Replying to AMD Strikes Back Against Intel

maybe its really their decision. I mean they think that intel have meet their expectation or
on the other hand maybe they have a contract of something like if they promote intel, intel
would in return promote skype. that vice versa thing though they really are doing damage to
AMD but hey its the users last choice that would count. a lot of users now would be knowledgable
enough to make the right decision

Its just like Oracle and Linux...Oracle made it clear that its red hat linux that would make oracle
unbreakable. they could just say linux so other linux would be included but no they intentionaly
stated red hat. because they have a partnership with red hat

It seems some people have managed to trick skype into running in 10 persom mode on an AMD processor.

So the claims about performace areofficially a blatant lie.

James_K

This is what we as consumers want, we want AMD and Intel to compete with eachother so that us, the consumers get a bettr product.

but anti-competative behaviour like this, crippleing software on opponenst hardware does not promote competition.

What if a local car company built their cars in such a way that the car knew what make of tyers you were using, and if you were using a competitors tyers, the gearbox locked out 4th and 5th gear.

forcing you to drive at moter-way speeds in 3rd gear.. destroying fuel efficiancy, costing you much more.

when in-fact, the competitors tyres may be better products, that last longer, give greater traction and stopping distances, perhaps saving lives in emergancies...

the competitor would go out of buisness, even though it had created a far superiror product.

I think the war between the two chip companies is rediculous I mean I think when were old and grey this will still be going on it's never ending there will always be AMD fans and INTEL fans me I dont care a processor is a processor I want the AMD for it's 64 powerful overclocking freatures and I want the intel for it's cool and quite features an know both intel and amd have made there version of the chip to compete with the strengths of the two companies but in a way we should be happy that this is happening if INTEL or AMD were the ONLY chipmakers of the whole word they would have control of the whole monopoly I mean think about it then they can make what ever they want when ever they want and put what ever price tag they want since they are the only suppliers at least this way the two companies are at each other's throats and we are benefiting with the faster and more powerful make of processors and chips and the competeing price trying to lure you to buy this or that product rather then their's "same feature" expensive product in a way we all should be amd AND intel fans same with ati and n'vidia but that's another argument

Let's just say Intel and AMD are 2 religions. And people have the freedom to choose whichever faith they wish to follow. Even though it's a very small thing (after how many people require 10 people conferencing?), it's a beginning.

*cough*payoff*cough* lol

I've YET to see a Dell PC come off the assembly line with an AMD CPU installed in it, same with an HP, Gateway, and NEC back in the day. If Intel was to pay you to support them over the competition, heck I'd take the offer! So why can't other companies other than OEMs get benefits of Intel payoffs? I DON'T support this kind of business since it is VERY wrong, but if a few million bucks is sitting on the table, I'd take it just like anyone else.

[N]F

LOL to true about the benchmark point but I could give you a bench mark showing you that Windows XP runs best on an old 486 Cyrix based machine. The whole problem with this Skype/Intel/AMD issue is that Intel paid Skype to say that their product works best on Intel chips and then use the GetCPUID call to make the program work at 50% on an AMD chip.

The problem with this is that there is no proof that the program works better on one chip vs the other just the fact that Intel paid for the option to have the program work better on their processor and then have the company make it sound like the intel chip is better....this is not only dirty but in some ways could be concidered as illegal due to it being false advertising. If AMD can prove that their was false advertising then they win, the problem with raising false advertising charges is that AMD has to prove that there was intent behind the advertising and that there is no proof of fact.

Haha yea, but then again lieing isn't exactly new in the corporate world either Nor is false advertising. Officially though I'm sure they could get benchmarks showing skype being more efficient on intel chips... just harass the code so that it used some random miniscule feature that intel does way better or something. Be fun to watch how this one turns out.

The explanation was retarded, that is a given, but the actual core reason behind people caring (Skype giving Intel the adge) is perfectly valid. Company A gives Company B money, Company B favors Company A in the agreed upon ways of their monetary based partnership. It happens in all industries... just to greater or lesser extents.

Agreed. The problem only starts when the buggers start giving lame excuses like "You'll get gastroenteritis if you drink Pepsi with a McDonald's burger, but you grow taller with a Coke and Burger combo" .

ab, I'll agree that AMD is weell within their rights to ask proof of Skype/INtel's stupid logic that the software performance is noticeably better on Intel then AMD chips.

I mean you go to buy food at McDonalds, they don't necessarily warn you "YOU CANNOT BUY PEPSI PRODUCTS HERE" prior to ordering but then... once you get the the counter only Coke is offered. Sure it's great for Coke fans like me but another, as a Pepsi lover, may think it's similar to apartheid

The explanation was retarded, that is a given, but the actual core reason behind people caring (Skype giving Intel the adge) is perfectly valid. Company A gives Company B money, Company B favors Company A in the agreed upon ways of their monetary based partnership. It happens in all industries... just to greater or lesser extents.

I think that Intel should've used whatever resources it used as an insentive to skype on building some better processors. It is obvious that AMD processors are more than good enough to handle a 10 person conference call. I don't think Intel should be doing this and trying to damage AMD's reputation. That being said I can't say that i wouldn't try to do the same thing if i was in their position.

And unfortunately abhiram this is nothing like reacial discrimination or apartheid, one for the obvious reasons we are dealing with inanimate objects and because it is perfectly legal in business law as stated above as joint marketing which again i point out has been going on for some time, probably just not to this extent.

Well, let's just take a hypothetical case then. Say there are two hypothetical brands of Jeans ... Lee and Levi. Let's say the telephone company has a new technology which let's them know which brand of clothing any subscriber is wearing whenever they make a phone call.

Now, Lee enters into a deal with the telephone company (secretly of course!) telling them not to allow people wearing Levi make Long-distance phone calls for more than 5 minutes at a time whereas subscribers wearing Lee can make Long-distance phone calls for upto 10 minutes at a time. In exchange, Lee offers discounted Jeans to all the employees of the telephone company.

Now ... when subscribers wearing Levi Jeans call up the phone company and ask them why they're being allowed only 5 minutes, the company tells them, "Sir, Lee Jeans are much superior to Levi when you are using the phone. I am afraid we cannot allow you to call long-distance for more than 5 min at a time for the safety of your <insert name of vital part of human anatomy here>" ... instead of just saying that they've entered into a deal with Lee and that is why subscribers wearing Lee Jeans get extra benefits.

I would say Levi jeans is perfectly right to demand proof about the validity of their statement. That's exactly what AMD is doing here ... asking them to prove that AMD does not perform well with Skype.

Joint marketing is fine ... but why not be open about it? You don't have to deal with brown envelopes. Intel and Skype could have had an open announcement saying that they've entered into a deal and Intel has asked Skype to grant extra features (10 people conferencing) for all users that use Intel. The normal features will be available to AMD users (5 people conferencing).

Besides, it's a bloody chat service! Not a resource-hungry-cpu-cycle-eater! How bad can AMD fare with that?