| June 12, 1998 |
|
By Michael Kanellos
June 11, 1998
C/Net
|
Intergraph CEO Jim Meadlock knew he was
in a tough spot: His company was trying to sell
Intel-based workstations even as the chipmaking giant was
trying to persuade customers to reject Intergraph, he
says. "They went in and said, 'You can buy that
from anyone but Intergraph. If you buy it from Intergraph
we won't fund it [through subsidies]," Meadlock said
in an interview today with CNET NEWS.COM. "They went
to one of our customers we introduced them to and took
one of our competitors in."
|
|
|
June 12, 1998
The Register
|
NatSemi has reported a $212.4 million Q4
loss, more or less in line with market expectations, and
although it says orders have continued to fall in the
current quarter, the rate of decrease has started to slow
down. As good new goes, this is pretty desperate stuff. The
loss for the year was $98.6 million, and the reason the
more recent figures havebeen whacked so badly is the
Asian crisis, high inventories in PC channels and
production difficulties at Cyrix (the NatSemi subsidiary
formerly known as 'fabless'). The parent was hit by drops
in order for mid-priced components, as sub-$1,000 PCs
took off, and says its technology has also fallen behind
in network adapters.
|
|
|
June 11, 1998
Semiconductor Business News
|
IC Works Inc. here today announced a
foundry agreement with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Co. Ltd. (TSMC) to offer frequency timing generators for
Intel Corp.'s BX chip set. The San Jose-based company
said the pact will allows it to offer spread-spectrum
frequency generators (SSFG) in volume for PC motherboards
using Intel's 440BX products.
|
|
| June 11, 1998 |
|
June 10, 1998
The Register
|
Copper technology is set to arrive in
Xeon servers towards the end of this month. A source
close to IBM's plans today confirmed that it will
introduce its own technology into machines at the
motherboard level. Last year, IBM announced a
breakthrough technology which allowed it to effectively
weld silicon to copper, making the speed of the data
throughput much faster. When it announced the technology
breakthrough, previously revealed here, its partner in
the Power PC consortium, Motorola, followed up with its
own announcement.
|
|
|
By Lisa DiCarlo
June 10, 1998
PC Week Online
|
If you're confused by Intel Corp.'s
32-bit road map, join the crowd. Since the Santa Clara,
Calif., company decided in the fall to segment its
processors for specific markets, such as portables,
low-cost PCs, mainstream PCs and servers, terms such as
"frontside bus," "backside cache" and
"Slot 1/Slot 2" suddenly became important for
system buyers to understand.
Why?
|
|
|
By Michael Kanellos
June 10, 1998
C/Net
|
Is Intel coercive or not? The latest
debate over the character of the chipmaker's business
dealings centers on its foray into the graphics chip
business. On Monday, the Federal Trade Commission filed
an action against the Santa Clara, California-based
company for unfair business practices. But specific
examples of misconduct, especially allegedly predatory
pricing, more often than not prove elusive, according to
analysts.
|
|
|
By Rob Guth and Terho Uimonen
June 11, 1998
InfoWorld Electric
|
The newly appointed CEO of Intel, in an
interview here Wednesday night, shot down recent reports
that his company is selling its graphics chips at deep
discounts in order to gain market share and reduce
inventories of its first-generation graphics accelerator
chip. "[Bull]," said Intel President and CEO
Craig Barrett when asked about charges that his company
is selling the i740 chip at below cost.
|
|
| Ongoing Intel/FTC
Drama |
|
By Robert Lemos
June 10, 1998
ZD Net News
|
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission's
complaint against Intel may spell relief for PC makers
who use its chips, but offers little solace to the
company's rivals, said industry execs and analysts. "They
are attacking the symptoms of Intel's dominance rather
than the core problem," said Mike Feibus, principal
analyst with Mercury Research. "They are not
addressing the issue of why Intel has over 80 percent of
the market."
|
|
|
By PC Week Online Staff
June 10, 1998
PC Week Online
|
Intel Corp. on Tuesday appealed a
judge's preliminary injunction in its ongoing legal
dispute with Intergraph Corp., according to Wednesday's
edition of the Wall Street Journal. The appeal was
filed in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington
one day after the Federal Trade Commission announced an
investigation of Intel (INTC) based partly on the
Intergraph case.
|
|
| June 10, 1998 |
|
By Dan Goodin
June 9, 1998
C/Net
|
A brief filed yesterday by Intel in its
ongoing litigation with Intergraph could be a guide to
interpreting the legal position the chipmaker will take
in its case with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The
brief argues that a lower court judge erred in numerous
ways when he ruled in favor of Intergraph in its
antitrust and patent infringement suit against Intel.
Chief among the errors: neither Intergraph nor U.S.
District Judge Edwin Nelson showed that Intel's dealings
with the Huntsville, Alabama, workstation maker harmed
competition, as required by federal antitrust law.
|
|
|
By Reuters
June 10, 1998
ZD Net News
|
In an antitrust case separate from the
one involving the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, Intel
Corp. has filed an appeal denying it held a monopoly or
harmed a competitor, the Wall Street Journal reported
Wednesday. Intel filed the appeal on Tuesday in the
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington seeking to
overturn a preliminary injunction issued last April in a
lawsuit filed by Intergraph Corp.
|
|
Intel
appeals to another judge
It's not interested in graphics
sub-systems, chip goliath claims
June 10 1998
The Register
|
Intel has formally lodged an appeal
against an injunction granted to Intergraph in a
continuing legal battle to fight allegations of
anti-competitive practices. US reports said that it
appealed to the Washington Circuit Court and filed a 64
page document claiming that an Alabama judge had erred by
suggesting Intergraph and Intel were competitors. Intel's
case is that because it doesn't make graphic subsystems,
it cannot be accused of being a monopoly.
|
|
|
June 08, 1998
ZD Net News
|
FTC Charges Intel Why is the Federal
Trade Commission charging Intel with antitrust
violations? William Baer, director of the FTC Bureau of
Competition, spells out the government's case.
|
|
|
By Will Wade
June 10, 1998
Semiconductor Business News
|
The pending antitrust case against Intel
Corp. will have little impact upon the chipmaker's daily
operations, according to both the company and analysts.
And despite the strong allegation in Monday's official
Federal Trade Commission filing (see June 8 story),
Intel's share prices have proven steady as Wall Street
affirms its opinion of the world's largest semiconductor
company. "The FTC case will have no impact
whatsoever on the company," said Jonathan Joseph,
semiconductor analyst at NationsBanc Montgomery
Securities. "There is no worst-case scenario."
|
|
|
Mark Hachman
June 9, 1998
Electronic Buyer's News
|
The federal government yesterday charged
Intel Corp. with illegally using its monopoly power in
relationships with three OEMs: Compaq Computer Corp.,
Digital Equipment Corp., and Intergraph Corp. As
expected, the agency contended that Intel illegally cut
off the supply of technical information and threatened to
cut off a supply of microprocessors when the three OEMs
attempted to enforce certain patent rights against Intel
or computer manufacturers favored by Intel. At this time,
the government's case does not include a broader
examination of Intel's practices regarding emerging
markets such as graphics chips or audio.
|
|
|
By Reuters
June 9, 1998
C/Net
|
Intel's chief executive said the Federal
Trade Commission's antitrust lawsuit would not have much
effect on its business or any financial impact in the
marketplace. "I don't think this lawsuit has much
at all to do with competition in the marketplace, so I
don't think it's going to have much effect on our
business," CEO Craig Barrett told a news conference
here.
|
|
|
By Aaron Goldberg
June 9, 1998
ZD Net News
|
The delay in Merced availability has
been pooh-poohed and sloughed off by Intel, its OEMs and
the analyst community at large. While the reason behind
the delay is not a game-breaker -- and Intel has the
skills to solve the problem -- the delay does directly
impact IT professionals. Although Merced availability
is still far off -- its 1999 release date was pushed back
to the year 2000 -- the reality is that Merced is the
architecture that will place PC-based systems in a
position of power. It will allow PCs to vie with any
proprietary or Unix system on an application-performance
basis.
|
|
| June 9, 1998 |
| Intel
Anti-trust Special Edition: The Accusations |
FTC
Lowers The Boom On Intel
After Months Of Investigation, FTC
Decides To Charge Intel With Violating Antitrust Laws.
Mark Hachman
June 9, 1998
Electronic Buyer's News
|
The federal government today charged
Intel Corp. with illegally using its monopoly power in
relationships with three OEMs: Compaq Computer Corp.,
Digital Equipment Corp., and Integraph Corp. As
expected, the agency contended that Intel illegally cut
off the supply of technical information and threatened to
cut off a supply of microprocessors when the three OEMs
attempted to enforce those patents against Intel or
against other OEMs Intel favored.
"Intel has acted illegally. It has used its
monopoly power to impede innovation and stifle
competition," said William J. Baer, Director of the
FTC’s Bureau of Competition, said in a statement
today.
|
|
|
By Tom Quinlan and Rory J. O'Connor
June 9, 1998
San Jose Mercury News
|
The Federal Trade Commission filed a
widely anticipated antitrust complaint against Intel
Corp. on Monday with an unusual legal basis: It seeks to
take laws designed to govern competition among rivals and
apply them to the relationship between a supplier and its
customers. The straightforward, 11-page complaint
alleges that Intel abused its microprocessor monopoly to
manhandle three computer companies -- Compaq Computer
Corp., Digital Equipment Corp. and Intergraph Corp. At
first glance, it is a powerful indictment of the hardware
half of the personal computer industry's ``Wintel''
duopoly, coming on the heels of last month's antitrust
suit against software giant Microsoft Corp.
|
|
|
|
In the Matter of Intel Corporation -
Docket 9288 - Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of
the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by virtue of the
authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade
Commission, having reason to believe that Intel
Corporation (“Intel”) has engaged in a pattern
of conduct, as described herein, that violates Section 5
of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15
U.S.C. ß 45, and it appearing to the Commission that a
proceeding in respect thereof would be in the public
interest, hereby issues its complaint, stating its
charges as follows:
|
|
|
By Michael Kanellos
June 8, 1998
C/Net
|
The Federal Trade Commission voted today
to sue Intel, charging the company with using its market
dominance to hurt rivals and hinder competition in the
computing industry. The agency listed PC leader Compaq
Computer as a company that allegedly was injured by
Intel's business practices. It added that the chipmaker
had violated antitrust law in dealings with two other
computer manufacturers: Digital Equipment, and
Intergraph.
|
|
|
By Alexander Wolfe
June 9, 1998
EE Times
|
Confiming long-standing reports of a
pending antitrust suit, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission
on Monday charged Intel Corp. with using "its
monopoly power to cement its dominance over the
microprocessor market." Specifically, the FTC
cited Intel for illegally withholding technical
information from three companies: Digital Equipment
Corp., Intergraph Corp. and Compaq Computer Corp. The FTC
said Intel (Santa Clara, Calif.) sought to punish the
three for refusing to license key patents on favorable
terms.
|
|
|
By Lisa DiCarlo
June 8, 1998
PC Week Online
|
The Federal Trade Commission today
charged that Intel Corp. violated federal antitrust law
by denying three customers access to technical
information after the companies separately sought to
enforce patents against Intel. The three companies
named in the FTC's case are Intergraph Corp., Digital
Equipment Corp. and Compaq Computer Corp.
|
|
|
June 9, 1998
The Register
|
The Intel Corporation has responded to
an 11 page allegation from the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) that it engaged in anti-trust action by claiming
that the government department does not understand the
law. And, like the DoJ case against Microsoft, Compaq is
now part of the fray. The FTC decided late Monday to
charge that Intel used its power to withdraw information
from Intergraph, Digital and Compaq after all three
companies refused to license patents to the chip giant.
According to the charge sheets, Intel responded by
refusing to give all three companies essential
information they needed to develop future products and
technologies.
|
|
|
By Michael Kanellos
June 8, 1998
C/Net
|
Intel and one of its chief antagonists,
Intergraph, wasted little time in waging a public war of
words over the government's decision to pursue legal
action against the chip behemoth today. Intel said the
Federal Trade Commission is venturing into untested legal
waters as regulators voted to press charges against the
chipmaker for anticompetitive behavior.
|
|
|
San Jose Mercury News
|
Past stories in the San Jose Mercury
News archives. |
|
| Intel
Anti-trust Special Edition: Industry Response |
|
By Lisa DiCarlo
June 8, 1998
PC Week Online
|
It looks like another high-tech behemoth
is going to the mat with federal regulators. Intel
Corp. this afternoon said that the Federal Trade
Commission's antitrust complaint, filed today, is
"based upon a mistaken interpretation of the law and
the facts."
The Santa Clara, Calif., company said it will appeal
to the federal courts if necessary.
|
|
|
By Reuters
June 9, 1998
Techweb
|
Intel's CEO said Tuesday the Federal
TradeCommission's antitrust lawsuit against the world's
largest computer chip maker would not have much effect on
its business or any financial impact in the marketplace. "I
don't think this lawsuit has much at all to do with
competition in the marketplace, so I don't think it's
going to have much effect on our business," said CEO
Craig Barrett at a news conference here in Tokyo.
|
|
|
The following is Intel's response to the Federal Trade
Commission's complaint regarding its business practices:
|
Intel Corporation said today that it
believes the Federal Trade Commission’s
administrative complaint before an FTC Administrative Law
Judge is based upon a mistaken interpretation of the law
and the facts. |
|
|
The following is Intergraph's response to the Federal
Trade Commission's complaint against Intel:
|
Intergraph Corporation today made the
following statement in response to the U.S. Federal Trade
Commission’s filing of a lawsuit against Intel
Corporation. |
|
|
By Will Wade
June 8, 1998
Semiconductor Business News
|
Intel Corp. here today refuted the
Federal Trade Commission's allegations that it engaged in
unfair business practices by withholding technical
information from three large computer companies. Intel's
response came hours after the FTC announced it was suing
the microprocessor giant for violating antitrust laws--a
move that has been widely anticipated for weeks. Immediately
after the suit was announced, Intel issued a statement
asserting that the government's case is based on a flawed
interpretation of both the law and the relevant facts.
The FTC's action did little to phase Wall Street,
however, as the company's stock dipped only $0.50 to
$69.32 from last week's closing price.
|
|
|
By Rob Guth and Andy Santoni
June 9, 1998
InfoWorld Electric
|
Intel's president and CEO on Tuesday
said he disagreed with the premise of the U.S. Federal
Trade Commission's antitrust complaint, made Monday
against his company, and said he is willing to appeal the
final ruling in U.S. federal court. Speaking here
Tuesday, Intel President and CEO Craig Barrett and
attendant company officials outlined their stance on the
FTC complaint that declared Intel had withheld vital
technology information from three computer vendors.
|
|
| Intel
Anti-trust Special Edition: News Analysis |
|
By Michael Kanellos
June 8, 1998
C/Net
|
Three computers makers are at the heart
of the Federal Trade Commission's case against Intel. The
FTC is alleging that Intel has used its monopoly position
in an unlawful manner against Digital, Intergraph and
Compaq.
|
|
|
By Tom Quinlan
June 9, 1998
San Jose Mercury News
|
For most of the past 18 years, Intel
Corp. and Microsoft Corp. have stood together -- as the
twin towers of the PC industry, controlling today a huge
share of their respective markets. On Monday, the two
came together in a new arena -- as the subjects of
federal complaints that they've abused monopoly power. On
the surface, the cases against the Redmond, Wash.,
software behemoth and the Santa Clara microprocessor
giant sound much the same. In truth, they are different
procedurally and in terms of their importance to the
companies. These differences underscore deeper contrasts
between the two halves of what's become known as the
``Wintel'' duopoly.
|
|
|
By Dan Gillmor
June 9, 1998
San Jose Mercury News
|
AS THE other half of the Wintel duopoly
heads into battle with antitrust authorities, some
questions: Does Intel Corp., which was charged Monday
with anti-competitive business practices, treat its
competitors and customers harshly? It does.
Will the Federal Trade Commission's case against Intel
hold up in court? Maybe not.
|
|
|
By Will Rodger
June 9, 1998
Inter@ctive Week
|
Few antitrust cases are straightforward,
and Intel Corp.'s case is no exception. According to
papers filed here Monday by the Federal Trade Commission,
Intel has violated U.S. antitrust laws by trying to
coerce computer makers into handing over their best
technical ideas free of charge. In exchange, Intel would
continue to supply technical information needed to build
computers compatible with its microprocessors.
|
|
|
By Tom Quinlan
June 9, 1998
San Jose Mercury News
|
In just nine short months, the Federal
Trade Commission's investigation of Intel has dwindled
from the darkest cloud on the chip giant's horizon to a
minor shower. Last September, when the Santa Clara
company first revealed the FTC probe, it stood at the
apex of one of the world's premier growth industries,
virtually free from competitive challenge. Today, Intel's
money machine is sputtering amid turmoil in the personal
computer industry.
|
|
|
By Suzanne Galante
June 8, 1998
C/Net
|
Intel had another weight loaded onto its
already depressed stock today as the Federal Trade
Commission decided to sue the company. But at least in
the short term, the chipmaker's stock shouldn't be hurt
solely by the action, because it came as no surprise,
some analysts said. Likewise, Microsoft's stock has held
up fairly well despite the antitrust lawsuit filed
against it last month.
|
|
|
By Dan Goodin
June 8, 1998
C/Net
|
In sharp contrast to a separate
antitrust action filed last month against another PC
industry giant, the Federal Trade Commission's complaint
against Intel contains few dramatic revelations or
previously unknown allegations. In its lawsuit against
Microsoft, the Justice Department included numerous
"smoking guns" that provided specific details
of alleged anticompetitive behavior. In one internal
memorandum, for example, a Microsoft executive suggested
the company should try to "kill cross-platform Java
by grow[ing] the polluted Java market," an exhibit
that helps bolster the government's case that Microsoft
engaged in a pattern of illegal behavior.
|
|
|
By Mary Mosquera
June 9, 1998
TechWeb
|
Intel shot back at the Federal Trade
Commission Monday, saying its antitrust suit against the
global chip maker was "based upon a mistaken
interpretation of the law and the facts." "Intel
intends to work through the administrative complaint
process and, if necessary, appeal to a federal court. We
believe that ultimately that process will conclude that
our actions are lawful," said Intel's general
counsel, F. Thomas Dunlap.
|
|
| Intel
Anti-trust Special Edition: Other x86-related News |
|
June 9, 1998
The Register
|
A legal spat between Cyrix and Creative
Technology has been settled out of court, with the former
company forced to stop using Creative's software drivers
or to make claims that its Media GX chips are
SoundBlaster compatible. Creative sued both Cyrix and
Compaq, which used the Media GX chip in some of its PCs
after Cyrix claimed that its Media GX chipset was
compatible with the SoundBlaster audio technology it
makes.
|
|
|
By Tom Davey with Mary Hayes
June 8, 1998
InformationWeek
|
Customers weary of the demands of
constant server upgrades said they are not disturbed by
the delay of Merced, Intel's highly touted 64-bit chip.
With the launch of its Xeon processor on June 29, Intel
may be offering quite enough power to satisfy many users'
existing and near-term needs. Next week at PC Expo,
vendors will demonstrate their first Xeon systems and
provide preferred customers with technical and
benchmarking data. Among the companies to join as
participants in the Xeon rollout are Hitachi and Toshiba,
which will introduce their first servers for U.S. buyers
at the show.
|
|
|
By Mark Hachman
June 8, 1998
Electronic Buyers' News
|
Intel is scheduled to update its desktop
processor pricing Monday, according to confidential
company road maps provided by Intel's customers. The
400-, 350-, 333-, 300-, 266-, and 233-MHz Pentium II will
sell for $722, $519, $412, $305, $198, and $198,
respectively. Pricing for the 300- and 266-MHz Celeron
processors without Level 2 cache will be $159 and $106,
respectively.
|
|
|
By Michael Kanellos
June 8, 1998
C/Net
|
In tandem with price cuts on its
mainstream Pentium II processors, Intel released a new
300-MHz version of its Celeron microprocessor for budget
computers, which is expected to spawn a spate of new
low-cost machines, including the first for less than
$1,000 from Dell Computer. And, unlike the lukewarm
reception that the 266-MHz version of the chip met with
upon its release, nearly all of the major PC
manufacturers, including Dell, are expected to release
systems based around this latest version of the chip over
the next few days, sources close to Intel said.
|
|
| June 8, 1998 |
|
By Brian Fuller and Anthony Cataldo
June 5, 1998
EE Times
|
While Intel Corp. stayed mum on the
causes and systems vendors dismissed the effects of the
delay in the Merced processor, long-suffering Digital
Equipment Corp. suddenly found itself with a thin ray of
hope in pitting its Alpha microprocessor against Intel's
processor dominance. Intel this week declined to add
further details to its May 29 statement, made after the
close of the stock market, that its first 64-bit CPU
would slip at least six months from an expected 1999 ramp
to sometime in 2000.
|
See
Today's Related Stories |
|
By Edward F. Moltzen
June 5, 1998
Computer Reseller News
|
Intel Corp. will offer its new Pentium
II Xeon processor as a potential alternative in mid-range
to high-end solutions until its now-delayed Merced 64-bit
processor is released, executives said. Engineers from
the Santa Clara, Calif.-based chip maker said in a
briefing this week that, although they did not plan on
it, the Xeon technology could fill the gap in workstation
and server situations created by Merced's stumble.
|
|
|
By Sandy Chen
June 5, 1998
Computer Reseller News
|
National Semiconductor Corp. has finally
arrived at a name for the low-cost system-on-a-chip
device it first previewed in April, dubbing the highly
integrated microprocessor the MediaPC. Speaking at the
recent Computex ’98 show here, Brian L. Halla,
chairman, president, and chief executive of National,
Santa Clara, Calif., said the chip is scheduled for a
June 1999 introduction, at which time it will replace the
MediaGX integrated processor manufactured by subsidiary
Cyrix Corp., Richardson, Texas.
|
|
|
By Reuters
June 7, 1998
C/Net
|
The government’s anticipated
antitrust lawsuit against Intel--expected to focus on the
chip giant’s practice of withholding its
intellectual treasuresfrom some computer makers--will
probably be flawed,
analysts say. On Monday, the Federal Trade Commission
is expected to file a lawsuit against Intel alleging the
world’s biggest chip maker abused its microprocessor
monopoly power to bully other high-tech companies. The
microprocessor is the heart of the personal computer.
|
See
Today's Updated Stories |
|
June 4, 1998
The Register
|
Pugnacious NatSemi CEO Brian Halla was
talking deals at both ends of the market yesterday in
Taipei. On the one hand Halla was reiterating NatSemi's
commitment to producing Slot 1 chips, and on the other we
was warmly supporting Acer boss Stan Shih's vision of the
XC application-specific device (see separate story,
below). |
|
|
June 8, 1998
The Register
|
In a swift response to news exclusively
reported here that Acer and National Semiconductor are to
team up on low-end systems, Intel has rejigged its
roadmap for the year. Intel has also confirmed other
details of its roadmap, previously revealed here. A
source from the company said that the map now looks like
this. Intel will release its 300MHz Celeron processor in
Q2 of 1998, while its 300 and 333MHz products with 128K
of integrated level two cache will arrive in the fourth
quarter of this year.
|
|
|
By Mary Hayes
June 8, 1998
InformationWeek
|
Intel accelerated the road map for its
Celeron chip, and will announce details of a 300-MHz
Celeron chip June 8, company officials said. The
analyst community has scrutinized the performance of
Intel's (company profile) first Celeron, a 266-MHz chip
for low-cost computers that was introduced in April.
Because the current Celeron design does not have Level 2
cache, which is a special type of high-speed memory, it
is considerably slower in performance than Pentium II
chips with comparable clock speeds.
|
|
| Updated Stories |
|
By Michael Kanellos
June 7, 1998
C/Net
|
The Federal Trade Commission is expected
to meet on Monday to vote on whether to take action
against Intel. Sources close to the case expect that
the commission's four members--a fifth slot is
empty--will vote at a midday meeting Monday to charge
that Intel abused market power by forcing other companies
to surrender their trade secrets.
|
|
| Today's Related Stories |
|
By Lisa DiCarlo
June 8, 1998
PC Week Online
|
A six-month delay in Intel Corp.'s first
64-bit processor will put more emphasis on 32-bit
platforms for enterprise computing. But that will provide
even less incentive for IT managers to move off their
battle-tested, proprietary data center platforms any time
soon. With the release of the 64-bit Merced chip pushed
back to mid-2000, Intel and its partners are working to
add muscle to the 32-bit Pentium platform to serve more
mission-critical needs.
|
|
