Does The Public Care About Microprocessor Anti-Trust Trials?
from the who-are-you-trying-to-convince? dept
Years back, Intel did something fairly amazing: it working out a way to brand a boring microprocessor so that many consumers actually cared enough to know if Intel was "inside." Normally, average consumer couldn't care any less about the specific technology included in the computers they buy. The successful marketing campaign is part of why Intel was so successful for many years. It looks like AMD is trying a different spin on the same idea. Following their plans to sue Intel for anti-trust violations, they took their side of the anti-trust story to the public, taking out large ads in a number of newspapers. With the inclusion of Roll Call, it's pretty clear they're hoping to influence law-makers and policy-makers, but some of the other placements suggest that they really are trying to convince consumers of the merits of their case. There's just one problem. Consumers really don't care about anti-trust trials concerning a component on their computer. It was an amazing enough feat to convince them to care about the brand of what was inside in the first place. For AMD to then try to get them to care about whether or not certain practices around those chips violate anti-trust rules, seems like a waste of time. Wouldn't they be better off focusing on convincing customers that AMD's chips are better, and getting end-users to drive demand that way?