Even if you were right about that, it would still be a huge leap from that to "Maxwell is just collecting dust waiting to launch only after until Kepler is totally milked dry"
I think what he's saying is that Big Kepler could afford to be delayed for the consumer market a year because AMD didn't have anything that required it be released in 2012. That is, nVidia could let the consumer market have a mid-range card overclocked to match AMD's fastest for most of 2012 and let Big Kepler focus on just the Compute market.
Then when 2013 came and AMD delayed the GCN update that should have been, nVidia who had prepared all of 2012 to release Big Kepler saw they were again going to have nothing to compete against.
They looked at the fact that back in December of 2011 when the 7970 was released they saw that AMD had released a card with 10-20% improvement over the ancient-by-then 580 (due mostly to drivers at the time) for $550+. So they figured Big Kepler, a year later worth of anticipation, would be worth at least $100 more, right?
But hey. AMD didn't have anything. So, nVidia could do whatever they wanted because they were so far ahead of the game and Big Kepler had been popping out of fabs for a good long while by then. Lots of defective dies were coming out and many of them could mostly hit the high end spec. So why not throw 6 GB on it and ramp up demand by making it a card unto itself since there wasn't anything Radeon that could even remotely come near it with the Big Tahiti's delay to end of 2013?
Bam, Titan. Cleverly using a halo product to ramp up demand for Big Kepler beyond the already ludicrous hype, they wait a few months and then release a Kepler at that $650 price point. They clever add to the pricing AMD had already raised themselves a year earlier and the beauty of it is because of Titan, there are people who scream like Twilight girls, "Omgz, it's almost half the price of Titan, it's a DEAL!" On a $650+ GPU.
It's not that nVidia is sitting around on Maxwell. But we know it was sitting on Big Kepler. If AMD had anything that came close to Big Kepler (GK110), they'd have had GK110 out there just like they have 780Ti coming out the very second AMD shows up with something comparable.
Hell, if AMD had showed up earlier this year when they were supposed to with Tahiti XL, it's hard to imagine nVidia even showing up with Titan the way they did at all.
Competition is healthy and AMD hasn't been competing on the GPU or CPU level except serving reheated leftovers. That's really, really bad because there's no reason for Intel and nVidia to do anything but tread water.
That's what he's saying. Fact shows it's happening, too. Look at Haswell, a mediocre improvement over IVB, which was itself a mediocre improvement over SB. If AMD had a majority of CPU's that could even beat the two year old SB right now, do you think Intel would be so lackadaisical about performance gains? Intel can afford to because AMD is not showing up with anything remotely compelling to anyone outside the fanboys and the cheapest of the cheap with an obsessive need for multicore beyond reasonable sense.
Intel and nVidia are just going through the motions because AMD isn't giving them much reason to look up from their mobility plans to do more than pop out a refresh or a rebrand.