Inside AMD’s lawsuit against Intel

Forget Apple’s chip-flipping, Carly’s ouster, Oracle’s PeopleSoft putsch, or even Paris Hilton’s hacked handheld. AMD’s June 27 lawsuit against Intel is the tech story of the year. This one’s got it all: High stakes, low blows, accusations of front-room arm-twisting and back-room payoffs. The 48-page filing is a bombshell that attempts to paint the world’s biggest CPU maker as a cross between a John D. Rockefeller monopolist and Vito Corleone-style thug.

Whether or not you agree with AMD’s assessment, the outcome of this tussle will have enormous consequences for customers and IT departments. And for better or worse, InfoWorld is right in the middle of the conflict. It’s right there in black and white, on page 8 of AMD’s filing:

“The computing industry hailed AMD’s introduction of 64-bit computing as an engineering triumph. Said InfoWorld in its Aug. 27, 2004, issue, ‘You just gotta love a Cinderella story. … AMD’s rapid rise from startup to $5 billion semiconductor powerhouse is, as Humphrey Bogart’s English teacher once said, the stuff of which dreams are made. … In the process, AMD has become known as the company that kept Intel honest. … After decades of aping Intel architectures, the AMD64 architecture … has actually been imitated by Intel.’ ”

Those words flow from the word processor of Tom Yager, InfoWorld’s Chief Technologist and back-page anchor, who suddenly finds himself cast in the role of expert witness. That’s not an uncomfortable position: He’s tested every 64-bit chip known to geeks. But those who follow Yager’s work won’t be surprised by the sentiments either. “For years I’ve been saying I believed Intel was trying to block AMD from the market,” Yager notes, “and that, if they succeeded, the consequences would be horrific, not on a theoretical or religious level, but in terms of a very real impact on the evolution of computing technology.”

Granted, the case will turn not on technical merit but on Intel’s business practices. AMD accuses the chip giant of bullying OEMs, distributors, and retailers to exclude AMD from the market. In the words of President and CEO Paul Otellini, Intel counters that it has been “aggressive and fair,” and predicts victory in the suit.

Wherever the courts come out, from the point of view of buyers, more choice is almost always better. When large companies push out smaller competitors, customers may be denied access to top-notch technologies — and I believe the industry as a whole loses.

One thing’s for sure; our man Yager will be on the case, however it unfolds.  He’ll cover ongoing developments in his blog and has set up phone (415) 978-3326 and e-mail accounts (AMDvIntel@infoworld.com) to get your opinions and/or information. We’ll keep you posted.