Nemesis 1
Lifer
- Dec 30, 2006
- 11,366
- 2
- 0
I thought March was always the date. Maybe they have decided on a hard launch.
I thought it was Nov . and Ican get links saying just that
I thought March was always the date. Maybe they have decided on a hard launch.
Lonbjerg I see you like talking . Lets see what your true worth is. Go retrieve the correct post I am referring to . Once you read it . You to may have the capacity to comprehend what was written so long ago. I am not aware of any company that has succeded in trying to do what nv tried to do . certainly No fabless company has.
This was not what I was waiting for?
Before I "indulge" your distraction, care to deliver as you promised?
I am against fud-sites, no GPU manufactors...thas is my only bias.
But did you look at his site at the time?
Or did that fact "slip" you mind?
Its here . I am sure other members are aware of it . You go retrieve show us your skills.
; you now cling to fallcies and wan't to turn the tables around?Nemesis1 said:Your correct and you probably won't get it until I retrieve that thread and show you the very simple logic I based it off of. That most in the industry would agree with.
From your posts in this thread you seem just as biased as charlie is against NV
Yes I did look at his site and there were only those two ads. Just looked again and only the flyspy. I still don't understand how people get off saying it looks like an AMD ad-page when there are rarely if ever any AMD ads on it.
What "fact"? You referenced no "facts". What are you talking about here?
Also, you're generalizing things into two categories - truth backed up by facts, and utter crap pulled out of someones ass with no rhyme or reason.
But there's a middle ground you're missing - this is where guys like charlie get their stuff - predicting possible outcomes based on logic/things known at the time. There's nothing wrong with speculating what MAY happen when done so using logic and deduction
I thought we already went through this with Wreckage insisting Charlie is a liar. Charlie (and his ilk) are rumor mongers and by nature they are going to be wrong more often than right. They take tiny pieces of information and then try to piece it together. Sometimes spinning things wholesale. Again, more often than not they are wrong but that doesn't mean they don't have contacts or don't get a few juicy tidbits.
With Charlie, he even went through his thought process and outlined why he came to the conclusion of what the likely dates for Fermi is in a recent article. Is there a lot of speculation? Of course, but as I pointed out earlier it's no different than what some people at very large analytical companies like IDC do. It's just Charlie uses more speculation and latches on to more rumors than what someone at IDC would be willing to do.
There is no question from Charlie's articles that he is biased against nVidia. Just don't take that bias to mean he doesn't at least get some information that is factual and correct.
How did a thread that didn't originally contain any semiaccurate.com links become a debate about Charlie?
How did a thread that didn't originally contain any semiaccurate.com links become a debate about Charlie?
Funny that his first articles didn't mention an A2 respin...or an A3 respin.
Claming a lucky pot-shot guesswork is "knowlegde" is far out, hillarious...but not logic or intelligent at all.
Funny that his first articles didn't mention an A2 respin...or an A3 respin.
Claming a lucky pot-shot guesswork is "knowlegde" is far out, hillarious...but not logic or intelligent at all.
Because, as my signature states, fanboys live and die by these rumour-sites...and nobody does anything to stop the FUD from these sites.
And you know what is even funnier? I think he was the first, at least to my knowledge, who even mentions when the A2 respin took place. His "lucky pot-shot guesswork" has panned out on more than one occasion and the chance of that happening if all he's doing is shooting blindfolded is extremely slim.
The fact that he laid out scenarios on the possible release date of Fermi in one of his recent articles shows that he's actually working through things logically and with at least some information that wasn't widely known before his article. This shows he's using logic and has at least a few sources to information that the common person/investor is not privy to.
Some of your "claims" about Charlie are more in the way of character assassination and not really based on facts. Again, not trying to defend Charlie's attitude. He is a biased person and anyone who isn't a fanboy can see he has something of an agenda against nVidia. It's just that we should separate his bias from the article and then weigh what is said and decide if it is true or not. He's been right often enough to warrant a look even though he's been wrong more often than right.
Man oh man . If the mods will allow time to have fun with you . This is a post from Sept . NO one new about the 5900 series But I did .
The supposed Huge ASS KIcking post that have plagued this forum for 3 nonths . You know the one were NV says one thing than changes names of the 200 series to 300 series . You been here awhile . You even took part in those post here at AT. So get your own links to the Great NV 300 .
Its funny ATIs R300 was a game changer. NV 5900 stunk place up . Can't wait for ATi 5900 it should kick ass. NV 300 had better be good really good. Or ATI will have turned the tables on the 5900 and 300 series cards for ATI/NV . ATI making a great 5900 and NV making a stinky 300.
Live with it until NV shows something , Nv go to back of BUS .
Good luck in your crusade.
He was "absolutely correct in regards to Fermi's timing" even when NVIDIA didn't know themselfes?
Where do you get that "logic" from?
Lets look at his early ramblings:
http://semiaccurate.com/2009/07/29/miracles-happen-gt300-tapes-out/
Lots of doom and gloom...but no mention of them needing a A3 respin.
Then this:
http://semiaccurate.com/2009/11/02/nvidia-finally-gets-fermi-a2-taped-out/
The A2 respin....excalty the same doom and gloom...but no mention of a A3 respin.
Then this:
http://semiaccurate.com/2009/12/10/fermi-a3-silicon-oven/
The A3 respin.
Nobody, not even NVIDIA, knew back June that it would take a A3 respin to get a product.
uhh, in the firts link he talks about 3 spins....
If they got the first one right we would have had cards in december. A1
If they had to do a respin, the first one, cards in february. A2
If they would need a second respin, cards in Q2. A3
He just wrote a timetable. anyone with some insight could do that.
I guess you didn't read my post with links to Charlie's ramblings...even before the facts where on the table?
He got lucky, because nobody, and I mean nobdy knew that before A2 and A3 respins.
(Meaning that we are down to the "magic crystal-ball" argument..and this link should be played then)
Or you didn't notice that Charlie cleaned up his site, after NVIDA spilled the beans about his affiliation?
And because I dislike Charlie I must be "pro-NVIDIA"?
Nice "logic" there, but you also set yourself up for a nice owngoal there.
Because by that reasoning all that are for Charlie must be "pro-AMD"...or is your circulear logic a one-way street?
The ironing is painful!
I am still waiting for you to deliver as you promised.
You try and derail all you want too...but untill you keep your word, that is all I will focus on from you.
Day 1: Nemesis still hasn't keept his word.
I wrote my post befor I read yours , But ya I think your correct.I am aware of charlies ramblings, he takes a few facts, applies his logic and comes up with a possible outcome for future events. He doesn't need to know ahead of time that there will be an A3 to make a fud article predicting that, it's just speculation. The whole point of speculation is that it's done without facts or without all the facts and extrapolating to think of possible outcomes. For example, back in the summer sometime charlie took a couple facts - A: TSMC was having mega 40nm problems, and B: I think it was announced that fermi was going to be even bigger than GT200
People get (understandably) mad at charlie and other writers because they confuse his speculation articles as reporting. Reporting =/= speculation. Anand reports, charlie/others speculate. Keep a clear distinction there and all is resolved. I know charlie has a bad habit of trying to parade his speculations as reporting but it's up to the reader to make that distinction.
No, not all charlie haters are pro-nv in my book, but the way you're arguing against him sounds a lot like some of our resident green team. You sound like wreckage