Quote from: BitSyncom on January 12, 2013, 02:51:48 PM

Quote from: nathanrees19 on January 12, 2013, 02:17:15 PM

None of the mining FPGA vendors "developed" their own FPGAs. They all designed boards, picked an FPGA and developed a bitstream. BFL designed boards, picked an FPGA and developed a bitstream.

How exactly does using recycled FPGAs make it a "fraud"?

You may be confusing it with the practice of sanding off a chip and printing a different and wrong label on it in order to falsely sell it as a different or new chip, similar to taking a 1GB sd card but labelling it as 16GB for sale. You're effectively complaining about (the equivalent of) an android phone, sold as having 16GB capacity, having a real 16GB card inside it, but with the label sanded off so that you can't see that it's a Sandisk, not a Kingston, even though the brand of the card was never mentioned in the phone specs. Oh noes! Fraud!

If the BFL single was called "xc6slx150 computation board" and had a chip with xc6slx150 printed on it (but was the Altera chip), then yes, that would be fraud.

You are missing the part where their advertised specification and released product was different. this has nothing to do with what chip they used. They did not meet their initial advertised speed of power consumption, which is why many, including knowledgeable people comment it on being a scam or a fraud initially.

I have no doubt BFL will eventually ship, although I highly doubt they will meet their 1W per 1GH/s rate though. History will repeat themselves, people just don't learn. Time will tell.

Speaking of which, are you guys meeting your targets?

Did the chip packer confirm things are looking good on your end? (Within spec)