SDL - WTF is that in my paid hardware..  - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2021, 01:41:02 pm
content: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Software-Defined-Silicon-IntelI was never really much fond to Intel methods of selling their stuff..Working as a repair man along some decades allowed me tobuild a pretty wide vision of hardware sellers and re-sellers..The list is long.. but none of them ever compared to Intel methods.WINTEL along the late 80 and all 90s.. caused me serious problems..A lot of prejudice and dozens of bad invested money...But this time WTF ... this time..Please just go to hell!I am not willing to pay a crippled hardware ...It may even be disabled without my consent.Just FUCK OFF.There are others..Paul

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2021, 02:53:23 pm
content: The next step will be subscription based CPUs?

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2021, 03:03:46 pm
content: Quote from: madires on November 21, 2021, 02:53:23 pmIt seems already this way...Bundled into their microcode or firmware ...Supervised by UEFI andtrustedby TPM shit...WTF .. if you do not pay the rent they pull the plug..or worst.. any bug or just mal function may render you stuff unusable..WTF .. greed replaced responsible brains.Just FUCK OFF these assholes..PaulPS not to mention EXTRA costs of power running daemons to supervise that shit...and all the hassle to live with this... fuck off

author: m k
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2021, 04:04:16 pm
content: Since commuting with second hand EVs is a bit unknown personal long time renting is lifting its head.Hand held computers have been up for quite some time and bigger ones down.Maybe they are combining things and are visioning that old way has no serious money any longer.Maybe they are right, for example I can't remember a broken motherboard without special external extras.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2021, 05:21:56 pm
content: Here's a dirty little secret then: Your CPUs are already full of disabled features. Ones for higher end models, cores disabled to sell in a lower price bracket, and so forth. Intel are trying to make more money and provide greater flexibility by allowing you to unlock these later, but to you this is evil and stupid and.. well, doesn't impact you in the slightest so why are you whinging?

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2021, 05:33:52 pm
content: I don't .I am aware that the Intel microcode can even contain a sparse CPU/MCUwith builtin TCP/IP stacks and so forth.They were never reliable nor trusty.The thing now is that their money make stratagem changed...From undisclosed builtin FAB to aggressive and hostile"you need to pay this to work"And of course.. running on line supervisors and now open schemasthat will not only monitor your CPU inner but also disable it in casesome "feature" not paid.So far I could live with the model of FAB bundled features..But I will not purchase that kind of hostile invasive stupid crap.There are alternatives.As usual your comments make my days..i was missing youPaul

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2021, 06:10:16 pm
content: You're jumping to conclusions without even having read the article, let alone reviewed the proposed software. Not to mention making major technical errors when stating your 'awareness'.As usual, nothing but angry noise from you.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 21, 2021, 07:08:15 pm
content: Yep, PKTKS, do you have to spread FUD in every single thread?It is great to have an option to enable certain features for a fee after the purchase. I'd like to buy the most basic CPU and then enable features as needed instead of buying the most expensive CPU right away just in case. If they see it as economically viable, then what's the issue? Does it burn you knowing that there is hardware right there that you can't use? Why? And if so, as it has been said, most modern microcontrollers include a ton of hardware that is disabled and not accessible on lower end models, but they can be reprogrammed at the factory to be higher end models.But it looks like they are only doing it for server CPUs anyway.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 09:15:52 am
content: NahNo fud no rant..These are published bits.Ok fan boysI got yours ideas..Paul

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 09:22:52 am
content: I agree that's its shifting the features from many SKUs with hard defined features to something like oscilloscope license upgrades. However it also opens the doors for subscription crap to produce a stableextortionrevenue flow.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 10:21:55 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on November 21, 2021, 07:08:15 pmHow about this. The CPU slows down over time unless you feed it periodic unlock codes.(Don't think they haven't thought about it.)

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 12:26:07 pm
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on November 22, 2021, 10:21:55 amI have a better...You paid a 32 CORE CPU...They locked 28 cores unless you pay monthly fees...But. you still consumes power over 32 CPUs and they require you to run an invasive daemon to monitor you CPU usage..If I buy a car or motorcycle I expect they have wheels and functional parts..fuck off this greed.Paul

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 01:05:00 pm
content: Quote from: PKTKS on November 22, 2021, 12:26:07 pmSure sounds like the manufacturer is just "reserving" those 28 cores for their own crypto mining...

author: mfro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 01:53:03 pm
content: Nothing new.In the very beginning of my career, I was working for Control Data when they introduced their Cyber 2000 model.This was the time when these machines were still sold including their "dedicated service engineer".Anyways, the Cyber 2000 was available in two different configurations, the more expensive one with dual the processing power than the cheaper one which was field upgradeable.On upgrade, the service engineer spent a whole day at customer premises at (and in) the machine needlessly opening and closing covers, pulling and plugging boards until he eventually set the one single jumper that activated the second CPU that was already there from the beginning...

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 02:13:04 pm
content: Quote from: mfro on November 22, 2021, 01:53:03 pmyehh sure it is not new.... but all things equal...I've seen people dropping that more than going happy with the flow..PHORONIX comments are hilarious.. they range from- yeah FUCK YOU INTEL to- my gosh i can't wait to pay these licenses...ALAS ... CISCO is out of my option list for a long time..No chance in hell I will pay a hardware capable ROUTER ...fully operational but BRICKED with license "upgrades"Fuck off CISCO..even MikroTik which uses license hardware is not that shitty.MIMOSA, UBIQUITI, Cambrium they all have better modelsThere are alternatives. And all things going that potty hole..Fuck off CISCO and Fuck off WINTEL....Paul

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 02:44:20 pm
content: Quote from: mfro on November 22, 2021, 01:53:03 pmAnd they where not the only ones. Early in my career I spend some time in a company selling mainframes. A customer wanted more performance so they ordered the CPU upgrade. The CPU had a single jumper to set the performance. After the engineer 'installed' the upgraded CPU the customer complained they didn't notice any performance improvement. Turned out that at some point the CPU already got set to the high performance mode

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 04:05:01 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on November 21, 2021, 07:08:15 pmThis is a genuinely good question.I personally do not object to this practice in principle. What I do object to, is when that is done in order for one market segment to subsidize sales in another market segment: that play only works when there is not enough competition in the market, or when the sellers collude against customers. In my experience, that play usually also involves skirting the law and copyrights... I do not believe Intel fits in that category at all, and they must base their plan on something different.For complex equipment, the design and manufacturing costs can easily be such that splitting the product (with run-time configuration the only difference) makes business sense for both the vendor and the customer. Simply put, the larger volume allows price such savings that selling any of the sub-products alone would not be (as) profitable.We see this often in high-end test gear and scientific equipment. Intel already does this type of splitting, by testing and binning its silicon, and selling them as different models. Now that AMD is once again manufacturing processors that are competitive with Intel ones in both price and performance, I don't see how Intel is going to benefit from this.(Interestingly, if we look at Nov 2021Top 500 supercomputers, the top five use processors from Fujitsu, two IBM (Power9), one SunWay, and one AMD Epyc. There are two Intel Xeon and four AMD Epyc based ones in the top 10. At these scales, the contracts with the vendor are obviously special, and we shouldn't draw any hasty conclusions. Indeed, theNov 2021 highlightstells us that 81.6% of Top500 still runs on Intel (but down from 86.4% since May 2021), and 14.6% run on AMD (up from 9.6% since May 2021). So, when I am talking about "AMD is once again competitive", I mean the situation has significantly changed in 2021, from say 2020 or 2019.)This leaves me puzzled.Every submodel has to be competitive (in terms of both price and performance) with respect to the competitors, especially AMD, possibly ARM-based ones too, or customers will just use the competitors processors instead. I do not see how Intel intends to pull that off in practice. It's not like people by server farmsfirstand then seek use cases for them; the need exists before the purchase, in this business domain.My guess is that a convincing salesdrone has hoodwinked the Intel board to try this, with some fancy calculations on how this will let them somehow subsidize Top 500 or some other server sector purchases, and buttress their business against competition somehow, and will somehow be profitable.Perhaps; I just don't see how. Those salesdrones are much better at getting paid and moving on before the actual results are realized.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 04:49:53 pm
content: I'm not a huge fan of this, but I wouldn't have a big problem with it as long as once you paid for the extra features, the implemented licensing scheme would allow you to *permanently* own the new features, would never be able to disable them behind your back, and would never ever spy on usage or do any kind of telemetry.Another byproduct of this licensing scheme is that it maximizes the margin for vendors - so at the expense of their customers.

author: mfro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 05:02:33 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on November 22, 2021, 04:05:01 pmI do. At least in some market segments where this practice is excessive.Take large storage systems sold with "capacity on demand". They are full of disks, all of them spinning (if they still do) and wasting (lots of) energy, wear and tear, it's just you can't use them because they are disabled by software configuration. That's waste of energy and resources and somebody has to pay for it. Unfortunately, it's those that still do careful capacity planning trying to only buy what they need.

author: olkipukki
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 06:10:20 pm
content: Quote from: madires on November 21, 2021, 02:53:23 pmActually, it would be great and will acceleration ARM/RISC-V adaptation with $$$ investments much quicker than these days...Intel are not stupid, just test the water

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 06:27:04 pm
content: Quote from: PKTKS on November 22, 2021, 12:26:07 pmThe unused cores wouldn't be clocked so they wouldn't consume any power. No daemon is needed to monitor CPU usage, because there are only 4 CPUs. They're not turning it off if you don't pay a subscription because all changes require a cold boot to take effect, and the licenses are written permanently into NVRAM.You've read nothing.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 07:20:51 pm
content: Quote from: mfro on November 22, 2021, 05:02:33 pmTo me, that is due to lack of competition. I'm pretty sure a competitor could sell only partially populated systems at a cheaper price, since they don't need to buy the unused hardware in the first place.The fact that these systems tend to have an "Enterprise" price tag while using exact same consumer-quality components, is what annoys me much, much more. (Even more, when they use "enterprise" parts that have lower quality and performance than consumer-quality parts.. but that gets into rant territory.)

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 07:23:19 pm
content: Quote from: olkipukki on November 22, 2021, 06:10:20 pmAnd they do occasionally misstep, too. To me, this has a distinct salesdroid stank to it.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 08:03:45 pm
content: It's not stupidity. It's greed.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2021, 09:52:30 pm
content: There are real-world scenarios where software-enabled hardware features make both the minimum and maximum-featured versions cheaper to their end users.It all depends on how much the added volume reduces the per-unit costs, how much design, setup, and manufacturing costs are saved by using only one hardware base instead of several for the models, and so on.Intel already does this with its processors, by testing and binning the chips as they come off the wafers, and selling the differently-capable ones under different model names, maximising their manufacturing yields. I don't see how they could shift from that to software-enabled hardware features without AMD selling more capable processors at cheaper prices just by using the tried-and-true binning method.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2021, 12:30:30 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 22, 2021, 06:27:04 pmThe problem with FAN BOYs...Your naive assumptions are just juvenile wonders...You trust a bunch of greedy idiots..Why in the bloody hell they care about you me or anybody else?go figurePaulPS? They want our money - no matter consequences. long period.they just do not care as long as (easiest) money comes in.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2021, 12:47:11 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 22, 2021, 08:03:45 pmThat is the point. Bottom line ...They use any method cheapest easiest profitable.That includes anythingPaul

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2021, 12:50:50 pm
content: Quote from: olkipukki on November 22, 2021, 06:10:20 pmThey never was... they are just too greedy...and never play the game by rules...WINTEL is the nastiest player out there..Just care about easy moneythe rest is BANANAPaul

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2021, 04:39:37 pm
content: Quote from: PKTKS on November 23, 2021, 12:30:30 pmI am no fan boy, little child, I simpy look at facts, not fears.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2021, 05:12:42 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 23, 2021, 04:39:37 pmIt is just about MONEY... money money..Selling competitive hardware is hard business..Much much easier to run the extortion algorithmsrenting intangible "licenses" over and over and over..from the same locked thing - cheaper easierThey will pass this DRM digital lobby .. sooner or later.. don't worryI've seen their methods dozen times.Very soon CORPORATE *NIX KIOSKs will be everywhereI'm already preparing to departure (again) from what is visible ahead.The whole thing converged already to 2 or 3 corporate landlords.You will have your biased ideas soon realizedPaul

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2021, 05:16:21 pm
content: Not to back up what PKTKS says in general, I think he tends to be a bit too extreme in general. But here, your "facts" are only partial.In this CPU example, sure, unused cores won't be clocked (at least, we sure hope that's what Intel implemented, as it's pretty reasonable). So they won't draw any dynamic power, but unless there's provision in the CPU to completely power down those cores - which I'm absolutely not sure of - they'll still draw static power, and for such large integrated circuits on such CMOS processes, that's not unsignificant. Sure is a lot less than when clocked at several GHz, but that's still useless power consumption.And then, there's also just the general fact of selling products containing a big part of unused items. That's just a *waste* of material. So however you look at it, this licensing model does have inherent efficiency issues generally speaking.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2021, 05:24:02 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 23, 2021, 05:16:21 pmI'm sure of it, because CPUs are already built this way to bring power consumption to an absolute minimum. This isn't a new technology (unless you're PKTKS).QuoteAgain, CPUs are chock full of such things already. It's far cheaper than totally different dies for every product.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 24, 2021, 09:30:16 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 23, 2021, 05:24:02 pmMonKy I love your diligent tireless efforts to make me look like a funky idiotJust 2 simple considerations:- WINTEL is a MULTI-BILLION dollar buzzz - the proper word *IS* RADICALnotordinarycasual or simple. Shareholders are not fan boys.- Second usuallyexperienceis like toillet paper.You never miss it - until you need itSo I am pretty confident that folks reading this will "trust" and believeif thesecompetitive offersare really fair deals..I will not manifest bias on what some fan boy think isfairUp to *you* think if your money is well paid increasing thesemulti-billion game margin gains...Fair deal?I always miss you monkyPaul

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 24, 2021, 09:43:00 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on November 21, 2021, 07:08:15 pmCan also go the other way, the license terms can change and oh, from now on you need to subscribe, and oh, from next month the fee will increase because, and oh, you can't activate because reasons (politicals and otherwise)this happen in the software world all the time, it's beginning to happen in the car world, why couldn't it happen in the CPU?

author: voltsandjolts
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 24, 2021, 10:02:50 am
content: This is all very old news.Intel was doing this kind of thing over a decade ago in consumer low end i3 systems, perhaps others.I remember because it annoyed me then.What was it called...oh, yeh...Intel Upgrade Service.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 24, 2021, 05:11:18 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on November 24, 2021, 09:43:00 amThis capability does not exist in this proposed mechanism. Could they in the future? Perhaps, but that's not what they're suggesting implementing now.Quote from: PKTKS on November 24, 2021, 09:30:16 amWhy should they trust and believe claims made by someone leaping to conclusions based on their fears, not the data?

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 24, 2021, 05:50:04 pm
content: Back in the day, Amdahl 470 mainframes had a dual speed capabilityQuoteNothing nefarious, just adjustable capability as needs demand.https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Amdahl_Corporation

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 26, 2021, 09:43:25 am
content: Quote from: rstofer on November 24, 2021, 05:50:04 pm20y ago I would say that should be a good deal10y ago I would consider alternatives..Today? geez ... today that is a spherical bad deal..no matter which side you look at it ..just meant to promote these "licenses" buz wo competitionToday cheap volume electronics allows us a wide option set...unless obviously you are an certified institutionalized monkey in the flow..wo need to think using your own pockets..today that represents the worst possible deal you can makeuc .. we have alternativesPaul

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 26, 2021, 05:40:40 pm
content: Quote from: voltsandjolts on November 24, 2021, 10:02:50 amWhich boiled down to "pay $50 afterwards to get the features you would have got if you had paid $15 more in the first place."Like I said, it sounds to me like a salesdrone hoodwinked the PHBs into believing this would make money.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 08, 2021, 09:37:28 am
content: More 2 centos of greedy jambo shitPlease WINTEL ... just FUCKOFF!!!Not only they will make you pay in full a crippled hardware...But require that you have an ONLINE connection and monitored valid shit.. running all timePlease FUCKOFF!!!https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Intel-SDSi-v2Paul

author: Haenk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 08, 2021, 03:35:05 pm
content: Well, digging around in my brain, I somehow remembered their previous attempt:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Upgrade_ServiceI wonder if people like that idea better now, now that 10 years have passed and everyone has forgotten about it...

author: TomS_
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2021, 09:56:14 am
content: Quote from: PKTKS on November 24, 2021, 09:30:16 amIt's hard to take you seriously when your arguments are presented the way they are. It's all conspiracy, and you provide no references to back up your claims.You look just like any other nutter on Facebook etc trying to sell anti vax and anti 5G conspiracies.So, no thanks.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2021, 04:23:25 am
content: Quote from: PKTKS on December 08, 2021, 09:37:28 amNothing in that article or the childishly titled screenshot you secured from it supports your claim of 'online connection' and 'monitored valid shit'.You feed it a certificate and payload, after a cold boot the functionality is enabled (presumably feeding it a different payload would allow to disable as well). You would not even need to load the driver once the required cert and payload are loaded, because everything happens at boot prior to OS, network, or even the RTC being available.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2021, 12:09:04 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 16, 2021, 04:23:25 amSo *YOU* say.. as usual.... to make me look like a funky idiot...Nothing supports your vagueopinionthat things will beor should be like this.. in due time...The very same way they have pushed TPM as a KERNEL MODULE...Things just sum up as experience teach us..Other modules are being insanely pushed to the low level firmware... (binary blobs)These folks were never reliable as so hope for the better..prepare yourself for the odds.2 cents of a dodgy veteran..I always miss you monkyPaul

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2021, 12:14:23 pm
content: Quote from: PKTKS on December 16, 2021, 12:09:04 pmNothing other than the code and documentation they've sent upstream..As usual, you're making yourself look like an idiot.

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2021, 12:18:41 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on December 16, 2021, 12:14:23 pmDon't think so..Things are summing up and converging a while to preparea full binary blob in kernel locked up devices...INPUT methods.. so calledSECURITYgizmos..and impossible to handle display firmwares..and stuff..Nothing really keeps mind at easy ..I have already prepared a full change if required fromwhat seems to be a hostile take over on FOSS..by using binary blobs like this and others..Paul

author: PKTKS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2021, 12:26:28 pm
content: Quote from: TomS_ on December 15, 2021, 09:56:14 amIt is calledexperience...I deal with that kind of business over 4 decades..they have VERTICAL CONTROL of the chain..Pushing things like this are not mindless...It just business..May sound conspiracy .. actually it is just about havingcontrol over the vertical chain...They already have their own compiler ..own binary blobs and proprietary firmware..Soon things should clear on how that will translatein business ..As said above..THEY ARE TRYING TO PUSH THIS.. DECADES SO FAR..one more try..Paul