22 Sep 2009
Intel president Paul Otellini has rubbished the evidence presented by the European Commission (EC) about alleged anti-competitive practices by his company.
This week, the EC released documents that it says shows computer manufacturers held off from using AMD processors under pressure or following incentives from Intel. But Otellini denied categorically that this was the case.
“No, that's not the case,” he said when questioned on the issue.
“We don't do exclusive deals and when our time comes we will show that. The EC can release evidence early, something we cannot do.”
The EC says that it has letters from companies such as Dell, HP and Lenovo that show the companies were either induced to use Intel technology by volume discounts or held off on switching to AMD technology for fear of reprisals.
Dell said that it feared any retaliation from Intel if it switched to AMD chips “could be severe and prolonged with impact to all LOBs [Lines of Business]”.
“There is nothing new in yesterday's revelations,” Otellini said.
"The EC has consistently ignored information and we have customers who are willing to state that that was wrong.”
However, AMD said that the evidence was damning and proved its case that Intel was putting pressure on OEMs to only use Intel hardware.
"The EU evidence was a validation of what we've been saying for years," said Patrick Moorhead, vice president of advanced marketing at AMD.
"Intel uses monopolistic power to coerce customers in the channel. Intel's now zero for three; it hasn't won a single antitrust case worldwide."
Latest stories from Skills
Related videos
Related articles
Related jobs
Poll
Are you confident that the UK's IT infrastructure is secure from attack in the wake of the Flame malware revelations?
Orange and Intel talk us through the ins and outs of their San Diego smartphone
Connect with V3.co.uk
The wrong printers, for the wrong tasks on the wrong contracts
Who leads the BI pack and who should we be watching out for?
Working within the central Service Desk Team of a well...
GIS Applications Engineer - circa £35k Excellent opportunity...
Senior C++ Developer x 2 - Senior C++ Software Engineer...
We are actively searching for Information security specialists...
Keep up to date with the latest products, services and technologies from the world's leading IT companies. IThound.com brings you over 2,000 white papers, case studies and analyst reports.
Do you agree?
Otellini is just full of "bliss"
Maybe you came in on the tail end of this criminal activity as I still think it violates the Ricoh Act, much less SEC and FTC regulations. Face it Paul, when you give Michael Dell an under the counter $1B/year to not use AMD CPUs over and beyond the legitimate OEM earned advertising dolars and volume discounts then that is a combination of extortion, payola, violation of the Ricoh Act and many more CRIMINAL activities. This payola was "hush-hush" and part of the agreement of getting it was that it not be reported to the SEC. Just pay the fines to the EU and be ready for many many more litigation. It would only be fair to make those companies that accepted the extorted bribe give all of the "under the counter" money to AMD for the losses thay incured when they had a much better product than that POS Pentium 4. If I were the board you'd be serving hamburgers at McDonalds.
Posted by: FD Texas 26 Sep 2009
Otellini, the lie is up! Fess up!
Wow, Otellini, that nose of yours is starting to look miiiiighty long! The evidence is obvious. Intel and Otellini cheated, BIG TIME. Perhaps Otellini can come up with a few purchase orders/contracts that indicate no exclusionary clauses. However, EVERYONE IN AMERICA knows now that Intel went out of its way to make those exclusionary clauses verbal. "You are going to order 95% of your processors from us, or we'll have to 'review' your rebates and we might just accidentally be late shipping your next order!" Boo! What disgusting leadership and corrupt company.
Posted by: austin 22 Sep 2009