saturn Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 the skype thing: I know for a fact that skype claims its for enhancements "only availble on intel" -- but what they dont tell you is they have access to those types of enhancements because of their deal with intel... so its sort of a two-sided thing... half-illegal. and as for AMD/ATI chips no longer being in apples: there will be no reason someone can't build a motherboard with an intel processor and an ATI graphics card even after AMD buys them... and I dont see apple switching to AMD anytime soon. a more likely scenario is apple becoming more like generic PCs and having both AMD and intel processors in their lines of PCs... though thats not very likely either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwprod12 Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 As far as I can see, it's untrue. Skype is crippled by discrete code that checks for an intel processor. Remove that code, and it works with the same capability on an AMD processor. The altivec code example doesnt even make any sense. A better example would be if Adobe, when coding Photoshop CS3 for Windows put in a piece of code that checks whether or not the computer is a Dell. If it is a Dell, make it fast. If it's not a Dell, make it slow. Especially if Dell gave them $$ to do it. As far as I can see (again), Skype uses no specific coding conventions that would limit its performance on an AMD processor. Only because Intel gave them consideration, did they cripple the software for AMD. In the united states, that's a crime (and a tort, which AMD is having a big problem with). And is fairly easy to prove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwhsh8r Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 As far as I can see, it's untrue. Skype is crippled by discrete code that checks for an intel processor. Remove that code, and it works with the same capability on an AMD processor. The altivec code example doesnt even make any sense. A better example would be if Adobe, when coding Photoshop CS3 for Windows put in a piece of code that checks whether or not the computer is a Dell. If it is a Dell, make it fast. If it's not a Dell, make it slow. Especially if Dell gave them $$ to do it. As far as I can see (again), Skype uses no specific coding conventions that would limit its performance on an AMD processor. Only because Intel gave them consideration, did they cripple the software for AMD. In the united states, that's a crime (and a tort, which AMD is having a big problem with). And is fairly easy to prove. Yes, i messed up my post, that is true and you are right... it does not cripple on amd, but gets a performance boost on intel, and i am in america, so that would make me think that its illegal, also both AMD and Intel are based in america... so that would be anti trust.... and i dont think that skype can get in trouble, but intel sure can... max Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturn Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 when I was at an intel event, some rep told me it takes advantage of a part of intel CPUs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2807 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwprod12 Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 Saturn: It might. The part that has intel stamped on it ;-p If Skype does what it's supposed to do and has the same performance as Intel with Maxxus' patch, then I dont see how the software could be coded using some magical Intel instruction set. I think it's safe to say that Skype was influenced by Intel to cripple their conferencing on AMD, thus making an Intel more attractive to Skype users. That's wrong, and illegal. Even if Intel pressured Skype to use some Intel-specific instruction set (cant think of any that would do that, though) to make their product more powerful on an Intel CPU, that would still be illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 I may have worded my post wrong... its not discrimintaion, but its not teh same as what you sayed, because they do not INTENTIONALLY impair the performance of photoshop for g3 computers.... thats what Skype did, and also, it could be considered with the anti trust because Intel might have.... motivated skype in a way that would not be considered legal.... Skype intentionally added a line of code to check for the Intel procs, and if you didnt have one you are treated to a less useable Skype.... thats like photoshop disabling half of its features because you do not have a g4, instead of it being limited because of the hardware not being able to handle it.... im glad that we can discuss this in a civil, educated manner instead of a useless flame war, i thank you for that max So we're not sure if anything illegal has happened here. It could be Intel just freely giving out the Intel optimizers (which is legal os long as they don't say "use it or else") and Skype merely taking advantage fo such a nice offer. It could happen. BTW, you are a poopy head, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts