Hardware Analysis Community Forums http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/ 2009-01-08T01:49:19-05:00 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/ http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/halogo.gif text/html 2005-09-10T23:38:21-05:00 Gerritt http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/?o=20#322241 Oy Vey,<br /> This keeps coming back!<br /> There are multiple automotive dealerships that do sell multiple car brands (and not all associated with a single parent company), but in the IT industry the high level vendors have been playing hardball with the distributers, but then the distributers are as much to blame.<br /> If the distributers (DELL/HP) are negotiating contracts with Intel and Microsoft based upon lots purchaced ONLY, then INTEL/AMD/Microsoft/Linux/Etc. and the alternative vendors have no justification for lawsuits, as long as the lots agreed to are met, and the distributer has the right to sell whatever they want, as long as they meet their commitment for the lots.<br /> IF, however, the distributers are getting an even BETTER price break based off of a no-compete or sole provider provision, the sole provider has the legal highground based upon the binding agreement associated with the additional price break.<br /> <br /> &quot;You sell only my solution and I'll provide you the product @ 50% off list&quot;, vs. &quot;You buy my product in 100000 size lots and I'll give you 45% off list&quot; are both acceptable business practices; in the USA as well as around the world.<br /> <br /> IF IT CAN BE PROVEN that &quot;You sell my product ONLY or I'll cut you off&quot;, NOW we have a lawsuit, and not necessarily a great one.<br /> <br /> Just my take as a past systems integrator/VAR for MS/NOVELL/DEC/COMPAQ/GATEWAY/HP/ETC.....<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> text/html 2005-09-10T22:56:27-05:00 jim private http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/?o=20#322228 all i'm saying is that <a target="_blank" href="/action/r/http://www.dell.com/">Dell</a> is no different than a resteraunt that choses to use only 1 vendor for their product.. the numbers bear out the fact that in a decade of making processors amd has only been able to eek out a miniscule portion of the market... to teir credit they make the best chip now but what about 5 years down the road ..dell is a big company and is not stupid, they (along with other o.e.m s ) went with the proven track record and the perks that come with it ...they had plenty of leverage in those negotiations they were not forced to buy only intel they chose to buy only intel text/html 2005-09-09T16:08:52-05:00 DublinGunner http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/?o=20#321777 Joining this a little late Jim!!!<br /> <br /> <br /> but you see, thats the whole point, Intel were (are) supposedly using dirty tactics to keep companies like <a target="_blank" href="/action/r/http://www.dell.com/">Dell</a> selling only their products. Not <a target="_blank" href="/action/r/http://www.dell.com/">Dell</a> or anyones 'choice'. Its anti-competitive, suppressive and illegal. text/html 2005-09-09T15:58:59-05:00 jim private http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/?o=20#321775 dell is a intel vendor like my local ford dealer is a ford vendor ...he receives pay for advertising training and customer support he agrees to only sell ford and not offer any competing brands that,s life ford doesn't own dealerships they are owned by companys and individuals who shop the manufacturers and srike deals the same way . if a company choses to only sell 1 brand that is completely legal. i could argue that honda makes a better cheaper more reliable vehicle but he is exclude by contract from selling them ..see my point?<br /> text/html 2005-07-04T08:33:14-05:00 OCGW http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#295544 Intel is the 800lb Gorilla<br /> <br /> OCGW<br /> <br /> PEACE text/html 2005-07-04T06:18:22-05:00 Orange Juice http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#295520 Hmmm... Intel forcing AMD down on it's knees isn't by far Intel's struggle for survival... Is Intel 'scared' about competition? Or he's just thinking ahead like MS...<br /> Just a hypothesis..how can you be 100% sure of your market share? By elliminating competition. And how can you be sure of doing it? Maybe weakening it just enough that it wouldn't fight a takeover? <br /> That would be a BIG blow.. And we've seen that happen a few times..(not at this level..ofcourse)<br /> But hey...it's just my imagination... <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile4.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=";)" title=";)"> <br /> text/html 2005-07-02T01:08:28-05:00 OCGW http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294686 Thx Josh<br /> <br /> OC<br /> <br /> PEACE text/html 2005-07-02T01:07:08-05:00 Josh http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294684 &quot;....That is how big companies unfairly stop little companies from competing &amp; stifle progress&quot;<br /> Good point, I didn't think about that. text/html 2005-07-02T00:58:46-05:00 OCGW http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294680 Anybody can reduce prices all they want, they can give them away for free if they want to<br /> <br /> What they CANNOT do legally is tell <a target="_blank" href="/action/r/http://www.dell.com/">Dell</a> that they will not fill their cpu orders if they give consumers a choice &amp; market AMD based PC's<br /> <br /> OCGW<br /> <br /> PEACE text/html 2005-07-02T00:45:27-05:00 A_Pickle http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294671 You know, it's funny.<br /> <br /> Of course AMD wouldn't mind being in Intel's shoes, and with respect, the Athlon 64 is a good processor, it's not the better product when a lil' 3.0 GHz Pentium 4 can whoop up on an Athlon 64 3800+. <br /> <br /> It bothers me to see Intel having done what they did, which unfortunately seems to be a characteristic of large corporations. It is a sad truth that corporations can have great power, but seldom if ever do they wield that power responsibly. It is also a truth, however that Advanced Micro Devices is by no means a weak corporation. In relation to their biggest competitor, they are not a threat, but in that they are the balance between absolute domination of the microprocessor market, they are not weak.<br /> <br /> The accusation that Intel is reducing CPU prices for large PC distributors solely to shut AMD out of that market is undeniably true. Welcome to the world of business. AMD seems to always have the low prices at <a class="ext" href="/action/r/http://www.newegg.com/" target="_blank">http://www.newegg.com/</a> or other direct computing dealerships, why then are they troubled with Intel's discounts? Why does it matter where the discounts go, be them to <a target="_blank" href="/action/r/http://www.dell.com/">Dell</a> or Frank Johnson? Seems to me Intel's move to give discounts to large computer distributors would be an honest and smart business move. According to AMD, it's all against them and therefore deserving of the law stick.<br /> <br /> I don't think Intel is innocent, but I don't think AMD is either. Trouble is, AMD has keenly watched for Intel to slip up. Intel wouldn't keenly watch AMD because a lawsuit against AMD would be needlessly expensive and wouldn't do anything except p**s off the world. AMD, however, being the little guy can slip up, hide it, watch Intel slip up and glide into the courthouse appearing like the harbinger of justice upon the Evil Empire of Intel.<br /> <br /> Intel isn't innocent. But AMD has easily done their fair share of burning documents. text/html 2005-07-01T23:21:50-05:00 OCGW http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294642 It is illegal under US comerce law for a company to say they will not sell you a product if you also buy from a competitor<br /> <br /> That is how big companies unfairly stop little companies from competing &amp; stifle progress<br /> <br /> It is also illegal around the world in Japan, &amp; in Europe, Microsoft was fined 100millionESD, or Euro for forcing ppl to buy IE w/ windows<br /> <br /> They have been given a cease &amp; disist order in the US<br /> <br /> &amp; in Japan the Intel Corporate offices were raided by police, &amp; evidence seized<br /> <br /> Once criminal proceedings are initiated against a company, the damaged parties have much more &quot;leverage&quot; to bargain w/<br /> <br /> OCGW<br /> <br /> PEACE text/html 2005-07-01T22:29:36-05:00 Josh http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294618 Intel is not really forcing a company to take their product (unless they have a contract), are they? If not, I don't see what the problem is. What law is that breaking? text/html 2005-07-01T22:13:49-05:00 OCGW http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294602 Right or wrong is ethics<br /> <br /> What Intel did was beak the law, they committed a crime<br /> <br /> Anti trust laws were written for a reason, so that ppl, &amp; companies would have the right to chose what they want, rather than be forced take what is given them<br /> <br /> I believe in a Computer OEM's right to chose LOL<br /> <br /> OCGW<br /> <br /> PEACE text/html 2005-07-01T21:33:04-05:00 Josh http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294573 As much as I hate to say it, I don't think what Intel did was wrong. I mean, every company in the world is trying to sell more products then their competitors. We live in a Democracy (those of us that live in the US). The government does that to other countries (have you heard of tariffs?). Like what was said before, making them stop doing that would be a commmunistic kind of thing.<br /> I do hope AMD wins it, though. text/html 2005-07-01T21:06:34-05:00 OCGW http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/45573/#294566 What we have is a free market<br /> <br /> Intel conspired illegally to control the market thru extorsion<br /> <br /> OCGW<br /> <br /> PEACE