Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Why can't Apple ever design an SOC without unfixable hardware flaws?

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Andy Burnelli

unread,
Jun 14, 2022, 8:36:59 PM6/14/22
to
Did you hear about the unfixable hardware flaws in the M1 yet?
<https://duckduckgo.com/?q=unfixable+A14+M1+design+flaws>

That the _same_ unpatchable flaws are in the A14 indicates how poor Apple
design team truly is (e.g., remember the power design that was so atrocious
from Apple that they had to secretly backdate release notes just so that
nobody would notice they secretly throttled phones with a new OS release!).

These new multiple unfixable hardware M1 & A14 flaws are yet more evidence
that Apple has never designed a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.

It's hard to design when all your money goes into advertising that you pay
for ARM technology and Qualcomm ICs and for TSMC to fab your flawed SOCs.
--
The iKooks will try to minimize the unfixable vulnerabilities; but the very
fact that they exist is the evidence that Apple can't design a
best-in-class SOC (and never has) because all the money goes into
advertising Apple fabs the Silicon (instead of TSMC who really fabs it).

Alan

unread,
Jun 14, 2022, 8:56:42 PM6/14/22
to
On 2022-06-14 17:37, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Did you hear about the unfixable hardware flaws in the M1 yet?
> <https://duckduckgo.com/?q=unfixable+A14+M1+design+flaws>
>
> That the _same_ unpatchable flaws are in the A14 indicates how poor Apple
> design team truly is (e.g., remember the power design that was so atrocious
> from Apple that they had to secretly backdate release notes just so that
> nobody would notice they secretly throttled phones with a new OS release!).
>
> These new multiple unfixable hardware M1 & A14 flaws are yet more evidence
> that Apple has never designed a best-in-class SOC in its entire history.
>
> It's hard to design when all your money goes into advertising that you pay
> for ARM technology and Qualcomm ICs and for TSMC to fab your flawed SOCs.


Sorry, but you claim these AREN'T Apple's designs, remember?

Your Name

unread,
Jun 15, 2022, 12:23:57 AM6/15/22
to
Besides which, it's not actually an Apple flaw. It's a flaw in *all* ARM chips.

Alan

unread,
Jun 15, 2022, 12:51:34 AM6/15/22
to
I hadn't read that. Got a link?

Your Name

unread,
Jun 15, 2022, 1:30:35 AM6/15/22
to
After the misleading attaention-grabbing headline, the real fact is
almost hidden away in the second to last paragraph at
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/06/10/new-pacman-flaw-in-apple-silicon-is-an-echo-of-spectre-and-meltdown>




Lewis

unread,
Jun 15, 2022, 10:08:40 AM6/15/22
to
In message <t8bao9$4kl$1...@dont-email.me> Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:

> Sorry, but you claim these AREN'T Apple's designs, remember?

Look, the shitgibbon trollboi hadn’t posted in days and finally posts
one message and THERE YOU ARE, ENGAGING WITH HIM.

Stop it.

Please, every time you're going to reply to him imagine that little
chubby he gets and think again. Do you really want to be responsible for
the only sexual stimulation that obese naked troglodyte gets in his
life? Please, think of that image first.

--
Don't ride in anything with a Capissen-38 engine, they fall right out
of the sky

Lewis

unread,
Jun 15, 2022, 10:10:45 AM6/15/22
to
You just have to read past the clickbait.

It also requires physical access AND requires having already bypassed
other security.

--
All people are different people

Alan Browne

unread,
Jun 15, 2022, 11:23:37 AM6/15/22
to
On 2022-06-14 20:56, Alan wrote:
> Sorry, but you claim these AREN'T Apple's designs, remember?

Why answer it? Just encourages it to post blather again and again ...

--
"Mr Speaker, I withdraw my statement that half the cabinet are asses -
half the cabinet are not asses."
-Benjamin Disraeli

Bob Campbell

unread,
Jun 15, 2022, 4:43:22 PM6/15/22
to
Now both of you guys have just ruined trollboi’s day. Well done.


Alan

unread,
Jun 16, 2022, 12:33:48 AM6/16/22
to
On 2022-06-15 07:08, Lewis wrote:
> In message <t8bao9$4kl$1...@dont-email.me> Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry, but you claim these AREN'T Apple's designs, remember?
>
> Look, the shitgibbon trollboi hadn’t posted in days and finally posts
> one message and THERE YOU ARE, ENGAGING WITH HIM.
>
> Stop it.
>
> Please, every time you're going to reply to him imagine that little
> chubby he gets and think again. Do you really want to be responsible for
> the only sexual stimulation that obese naked troglodyte gets in his
> life? Please, think of that image first.
>

Hey, here's a new idea for you:

Fuck off and let other's do as they prefer to do.

Andy Burnelli

unread,
Jun 16, 2022, 9:49:50 AM6/16/22
to
Alan Browne wrote:

> Why answer it? Just encourages it to post blather again and again ...

*And yet the fact remains the M1 has _multiple_ unpatchable hardware flaws.*

Given every Axx CPU from Apple contains unpatchable hardware flaws, and
given even the so-called "secure enclave" contains unpatchable flaws...

The _adult_ question remains apropos:
Q: Has Apple ever (in its entire history!) designed a best-in-class SOC?
--
If it contains any unpatchable hardware flaws, it's _not_ best in class.

Andy Burnelli

unread,
Jun 16, 2022, 9:50:36 AM6/16/22
to
Lewis wrote:

>>> Besides which, it's not actually an Apple flaw. It's a flaw in *all* ARM
>>> chips.
>
>> I hadn't read that. Got a link?
>
> You just have to read past the clickbait.
>
> It also requires physical access AND requires having already bypassed
> other security.

*If it contains any unpatchable hardware flaws, it's _not_ best in class.*

The logical point is an M1 with _multiple_ known unpatchable hardware flaws
is _not_ best in class by any stretch of the best-in-class definition.

However, I have to give YourName "some" credit as _one_ of the flaws is
also in other designs, but notice I'm informing you iKooks of _two_
unpatchable flaws... and the fact you whooshed on that is typical of you
iKooks.

What's typical of you low-IQ no-education Apple-adoring iKoos is you only
read the clickbait without delving deeper into the cause of the flaws.

The fact Lewis is _desperate_ to minimize one (but he whooshed on the
other) is also rather typical of you low-education low-IQ iKooks.

BTW, I _knew_ you iKooks would miss the point which isn't the severity of
the unpatchable hardware flaws, but the certainty of them in Apple devices.

Why is it certain that all Apple SOC's have built-in hardware flaws?

Because Apple likely spends ten to fifty times the money to advertise that
they "made" the design than Apple spends in actually making the design.

Apple bought almost everything from someone else, which is partly why Apple
has never in its entire history ever designed a best-in-class SOC.

The proof that Apple can't design a best-in-class SOC is simply in knowing
about the unpatchable hardware flaws in _every_ Apple designed SOC.

And no, an M1 with _multiple_ known unpatchable hardware flaws is _not_
best in class by any stretch of the definition of what best in class means.

Alan

unread,
Jun 16, 2022, 11:53:53 AM6/16/22
to
On 2022-06-16 06:50, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Why answer it?  Just encourages it to post blather again and again ...
>
> *And yet the fact remains the M1 has _multiple_ unpatchable hardware
> flaws.*
>
> Given every Axx CPU from Apple contains unpatchable hardware flaws, and
> given even the so-called "secure enclave" contains unpatchable flaws...
>
> The _adult_ question remains apropos:
> Q: Has Apple ever (in its entire history!) designed a best-in-class SOC?

You want to have it both ways:

"Apple didn't design the A or M series processors"

and

"Apple is responsible for the flaws".

Alan

unread,
Jun 16, 2022, 1:18:07 PM6/16/22
to
On 2022-06-16 06:50, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Lewis wrote:
>
>>>> Besides which, it's not actually an Apple flaw. It's a flaw in *all*
>>>> ARM chips.
>>
>>> I hadn't read that. Got a link?
>>
>> You just have to read past the clickbait.
>>
>> It also requires physical access AND requires having already bypassed
>> other security.
>
> *If it contains any unpatchable hardware flaws, it's _not_ best in class.*
>
> The logical point is an M1 with _multiple_ known unpatchable hardware flaws
> is _not_ best in class by any stretch of the best-in-class definition.

And now you extend your lie?

"Multiple" hardware flaws, Arlen?

And you've previously insisted that Apple didn't design their Apple
Silicon processors...

...so how is this on Apple anyway?
0 new messages