I find the following disconcerting:

Quote from: kleeck on February 15, 2014, 11:07:29 PM

Quote from: brianpbaker on February 15, 2014, 10:45:55 PM

I don't see how we can have a legitimate discussion regarding the two chips. Both chips are nothing but specifications at this point, but one set of specs is coming from an established company with a proven track record of delivering actual products, while the other is simply specs. I hope we end up shipping product on the date that has been announced, but history is not on our side.

You can't assess your position in a race if you're not even running yet. I am more interested in acquiring some concrete evidence of anything Ken has announced to us before I worry about our position in the field.

If you are still unsure of the 55nm tape out then you aren't in the position to discuss this.
For those of us that know that the UMC 55nm chip has achieved tape-out, what do you think about the chips? I've heard some EEs sincerely doubting the AM offering's power draw, but I don't know enough to weigh in. Is what FC claims possible?

Also, word on the street is that the UMC 55nm is being produced at sub $1/GH. What is a reasonable profit margin for these chips?

With all that has happened, it is only rational to demand documentation. Yet there still hasn't been any poof of a 55nm tape-out, with Ken stating that he has zero documentation.

No NDA this time, so what's the deal? It's not 'trolling' to ask these questions.

Quote from: kslaughter link=topic=297503.msg5127415#msg5127415

I don't have any documentation on the tapeout. This was for the shuttle run and prototypes which we have canceled and have now changed to the production run. See my weekly update for the wafer delivery dates.