The issue with solutions like this is the amount of power draw they require for the cooling potential. In non-battery powered ultra slim devices that have a low power draw. They may have a market, but they also cost a lot so that tends to be industrial applications that can absorb the cost and don’t have high thermal load.
That is why the demo is with a MacBook Air and they need to use three of them.
It is and has been used in industrial applications for a long time. Situations where you don’t want a spinning fan. But those are you say low power sustained cooling.
Yeah, that cooling solution actually ends up drawing more power than multiple high-performance, Apple Silicon CPU course
From the EU perspective iMessage does not even qualify as having enough regular users
It will be a lot of work to go correctly without leaking user info
Given a large part of the GSMA are gov agencies or carriers that are under gov pressure and subject to well established wire tapping requirements I would be very surprised if encryption is adopted. It was proposed during the original spec and refused and again more recently refused.
that is very different form forcing the existing platforms to open source… publicly funding the development of a open platform is rather different to writing ga law that just removes all the existing IP from a privately funded company.
so you saying the maker must open source all the software and IP and internal deisnges of every chip not to mention provide the tooling and rigs they used to make them for free to any factory that wants to make rip offs?
The CA law explicitly does not require third party repair to be certified and does not permit setting of rates
Apple are happily with thus law as it applies to everyone and due to thier vertical integration and small number of products screws it will cost them a lot less than competitors. In effect for apple the CA right to repair law benefits them more than it hurts them.
If apple had managed to add haptic feedback to the Touch Bar so that one could use it without always looking at the display requirin presser to trigger a button and using haptics well to let you feel the edge of each button and slider being slid it would have worked but without haptics most users and devs did not care for it.
It better to say the put effort into bespoke designing it rather than just taking part of the Max chips design… why did they put this effort in? I expect the reason is yields are lower on 3nm and cost per mm2 is much higher… You can see from the die shots how everything is packed much tighter on the M3 Pro compared to the M2 pro (this takes a lot of work to do and still have the internal frabic within the chip). Apple clearly wanted to shink the die size down otherwise they would have had to increase the prices of Macs with the M3 Pro.
I think they are, most Indi games are using Unity or Unreal and are not pushing the envelope of HW like this one… but these AAA titles shipping (at full console prices) are important for showing that devs can charge real money… many devs do not consider porting as they assume they would need to make the game free to play full of ads for it to work on the AppStore if apple can show that people will pay real money then the market changes a lot for indie devs were the work is not much but they do not want to make the game a horrible mess of ads and in app purchases.
you can overcome the extra power draw (mostly) but it costs a lot in fancy packaging. Doing stuff like ahving a silicon interposer layer bridging the chips rater than talking through the organic substrate.
So apple should not sell parts? or should give parts away for free? What is your suggested solution to the selling of parts? Force them to open source all software and release any and all IP licenses they hold to anyone who wants to make parts and products of thier own?
Legacly speaking there is no “serial pairing on device” apple have crafted this to infact be calibration profiles and then have put the job on apples servers to not let a phone download calibration info for part SN that have already been paired to another SOC.
This was a change with the iPhone 12 (and M1 Macs). Moving it server side means they could (and might well) change this to let you download the profile but only if the donwer device is not iCloud locked (otherwise it might be stolen…)
Should they provide documentation on how third parties can create thier own calibration profiles and provide them along side parts? Yes but getting a law past that would require apple to write stuff would be hard in the US… the entire “you can compel speech” legal defence that apple used successfully to not be forced to make a custom version of iOS that would let the FBI crack into phones.
That is called calibration, and if your using parts form an iCloud locked devices apple servers will not provide diagnostic mode the calibration profile as you are likly using stolen parts.
Wha apple should do is document the protools that would let you load your own claibraiotn profile if you purchase third party parts (that come with profiles)… but such parts would cost as much as OEM parts from apple as factories that produce parts and bother to create calbiraiotn profiles do no too this for cheap.
There is a higher overhead if you’re selling each capacitor and restitor separately. This would be a logistic nightmare… even if apple did this the cost would be astronomical for these parts.
I expect they will yes, but they might do this gradually, eg release a new screen assembly that is not compatible with the existing edge trim.
From internals they already have this with the AMD upgrade requiring you to update other internal parts. like wifi etc