Quote from: armyof1ne on May 17, 2014, 04:20:51 PM

Quote from: cedivad on May 17, 2014, 03:48:20 PM

Quote from: starsoccer9 on May 17, 2014, 03:10:57 PM

If there supposed story is true had all intentions to ship last week of oct, or first week of nov.

Well, let's start by defining what version of their supposed story we should take into account:

1) Edward's house fire forced Simon to focus on the business side and he forgot to take a look at the board. He realised 3 days before shipping that the board was late. (I couldn't help myself not to laugh while writing this).
2) Their core competence was focused on the ASIC that taped out in August and didn't notice that the boards were late until 3 days before shipping.
3) Substrates. Don't forget substrates. And don't forget that everything else was right on schedule or ahead of schedule, but substrates.

HashLabs: Thank you for making our case so much easier Kiss

wasn't there 2 "board problems", "substrate" issues were present after the redesign i thought? hence why they didn't ship batch 1 barely. and the ones that did ship failed within the first 20 days or so? Does anyone even have a functional babyjet/sierra still that didn't need to be sent back for repair?

let me offer clarity;

Hashfast failed, now you are here to instigate in-fighting amongst those who Hashfast conned out of money.
methinks you would be better fucking off to a planet of your own and causing your own argument, with yourself.