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

Feral Interactive Ports Life Is Strange to Linux and Mac, Episode 1 Is Now Free

Feral Interactive has recently announced that they have managed to successfully port the popular, award-winning Life Is Strange game to GNU/Linux and Mac OS X operating systems. Read more

Introduction to Modularity

Modularity is an exciting, new initiative aimed at resolving the issue of diverging (and occasionally conflicting) lifecycles of different “components” within Fedora. A great example of a diverging and conflicting lifecycle is the Ruby on Rails (RoR) lifecycle, whereby Fedora stipulates that itself can only have one version of RoR at any point in time – but that doesn’t mean Fedora’s version of RoR won’t conflict with another version of RoR used in an application. Therefore, we want to avoid having “components”, like RoR, conflict with other existing components within Fedora. Read more

Our First Look at Linux Mint 18 Cinnamon

Now that I’ve had about a week to play around in Mint 18, I find a lot to like and have no major complaints. While Cinnamon probably isn’t destined to become my desktop of choice, I don’t dislike it and find it, hands down, the best of the GNOME based desktops I’ve tried so far. Anybody looking for a powerful, all purpose distro that’s designed to work smoothly and which can be mastered with ease would be hard pressed to find anything better. Read more

The subtle art of the Desktop

The history of the Gnome and KDE desktops go a long way back and their competition, for the lack of a better term, is almost as famous in some circles as the religious divide between Emacs and Vi. But is that competition stil relevant in 2016? Are there notable differences between Gnome and KDE that would position each other on a specific segment of users? Having both desktops running on my systems (workstation + laptop) but using really only one of them at all times, I wanted to find out by myself. My workstation and laptop both run ArchLinux, which means I tend to run the latest stable versions of pretty much any desktop software. I will thus be considering the latest stable versions from Gnome and KDE in this post. Historically, the two environments stem from different technical platforms: Gnome relies on the GTK framework while KDE, or more exactly the Plasma desktop environment, relies on Qt. For a long time, that is until well into the development of the Gnome 3.x platform, the major difference was not just technical, it was one of style and experience. KDE used to offer a desktop experience that was built along the lines of Windows, with a start center on the bottom left, a customizable side bar, and desktop widgets. Gnome had its two bars on the top and bottom of the screen, and was seemingly used as the basis for the first design of Mac OS X, with the top bar offering features that were later found in the Apple operating system. Read more