tangey

I wonder is it possible to sideload appleTV onto say the quest3 and watch these 3d movies using that ?

So you put the key in a faraday pouch to stop the relay exploit working. Most manufacturers of new cars now no longer require this, they have put movement sensors in the key, if the key has not moved for X minutes, the key switches off all its wireless functionality, and therefore the relay system can not talk to a key that has not moved for a while.

The story infers that the car wasn't physically lifted and they managed to drive it away even though the key was in a pouch. There is another exploit on some cars, whereby a laptop can be plugged into the ODB port on the car, and but some magic, can then start the car. Perhaps this is what they did.

davidmalcolm said:

I like how they say that Apple can't make their own GPU without infringing. Apple makes the best ARM chips out there, you think the people who make the best ARM chips couldn't also recruit the people who make the best mobile GPUs? You think those people aren't chomping at the bit to design something when they know the exact use case for it?

Your argument argues against yourself. Apple CPU engineers clearly know the exact use case for the CPU, yet they still pay ARM a fee for every single one of those cores, because they could not totally do a successful design without using ARM IP.

So no matter what the accumulated expertise, it does not follow that you can design in a complete vaccuum, and engineer every aspect of everything in a novel way. I suspect in total Apple is paying many $10s per iphone in royalties and fees for various IP they are using. THey aren't doing it because they could not be bothered to designed that stuff out.

The issue here with IMG is manyfold:-

1) There is no potential infringement of IP until Apple sells a physical product with a GPU that they contend does not include any IMG IP. I don't for 1 second expect that to happen in this years iphone. So lets just say it is 2018.

2) There is a reasonable case to be made that given the extended use and highly embedded nature of IMG's IP into Apple's entire ios soc line since the very first iphone, that there may be some owness on Apple to provide some proof that their products are IMG IP free. Just to mention 1 aspect, PowerVR texture compression, has been the default texture compression used in ios apps since ios began. No one can decompress PowerVr texture compression unless they use IMG IP, it's their patented IP. If you use the algorthim, then you have to pay. If you don't use the algorthim, then ios apps that use PVRTC will not work.  Apple would have to prove they have removed this from all apps that run on these new "non-IMG" GPUs. Perhaps they have some process that changes the likely 100Ks+ apps that use PVRTC and replaces those textures with a different texture compression. They can't do it inside the phone, as that would be infringing, the apps on the app store themselves would have to be changed. They also need to keep both type of apps on the app store. It is of course possible that as part of IOS11, they will demand that new apps no longer use PVRTC, not dis-similar to the demand that all apps are 32-bit. But as it stands, it is hard to see how they resolve this issue.

3) IMG does not have the finanacial strength to contest something of this size. So take the lack of royalities that IMG is not getting whilst in dispute, add in the cost of a legal case, and IMG will be dead long before Apple has even taken a second glance at the situation. And Apple knows that. Thus the case for Apple abusing their power is not without merit.

4) It will be interesting if say someone with bigger pockets such as Samsung buys them (samsung has always wanted their own GPU division).