Topic: Just what is a clock buffer anyway? - page 2. (Read 16570 times)

Get some education and help bud, not all of your current and future customers can be "pathological/liars". There is always a cause behind every situation. Find out what the commonalities are as a first step to a resolution.
 
http://www.dce.k-state.edu/humanecology/conflictresolution/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DVGZRYvxqc

It can be anything from communication issues to simply a lack of a broad understanding of a series of issues.

Fitting your current/former/future customers base into a labeled box of "liars" is an uneducated way of going about finding a resolution to these issues.

A former customer can be won back if you pamper them. Though you don't write to them as if they are trash once you have issued a refund. If you consider them trash or a waste of resources, at the tip of a hat, then what does it say about your valuation of these individuals buying products from you?

Stop with the "pathological liar" routine and start somewhere helpful. If there is an issue, find a way to correct it and resolve the issue.

P.S. Also, get Jody on the same page. Lately her statements are broad reaching and causes conflicting pieces of information to not jive with different statements.

Face-palm......

I cannot think of any useful digital logic design that is "clock-less" (suspend/resume is in-fact a type of "clock")
As is the case for a number of manufacturers.... this is what happens when sales people speak to engineers...
Sony also does it, you will find that the whole industry is ripe with it (using engineering terms incorrectly, that is.....)
http://funnysalescartoons.com/photo/dilbert-product-knowledge
http://funnysalescartoons.com/photo/dilbert-as-a-sales-engineer-on?context=latest

There you go lying again Puerto Libre.  Why do you insist on manufacturing facts and lying about things that can be readily discovered by anyone putting in even a little bit of time?  


Everything I say can be backed up with facts... just like the fact that you are, apparently, a pathological liar.  Faced with undeniable quotes you yourself made, you try to claim you "Oh no, I didn't really mean you wern't going the full custom route."  

Whatever, you are a joke Elden.  Just like Puerto Libre and CreativeX you have to make up "facts" to bash BFL.  You are pathetic. Unlike Puerto Libre and CreativeX, I had some respect for you until it became clear that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about and you're still pissed off BFL rained all over your parade last year.  If you were able to actually develop something people wanted, BFL wouldn't have been able to steal your thunder. But as it is, you're just a has been who can't actually compete so you resort to bashing and crying.  Pathetic.

The point still stands, anything you say with regards to technology and BFL in particular needs to be evaluated for "truthiness," because you're incapable (or unwilling) to actually tell the truth when it comes to design.  I'd hate to have actually tried to work with something you designed, it'd have be likely to electrocute me or something with your poor understanding of engineering.

Imagine your city without traffic lights. That will be your clockless chip. Not counting that you will need to feed nonces from outside.

Let me be the first to tell you that doesn't make any sense.

I would like you to elucidate on a point related to clock buffer and electromagnetic noise.

Question: Do you remember when one BFL representative started to mention FCC requirement for certifying a device and various other certification required for producing a device that complies with various international regulations?

Background 0: A BFL representative when asked about their own compliance with such regulations went on record to state that their device was currently in testing. (presumably at a lab)

Background 1: Later, after that debacle, when asked if there were any functional prototype devices, the BFL representative stated there were none at that time. (November)

Question: How can a device be sent to the FCC labs for testing and certification if there is no working and functional prototype?

Is that the reason why additional clock buffers were added? To reduce noise?

(Admittedly, this is unlikely, but possible)

Note: I presume that the clock buffer are/were to reduce noise localized to the chip. But I have to ask, was the noise leaking further than the immediate area of the chip? Did it fail FCC certification or inspection? Further, if there are no prototypes, then what was sent in late October for evaluation? [Speculation]

hahaha I love your new Avatar  


Little I know about designing chips but wouldn't a real, and most effective Bitcoin chip be better done without a clock or clockless? Units waiting for Data could so automatically be suspended and resume work just in time when they are needed.

I will be careful.

What you have received though is hardly comparable to what I may have received. Theymos (and Tom of bASIC) has an inkling as to what I mean. Other than that, no comment.

Be careful.  If you point out inconsistencies and ambiguities in BFL's announcements Josh will start rageflaming you.  Spoken from experience.

Unfortunately (and quite strangely) BFL keeps the real names of their employees secret, so I doubt we would find out about it until long afterward.

Sonny, his father, and Nasser were identified only by searching public records, and their press release weirdly uses initials instead of surnames.

Not at all; are you?  Because this is certainly a lie:


If this were true you would have quoted it.



Not at all.

I called you out on ambiguous and misleading terminology and you're trying to somehow construe that as a prediction about a product I've never seen.

Actually, most GPU miner would. So the argument falls flat on it's face for those types of customers.


First they said they would put their shipping dates first rather than compete with the new hash rate for the bASIC device (60Gh/s Vs 72Gh/s).

Then promptly, they released information that they would not receive their first batch until Mid December. Then revised the revision again to make it sometime in January. (A full 30 day delay)

Now we have a BFL representative that says their chips were not ready due to the adding of clock buffers. Recently implemented to reduce noise on the chip as well as aid in the overclocking of the chip.

Following on the heels of an announcement that they will be revising their chips packaging to include metal rather than plastic components.

---------------------------

What does this spell out to you?

It spells out to me that shipping is not their first priority.
It spells out to me that revising their hardware for competitive sake (at the cost of time) is their first priority. Counter-intuitive to what the two BFL representatives stated not more than a few days ago.

Hence, this is why the framing of the information....seems a bit off.

If someone were polite enough to ask a BFL representative if they were indeed changing their chip to a metal packaging on their FIRST revision, then that would clearly indicate their chip is still being revised and that even the January date is an optimistic sign.

Later on, if this speculation is spot on, they will release information that thier chip is actually not 60Gh/s but something higher. (Probably at the cost of more electrical juice, a beefier power adapter and a few months time.)

Keep in mind, if they are having a hard time sourcing High AMP wall adapters...I can only imagine how much harder it will be if this speculation is spot on.

I think it was remarkably similar to the same timeline a year ago.  They were supposed to ship October-ish in 2011, but actually shipped in March of 2012.

Furthermore, backlog of orders was only recently caught up on now in November 2012:

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/blogs/bfl_jody/41-fpga-orders-all-shipped.html

The facts hurt, huh?

Edit, by the way, they already did.

The new date for reciept of BFL ASIC (not shipping out to customers, mind you) has now been revised from Dec 11 to later in the month.

Aye, Plan B is as bad as Plan Z.

Well unless your second option ships before BFL. That would be the ultimate act of humiliation for that company.

I wasn't around when BFL first started advertising their FPGA single, so I've got a question that I'm sure someone in here knows the answer to.

How long did it take for the first Singles to ever start arriving to customers after their initial release date was supposed to happen? 3 months? 6 months?

On the part of Avalon this is false. They only took in 300 and there is currently no second batch.

They took in only 300 to make sure (they said) they could deliver in a shorter time frame than other vendors.

With BTCFPGA, they may start a second batch as their initial batch is 30% (or thereabouts) not filled with paying customers.

BTCFPGA is not all that different than BFL in their order sizes.


I think the warning sign is when employees start to bail from the company.

At that point I would worry that the whole thing will fall apart.

Quoted for emphasis. Hopefully BFL/Inaba can be sure to fulfill this promise then.

I hope for the sake of BFL customers that turns out to be true...unlike nearly everything else you've said with regard to BFL shipping dates.

Since when is BFL up front or honest about anything? If you guys had told everyone in September that October shipping was a fairy tale, and the reality was a "fuzzy" hopefully maybe January shipping date, how many would've cancelled then? Now that's some HUGE hidden cost. I have a dozen PSUs on hand thanks, not worried about it, but I appreciate your concern. Perhaps your concern would be better utilized getting your own very late product out the door? Oh that's right you said January all along...cept when you didn't.

Yeah, and BFL will still be shipping before bASIC.  As for cheaper per G/h, good luck with that, but you already knew that BFL would match competitive offerings.  Enjoy your 200w piece o' junk that is obsolete before it even ships!  Oh, tell me again how much power or even what kind of power connector bASIC is going to be using?  Do you get a PSU with your unit? No?  You mean you have to BUY a PSU, cables, etc...?  Really?  So I guess that $1069.00 isn't really the REAL cost of running a bASIC is it?  Yay for hidden costs!  At least BFL is up front and honest about the cost of a unit.