Read the rest of this post on the original site »

And while a search for Meyer’s replacement is underway, I’m told it could easily extend into the summer.

It didn’t take long for rumors about “takeover chatter” concerning AMD to emerge, and briefly yesterday, Dell was mentioned as a possible buyer. AMD shares traded up 4 percent for part of the day but closed down 3 cents during the regular session. Dell more or less shot down the rumor. During its earnings conference call, CEO Michael Dell, answering a question on acquisitions, said, “…we’re looking for relatively smaller sized ingredient acquisitions where we can leverage them with our substantial customer access and distribution.” With AMD currently trading at a valuation north of $6 billion with about $2.2 billion in long-term debt, it’s not the kind of target that would qualify as “smaller sized.”

There will always be rumors of this sort about the perennial number two in the PC microprocessor business. Those who trade on them don’t get something fundamental about AMD: That it would be a complicated company to buy and to own.

Any deal to acquire AMD will necessarily include a third party: Intel. For decades Intel and AMD have operated under a series of patent cross-license agreements that give AMD access to the crown jewels of Intel’s intellectual property, including the x86 instruction set. These patents are on the technology that make a PC a PC, and they are fundamental to the success, or failure, of both companies.

When AMD first sought to spin off its manufacturing operations into the company that became GlobalFoundries, Intel asserted that AMD couldn’t assign access to these patents to a third party without its say-so. This dispute ultimately got the two companies talking and resulted in what I like to call the Treaty of Maui, the settlement of a sweeping antitrust dispute in 2009, a story I reported at the time for BusinessWeek.

There are, however, some limits governing Intel’s conduct in this scenario. When it settled an antitrust case against it last year, Intel agreed to hold off on suing any company that buys one of its competitors for a year, in order to hold “good faith negotiations” over the terms of that patent cross-license agreement. What this all means is that any company that first concludes a deal to buy AMD will then have to pivot and face the possibility of lengthy negotiations with Intel that could, if not successful, end in a costly and distracting patent lawsuit.

Intel may turn out to be willing to play ball, and cut a reasonable deal with any new owner, but the fact remains that every so often the cross-license arrangement has to be renewed. And that’s not to say a determined buyer couldn’t ultimately cut through all this and get a deal done. Dell has $15 billion in cash and could conceivably get a deal done, and being an AMD customer could arguably benefit from owning AMD over the long term, but it has signaled that it’s not interested, and probably never was in the first place.

There are other considerations: AMD is 20 percent owned by the Mubadala Development Company, the investment arm of the Arab Emirate of Abu Dhabi, which changes the potential deal dynamic a bit. Then there’s the big question concerning the wisdom of competing with Intel. As AMD’s prior CEOs will tell you, simply grappling with Intel in the marketplace is a dangerous, thankless job.

But the complication of the Intel cross-license agreement alone should be enough to give any company mulling an AMD buyout serious pause. At the same time it should serve as food for thought for anyone wanting to trade on the latest AMD buyout rumor. This surely is not the last.

Something is definitely going on between Intel and Nvidia, and it’s possible that a settlement could be announced after the market closes today, sources said.

[UPDATE: Yes, they settled, in a new $1.5 billion licensing deal. Story to come.]

The two had been scheduled to go to trial in December in the Delaware Chancery Court, but the parties agreed to reschedule that.

Soon, word of settlement talks surfaced. Still, as recently as last week, a source familiar with the matter said a trial was on track for February. Now, other sources are saying that may not be the case, which would suggest a settlement is imminent.

Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang declined to discuss the Intel dispute in an interview with Mobilized’s Ina Fried at D@CES last week.

The fight between the two tech giants is over the terms of a 2004 agreement under which Intel granted Nvidia access to some of Intel’s technology for use in its chipsets, the chips that sit between the microprocessor and the graphics chip like connecting tissue. The cross-licensing agreement allowed Nvidia to make chipsets that were compatible with Intel microprocessors.

The company also told analysts Tuesday it should be able to reach gross profit margins of 44% to 48% in 2011–up from a prior target of 40% to 45%–and said a long-term goal of 50% should be achievable.

AMD’s technology milestone, part of a strategy called Fusion, opens a new chapter in AMD’s longtime competition with Intel Corp. Where AMD has often lagged its much larger rival in microprocessors, it believes the technology acquired through the $5.4 billion purchase of ATI Technologies provided a lead in an emerging breed of products that AMD calls APUs, for accelerated processing units.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Mr. Otellini pulled off three deals this summer aimed at building Intel’s business outside computing, where its microprocessor chips dominate. The urgency to do so became clearer late last month, when turbulent conditions in the personal computer market made Intel trim its third-quarter projections.

Intel’s revised guidance still calls for revenue growth of 15% to 19% over the year-earlier period. But even a healthy PC market won’t provide enough growth to satisfy Intel and its shareholders, Mr. Otellini says. So he has pushed to broaden the Silicon Valley giant’s business to chips for smartphones, consumer electronics devices, cars and other products.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

AMD spikes in after hours trading after the company posted better-than-expected revenues and profits for the second quarter, the stock has reversed and is trading meaningfully lower this morning, as attention turns to a noteworthy production delays for a much-anticipated “Fusion” chip code-named Llano that combines a microprocessor with a graphics processor.

While the results initially looked like a carbon-copy of the strong results from Intel (INTC) earlier in the week, AMD once again proves to be a stickier story than many investors would like.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

The company commercialized the CDMA mobile standard and its chips can be found in many of today’s smartphones. If things play out as CEO Paul Jacobs would like, Qualcomm (QCOM) chips will soon be showing up in a wide variety of consumer electronics devices as well. As Jacobs said at the Consumer Electronics Show earlier this year, “consumer electronics devices will essentially be phones inside–different shapes, different software, but fundamentally, inside they’ll be phones.”

With its latest chips, which ably bridge the performance gap between smartphones and larger devices like netbooks and tablets, Qualcomm is delivering on Jacobs’s prediction. And that is increasingly putting the company at odds with some formidable rivals in the ultramobile computing market–Intel (INTC), for example.

Liveblog

3:28 pm: Off to a bit of a late start here. The interview should begin momentarily.

3:31 pm: A few quick words of introduction from Walt, who notes that most of the folks in the audience have likely used Qualcomm products at one time or another, and Jacobs takes the stage.

3:32 pm: Walt–You make chips, right?

Jacobs: We ship 36 chips every second for cellphones around the world. These chips handle radio communications, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, all sorts of things. They essentially run mobile phones.

3:33 pm: Jacobs–Does anyone in this room have a simple GSMA phone? [No one does.] Then you’re all using our intellectual property.

3:35 pm: Some discussion of licensees. Jacobs notes that Foxconn is among them.

3:35 pm: Walt: Typically, your technology is buried in these devices, but now you’re introducing something that will be out front.

Jacobs says the company is working on a new display technology that uses the same thing a butterfly’s wing uses to make color. Because it’s reflective in that way, you can see it outside and in bright light. It does color and it does video. This isn’t a lab project. We’ve got a fab [fabrication], and it’s being developed.

Walt wonders when we’ll see it. Jacobs says Qualcomm hopes to get it to its partners next year.

3:37 pm: The display is called Mirasol, and it employs a bunch of tiny mirrors to display images.

Jacobs has brought a demo with him, and the display does seem impressive, certainly a big improvement over today’s e-ink.

3:39 pm: Walt–Unlike a Kindle, this thing has color, plays video and better battery life.

Jacobs: If we’re using a still image outdoors, the battery will last for a very long time–it uses very little power. If we’re running stuff, animations for example, it won’t run quite as long. But it will still be a significant improvement over what we see in devices like the Kindle and iPad today.

3:41 pm: Walt–What about downsizing these screens? Will they work on cellphones?

Jacobs says they will. In fact, Qualcomm is working with someone to develop a watch that uses it.

Walt: And this can support multitouch?

Jacobs: Yes. The display, because its MEMS technology, there are other things we can integrate into it–antennas and whatnot.

3:43 pm: Walt–So will this be a Qualcomm reader or will you build it for someone else?

Jacobs: We’ll be developing this for partners

3:44 pm: So why did you get out of the device business, asks Walt.

Jacobs: Because we sucked at it. I just said, you know this is not our core competency. So today we’re focused on chips. Technology is moving so quickly these days that if you’re not focused, you just end up doing things badly. We’re very focused on the chip business.

3:45 pm: Walt–You’ve jumped into the brains of the phone business, yes?

Jacobs: Yes we have. It’s called Snapdragon and its a microprocessor that uses ARM. These are very lower-power chipsets.

3:47 pm: Walt–But these chips are going into high-power devices. They can’t have wimpy processors.

Jacobs agrees and notes that Qualcomm is developing multicore processors for smartphones. “You think about the phone, why do you need the phone to turn on to do stuff? You don’t need to turn on the entire user interface to do something like email. So we’re managing power very carefully to extend usage time.”

3:49 pm: Walt–Is Intel (INTC) your biggest competitor?

Jacobs: That depends. Intel is on the high end. There are other smaller companies though that are low-end threats.

Walt: Do you power BlackBerrys?

Jacobs: The Verizon (VZ) Blackberrys run our chips.

3:50 pm: Walt asks for Jacobs’s thoughts on Intel’s “Intel Inside” campaign, which made the company a known brand. Has Qualcomm considered doing something similar?

Jacobs: You know we have Qualcomm Stadium, says Jacobs. And sometimes people think we make beer, not chips. The truth of the matter is, I sell to the manufacturers and the operators, but we don’t sell directly to the consumer, so a big branding campaign like that isn’t a big concern.

3:53 pm: Conversation moves on to Qualcomm’s FlowTV service. Walt notes that it hasn’t really been successful, and Jacobs agrees. But he adds that it has great potential for the future, particularly in terms of broadcasting information to smartphones, a la PointCast.

3:56 pm: Jacobs: Today when you think about FlowTV, you think about cable TV on your phone. Tomorrow, it will be more of a data service.

3:57 pm: Walt–Obviously, we’re heading toward a bandwidth congestion problem. Is there a solution?

Jacobs: Fixing the backhaul problem already helps. We’re now going to more and wider spectrum, and that helps as well. Fourth generation will feel like you’re getting a better experience as a user. The big issue, though, is getting more access to spectrum, moving people off of it. Adding additional Wi-Fi access points that are integrated into the cellular network will help as well.

Walt: Is it a good trade-off in our country to reallocate the broadcast spectrum?

Jacobs: That’s a tough question because there are people who still use it.

Q & A

Q: Qualcomm seems to be involved in a lot of sensor work. Can you talk about that?

A: One of the things we’re involved in is the development of sensors, sensors that can be stuck onto your body and can talk to your phone. Glucose monitors, for example. But battery life is very important here. So we’re spending a lot of effort developing these technologies for health care with that in mind.

Q: Can you compare SnapDragon to Apple’s A4?

A: I don’t know a lot about that because we haven’t done a tear-down of Apple’s (AAPL) processor.

Q: Can you talk about your BREW [binary runtime environment for wireless] OS and where it might be heading?

A: We actually have a lot of demand for it now. In addition to Verizon, it’s going into AT&T (T) and into Chinese operators. HTC actually just built a phone that’s BREW-based. If you had asked me a couple of years ago, I would have said BREW was headed to emerging markets. Now I think it’s headed to the low-end of the high-end market.

Q: Do you think there are other areas in which your technology might be used, education, for example?

A: Jacobs notes an experiment in education where one classroom was given cellphones running Qualcomm tech and others weren’t, and the group with the phones showed a marked improvement in its grades. “The cellphone is humanity’s biggest platform. If we can’t use it to change education or health care, then shame on us.”

A note about our coverage: This liveblog is not an official transcript of the conversation that occurred onstage. Rather, it is a compilation of quotes, paraphrased statements and ad-lib observations written and posted to the Web as quickly as possible. It is not intended as a transcript and should not be interpreted as one.

“The ultrathin microprocessor which fits into the ultrathin solution is addressing all of these areas–better battery life, better performance,” Mooly Eden, vice president and general manager of the PC Client Group at Intel (INTC), said while announcing the chips this morning. “It’s going to be lighter, it’s going to be smaller, and it will fit the consumer system price point. You’ll see some very affordable systems.”

This bodes well for the ultrathin laptop, which hasn’t had much success staking out a middle ground between the netbook and the laptop because its performance often doesn’t justify its price. If Intel’s new chips change that, the ultrathin segment may stand to gain a bit of traction in the portable market.

“The underlying engineering teams are so good, but the direction they got was so astonishingly bad that even they couldn’t succeed. Really great blogs do not take the place of great microprocessors. Great blogs do not replace great software. Lots and lots of blogs does not replace lots and lots of sales.”

– Oracle CEO Larry Ellison tars and feathers Sun’s blogging, Haiku-writing former CEO, Jonathan Schwartz.

Though Q1 global shipments of microprocessors slipped 5.6 percent from Q4 due to seasonality, they grew 39 percent over the same quarter in 2009. And, as IDC analyst Shane Rau notes, that is good news indeed.

“PC processor shipments typically decline around seven to eight percent going from fourth quarter to first quarter,” Rau said in a statement. “A decline of 5.6 percent is modest and wouldn’t mean much by itself. However, after the huge rise in shipments we saw in the fourth quarter, it adds more credibility to market recovery and that the PC industry anticipates improvement in PC end demand in 2010.”

To that end, IDC is predicting PC processor unit growth of 15.1 percent for 2010, though it concedes that it could prove a conservative estimate. And that may well prove to be the case. Earlier this month Intel, the world’s largest PC chip maker, reported the highest first-quarter sales ever…

Good day everyone … and thank you for joining us. For the past few years, we have been very open in outlining the major steps for AMD’s transformation into a processing powerhouse:

• From the acquisition of ATI Technologies;
• To the formation of GLOBALFOUNDRIES; and
• The creation of AMD-The Product Company,
  o with a single business unit,
  o a reinvigorated roadmap,
  o a new business model,
  o And a close relationship with a world-class leading-
  edge foundry.

Today, I am pleased to announce the last major component of that transformation–in the form of a transparent and public agreement with Intel to create a level playing field in the x86 processor industry–taking us one big step closer to achieving our bold vision.
There are three key components to the agreement:

• First, Intel has agreed to an important set of ground rules that we hope will define the path to a free and open market in the microprocessor industry;
• Second, we have agreed to a new patent cross-license agreement that gives AMD broad rights and the freedom to operate a business utilizing multiple foundries,
• And third, GLOBALFOUNDRIES has agreed to terms that allow them the freedom to operate as an independent world-class leading-edge foundry company, going forward, without being a subsidiary of AMD.

In addition, Intel has agreed to pay AMD $1.25 billion.

Today marks the beginning of a new era… one that confirms that the game has changed for AMD. It is an important milestone for us, for our customers, our partners, and most important–for consumers and businesses worldwide. In addition, it represents the culmination many years of litigation and regulatory engagement.

And we are optimistic that it will usher a new era for our industry. We recognize that it will take time for people to understand how operating conditions in the processor business have changed–but make no mistake–they have changed.

I would like to thank the regulatory agencies around the world for their diligence and consistency. Their work has enabled us to achieve this milestone. We are optimistic they will continue their vigilance in maintaining a level playing field, especially with respect to exclusionary practices in our industry.

Looking forward to three keys to our continued success: Compelling offerings; Access to customers and channels, And a winning business model.

We are optimistic this agreement addresses concerns about customer and channel access and our business model. We look forward to healthy competition with the mutual respect one would expect between world-class competitors.

Under terms of the agreement, Intel (INTC) will pay AMD (AMD) $1.25 billion (nearly a quarter of AMD’s $4.46 billion market cap) and agree to “abide by a set of business practice provisions” presumably crafted to temper Intel’s allegedly anticompetitive practices. Here are details of the agreement:

Business Practices Provisions Prohibit Intel From:

• Offering inducements to customers in exchange for their agreement to buy all of their microprocessor needs from Intel, whether on a geographic, market segment, or any other basis (Section 2.1.1.a)
• Offering inducements to customers in exchange for their agreement to limit or delay their purchase of microprocessors from AMD, whether on a geographic, market segment, or any other basis (Section 2.1.1.b)
• Offering inducements to customers in exchange for their agreement to limit their engagement with AMD or their promotion or distribution of products containing AMD microprocessors, whether on a geographic, channel, market segment, or any other basis (Section 2.1.2a-b)
• Offering inducements to customers in exchange for their agreement to abstain from or delay their participation in AMD product launches, announcements, advertising, or other promotional activities (Section 2.1.2.b)
• Offering inducements to customers or others to delay or forebear in the development or release of computer systems or platforms containing AMD microprocessors, whether on a geographic, market segment, or any other basis (Section 2.2.2 and 2.1.2)
• Offering inducements to retailers or distributors to limit or delay their purchase or distribution of computer systems or platforms containing AMD microprocessors, whether on a geographic, market segment, or any other basis (Section 2.2.1)
• Withholding any benefit or threatening retaliation against anyone for their refusal to enter into a prohibited arrangement such as the ones listed above.

In return, AMD will drop all its pending litigation against the company and pull out of regulatory complaints worldwide. Finally, the two rivals will enter into a five-year patent cross-licensing agreement.

In a joint statement, the companies said, “While the relationship between the two companies has been difficult in the past, this agreement ends the legal disputes and enables the companies to focus all of our efforts on product innovation and development.”

Interesting. Clearly, AMD CEO Dirk Meyer’s earlier comments about the ratification of its complaints about Intel’s business practices and the company’s hope for a future in which AMD’s “ability to succeed as a business is really determined by the quality of our products and customer relationships” was quite prefigurative.

During a call to discuss the settlement, Meyer said the accord marks the beginning of a new era, one that changes the game for AMD. “It is an important milestone for us, for our customers, our partners, and most importantly–for consumers and businesses worldwide,” Meyer said.

“It is the culmination years of litigation and regulatory engagement, and we are optimistic that it will usher a new era for our industry,” the CEO continued, further noting that change may not be immediate. “We recognize that it will take time for people to understand how the operating conditions in processor business have changed–but make no mistake–they have changed….We look forward to healthy competition with the mutual respect one would expect between world-class competitors.”

It is unclear if the settlement will affect the antitrust suit brought against Intel by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo last week as Cuomo hasn’t yet commented. But the European Union says it will not change its decision in May to fine Intel a record $1.5 billion for anticompetitive behavior.

“The European Commission takes note that Intel and AMD have settled all their litigation and that Intel is paying AMD compensation of one-and-quarter billion dollars,” said an EC spokesman. “But Intel has an ongoing obligation to comply with the commission’s antitrust decision and with EU competition law. The commission continues to vigorously monitor Intel’s compliance with its obligations under the EU antitrust decision.”

Analysts had expected AMD to lose 42 cents a share on revenue of $1.26 billion, according to a consensus survey by Thomson Reuters. Instead, the company lost 18 cents a share on revenue of $1.4 billion, which was down from $1.8 billion for the same quarter last year.

Not the sort of blow-out quarter we saw from Intel (INTC) earlier this week, but encouraging news nonetheless. Certainly, AMD’s leadership believes the company is poised for a turnaround. During a conference call to discuss AMD’s (AMD) third-quarter results, CEO Dirk Meyer offered an upbeat outlook for the remainder of 2009 despite the current loss.

“Third quarter consumer PC demand continued to improve from prior periods, with particular strength in notebooks and in China and continued recovery in Europe and in North America,” Meyer said. “And it appears the commercial IT markets are positioned to improve next year….Going forward, we believe we are well positioned to succeed.”

“The interesting thing about cloud computing is that we’ve redefined cloud computing to include everything that we already do,” Ellison said. “I can’t think of anything that isn’t cloud computing with all of these announcements….These people who are writing this crap are out there. They are insane. I mean it is the stupidest. Is it ‘Oh, I am going to access data on a server on the Internet.’ That is cloud computing?…Maybe I’m an idiot, but I have no idea what anyone is talking about. What is it? It’s complete gibberish. It’s insane. When is this idiocy going to stop?”

In conversation with former Sun (JAVA) CEO Ed Zander at a Churchill Club event a little over a year later, Ellison expanded on those remarks, suggesting that if the cloud is anything, it’s a cloud of BS.

Cloud’s water vapor….Cloud computing is not only the future of computing, it is the present and the entire past of computing.

…Salesforce.com has been around for a decade. And so has NetSuite…and people are saying, “Well, that’s cloud computing.” Google is cloud computing. Everyone is cloud computing….Everything is in the cloud now….It’s this nonsense.

…But it’s not water vapor. All it is is a computer attached to a network. What are you talking about? I mean, what do you think Google runs on?…Water vapor? It’s databases and operating systems and memory and microprocessors and the Internet!

…And the VCs, I love the VCs. [They ask their start-ups] “Oh…is that cloud?” [And the start-ups go] “Oh! Oh! Microsoft Word! Change ‘Internet’ to ‘cloud’! Mass change. Give it back to these nitwits on Sand Hill Road.”

…What do you mean by “cloud computing”?…All the cloud is is computers on a network.

Our industry is so bizarre. They just change a term and they think they’ve invented technology….You can’t just come up with a [slogan] like “Let’s call that ‘cloud.” [But] it sure beats innovation.”

Below, the full video. Ellison’s rant begins around the 45:54 mark.

“No, we’re not going to spin [MySQL] off,” Oracle CEO Larry Ellison told attendees of a Churchill Club event in Silicon Valley Monday evening. “We are keeping everything. We’re keeping tape. We’re keeping storage. We’re keeping x86 and SPARC. And we’re going to increase investment in all of them.”

In other words, technologists worried about Oracle’s (ORCL) intentions for MySQL and other Sun (JAVA) systems need to relax.

“Sun has fantastic technology. We think it’s got great microprocessor technology–it needs a little more investment, but we think it can be extremely competitive. It’s got the leading tape archival systems. We think the Open Storage on their new disk system is absolutely fantastic. Java speaks for itself. Solaris is overwhelmingly the best open-systems operating system on the planet….Sun has been a national treasure for the last couple of decades.”

Which is interesting since Sewell has been quarterbacking Intel’s (INTC) fight against antitrust allegations at home and abroad since, well, since they were first brought against the company in Japan. And Korea. And the United States, and now the European Union as well.

So to hear he’s leaving today after 14 years with the company with no explanation of why or where he’s headed…

to hear there’s no one lined up to take his place (Suzan Miller, currently deputy general counsel, will become interim general counsel until a replacement is found)…

and to hear this at a time when the company is grappling with some of the most important legal issues it’s ever faced…

when the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the European Commission are both probing Intel’s alleged antitrust violations in the microprocessor market…

when the company is just six months away from going to trial with rival chip maker AMD (AMD), which accuses Intel of using illegal inducements to dissuade OEMs from buying AMD processors and “knee-capping” those who did….

Well, it’s all a bit odd, isn’t it?

I mean Sewell’s Intel bio is already returning “Page Not Found” errors (see below; click image to enlarge).

What’s going on in Intel legal? Reached for comment, the company didn’t have much of an answer to the question other than to say that Sewell is leaving of his own accord and it’s sad to see him go. “All I can say is that Bruce has decided voluntarily to leave the company,” Intel spokesman Chuck Molloy told me. “We are not talking about his plans. He was not forced to leave and we were surprised by his decision.”

UPDATE: Sewell’s leaving Intel to become General Counsel at Apple.

Oh, this was AMD’s 11th quarterly loss in a row.

So nothing much to get excited about here. Or in the company’s guidance. “Considering current macroeconomic conditions, limited visibility and historical seasonal patterns, AMD expects its Product Company revenue to be up slightly for the third quarter of 2009,” AMD CEO Dirk Meyer said in a statement. “New platform, microprocessor and graphics introductions planned for the second half of 2009 position us well to improve margins and meet our financial goals for the year.”

AMD shares were down more than 11 percent to $3.60 in after-hours trading.

“After losing share to Intel on a sequential basis during three out of four quarters in 2008, AMD managed to reverse the trend in the first quarter of 2009,” iSuppli analyst Matthew Wilkins said in a statement. “AMD increased its allocation of global microprocessor revenue due to strong performances in each area of its microprocessor portfolio, particularly in its notebook products. This was an impressive feat given the economic downturn and the weakness in the PC and server markets.”

Of course, AMD (AMD) did suffer an econalypse-inspired revenue decline in Q1, as did Intel (INTC). And the factors that caused it are expected to persist. iSuppli figures the 2009 microprocessor market will top out at $28.6 billion, down 15.8 percent from $34 billion in 2008.

You know things are bad at AMD when the company’s schadenfreude over Intel’s European legal woes spills over into its brand messaging. Surf over to AMD’s Web site this morning and you’ll find foremost on its homepage not a message about Fusion, its next-generation microprocessor design, or branding for its various chips, but a gigantic European Union flag flying over this text:

“European Commission finds Intel guilty of breaking antitrust laws, harming consumers.”

Click through and you’ll find an entire subsite celebrating the EC’s finding–a shrine of court documents, press releases and industry quotes. “European Commission Reveals the Truth About Intel,” the page shouts, cataloging AMD’s grievances against the company. And while that’s apparently the case, AMD’s response reveals a bit of truth about AMD. Gloating over a legal victory is one thing, but building a branding campaign around it is another one entirely. Moral superiority is wonderful, but it’s not going to win any battles in the marketplace.

For AMD (AMD) to beat Intel (INTC) at its own game, it must beat Intel at its own game. “Imagine a world where the world’s most important information technology only comes from one place,” AMD President and CEO Dirk Meyer recently told BusinessWeek. “Nobody wants to live in that world.” No, I suppose not. But if we’re going to live in the better one the Meyer is hinting at, AMD has got to build it. Talking about it as your company continues to struggle toward profitability after more than two years of losses, isn’t going to cut it.

Zing.

Ellison went on to note that Oracle has big plans for Sun’s SPARC chips as well. “Once we own Sun we’re going to increase the investment in SPARC,” he said. “We think designing our own chips is very, very important. Even Apple is designing its own chips these days. Right now, SPARC chips do some things better than Intel chips and vice-versa. For example, SPARC is much more energy efficient than Intel while delivering the same performance on a per socket basis. This is not just a green issue, it’s an economic issue. Today, database centers are paying as much for electricity to run their computers as they pay to buy their computers. SPARC machines are much less expensive to run than Intel machines….our primary reason for designing our own chips is to build computers with the very best performance, reliability and security available in the market. Some system features work much better if they are implemented in silicon rather than software. Once we own Sun, we’ll be able to plan and synchronize new features from silicon to software, just like IBM and the other big system suppliers. We want to work with Fujitsu to design advanced features into the SPARC microprocessor aimed at improving Oracle database performance. In my opinion, this will enable SPARC Solaris open-system mainframes and servers to challenge IBM’s dominance in the data center. Sun was very successful for a very long time selling computer systems based on the SPARC chip and the Solaris operating system. Now, with the added power of integrated Oracle software, we think they can be again.”

Oracle’s (ORCL) intentions for Sun’s (JAVA) hardware business come as great news for engineers worried they might lose their jobs as a result of Oracle’s surprise acquisition of the company. Bad news for rivals like Dell (DELL), Hewlett Packard (HPQ), and IBM (IBM), though. Having Oracle out there in the market peddling an integrated hardware and software solution is going to make their lives more difficult.

Zing.

Ellison went on to note that Oracle has big plans for Sun’s SPARC chips as well. “Once we own Sun we’re going to increase the investment in SPARC,” he said. “We think designing our own chips is very, very important. Even Apple is designing its own chips these days. Right now, SPARC chips do some things better than Intel chips and vice-versa. For example, SPARC is much more energy efficient than Intel while delivering the same performance on a per socket basis. This is not just a green issue, it’s an economic issue. Today, database centers are paying as much for electricity to run their computers as they pay to buy their computers. SPARC machines are much less expensive to run than Intel machines….our primary reason for designing our own chips is to build computers with the very best performance, reliability and security available in the market. Some system features work much better if they are implemented in silicon rather than software. Once we own Sun, we’ll be able to plan and synchronize new features from silicon to software, just like IBM and the other big system suppliers. We want to work with Fujitsu to design advanced features into the SPARC microprocessor aimed at improving Oracle database performance. In my opinion, this will enable SPARC Solaris open-system mainframes and servers to challenge IBM’s dominance in the data center. Sun was very successful for a very long time selling computer systems based on the SPARC chip and the Solaris operating system. Now, with the added power of integrated Oracle software, we think they can be again.”

Oracle’s (ORCL) intentions for Sun’s (JAVA) hardware business come as great news for engineers worried they might lose their jobs as a result of Oracle’s surprise acquisition of the company. Bad news for rivals like Dell (DELL), Hewlett Packard (HPQ), and IBM (IBM), though. Having Oracle out there in the market peddling an integrated hardware and software solution is going to make their lives more difficult.

Platforms and products is one of four new operating units created in this latest restructuring, which also birthed an advanced technology group, a marketing group and a consumer group. Why this particular arrangement is any better than AMD’s reorg of a year ago–which spawned the Central Engineering Organization and Computing Solutions Group–is anyone’s guess. AMD CEO Dirk Meyer says it will optimize AMD’s operations and drive the company toward sustained profitability and long-term success. But then he said that about the last one as well.

Oh, speaking of that last reorg, Randy Allen, the 24-year AMD veteran who figured so prominently in the company, is leaving. AMD (AMD) offered no explanation for his departure and there’s no word yet on where he’s headed. That said, some surmise that he may be following a path beaten by two of his former colleagues, Raja Koduri and Bob Drebin, who both fled AMD for Apple (AAPL)