Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
i think you shouldnt look at everything from intels perspective only...
imo both intel and nvidia are trying to misuse their market dominance to push their will onto people, but in this particular case intel is wrong.

but why should nvidia pay intel? for what? what technology does nvidia get from intel? essentially they are licensing their sli driver, a piece of software...
does any software vendor pay intel to run on their cpu/chipset?
i dont see why nvidia should be paying intel for beeing allowed to run their driver on an intel based platform. if nvidia really HAD to pay intel for this, then why doesnt intel just lock sli on their chipset?
I know there is a prevailing sentiment that many here think IP and Patents are wrong. This leads folks to think License Fees are repugnant and or evil. The business world wouldn't be worth a flip if that were the case. There are thousands R&D companies making our lives better every hour. These folks can't perform their magic for Free

I'm NOT on just Intel's side and just as I've argued for AMD and thought they were rightly awarded their case vs. Intel on the whole X86 fight from the early 90's. I was for Intergraph long before they won vs Intel. I said AMD would have to pay them too.

My view is that everyone should either;
A. Pay each other for their respective tech/IP.
Or
B. Agree to mutually use each others' IP free of Charge as AMD and Intel currently does.
Not
C. Everyone pay nVidia for their IP while nVidia gets everyone's else's IP free.

Sorry Saaya but you and nVidia are wrong here. So of course I agree with Intel on this simply because they made the agreement with nVidia and nVidia found it hard to break their old Habits. nVidia is aggressively greedy and stengey, a bad combo nVidia doesn't pull the crap they pulled I'm about 85% certain we're not talking about this right now.