Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Did Intel Kill Opteron?

In April 2003, AMD released Opteron, a fancy new chip designed for servers. Analysts said it was cheaper, faster and guzzled less power than anything else on the market, including Intel's muscular Itanium chip, which debuted in 2001 but never lived up to expectations.

AMD had done its homework during the design process. While both Opteron and Itanium ran newer 64-bit software, AMD's chip was also backward-compatible, enabling it to run software written for older 32-bit processors. That made it more practical in corporate data centers, which run a lot of older software.

A year after the Opteron chip hit the market, we recognized that AMD was winning over some big customers and seemed poised to make a mint. AMD filled the airwaves with press releases and staged anniversary parties as it declared itself the technological leader over Intel.

But Intel held on to its 92% market share in server chips. AMD was stuck at 6.5%. Opteron looked as if it was mostly hype.

AMD's real answer came in the form of a lawsuit filed Monday that accuses Intel of a litany of abuses, including using rebates to bribe computer makers into limiting their AMD purchases and threatening uncooperative customers with delayed shipments. "Tellingly, AMD's market share has not kept pace with its technical leadership. Intel's misconduct is the reason," the lawsuit stated.

The Opteron is featured throughout the lawsuit. AMD accuses Intel of paying IBM to stop marketing servers with Opteron chips. AMD also accuses Intel of interfering with Opteron's marketing and public relations by intimidating customers into skipping launch events.

Soon the courts will get to hear both versions of the story while Opteron, at least for now, collects a lot of dust.

Unfortunately for AMD, there is no good history of saving a product with lawsuits, as former Netscape executives can attest.

Full Story.

More in Tux Machines

UbuCon Paris Party Starts Today In Celebration of the Ubuntu 16.04 LTS Release

Yesterday we reported on the fact that even if Canonical unveiled the Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (Xenial Xerus) operating system last month, on April 21, several LoCos are still organizing release parties. Read more

Why I won’t use Dropbox’s Project Infinite if it’s not open source

Why not Dropbox? Because the open source community can’t see the Dropbox source code, there is no way to know what Dropbox does to my stuff. Experts should be able to audit Dropbox source code to ensure there are no security vulnerabilities, that there are no back doors. Beyond that, I am not comfortable with making any company a co-owner of my files. I don’t want to be at the mercy of a company that can revoke access to my data for whatever reason. I am not comfortable with the idea that my data could be subject to scanning and privacy-invading laws that otherwise don’t apply to my local data. Read more

Open-source vs. Proprietary – Keeping Ideology Out of the Equation

Open-source really means no more and no less than making the source code readily available to anyone. Thus, open-source makes no statement as to the licensing conditions for using the software, whether there are charges for using the software, whether the software is supported, or actively developed, or any good, and so on. Closed-source means that source code is not readily available, but makes no comment on issues like licensing, costs, support, and quality. Read more

NetOS Enterprise Linux 8 Promises to Be a Worthy Alternative to Chrome OS

Black Lab Software CEO Roberto J. Dohnert informs Softpedia today about the general availability of the NetOS Enterprise Developer Preview 8 operating system. Designed as a replacement for the Linux kernel-based Chrome OS or Chromium OS operating systems, Black Lab Software's upcoming NetOS distribution is using the same technologies that have been implemented in the Enterprise Edition of the Black Lab Linux OS. Read more