Replies to post #128283 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[Dmcq]

LOL, that's not "all you said".

You've argued that TSMC's 20nm volume production is meaningless (I can't buy products!) and untrustworthy (just like AMD*!)

You've argued this for something like a dozen posts with me refuting you with facts the whole time.

And now you're playing the victim.

Spin, spin, spin, 24/7.

fpg

* As if we should apply the same amount of skepticism to TSMC's claim of 20nm already being in volume production as you like to give AMD because AMD's years-out projections didn't pan out.

Needling people is totally content free as far as I'm concerned. I am uninterested in this loop continuing. Yahoo message board is the place to go for this waste of time.

[Elmer Phud]

FPG

You've argued that TSMC's 20nm volume production is meaningless (I can't buy products!) and untrustworthy (just like AMD*!)

Precisely but I wouldn't go so far as comparing them to AMD who had a long track record of making claims that were demonstrably false. TSMC isn't that bad. They just don't have established credibility. I've never said that TSMC won't meet their schedules. I've pointed out that you are accepting their claims on Faith (where have we seen that before!) and I don't because they have no established track record of delivering new processes on time. You've also made the mistake of comparing TSMC's definition of production with Intel's definition and tried to draw an equivalence where none exists. You are welcome to believe anything you want, just don't expect others to share your beliefs on faith alone.

[walbert]

You've argued this for something like a dozen posts with me refuting you with facts the whole time.

Your "facts" that you are so proud of have consisted of TSMC press releases about projections. There weren't any facts in them, just conjecture.