I designed cpus for many years and no one ever asked me to insert a back door. Like I said - possible, but I don’t believe it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Chips Have Memory Access Design Flaw and Fix Could Lead to Performance Drop
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think you're aware that executives and people with privileged information can't just sell their stock when they feel like it?
Typically you have to give 6 or even 12 months notice to buy or sell, notify the SEC and so on.
I haven’t read through all 300+ comments yet so I might edit later... the problem goes all the way back to Pentium Pro machines.
Guess I'll hold off buying any new PCs (any platform) for about a year. I'm thinking it will probably take at least that long before I can be reasonably sure the CPU in whatever I buy doesn't have this flaw... Wonder if AMD processors have the same issue?
Are you saying that it's impossible for the CEO to have known about this issue 6-12+ months ago?
I'm betting large corporate and government systems have already been breached. We have some wickedly smart adversaries, using the same backdoors as our own clandestine agencies have been using. This is quite the "chess match"!
I am pretty sure that regardless of the issue or outcome, Apple will just require you to enter your user name and password more often to implement supposed improved security.
[doublepost=1514997461][/doublepost]
They would have to be crazy fast to even match performance of Intel desktop/laptop. I can see Apple offering consumer level MacBooks running on ARM in a year or two, but their Pro models will suffer greatly regardless of what Apple's team comes out with. Realize that Apple is still beholden to the ARM core architecture, which has not produces a desktop competitor yet. Apple can tweak that ARM design all they want, they are not going to match a top end i7 or Xeon within a couple of years.
[doublepost=1514997461][/doublepost]
They would have to be crazy fast to even match performance of Intel desktop/laptop. I can see Apple offering consumer level MacBooks running on ARM in a year or two, but their Pro models will suffer greatly regardless of what Apple's team comes out with. Realize that Apple is still beholden to the ARM core architecture, which has not produces a desktop competitor yet. Apple can tweak that ARM design all they want, they are not going to match a top end i7 or Xeon within a couple of years.
You are correct, it's not practical, but that's the point. Force corporations to do this type of thing a few times and maybe, just maybe, they would think a little more about getting their products right in the first place. Taking VW as a glaring current example - their "fix" reduced power in the cars. I think VW should have been forced to make it 100% right - build, produce, and install engines with the cleanliness, power, and fuel economy they pretended to sell. Yeah, it would have cost them big-time, but instead of just a financial penalty (at least VW's penalties were big!) companies would actually have to correct the problems they create. I think that would be excellent incentive.
And yes, you are correct, I do absolutely think companies owe us when they screw something up royally, and I think they need to be held to that. I don't think they owe us the world, they just owe us proper support for what they sold us.
Some people seem to think it's perfectly fine for corporations to just bend everyone over and f**k them up the arse over, and over, and over again, in pursuit of the almighty dollar.
Exactly.
We're not talking about iPhones anymore here, I do expect to get secure work done on my 3 year old machine, regardless of ports, software updates and battery usage.
It's not even legally enforceable. Like I said, the is the last 10 years? Like 9 of those years, people got use out of their chips...full use. Did they have any damages from the security flaw? Most likely, no. For the chips sold in the last year, owners may have a case to get some kind of compensation, albeit still at some value less than full retail. They could also settle by providing a 25% refund on the chip's current value.
Point is, it's not going to be a full refund of purchase price because there are many more components in a computer, the chips are older than brand new, and many people have received quite a bit of use out of them.
I agree companies should be responsible for errors, but this is not a health/safety violation, so it's not life or death. It's also more gray than just providing refunds or swapping out billions of chips with zero regard for logic.
It's just like the Apple situation. People got use out of their phones, lithium batteries degrade over time, etc etc etc. There is some responsibility, but not as much as the pitchforkers believe and not as much as any logical person would conclude if they thought critically instead of looking for a freebie.
No, but some of them are. Point is this wasn’t an easy, obvious flaw, and Apple might suffer something similar.
Wow. I had a 486DXll66 once. It was the King in it's time. I was stoked to run Falcon 3.0 and it's polygon terrain.
motherboard with local bus or PCI ?
PCI is nicer, so you can use S3 Trio or Virge for graphics card
I guess:
- Our Pentium laptop will become unusable
- Our Celeron AIO will become unusable
- Our i3 Thinkpad will become barely usable
- Our Core 2 Duo laptop will become barely usable
- Our Core 2 Duo MBP will become barely usable
Happy to have switched from Intel to Phenom
- Our Pentium laptop will become unusable
- Our Celeron AIO will become unusable
- Our i3 Thinkpad will become barely usable
- Our Core 2 Duo laptop will become barely usable
- Our Core 2 Duo MBP will become barely usable
Happy to have switched from Intel to Phenom
Last edited:
What new formfactor are you expecting a Mac computer to have? The MacMini is already pretty small. And an intel based motherboard easily slips into an all in one iMac display, so what other forms are you looking for?
You need to actually read the article.
Some, in fact many of the comments in this thread are just appallingly off-base.
Apple clearly thinks that an iPad replaces a computer for the only demographic they seem to care about. They already have an iPad Pro. So you can be as logical you want, but Apple is not logical.
