Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Blog

Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel

Blog
5/14/2009 01:00 PM EDT

 17 comments   post a comment
NO RATINGS
View Comments: Threaded | Newest First | Oldest First
TheColin
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
TheColin   5/14/2009 3:45:07 PM
NO RATINGS
"Lets be frank." You are assigning guilt before even having read the 542 page document you mention in your opinion piece. You also claim that Intel is a monopolist "with business practices that one would be polite in calling aggressive." Wow. That is brilliant, Sherlock. With opinions that strong, you must be sitting on a mountain of evidence. Either that or you are just hoping that using strong language and shouting it from the rooftop is going to make people believe that what you are saying is true. The fact is, you don't have any more proof or evidence that the rest of the world. Your opinions on this matter are laced with half truths, pseudo-facts and blatant fabrications. But hey, if it supports your opinion then it is fit to print, right?

Mr. FA
User Rank
Freelancer
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
Mr. FA   5/14/2009 4:21:29 PM
NO RATINGS
Intel (and many people ^) are arrogant enough to think they've done no wrong. Bottom line, Intel has been cheating to lock it's monopoly into position. It was pretty clear when Intel was beaten 7 years ago with the inferior P4 architecture and AMD steamrolled them with the Athlon 64 architecture that something was going on. It was all too bizarre that the number 1 pc maker in the world refused to sell the superior product. That my friends is a lack of choice for the consumer, driven by Intel's anti competitive practices of paying companies to not use competitors products. They will not win any of these so called "appeals" - pure delay tactic.

specee
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
specee   5/14/2009 6:11:41 PM
NO RATINGS
All will be forgiven, if Intel, like AMD did, promises to set up a fab in germany or korea or wherever and creates jobs. How pathetic the EU is, and btw, this article is sooo blatantly anti-intel, the author should be ashamed to call himself a journalist

Semiconductor Design Engineer
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
Semiconductor Design Engineer   5/14/2009 6:44:47 PM
NO RATINGS
Wooo, this article upset a couple of intel fan boys. Let's face it, unfortunately, I don't think the technology sector is immune to the kind of shenanigans our Wall Street financial/insurance industries are in the spot light for these days. After all, they have two things in common: human beings and money.

Stillwater0
User Rank
Apprentice
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
Stillwater0   5/14/2009 7:08:19 PM
NO RATINGS
Intel is a monopoly. Monopolies are bad because they overcharge consumers. But Intel has a competitor, so how can they be a monopoly? Because they charge less than AMD can charge to get market share. For this reason the EU wants Intel to charge more than AMD. So how does this benefit consumers and how does it make Intel a monopoly?

Mr. FA
User Rank
Freelancer
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
Mr. FA   5/14/2009 7:51:59 PM
NO RATINGS
Stillwater, Intel is not a monopoly because they charge less than AMD, and the EU is not asking them to charge more for their products. Intel is a monopoly because they force customers into agreements which exclude the customer from selling more than X amount of components and/or computers based on AMD products. Thus AMD can't gain market share no matter how good their product is. You should really read up the issue. It isn't just the EU, Intel has faced and been found guilty of the same behavior in Japan and South Korea, and it'll soon happen in the US as well.

gutieaphd
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
gutieaphd   5/14/2009 10:08:27 PM
NO RATINGS
I find this EU fine against Intel biased, anti-competitive and an attack to the entire global free trade system. The European Union has, starting in the mid 1990s, engaged massive subsidies to artificially develop the so called ?Silicon Saxony? around Dresden, Germany; an artificial economic development project that is now floundering as most EU and German "investments" of taxpayer money in AMD, Quimonda, Infineon and others are becoming massive and quasi-permanent corporate welfare programs. Just yesterday, those subsidies where once again implicitly extended through the ?Cool Silicon? initiative for Silicon Saxony; perhaps this is the way that our industry will look as Moore?s Law fades away, full of subsidies, overwhelmed by the Law of Diminishing Returns and with government intervening everywhere. AMD (and its newly created spinoff Globalfoundries) has, over the past 10 years, received nearly $3 billion in ?public incentives? from the EU; and a similar amount from the German government and the state of Saxony; and delivered nothing but massive operating losses for the last 11 consecutive quarters, that now exceed $7 billion. Predictably, AMD and Globalfoundries are facing imminent exhaustion of EU subsidies, and are now actively looking to exploit taxpayers elsewhere through similar ?regional development? models based on dysfunctional corporate welfare programs masked as private-public partnerships. (Recently, NY State granted a $1.2 billion in subsidies to AMD and Globalfoundries to partially fund Globalfoundries? Fab 2 in Malta, NY. Just the beginning a long string of public subsidies to companies that simply can?t compete in the marketplace.) It is no surprise that, as Germany and the EU increasingly accept the failure of their "job creating" subsidies in Saxony, the EU Commission accelerated the issuance of fines against Intel because of, according to the EU Commission, Intel has engaged in business practices that in the US are standard operating procedures among most corporations, most of them revolving around manufacturers? incentives, selective rebates, volume discounts and other more or less standard volume pricing practices. Essentially, Intel is accused of practices that is unclear resulted in damage to EU consumers, and quite the contrary, EU consumers received quantifiable benefits through significant product savings; much of those savings subsidized by Intel for the benefit of EU consumers. The EU decision explicitly indicates that citizens of the EU member countries have been hurt by Intel?s business practices; when in reality EU politicians, for nearly 10 years have been hurting their own citizens by dilapidating taxpayers resources in failed corporate welfare programs such as those supporting Silicon Saxony. Ironically, AMD and Globalfoundries, as disclosed in their last 10-Q filing for the quarter ending in March 2009, are engaged in a pricing practice that could just as easily be construed as ?intersegment price dumping? if this practice were to continue following the complete separation of the two companies since one is primarily located in the EU and the other in the US. AMD?s 10Q Filing for Q1?09 shows in ?#6 Segment Reporting? that out of $938M of AMD?s Revenue related to MPUs (Processors), only $283M are being allocated to wafer purchasing from Globalfoundries, which in turn sustains a NET OPERATING LOSS of $298M. Simply said, the price of the wafers being sold by Globalfoundries to AMD is being discounted by at least 50% from real production cost; or that the price per wafer being sold to AMD should be at least double in order to recoup production costs and close Globalfoundries' operating deficit. This decision of the EU is not only an unfair attack on Intel success, but on the entire global free trade system, and an unprecedented act of government meddling in perfectly legal private transactions between willing business partners; the anti-trust action is being enforced for the sole purpose of elevating EU protectionist barriers through the use of subsidies, regionally biased legislation and selective use of anti-trust legislation to promote and protect a failed corporation (AMD and Globalfoundries). These two companies, AMD and Globalfoundries, have elevated to new heights and on a global scale out-of-control lobbying of elected government officers by encouraging the dilapidation of public resources, by systematically creating quasi-conflict of interests involving public servants, by manipulating the media, and even by involving investors whose only qualification is having abundant petro-dollars; all of these practices for the purpose of competing against Intel, a company that has shown superb entrepreneurial execution since its founding, constantly innovating ahead of the competition by boldly extending Gordon Moore?s law, and diligently competing primarily in the marketplace instead of through obscure lobbying of public servants. Intel should appeal this decision not only because is abusive and excessive, but because the future of the global business enterprise based on free trade practices is increasingly in danger, as so many aspects of the anti-trust decision of the EU Commission against Intel clearly exemplify.

Sean Raman
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
Sean Raman   5/14/2009 10:12:22 PM
NO RATINGS
'TheColin' is either blissfully ignorant or a part of Intel's PR team. Obviously, you are sitting on a ton of evidence that clearly demonstrates Intel is completely free of ANY wrong doing. I have personally worked with many retailers in the last 20 years who chose Intel for reasons 'financial' reasons and I have always thought AMD was not getting its fair shake. Intel is not the only company. Microsoft, Oracle, and many others in a similar powerful position ALL do the same thing.

Semiconductor Design Engineer
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
Semiconductor Design Engineer   5/15/2009 2:06:47 PM
NO RATINGS
gutiea/CTO Well, I guess your not CTO at AMD - huh? I've seen State (NM, OR, AZ, etc.) and Local governments across this nation throw millions and millions of tax incentives, elimination of construction fees, etc., etc., etc. over the decades at Intel. The picture is not so clear as you try to paint. If I for one (if living in the EU) would not mind a few of my tax dollars going to ensure a level playing field in the microprocessor market. Despite how Intel gained it's success, via marketing prowess, solid engineering, good execution, strong arm tactics, some luck, or combination of all the above. It doesn't really matter to me, it's kind of like racism in a sense (yea this is a stretch :-). Despite all the good unbiased majority of upper middle class from European heritage we have here in the US, there's a few bad seeds who might take advantage of minorities. So, we have equal opportunity laws in place to protect the minority. I may not like that solution, but understand the need and cant think of a better one at this time.

specee
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
specee   5/15/2009 4:46:17 PM
NO RATINGS
Semiconductor Design Engineer Senior Design Engineer What a bunch of twisted socialist nonsense. By your definition of "racism", it behooves all successful businesses in every indsutry to protect every failing business in their field, or face being charged with "racism". you are truly confused between money and ethics. EU is weak industrially, and using really lame methods to justify its socialism, to cripple healthy US businesses. Perhaps Google is being spared because of the founders origins, or they would be next - "showing raacism by not helping yahoo get its fair share of search ads" ?

rick merritt
User Rank
Author
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
rick merritt   5/15/2009 5:07:49 PM
NO RATINGS
I am interested in real life experiences where Intel or any chip maker used hardball tactics such as those described by MiguelS. This is the kind of bad behavior that only gets addressed when someone has the courage to go public about it.

Semiconductor Design Engineer
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
Semiconductor Design Engineer   5/15/2009 7:43:04 PM
NO RATINGS
I'm vehemently against TARP bailouts and vehemently against the millions I see in tax breaks, etc. I've seen go to Intel. So - politically I'm not sure where that puts one. Perhaps it's just being in this industry for many decades and seeing the questionable tactics Intel employs that elicited such a poor analogy. -- Mao Z. ;-}

whysman
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
whysman   5/20/2009 11:46:54 PM
NO RATINGS
What amazes me is that people in this industry still don't understand how Intel has sold their product for decades. My group was working on a small telephone based product years ago. We liked the Motorola MC68008 better, but for other reasons (mainly software) we had to use the Intel 8088. All we needed was the microprocessor -- we had our own version of the other support chips. We were told that "Golly, we don't have any processors to sell separately, but if you buy the whole set you can have all you want." We really resented being forced to buy parts we didn't need. And it was even more repulsive to an engineer because their "companion chips" didn't even interface to each other correctly. I think the biggest offender was the i8257 in that regard. Bottom line is that Intel was out to sell parts and they would employ whatever tactic was necessary whether it was ethical or not.

Semiconductor Design Engineer
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
Semiconductor Design Engineer   5/21/2009 2:54:25 AM
NO RATINGS
Their doing the same thing with graphics chip sets. The most recent example is the atom priced separately costs WAY more then if you by atom with 945G memory controller and crappy graphics controller. It's a real shame to engineers and the end consumer.

specee
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
specee   5/22/2009 6:32:46 PM
NO RATINGS
thats business: "you want fries with that"? type of business. A yr ago, when nintendo wii was "2-3" per store, walmart insisted we buy the wii + 2-4 games combo for total cost much higher than the wii itself. I didnt like it, and didnt buy it. I didn't think it was illegal or that Walmart should pay a billion dollars fine for it.

ee_joe
User Rank
Rookie
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
ee_joe   5/27/2009 9:53:41 PM
NO RATINGS
Editors, I agree that companies must do business with integrity. But maybe you are not as bright as you think you are. Who will pay for the fine of billions on Intel? Consumers will. Why should you care which day of the month rebate money is paid? Do you want to micromanage someone's activities to that degree? The only thing that will come out of the Eurocrat fine is higher consumer prices for chips and more attempt at regulation. That is the very reason Europe's chip industry lags. EE and Free Market Advocate

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Blogger
re: Opinion: Setting the record straight on Intel
junko.yoshida   5/28/2009 12:48:06 PM
NO RATINGS
Do we think we are so smart? Not really. But we don't think we are so naive, either. The consumer pays for everything any corporation does. When the corporation operates legally, the consumer pays for legitimate operations, like buying materials, marketing, advertising, wages, etc. When the corporation violates regulatory standards and breaks the law and gets caught, followed by huge fines, then the consumer pays more, for illegal acts. The guys who perpetrated the illegalities don't have to come up with the fines, do they? The only way to spare the consumer every single corporate cost of doing business is to separate the legal from the illegal and take the illegal costs directly from the CEO's felonious hide. What are the odds of that?

Flash Poll
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week