Again, I get that, but the target of the accusation is wrong to me. You can say the people suck at keeping their promises, or the company sucks at marketing things that are not true. But those things have little or nothing to do with the hardware that customers have in hand right now. What I read in that article is that the underlying hardware, to some even the whole concept, sucks because its graphics driver model is not as open as some would like.

There's been no indication that the hardware itself, the chips on the board, nor the driver do not PERFORM as expected.

If the Macbook Pro was advertised in such a way that was not true in the end, yes indeed that "situation" would suck, but the computer itself would still be a good computer.