[darkpuppet]

the point is that intel is 80% of the desktop market and is trying it's darndest to hold it's lead in the face of inadequate technology.

it's their compiler, they can do whatever they want to it. You think AMD's own benchmarks were designed to run favourably on Intel? They aren't. It's the same as all the Mac benchmarks that show performance gains over Intel... Intel is fully in their right, to disable features, cross licensed or not, that they don't want to run on anything other then their own hardware.

The fact alone that they did this would make no difference in an anti-trust lawsuit, however, piled on top of other things, it further demonstrates an active strategy to cripple AMD's growth.

i'm more concerned that Intel made policy to hurt vendors that didn't deal with them exclusively.. that's a more damning accusation than an intel-branded product being designed to not work on a competitor's product.

Any developer worth their salt wouldn't develop solely on intel's compiler as-is.

The whole antitrust lawsuit against intel may actually do more damage to AMD in the long run than it's worth. A settlement or ruling of a few hundred million dollars isn't going to make a very big difference in the market where the two main competitors are worth tens of billions.

AMD seems to be clueless as far as marketing strategy goes, since they're spending zero time actually building a brand name that is recognizeable by the mass market. How many people take notice of the AMD sticker on the Ferrari Formula 1 cars, and go buy AMD becuase of that?

AMD isn't like intel where everyone knows them immediately... and even Intel has mainstream tv commercials and ads to actively build their brand.

AMD has lost the pulse of what matters in the market right now, and are trying to bully a way into the lead, when a bit more finese would have been a lot more effective.