To be introduced with next-gen Meteor Lake chips, which Intel calls an "inflection point for design, manufacturing, and architecture."
    • Sami@lemmy.zipEnglish
      37·
      2 years ago

      Lots of companies are guilty of this. Nvidia and SSD manufacturers with their stealth downgrades under same product name and the entirety of the monitor space:

      • jjakc@lemthony.comEnglish
        13·
        2 years ago

        I want to buy a second hand iPad or MacBook. How am I meant to know which one is which gen?

        The only product they have that is clear and somewhat easy for consumers is the iPhone.

        • shapesandstuff@feddit.deEnglish
          10·
          2 years ago

          Always irked me. Not even apple fanboys i know could tell which is which until they know the date of release.

          You don’t intuitively know which quarter of which year which version of a different device with the same name is at a glance?

          • snowbell@beehaw.orgEnglish
            3·
            2 years ago

            They all have model numbers that are on the back of the device and easy to look up

            • shapesandstuff@feddit.deEnglish
              2·
              2 years ago

              Interesting because everyone i know always went “which macbook pro is that? Q3 2018?”

              Or is the number system a new addition? Most of my apple. Experience was in uni a good while ago

  • TheOtherJake@beehaw.orgEnglish
    13·
    2 years ago

    It’s because of Moore’s law. Unless Intel responds to AMD’s openSIL initiative to open the bootloader initialization API, it doesn’t matter what they do. The ability to finally run an entirely secure x86 computer hasn’t existed in 15 years since the i-core/ryzen series. OpenSIL means Intel doesn’t even exist any more IMO.

        • SlamDrag@beehaw.orgEnglish
          11·
          2 years ago

          Okay but what I’m getting at is why does OpenSIL make them hardware irrelevant? I’m not a programmer, I don’t know why a firmware library matters at all in this case, can you explain that to me?

          • TheOtherJake@beehaw.orgEnglish
            32·
            2 years ago

            There are several vulnerabilities in bootloaders that have not been fixed. Namely, there is an entire tiny operating system that is used to initialize the processor before the main bootloader begins. Then the bootloader creates a bunch of handles to control the hardware, and hands them over to the operating system kernel. The i-core/ryzen processors include the second generation of this tiny underlying operating system that runs before everything else. This tiny operating system was originally marketed as a way to remotely monitor and troubleshoot data center servers, but this is a very weak and flawed marketing strategy. The way this system runs before everything else, it has root/admin privileges and access that supersede everything that comes after it. A bad actor accessing this system is absolutely game over for all hardware including the bootloader itself. Well this tiny operating system is tied to the microcode for the processor generation.

            If you know anything about old computers that had a bunch of boards and chips inside the case, modern computers still have all of these chips and systems, but they are all integrated into just a few chips. These systems are still complicated and have a certain way they must be powered up and initialized so that each system begins in a specific state along a long chain. The “microcode” in a modern computer is really just a bunch of “software” that controls the order that the hardware is brought online. In the i-core/ryzen generation of hardware the microcode is proprietary and copyright protected. This is a way to get around many x86 patents expiring. It has long been speculated that the tiny operating system is also a back door for governments as it can completely own any system regardless of encryption or any other security measures.

            There is a way to mostly disable this tiny operating system but there is no way to monitor or confirm its activity at run time. OpenSIL is like having access to the control room of this tiny operating system for the first time. It means it is now possible to completely secure and verify the state of a system. There is no security in obscurity. OpenSIL is the removal of a major failed attempt at security through obscurity.

            Ultimately, at the most fundamental level, openSIL means full ownership over your hardware. I can buy AMD, but can only rent Intel. Intel keeps ownership of this tiny little corner of the hardware and they have done a terrible job of managing what they own. When faced with that buying choice the outcome should be obvious, assuming you are able to run the software that can take advantage of this. It will take at least a few months, but there should soon be a completely open source version of Coreboot that will use openSIL. Hope this helps.