Spanading_returns

racerhomie3 said:

If you can’t use common sense with your electronics, you don’t deserve one .

I totally agree. What dumb ass puts a super thin phone in there back pocket, sits on it and expects it to be fine! 

I kind of like the concept image in the article, I really hope we move away from the old style little box. I think it is more than likely the apple will stick with just USB C if the MacBook is anything to go by, espcially given the plethora usb-c accessories to allow the attachment of everything from thumb drives to 4K monitors. I also think those expecting an A series processor instead of an intel processor may have a point at least in part. While I don’t think the A series processors will replace the CPU, I could definately see it or a derivative of it replace the auxiliary chips espcially the integrated graphics and sound card. I base on the advances in the iPad Pro graphics and also thinking about the T1 and T2 chips that are now taking over more of the key systems aspects. However who knows, given what is already possible with the A series chips maybe there could be at least a base/ entry level Mac mini that is run solely on the A series procesdor, especially now office is available for iOS. 

I’m really sprised google were so low down the list. Although 23 and me are not officially linked to google, it was hardly supprising after years of saying they wouldn’t sell data from the profiles the determined, they eventually said that that was exactly their business model. What’s that got to do with Google you ask? Well the original CEO of 23 and Me was married to Google’s other co-founder Sergey Mikhaylovich Brin. 

As the patent stated near infer red light source and the Apple Watch uses a green light source. Hence I doubt the technologies are the same, beyond using an LED and a photoreceptor. In the hard sciences, (read physics, biology and chemistry) a patent must state far more clearly how something is achieved and only minor deviations (read improvements) can circumvent the patents. On an aside this makes patenting reaction buffers really difficult as all possible concentrations of the chemicals must be stated, and this must cover all the concentrations that allow a process to work and not just the optimal ones.  Further changing just one component such as replacing MgCl2 to MgSO4 as a source of Mg + ions could be enough. It is unfortunate this approach is not applied to the IT sector. If this was the case then using different LEDs and probably different algorithms would probably be enough . 

lewk said:

A bunch of greedy a-holes and ambulance chasers hoping to cash in big on something that isn't Apple's fault. LewK

Well said Lewk. This is fundamental flaw in all chip desing that use prediiton to speed up calculations. As Apple dont desing the core of the ARM archtecture or the Intel chips, I cannot see how they can be held responsible for this one. I hope the same type of people are going after all the other tech firms thart use CPUs based on ARM or x86 technology. Before anyone starts to say we should have stuck with motorola, pipeline prediction was the issue that cause Apple to move away in the first place as (if memory serves) the deeper and longer pipelines needed to get the performance increase, caused these chips to run too hot. Its the issue of staking unused calculations in pipelines (which are subsequently flushed) that is the flaw that these viruses exploit. However, from reading around the new iMac pro, the custom A series processor it contains does doe some sort of system oversite (especially during the boot). The new macbooks with touch bars all have a lighter verison of this chip, so maybe for those machines Apple could use these chips to protect against this exploitartion. For older macs, maybe if the user has an devicce then the A series chin thart could be used to provide some level of oversight?