We know that the boards were compliant because Intel won't sell chipsets to anyone who doesn't follow their rules. Hardware Unboxed was exercising extreme diligence to confirm that Intel hasn't specified which power limits they're ok with. The whole market stack is captured, which unfortunately for intel leaves them with nobody to blame but themselves.

The only way intel could escape liability for this problem would be if some of the board makers were falsifying data to pass the conditions (like VW with their DEF emissions fraud scheme), which hasn't been alleged.

That's a great car analogy because it involves a car. Here's a better one.

Ford: Buy our 500hp engines, it will allow you to drive 200mph!

Dodge: We plan to hit 210mph by using Ford's engine. We are going to run it at 50,000rpm and will be saving costs by using no radiator.

Ford: Sounds great, we will tell everyone to buy a Dodge!

Probably because of the 20 minutes of script reading. If I wanted to waste my life listening to a drone read I'd call customer service.

MSI was one of the makers pushing infinite power on all their boards and this advice is not current. I'd expect their aberrant results to be an indicator of some other configurations that are quite unreasonable.

The Chinese don't want to spend their annual salary on a phone known to fall apart just so they can look cooler than their neighbor?

As an early beta-tester (read: customer) of Ford's attempt at making a CVT transmission, please stop giving them ideas.

Article is about intel's approved rules and bios's bricking CPUs, not boards failing due to inadequate VRM's. If you had the same problem, then even after replacing the board your problem would persist, except that board likely is ewaste-by-design everything soldered on-board so you accidentally replaced the whole system.

It's the fault of the motherboard makers for using the chipsets exclusively allowed by Intel with a bios explicitly approved by Intel while following the rules drafted by Intel.

The common failure when all your decisions must be approved by some outsider is to stop doing your own oversight. Of course the board makers should have done better, but it's 1000% intel's fault for failing to use their position to actually protect their products and customers.

I appreciate your comments as my original comment was not particularly good.

I suspect, at this point, that Hasan is already making a living running No Tech For Apartheid, and protesting for Palestine. It is even possible that it is a better living than they made working for Google, but probably not. I am not saying that sacrifices have not been made. However, when I say that this person is a professional protester I understood what that meant. My wife is a professional organizer. You can pay her, by the hour, to organize your closet, or your warehouse. Ibraheem is a professional protestor.

It is funny how you think that it is the red states that will kill this. Noncompetes are already not enforceable in many right-to-work states. It's the blue states where noncompete clauses had weight.

I actually believe that. Probably because that's what Hasan Ibraheem is quoted as saying in this article. He was already part of an organization No Tech For Apartheid. Here's the requisite quote from the article in case you don't feel like clicking on a link.

I don't see why this should be a surprising take. There are quite a few people that have become professional protestors. Nine people sat for a while in an office building with some very nice banners and somehow this has been in the national news for a week. These people came prepared, they were well-funded, and they clearly were plugged into the media well beforehand. He's done it once. I am sure that he has a long career ahead of him in this profession.

I want to make this very clear. I actually applaud this guy for his work. I am quite sure that he is genuine in his regard for Palestine, and it is hard to argue that it isn't an important topic. I just don't believe, even for a second, that any of this was a surprise to him. Hasan used his job at Google to catapult himself into this role.

Apple's only advantage is that they are seen as a status symbol by certain people. Apple has gone out of its way to make sure that you can tell if someone you are talking to is using an iPhone. If they aren't using an iPhone then the experience is degraded significantly. There are a million video chat programs, and they all work great, but the cool kids all want to Facetime. In group chats they care what colors bubbles they have.

That works great in places where there are a lot of Apple users, but it works against Apple in places where there is not. In China there are replacements for all of Apple's software that everyone uses, even if you have a fancy phone you aren't really in Apple's ecosystem. In essence you are buying an iPhone to become a second class citizen in all of the software you actually want to use. Everyone else is running Android.

Throw in major financial issues in China and all of a sudden Apple's phones look like a very poor choice, even without throwing politics in the mix.

I read an interview with one of the main protestors that got fired in the first wave. Their plan is to become a professional protestor. I suspect that pays better than being an average Googler.

Exactly. I drive a 1996 Honda Civic. If I were to buy a new car, that is the sort of car that I would be interested in. The sort of car that is inexpensive and capable of driving at freeway speeds. If the government would let me buy a Toyota Hilux for $12K I would do that tomorrow. Instead I get enormous pickups and SUVs that get through the loopholes in our current EPA standards and that cost more than my first house.

I just spent a week in Peru where Chinese cars are quite popular, and the taxi drivers that I talked to were pretty happy with theirs. The mentioned, time and again, that, for the price they were great cars. They were definitely popular. I would buy one of those. They tend to have manual transmissions, which I know how to drive, and which I trust not to leave me stranded.

If I could buy an electric vehicle for $10K I would do that. It wouldn't be my only vehicle, but it probably would be my primary vehicle. I love the idea of electric vehicles, but it doesn't make sense to replace my ridiculously inexpensive (paid for and hyper reliable) Civic with an expensive electric vehicle, or my far more useful Honda Odyssey mini-van. It sort of makes sense to replace the Civic with an electric vehicle, however, if the price is right.

Apple's market dominance in the U.S. means that people with Android phones face significant headwinds. Being the only Android user in a group chat is its own special Hell. That lack of interoperability works against Apple in places where Android phones are more established. It is hard to convince people that your phone is so much better than theirs when every time you put a picture in a group chat it looks like you took the picture on a flip phone from 1995. Everyone else's pictures look fine. In these cases Apple is clearly the problem, and it is a bad look for Apple.

That doesn't stop iPhones from being a status symbol, and there are certain parts of the population, where all of the rich and powerful people have iPhones, where being part of the crowd is worth the price of entry. However, in a country where 90+% of the population is using Android you have to be pretty darn snooty to justify buying an iPhone. I suspect that is a very hard market to sell into.