Xref: utzoo comp.arch:19198 sci.econ:2030
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!sdd.hp.com!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!mozart.amd.com!cayman!brett
From: brett@cayman.amd.com (Brett Stewart)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,sci.econ
Subject: Re: Intel bugs / bugged by Intel :-(
Keywords: Monopolist, profit, cost, revenue, price, 386
Message-ID: <1990Nov12.171755.19378@mozart.amd.com>
Date: 12 Nov 90 17:17:55 GMT
References: <8527@scolex.sco.COM> <1990Nov7.184237.22840@mozart.amd.com> <595@pdxgate.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@mozart.amd.com (Usenet News)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., Austin, Texas
Lines: 21

In article <595@pdxgate.UUCP> chedley@eecs.UUCP (Chedley A. Aouriri) writes:
>So, regardless of the contractual legalities, INTEL does have a point in 
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>refusing to share the spoils of its R&D outlays and risks with another 
>company who did not contribute a dime to the R&D costs of the 386.

Are you saying they didnt make an agreement with AMD?  Or that they didnt
break it?  Neither position is an informed one.

Interesting point.  I have always thought that rule of law and
sanctity of contracts were foundations of our society.

I think you might have misunderstood me;  I think it is deplorable
that they made an agreement then broke it to exploit others.  I do
not think it is deplorable that they are trying to be monopolists,
since every company that sells a differentiated product is trying to
do that.
Best Regards; Brett Stewart
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.           1-512-462-5321  FAX
5900 E. Ben White Blvd MS561           1-512-462-4336  Telephone
Austin, Texas 78741      USA           brett@cayman.amd.com