Nvidia accuses Intel of unfair pricing

[Manao]

Competition does NOT mean better productsIndeed. But competition increases the likelihood of having better products, faster. Without AMD's competition, I don't think we would have core i7 right now. And it is interesting to draw a parallel between the insane pace of CPU evolution these last few years and windows' (lack of) innovation in the same period. Or, on a smaller scale, internet explorer revival once firefox began to gain more and more market shares.

[Sharktooth]

The Phenom processor was a disappointment coz AMD was in financial troubles due to the acquisition of ATI but even more coz of Intel anticompetitive practices (proven by Japan FTC, Korea FTC, EU antritrust commission, etc) and needed to push the Phenom release when it was not ready for debut.
Phenom II is a much more appetible CPU since it is finally a competitive and performing product.
But, again, most of the AMD financial troubles were caused by Intel and its unfair practices. Intel was fined for VIOLATING the FAIR TRADING laws in several countries AND you cant deny that unless you LIE on purpouse.

[Sharktooth]

some usefull news on the netbooks (just to confirm the anti-competitivness of intel):
asus is planning new 11,6" atom based netbooks. they will cost more since the user will be forced to buy a full licence of windows due to the Intel-MS mafia.
qualcomm presented the snapdragon platform to compete with atom/GMA platform. they are able to play back 720p videos without problems despite the 1Ghz CPU. Asus (which will sport qualcomm based products) chosen google Android as OS due to some unspecified licensing restrictions...
Asus, Lenovo and Acer are prepearing products based on the ION platform that will cost more coz of Atom processor licensing scheme where a CPU+Chipset from Intel will cost much less than the CPU alone ***AND*** CPUs without chipsets supplies are not guaranteed.

[kypec]

I fully agree with you, Sharktooth. Anyway, I'm starting to wonder what prevents those manufacturers to order and buy Atom+Chipset packages from Intel with lower pricing and then just throw away the chipsets and mount bare Atoms with Ion chipsets from Nvidia? Would they violate some other agreements by doing that? Apart from lots of material being thrown away I don't see a reason why they couldn't do it like this...

[Sharktooth]

Once they buy a product, I think they have some sort of agreements binding them to sell certain products.
Furnitures of those products are between manufacturers, so intel would first sell their products to those who can guarantee the best for them. it's a monopoly...