half that of DDR using DDR2.
Would you upgrade to Windows Vista right now just because it offers DirectX 10? No [hopefully, no games actually support to make it 10 better than 9]. You start playing the wait and see game. Do they have drivers for my equipment, can I play my games on it, etc. However, if you're buying a new computer, you may take the plunge as an investment so you don't have to upgrade down the road.
Anyway, the Core 2 Duo lineup is really the only race Intel has beaten AMD in (as far as performance) since AMD's products took the lead ["quad-cores" not included].
Neither the Pentium 4 nor the Pentium D were 'screw-ups'. When Intel released the Pentium 3 and was working on the Pentium the market only understood one thing: MHz/GHz rating. Much like how DDR/DDR2/DDR3 sells in the RAM world users didn't understand the idea that one cycle could mean two operations. Intel would need to spend a fortune in order to market the Core 2 Duos at that time, instead that let AMD do the work for them and then dominated the market with a product generations of AMD (who was claimed to be the highest-quality chip producer). The Pentium D was a quick response to the need for dual cores and when they were sold they were a great quality for their price and most of the over clock far better than their competitors.
P.S. Ever notice how the only thing internet providers ever provide is the speed in GB/s even though latency affects your download speed and quality more? Computer chips were the same way ‘back then’ where you got one number even though it was only 50% of the necessary information to understand performance. RAM (alluded to earlier) still works the same way for most consumers; they say the bus speed but ignore the latency ratings which effects RAM speed just as much and often more because if you have to wait several clock cycles a fast bus won’t do anything to speed up all the idling. It’s like having a car that can go 200mph but only for 15 seconds a minute while an 80mph car can go non-stop.
Any product that touts its position simply by technical specs and not performance is a screw-up. The marketing department did a good job, though, as you believe they were good products.
The best Pentium D was slower than the 'most economical' Athlon X2 in many multi-threaded applications. (one example here: http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/08/01/dual/). The best Pentium D did have better performance in standard, single-threaded apps, but that's not why you buy dual-core processors, is it?
"P.S. Ever notice how the only thing internet providers ever provide is the speed in GB/s even though latency affects your download speed and quality more? "
You must not live in the US. Our consumer internet is still rated in MegaBits (not bytes), and most ISPs cover themselves by saying speeds "up to" x.x. Even with cable, they usually say up to 5.x Mb/s, but it only works half that fast (they usually impose their own limit-- You're not going to tell me that I can't reach 5.x simply because there are too many people on the Internet at 3am in that location...) and that's only with download speeds. Uploads are usually 1/6th of the reported speed.
"The Pentium D was a quick response to the need for dual cores and when they were sold they were a great quality for their price and most of the over clock far better than their competitors."
The Pentium D was only a quick response to the need for dual cores in Intel's product line-up, so that the retailers, system builders, et al. wouldn't be able to break the exclusivity contract that AMD is complaining about in the law suit. If Intel waited for a decent product, the market would have been clamoring for AMD. This would have created instability in the market place, since consumers want dual core instead of dual proc, but retailers and systems builders wouldn't be able to give them what they need without having to charge more for Intel products (AMD's suit claims Intel had clauses in contracts for price increases if the company didn't exclusively sell Intel products). So Intel fans got a half-baked product because Intel wanted to throw something out there to bridge the gap and retain market share.
It is *never* a good idea to sacrifice quality just because your customers believe in [most of] the history of a brand name, especially when the consumer market only has real care or access to those brand names. All we really care about from Intel, as end-consumers, are the Pentium and Celeron names, so tarnishing those brands can ruin your entire credibility for the market.
"I don't understand why anyone would want to limit their offering of systems to a single chip maker. This is the main reason why I have built all of my own computers from retail parts using AMD since 2000."
Allow me to rephrase that for you so it's less hypocritical:
"I don't understand why anyone would want to [broaden] their offering of systems to [anything from Intel]. This is the main reason why I have built all of my own computers from retail parts using AMD since 2000."
At any rate, when I upgraded from my Athlon XP 2500, the Pentium D had a far better bang for its' buck compared to Athlon X2s at the time. Case in point, the $100 Pentium D 820s performed only slightly worse than the $200 Athlon X2s.
I was the proud owner of a 486 DX2, a Pentium, a K6, a K6-2, a Celeron II, an Athlon XP, a Pentium D and am now a proud Core 2 Quad owner. AMD would have had 4 out of my 8 personal systems, except they just didn't step up to the plate this time. I wanted quad core for my particular applications, and despite the fact that Hypertransport is freaking practically made for high speed multi-die-single-chip interconnect, AMD's marketing department said that "fake quad" is "bad form" in a last ditch effort to one-up Intel by being first to an achievement that they pulled out of a hat (even though they have no problem at all with multi-chip 8 core!!).
And now this! Honestly, AMD has been pissing me off more and more lately. They need to get someone smart in charge again. Preferably someone who climbed the ranks from the R&D department with a clue on what makes a chip "fast", as opposed to leaving the reins in the hands of their idiotic marketing department (hint hint, hey AMD, a successful brand name doesn't make a chip fast, and neither does having a monopoly!!). In the words of the great Napoleon, "Gosh, IDIOT."
This is hilarious, especially the bad photoshop of the guy with the sign calling for "Fair & Open Competition"
Hey AMD shame on you! Instead of throwing a tantrum like a baby, you should have concentrated on beating Intel. Why the hell did you buy ATi? What a waste of money and resources. Money that could have been spent on making better chips. The website insults the intelligence of the computer community. Go Intel!
If I recall correctly, AMD purchased ATI with the specific intent to utilize their chip production facilities to produce cheap chipsets with integrated graphics in the same way that Intel does. Plus, then they could actually work on their idea of integrating a graphics accelerator directly into a mobile processor.
I'm pretty sure Intel knocked my trash cans over last week, too.
as much as I also think is a low blow...
AMD's complaints are true.
Bad press is better than no press? I don't know who in AMD's PR/marketing dept. that approved this project, but the person needs to be fired straight away. I can't seriously believe that AMD would sink this low... mind boggling!
An amd chip is like a mac computer, unix os, and every other off the wall device. Life's too short to use sorry , different crap. Intel's kicking their ass and now they are boo-hooing and running to every govt. that will listen.
Make something decent and maybe people will use it.
Intel has engaged in monopolistic practices without a doubt, now and in the past. I use both Intel and AMD machines and own stock in both, but I believe in AMD's suit. Look what M$ did to lots of good companies by illegally (in my opinion and Judge Penfield _____ opinion) using their control of the op system to gain advantages in apps. The proper solution would have been to sever M$ apps from op system, forming two companies, but politics triumphs over justice. Our government has no stomach for fighting anti-trust cases (the govt case vs M$ hinged on the browser issue, which was tertiary). Go AMD!
I agree with most of the conversation in this thread: AMD shouldn't let its lawyers decide and produce its branding and marketing. The full-pager in the Wall Street journal really sealed it for me...what a missed opportunity to communicate positive, meaningful actions for customers and consumers (instead of tisk-tisking Intel). I've written about this in some detail on DIM BULB, at http://dimbulb.typepad.com, if you'd like to check it out.
Before we can break free, we need to make a chip that beats out Core 2 Duo in terms of price/performance.
Awwww. Isn't that cute? AMD is throwing a temper tantrum. Someone give AMD some warm milk and send em to bed. Please?
Heh, "Fair & Open Competition", eh? How 'bout some "Fair & Open" Drivers, like the oh-so-evil Intel releases? I am a lifetime lover of AMD chips, and have only owned 2 Intel products (a 486 machine back in the day and a 2003 Gateway laptop), but hot damn if this HP AMD/ATI laptop hasn't been a pain in the ass to get everything working in Linux, and the video drivers from AMD don't even offer 3D-accel. OTOH, thanks to Intel's openness, I only had to make one adjustment to my old Gateway that is now ready to ship off to my relatives with Ubuntu, fully functional.
It is with a heavy heart that I admit I will not be buying any more AMD products until they practice what they preach on that slogan. :(
This pretty much parallels the fight against wal-mart. Of course we know that they are all D-bags but as long as they get the job done, we won't care (that much, anyway) until all their workers walk out on them