It is healthy competition, but it doesn't bare down too well with those that aren't in line with that company. I have an AMD, so I am peanalised and only allowed to have 5 people in conference.

I have no problem with applications beeing optimised for intel or AMD.
i believe windows is optimised for intel, as intel has been more widely used.

i also have no problem with companys striking promotion deals with each other.

But this deal is about Skype delibratly crippleing itself if you didnt buy intel.

For all of you who say this type of comeptition is fine, and does not harm technology, i ask you..

What if Microsoft decided to change MS windows, so that it never allowed processor useage to rise above 10 % on AMD and Intel chips, and refused to do hardware accelerated graphics with ATI and NVIdia cards.

and only worked properly with WinChip processors, and SiS intergrated graphics.

(okay, i know this is overkill, but im making a point)

The advanced technology or AMD and Intel would die, in favor of vastly inferior WinChip.
same with Nvidia and ATI.

Competition is heathy, it improves technology.

This is cheating... its like when all the losers in a monopoly game gang up on the winner, and smacks him/her over the head with the board, and shove hotels up his/her nose.

maybe im too much of an idealist.

I'm not saying its "good" I'm saying its perfectly understanable. Actually I almost respect them for thinking of it haha, its underhanded sure but it gets the point accross...

and how is this 'losers' of a monopoly? Intel isn't exactly hurtin in sales even though amd has a lead in desktop chips (far as I heard)... neither have a monopoly. :|

I never knew that, I'm using Intel Pentium anyways, so there's no difference for me.

xboxrulz

LMAO ... that's a good analogy... "Oh, so you're winning eh? Take that <POW>!"



That would be great as well. Nothing would work on the system.

This is pretty much the same thing with the whole AMD/Intel thing... Intel was paying computer companies big bucks to use its processors (aka, unfair competition) which resulted in a law suit.

This is why I despise Intel a lot. It is unfair business.. and hurts the economy.

Anyway, Intel knows AMD processors preform better and are better so they want to hurt AMD as much as possible... how? BIG PAYOFFS! If you were a company (software or computer) and Intel offered you, oh $70 Million or more a year if you support them and if you even support AMD, you'd lose the contract and the cash? I sure would support Intel!

That's how it works (of course, there could be billions involved, but same idea)

[N]F

I don't see how this is so shocking to you people. Cola companies bid to have exclusive rights for companies to sell only their product... mcdonalds sells only coke because thats who offered to give them the best deals. Is it unfair business because they offered a service for less? How is offering a service for less any dif then paying then to use their stuff... either way its saving money. Again I don't think its the nicest possible business practice but it's not like they're doing anything that out of the ordinary, you're just not used to seeing it in tech companies.

Then again you sort of do... many times big comp retailers will sell only ati or nvidia boards in their systems... I'm sure its not ONLY because their employees prefer one over the other. Don't you think they are given incentives? That's how the business world works, better start accepting it now

I think that they simply do the first test on their partner's hardware, check that everything works fine, and after that, if they have enough time they do correctly the job for the other hardware devices ; if they are in a hurry, they do a "quick and dirty" job, and it works slitly less fine.