its a somewhat selectively accurate chart that has downgraded some companies more than others for making identical mistakes. for instance, AsicMiner's latest chip ended up much worse than double its power consumption from the announced spec to the delivery, yet that hasnt been recognised.
No. AM missed estimated specs. AM doesn't sell preorders and doesn't guarantee estimated specs. Investors simply asked FC to gaze in to his magic crystal ball and he happened to be wrong just like every single manufacturer to date. Nobody was ripped off or scammed. Only a bunch of disappointed investors.
I also object that AsicMiner in the past has sold off old stock and perhaps even used systems that were under performers and over power consumers, and yet theyve been classed as shipping on time, when in reality they were simply upgrading their own private mine, and selling off the old boards in new boxes.. and yet that was interpreted as 'can do no wrong' by the asicminer fanboys.
So you just made up a hypothetical situation and expect AM to get penalized for it?
Please show me a single person complaining about late shipping or used hardware.
i didn't make it up, but you're totally right.. people don't seem to complain when they've bought inefficient old chips, as new. I've seen people in these forums praising AM to the stars for shipping 'excellent' products that consumed for some reason significantly more power than any other system available by a large margin, and calling them rock solid and fantastic systems. even those that consumed multiple watts per gigahash. but you're absolutely right, people seem happy with buying AM's old stock 'as new'. that all changed with the current AM chip which is being sold as 'fresh' and seems to be a new business model for AM however even that one was considerably out of spec when it was released. (promised to be 0.35 watts/GH in the spec, and ended up consuming a lot more).