Post
Topic
Board Hardware
Re: Kano vs Bitsyncom
by
kano
on 09/02/2013, 06:35:42 UTC
sigh, you know what, I've lost faith in you kano. I'll leave you with some parting notes for historical purposes.

- xiangfu can get access to units anytime he wishes, physically; there is a unit for him once various mess due to CNY blows over; the real cause is lack of time, all your other "guesses" are incorrect. fact: none of the people on the Avalon team have their own units yet.
- I should have known better when you nitpicked me on the "patch" vs "pull request" issue before. The removal of debugging information is still my answer, but this is not cgminer related, it is however still the reason why we can't just push the repo to a public git somewhere. If you choose to interpret this as violation of license that's up to you.

I think next time in the future like with batch two, I will only announce things at their worst possible outcome, so people won't complain as much and there's nothing to troll. e.g.

- batch #1 will finish shipping by end of Feb, 2013 as originally stated when this project first started back in September.
- source code will release 30 days to comply to an infringement notice from a copyright holder.
- not announce anything regarding open sourcing and show up one day with a github url.
- and the list goes on.
Yeah I get it.
Being open (and open source) and the best of the ASIC producers was too much for you.
As soon as something changed that made that difficult, your ideals were ... something else all together.
You've sunk to the level of hiding information and not supporting your customers and not giving them updates.

As for debugging, ah OK, 182 Avalons contain this debugging that's somehow problematic.
Oops ...

Anyone considering buying an Avalon should take this into consideration:
Quote
I think next time in the future like with batch two, I will only announce things at their worst possible outcome ...