Yup, you are right, and I was in the audience too. I guess I am still jetlagged. In any case the release cycle of GPUs says that they should have silicon back by now for Navi, or really soon if it is not already in hand. It was originally due in Q4/2018 but it got pushed back earlier this year, my educated guess is because of things on the process side.

              -Charlie

As the person who first dug out the specs on the next gen Playstation over two months ago here:

https://www.semiaccurate.com/2...

I found this 'report' to be laughable. No it was borderline ignorant and seems to be based on my work, rampant speculation, and a random technical phrase generator. Also do note that the phrase I used in the story was Playstation 5/Next, I did that for a reason.

So what do we know? Navi is slated for ~Q2/2019, likely early, next year. Lisa Su held one up at Computex during her keynote, this is not a 2020 product, nor is it tied to the Sony roadmap. I won't go into the sheer technical ignorance of these statements, but lets just say that GPUs don't have a >18 month validation cycle.

As for the bit about Vega being designed for Apple and Navi for Sony, do I really need to comment on that? It sure sounds good if you are at Youtube levels of technical understanding but, well, just thinking about it makes my brain hurt. Go look back at Polaris, the pre-Vega architecture that formed the basis of the PS4 Pro and the XBox OneX, look at the release cycles for those consoles versus the release cycles for the GPUs. See a pattern?

And delaying the APUs because of a console? Really? You might want to consider the current launch cadence for AMD chips, roughly yearly on the consumer side. The Ryzen 1xxx launched about a year ago, March 2017. Ryzen 2 launched in March of 2018. That puts Ryzen 3, presumably with Navi, when? I guess that is up to Sony, NOT.

All in all this 'article' makes my head hurt. It is a rehash of technical stupidity and rumors slapped together by someone with no sources, no clue about how things work, and desperate for clicks. (Note: I am often accused of that but my site doesn't have ads, clicks buy me nothing) For once I wish people on the net would just try and logically parse 'articles' a bit before they repeated them as 'truth', the internet is a big, relatively worthless echo chamber for a reason.

              -Charlie

It would have been more like 1998. Yahoo Mail was part of an acquisition of Four11's RocketMail in late (October/November) 1997.

I think that subscriptions, like micropayments, are evil and ruining the industry by blatant money grabbing and extortion. That said it is easy to see why the companies inflicting this are doing it, it makes them lots of cash.

So my question to all of you who dislike this state of affairs, what are you doing about it? Have you contributed time or money to open source alternatives? Have you purchased a commercial alternative? Are you sitting on your ass bemoaning the state of affairs while enabling it?

          -Charlie

Why bother when you have Bing ads? :P

I agree. Inte; has that feature but they deny it and hide it from users, even users who they know are being exploited. I am pissed.

The hacking is already done and it is more than documented. I have been warning Intel directly about the financial implications for literally years. They denied it was a problem. Now it is too late.

Some, enough to keep me from sleeping some nights, and more than enough to keep me from having any respect for the people ostensibly working in our best interest who simply don't get the implications what they are doing.

Intel can't say their chips don't have a back door. They also haven't said their chips don't have a back door so at least they are honest.

AMD is working on greater disclosure and I am prodding them as hard as I can. Internally they seem to be doing the right things, or at least trying to.

ARM has their full code base published on Github. This doesn't prevent licensees from using something else, adding nefarious things etc, but I can almost guarantee most don't. You can always checksum the code if you want.

As an aside, AMD's PSP is based on ARM's stuff which is completely open source. I am fairly sure that the majority of AMD's code in this area is unchanged from the vanilla ARM version so you could consider AMD's partially open.

        -Charlie

There have been remote attacks capable of provisioning AMT in the wild. Intel conveniently does not acknowledged them in their NDA documents about security for some reason, can calls users with AMT turned off 'safe'. Take from that what you will about their priorities when it comes to customer's security.

I take issue with the term 'a'. :)

Like many others trying to do the right thing on Intel security, I am sorry you left. I know several others starting with the pre-AMT vPro reveal team members who got sick of beating their heads against the wall and quit in frustration. The idiots stay. This is not good for humanity.

As the one who outed the 10+ year AMT bug a few months ago, Intel's ''security' policy is a joke. No it is worse than that, it is willfully malign. They know how to do the right thing but they refuse to do so for whatever reason. I have been begging them for quite literally years not to be abjectly stupid on TXT and ME security issues but they just get worse. You are seeing the tip of the iceberg, wait for the hardware issues you can't patch to be found....

              -Charlie

Not for him though.