Hacker News Reader

Comment by mildweed | Hacker News Reader

This was much, much quieter than the Microsoft proceedings. Its generally the same story, but it was probably quieter since Intel isn't the OS, it doesn't evoke such strong emotions in the users.

View on HN

It's less emotional, but in my book more cut and dry as well. Microsoft was bundling "free" things, for the most part, which honestly, I do believe have a part in a modern, rich desktop. Intel on the other hand was basically paying major vendors not to buy anything from its main competitor.

Are these major vendors considered culpable as well? I read the NY Times article and didn't see anything about that. It seems to me, though, that behavior like this could be stopped a lot earlier if those taking what are essentially bribes were held accountable as well.

How is this different from pricing and special discounts?

Its not. They just have 80% market share in a huge market, so they are treated differently. Technically these were optional rebates by intel, which I think is what pisses the intel guys off so much about this.

And rightly so, the whole history of antitrust law is completely full of injustice. It is impossible to tell what is legal or illegal because it is not defined, it is merely a tool for the government control successful companies.

Hum, I think:

Special discounts: We lower the price if you buy more than X amount. This: We lower the price if you buy more than X amount, and don't buy from the competition.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com