Butterfly Labs November Update (ASIC Chips are "flawed". Delays.)

[elux]

ASIC Update 26 November 2012

While I can't give a hard date and say "absolutely" this is the date, it looks like the week of the 11th, but that's the "fuzzy" date I have at the moment and I'm waiting on confirmation on a not-fuzzy date from the foundry right now. There was a flaw in the chip that needed to be addressed and it pushed the date out, plain and simple.

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/bfl-forum-miscellaneous/437-asic-update-26-november-2012-a.html

Welcome to "the week of the 11th". Time for another delay announcement?

Why haven't customers been issued prompt refunds in accordance with FTC regulation?

[Korbman]

Why haven't customers been issued prompt refunds in accordance with FTC regulation?

Unfortunately the regulation part deals with shipping delays after their "official" ship date, which last time I checked (a while ago) was January 1st.

Other than that, people can apparently get refunds at any time if they ask before the 1st.

[PuertoLibre]

Why haven't customers been issued prompt refunds in accordance with FTC regulation?

Unfortunately the regulation part deals with shipping delays after their "official" ship date, which last time I checked (a while ago) was January 1st.

Other than that, people can apparently get refunds at any time if they ask before the 1st.

I believe you misunderstood.

The current policy is that they are refunding on a "case by case" basis. This is a voluntary effort on BFL's part.

When [err...IF] January 1st passes, they no longer have a voluntary "case by case" review. Any and all customers at that point can demand a refund and BFL is obligated to give one. (as in, not voluntary).

By January 1st [2013)you either have a rig in your hands, or you can demand a refund. Its what the BFL rep mentioned a while back. (Use the search feature folks!)

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

The reason why the 1st of January is supposedly "the deadline" date, it is because they set their original time frame to October 2012. (60 days later...November/December)

[kpriess]

Where is this standing..?

[repentance]

Where is this standing..?

Check in the custom hardware subforum.  There's a BFL thread there.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=87934.0

Or check the BFL forums.

https://forums.butterflylabs.com/forum.php

[MrTeal]

Hi Everyone,

We've been very busy recently, unfortunately I couldn't catch up with the forums. There is a correction to be made: Chips are not and were not flawed. We decided to add certain clock buffers to improve noise-resistance and possibly increase frequency even further. The improve in noise resistance was our real goal (average frequency increase across a full wafer can be a bi-product). The decision was made to increase the near 100% chance of success even more. We'll keep you posted. If you had any questions, please let us know.


Regards,
Nasser

Since I saw you were online today Nasser, can you comment on this quote by Josh in a Wired magazine article?

The problem was that Butterfly — based out of Kansas City, Missouri — banked on a cool design and a brand new chip manufacturing process and ended up getting in over its head. “We’ve hit quite a few snags along the way, says Butterfly Chief Operations Officer Josh Zerlan.

The company had to redo its initial chip designs, but the worst snag was in November, when the Butterfly got a hold of its first chip samples. They were basically too hot to work, Zerlan says. “The plastic packaging on the top of the chip just couldn’t exhaust the heat fast enough, so it basically melted the package.”

Link: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/04/bitcoin-mining-rigs/

Was Josh misquoted or incorrect, or did you get chip samples in that ran so hot they destroyed the QFN packages?

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Hi Everyone,

We've been very busy recently, unfortunately I couldn't catch up with the forums. There is a correction to be made: Chips are not and were not flawed. We decided to add certain clock buffers to improve noise-resistance and possibly increase frequency even further. The improve in noise resistance was our real goal (average frequency increase across a full wafer can be a bi-product). The decision was made to increase the near 100% chance of success even more. We'll keep you posted. If you had any questions, please let us know.


Regards,
Nasser

Since I saw you were online today Nasser, can you comment on this quote by Josh in a Wired magazine article?

The problem was that Butterfly — based out of Kansas City, Missouri — banked on a cool design and a brand new chip manufacturing process and ended up getting in over its head. “We’ve hit quite a few snags along the way, says Butterfly Chief Operations Officer Josh Zerlan.

The company had to redo its initial chip designs, but the worst snag was in November, when the Butterfly got a hold of its first chip samples. They were basically too hot to work, Zerlan says. “The plastic packaging on the top of the chip just couldn’t exhaust the heat fast enough, so it basically melted the package.”

Link: http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/04/bitcoin-mining-rigs/

Was Josh misquoted or incorrect, or did you get chip samples in that ran so hot they destroyed the QFN packages?

That definitely explains a lot of things: