Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on August 15, 2014 7:55 am wrote:
> Ronald Maas (rmaas.delete@this.wiwo.nl) on August 15, 2014 7:40 am wrote:
> >
> > Hm, David. It seems you are not very open to any positive opinions of upcoming ARM 64-bit processors
> > intended for the server space. You are rejecting such claims with arguments like vaporware, unreleased
> > products, NDA, not freely available, etc. etc. At the other hand you have no problem to be very
> > critical on Broadcom Vulcan which is two years to be released down the road.
> >
> > I think we could either restrict our opinions on officially released products and verifiable benchmark
> > figures, or allow some free (and sometimes wild) thinking about what may be available in the future.
> > With the former approach this forum will quickly become very boring. So suggest to go with the latter
> > approach. Of cause critical thinking is always welcome, but then a level play field.
>
> For more than decade now we have all server processors in the world delivered by exclusive
> club of just 5 companies. The whole rest of the world delivered nothing!
> So, I understand why David would be highly skeptical when
> he hears claims coming from non-members of the club.
>
> Now, one Arm64 server claim is coming from withing a club, so it should be taken more seriously.

Skepticism is acceptable, but bold negation of facts ("no one has announced server-class SoC", "no product is shipping"...), ad-hominem, and other ways of attacking the messenger whereas avoiding the message are not acceptable.