Xref: utzoo comp.sys.intel:1461 comp.arch:19021
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!amdcad!brahms!phil
From: phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.arch
Subject: Re: Intel bugs / bugged by Intel :-(
Message-ID: <1990Nov5.165417.15870@amd.com>
Date: 5 Nov 90 16:54:17 GMT
References: <1990Oct30.210042.14836@mozart.amd.com> <35420@cup.portal.com> <380S02pf039A01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
Sender: usenet@amd.com (NNTP Posting)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc; Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 33

In article <380S02pf039A01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (PUT YOUR NAME HERE) writes:
|>Perhaps if AMD would develop some original products of its own that could
|>generate the revenue that the "second-sourced" and cloned Intel parts do,
|>then poor AMD wouldn't have to worry about the "deplorable" actions of 
|>Intel.
|>
|>These are my opinions, not Intel's.
|>
|>Brad Anders
|
|I don't work for either company but, I think that what Intel did sucks big
|time!!!!!   If someone signed an agreement with me and then when stuff
|got real profitable they said "I'm keeping everything; and for you tough
|shit."   I would be pissed as hell and rightly so!!!

I have the entire text of the arbitrator's decision and it's pretty
clear he feels the same way. That's probably why Intel went to court
to try to get him removed after they saw what he wrote.

|When Intel needed AMD everything was fine but when Intel started getting
|more profits and the majority of computers were using Intel products, they
|decided "We got em' locked in now forget second sourcing."

According to the arbitrator, Intel actually decided a long time ago
to deny new designs to AMD but to keep holding out the promise of
continued second sourcing so that AMD would not do chips for other
processors like the 68K family. You could say they wanted to have
their cake and eat it too.

(I speak for no one but myself.)

--
I voted. Did you?