AMD is the most infuriating company imaginable.
If Intel is the big dog of the chip world, AMD is the little dog jumping around it, nipping at its heels, acting like it (not Chipzilla) owns the street.
Its latest legal assault may be its dumbest move yet.
Strictly from a timing standpoint, it sucks.
This Administration does not look kindly at anti-trust claims. They settled with Microsoft, they gave the cables and Bells a duopoly (leaving America a third-world broadband country), and they seem content to let China monopolize world trade while India gains control of services. All this is in pursuit of an ideology that becomes less-and-less distinguishable from Putinism and Kleptocracy by the day.
Short form. If they had a case they should have filed it in Europe.
Second, the chip market is competitive, and AMD proves it. Its chips are fine, it's making inroads. Its biggest problem is it's supply-constrained, and Moore's Second Law means it will take billions and billions of dollars to make up the gap. That's why Apple went with Intel -- Intel can supply the whole market and AMD can't.
Third, this is a huge distraction. It's typical of AMD to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, has been ever since Jerry Sanders (and friends) founded it over 35 years ago.
What AMD will find is aggressive tactics by a market leader in a competitive market. It will spin this as evidence of monopoly and maybe, if it forum shops carefully, it will get a hearing. But it will never get a result.
Moore's Second Law means the costs of a legal offensive are not material on the cost structure of the overall company, so I guess they can afford it. I just wish they would do something useful.
Like sell-off to Dell.
Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for over 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the "Interactive Age Daily" for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age, and dozens of other publications over the years.
1. Nate on June 29, 2005 06:32 PM writes...
I'm not sure about this Dana. I have the feeling that this is case is going to be really ugly for a really long time. I am immediately reminded of the recent anti-trust judgements against Micron and Hynix (and I forget who else), but maybe that's a totally different kind of situation, involving as it does a raft of foreign companies instead of a home-grown brute like Intel.
I think Intel is a very dirty company, and I am betting on discovery to turn up a lot of ugly things. And you're right, the effort may prove fuitless in the U.S., but it's a good bet that AMD will pursue this in other, much friendlier nations as well. I think AMD has been waiting for years to start this fight, compiling evidence, securing witnesses. This is D-day for them.
I also wonder if this lawsuit might create some it's own momentum; if what AMD says is true, there could be a lot of computer makers resentful of their coerced ties to Intel. The scrutiny of Intel produced by this case may make these companies feel safe enough to challenge those ties, or at least be very cooperative with AMD's lawyers. Even if AMD itself isn't a huge threat legally, a gang of little ankle-biting dogs could be real painful for Intel.
Permalink to Comment