7 ms·

I say it also has to do with them just not caring about what their users want. You’re still gonna buy an x86 processor and AMD has their own ME-like tool too. W

I say it also has to do with them just not caring about what their users want. You’re still gonna buy an x86 processor and AMD has their own ME-like tool too. What are you gonna do, run your desktop on ARM or RISC-V?

cturner 9y ago
Would be good to have a low performance riscv motherboard with something like a PCI bus. Then, run an x86 daughter card. Early arm systems (acorn RISC pc) could house a 486 daughter card like this, and you could run Windows on it in a box. Have one at home.
drvdevd 9y ago
Sadly, the main reason IMO this isn't possible is not just that desktop software is designed for the x86 instruction set, but that it's designed for lots of RAM and CPU usage, when it could be slimmer.
prophesi 9y ago
And even with ARM (I'm not familiar with RISC-V), you're likely going to have binary blobs for critical drivers.
- AstralStorm 9y ago
  Worse, in Qualcomm chips you have essentially the same OS as in AMD "Secure" Processor. Trustonic TEE OS. Handling ARM "Trust"Zone.
ksk 9y ago
>I say it also has to do with them just not caring about what their users want. Why are people buying their products?
- colejohnson66 9y ago
  Because the only alternative is AMD, who, until Ryzen, was lacking in performance quite a bit.
  - ksk 9y ago
    In that case, it actually goes against your "they don't care about their users" narrative. Or maybe they partially care about their users. Anyway, I see some value in the features that ME provides, and so I'm not as anti-ME as a lot of the commenters on here. But obviously, I want the security bugs to be fixed too.
    - y_u_no_rust 9y ago
      I wouldn't care if you could just disable it, NBD then
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - colejohnson66 9y ago
      What I was trying to say is that Intel doesn’t really have a financial incentive to have non-ME SKUs because, besides the majority of users not caring, those who do care don’t really have any other options.

cturner 9y ago

Would be good to have a low performance riscv motherboard with something like a PCI bus. Then, run an x86 daughter card. Early arm systems (acorn RISC pc) could house a 486 daughter card like this, and you could run Windows on it in a box. Have one at home.

drvdevd 9y ago

Sadly, the main reason IMO this isn't possible is not just that desktop software is designed for the x86 instruction set, but that it's designed for lots of RAM and CPU usage, when it could be slimmer.

prophesi 9y ago

And even with ARM (I'm not familiar with RISC-V), you're likely going to have binary blobs for critical drivers.

AstralStorm 9y ago
Worse, in Qualcomm chips you have essentially the same OS as in AMD "Secure" Processor. Trustonic TEE OS. Handling ARM "Trust"Zone.

ksk 9y ago

>I say it also has to do with them just not caring about what their users want. Why are people buying their products?

colejohnson66 9y ago
Because the only alternative is AMD, who, until Ryzen, was lacking in performance quite a bit.
- ksk 9y ago
  In that case, it actually goes against your "they don't care about their users" narrative. Or maybe they partially care about their users. Anyway, I see some value in the features that ME provides, and so I'm not as anti-ME as a lot of the commenters on here. But obviously, I want the security bugs to be fixed too.
  - y_u_no_rust 9y ago
    I wouldn't care if you could just disable it, NBD then
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - colejohnson66 9y ago
    What I was trying to say is that Intel doesn’t really have a financial incentive to have non-ME SKUs because, besides the majority of users not caring, those who do care don’t really have any other options.