The minute I read that the EU had decided to stick Intel with a fine of over one billion Euros for purported anti-trust violations, I almost threw a heavy object at a nearby wall. Adding insult to injury, the EU provided a whole host of reasons why this move would ultimately benefit consumers, which I doubt it will. This looks to me like a clever way for the EU to levy a tariff on American goods without violating trade agreements.

But let us take a few steps back. The EU brought a suit against Intel, the world's largest microprocessor manufacturer, for engaging in some practices it deemed anticompetitive, such as offering computer manufacturers discounts for large orders or for signing exclusivity agreements. The EU argued (and continues to argue) that these practices drove other players out of the market, principally AMD, which hurt consumers by reducing the incentive to innovate and restricting their choice. It also helped the EU's case that Intel has about 80% market share: market dominance the EU claimed was only possible through Intel's various business strategies.

None of this makes any sense. Many companies offer other large buyers or exclusive partners preferential pricing or other benefits. BMW, I believe, outfits all of its vehicles with Michelin brand tires. Yet I doubt the EU would impose an enormous fine on BMW if they discovered Michelin offered the German carmaker lower prices than Audi, provided Audi buys their tires from some other manufacturer.

Furthermore, I don't see how the bundling practices the EU so dislikes hurt consumers. First and foremost, the agreements Intel had with computer manufacturers gave consumers cheaper computers! While Intel may have the personal computer microprocessor market cornered, there exists heated competition among computer manufacturers to produce the cheapest computers possible. Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that, if Dell managed to procure processors for its computers at a lower cost, Dell would sell the computers to consumers at a lower price. Could someone please explain why having access to cheaper computers hurts consumers?

The EU also fails to recognize the fact that Intel plain and simple makes a better product. I recommend people buy laptops with Intel processors not because Intel pays me to do so, but rather because Intel makes the best notebook processors. It hardly seems reasonable to punish a company who has, by and large, managed to obtain market dominance by providing a superior product to its competitors.

Not that average consumers really care whether their computer has an Intel band microprocessor anyway. Saying that a shopper will prefer one laptop to another solely because the preferred laptop has an Intel processor would be akin to a car buyer opting for an Audi over a BMW because the Audi has a Bose brand sound system. Yes, I can imagine there are some people who might do that (crazy people at that), but I doubt whether the average or "reasonable" person would.

Intel has appealed the decision, and I'm sure they have a top-notch legal team to combat the EU's absolutely ludicrous ruling. By imposing this fine, the EU does nothing to help consumers, unless forcing people to spend more for computers fits their definition of "help consumers." The ruling also cements the perception that the EU's is a place hostile to business, something I'm sure the millions of unemployed Europeans will love when they go looking for jobs. It just makes no sense.

I have devoted so much time on my blog to bashing textbooks I thought it was time to lavish one with praise.

While I cringed at the cash register when I paid for Miklós Bóna's "Introduction to Enumerative Combinatorics," I have few qualms with contents of the (overpriced) volume. Unlike most textbooks, which dumb down the material with colorful pictures and so-called "real-word applications" in cute colored boxes, this textbook dishes the concepts out straight. It is to most textbooks what a shot of espresso is to a double soy chai chocolate cinnamon lemon ginger latte with whipped cream.

The author also has a subtle sense of humor that permeates the explanations, examples and exercises. Take this gem from page 83:

It's not quite as entertaining as a performance by the local improv troupe. It is, however, far better than a dry example involving boxes and tokens of various colors, or an example that tries too hard by including gnomes, unicorns and other fanciful — but entirely unfunny — creatures and features.

As a relatively new text, the book does have a few typos here and there. But these do not outweigh the benefit provided by the clarity of writing, lack of superfluous fluff and colorful style. If the publisher knocked about $150 off the price tag, it would be perfect.

Sometime today Dell launched a new section of their main website called "Della." While Dell makes no overt claims about Della's intended audience, it's clear Della targets women buying computers.

No doubt, within a few hours the hoard of feminist technology bloggers online will produce (or have already produced) a few volumes worth of writing decrying Dell's latest initiative as misogynistic, sexist or both. "Surely," these bloggers will argue, "Women don't need to have a special section of the Dell website with softer corners, pastel corners and helpful tips to buy a computer."

But I disagree. In my experience, most people — women and men — have a hard time wading through page after page of configuration options when they go to buy a computer. So much so they would benefit from a dumbed-down buying experience.

On Dell's website, for instance, people have a choice between 13 different laptop computers and 14 different desktop computers. Even the particularly adept souls who manage to pick one model have even more choices to make once they've whittled those 27 choices down to one. By my count someone who choses to buy a Dell Studio 15 laptop can configure the computer in nearly 3 sextillion different ways, assuming they only either buy one or zero sets of speakers along with their laptop. (A sextillion, by the way, is a one followed by 21 zeros. A stack of 3 sextillion one dollar bills would reach from the surface of the earth to the sun and back about 10 million times.)

For tech savvy people, the degree of customization Dell offers is wonderful. Should I ever decide to defect from the Macintosh camp and buy a Dell laptop, the number of choices Dell offers would draw me to their site. For everyone else, however, such choices are surely confusing. When most people buy a computer they want a product that will edit their photos, or allow them to email their friends. I doubt they care whether their computer's processor can do 2 billion calculations versus 2.4 billion calculations every second.

This is one reason Apple has been so successful of late. Indeed, they offer online shoppers the ability to customize many of their computer's features. But they also offer a fairly limited selection of computers, and they do not try to befuddle consumers with choices. Their online store also makes it easy to skip right past the "Customize Your Mac" step to the shopping cart.

By stressing the fact that every computer they sell ships with iLife and OS X, Apple implies that every computer can do everything most people want to do with a computer: edit photos, browse the Internet and so on. The few choices consumers must make, such as whether to buy the MacBook or the MacBook Pro, can be done without too much of an understanding of technology.

The average buyer could probably answer the questions, "Would I be willing to pay $700 more to do everything faster?" or "Do I care about having a 15-inch screen?" without too much difficulty. On the other hand, John Q. Shopper would not know whether the "Dell Wireless 1397 802.11g Half Mini-Card" or "Intel WiFi Link 5100 802.11agn Half Mini-Card" best fit his needs.

Dell has the right idea with Della: make buying a computer less confusing. But in this case, it's the men of the world — or at least the men who refuse to shop for a computer with pink flowers all over the page — who lose.