Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 23:36:33 -0700 From: Sean Eric Fagan <sef@Kithrup.COM> To: nadav@cs.technion.ac.il Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Intel Pentium II released Message-ID: <199705260636.XAA20276@kithrup.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95-heb-2.07.970526090852.14505B-100000.kithrup.freebsd.chat@csd> References: <199705251747.KAA17807@kithrup.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <Pine.GSO.3.95-heb-2.07.970526090852.14505B-100000.kithrup.freebsd.chat@csd> you write: >What worries me is that, at least here, this went unnoticed >by the press, much like when someone sues Microsoft for violating >copyrights or whatever, meaning that it might be a lost cause. Still, I >think I'll follow this... Trust me... around here, it has *not* gone unnoticed. Of course, I live in Silicon Valley, where new chip announcements make the front page :). There's also a lot of discussion going on in comp.arch, including all of the patents being posted along with some analysis. Also, DEC is not claiming that Intel "intentionally" infringed; they are claiming that Intel knew about the patents at some point before DEC filed suit. (It's a subtle but important distinction.) Yes, I am rooting against Intel in this case. Not because of any love for DEC, but because something needs to be done about Intel. In a related issue, Cyrix, I think it was, also sued Intel last week. I don't know the details about that, though.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705260636.XAA20276>