6 ms·
Apple’s T2 security chip blocks some third-party repairs of new Macs
- overcast 8y agoPretty much at the end of my 2008 Mac Pro rope. Along with repair-ability, the base and upgrade pricing is just getting out of control. With a high spec mac mini approaching 2k, I can only imagine what the new MacPro will end up being. I sure as hell am not spending $6000+ on one. Next machine will be a coffee lake Hackintosh, it really takes very little effort to install nowadays.
- dpcx 8y agoYou have a (probably) $6k machine that is still giving you a workable system 10 years later - doesn't that tend to suggest something?
- 64738 8y agoMine's a mid-2010 MBP, only paid $1600 new (later upgraded the memory and swapped to an SSD). It's still my main system eight years later. Unfortunately, I can't install newer versions of the OS. I'm stuck at no higher than 10.12(?), so now there's mainstream software I can't install because of OS version requirements. Kind of a bummer since it's still a good machine. 8+ years is a pretty good run, but that doesn't mean I'm ready to replace it. I guess my point is, yeah, even if initially expensive, it's been a good value. I hope the new ones are similar...
- overcast 8y agoYou can definitely install a newer MacOS, they run fine. It's a 5 minute patch to the installer, and away you go. My 2008 has been running High Sierra without any issues. http://dosdude1.com/software.html http://dosdude1.com/software.html
- 64738 8y agoVery interesting! I have looked for ways to fake what version MacOS reports to installers, but was unaware of methods to install the newer OSes. Thank you, I sincerely appreciate the link :D
- llampx 8y agoA 10 year old desktop PC with similar specs would have lasted just as long. I just upgraded my PC from 2008 (original Intel Core i7) to a Ryzen system this year, and a Mac Pro had much more power to begin with.
- tkcins 8y agoThat's apples to oranges. A laptop includes many pieces of hardware you probably don't understand as part of your desktop PC (think keyboard, screen, loudspeakers, ...), is carried around all day, and sometimes suffers some abuse :)
- andrewstuart2 8y agoA Mac Pro is a desktop computer, not to be confused with a MacBook Pro. :-) https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/ https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/
- Someone1234 8y agoI still have a $1.5K system doing the same. I'm pretty sure it suggests that after Moore's Law computers now last significantly longer than they used to. Only major hardware improvement in that period is Nvidia's GTX 1060/1070/1080 series graphics cards and faster PCI based SSD storage. CPUs and memory have barely moved.
- p1necone 8y agoI think it's just as much Intel just not having competition/incentive to improve as it is Moore's Law. Until Ryzen forced Intel to get off their asses there was very little performance improvement generation by generation in intel processors. For example: Over 2011 - 2017 there was a ~18% (userbenchmark) improvement in the *700 i7 model. https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-2700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-7700/1985vs3887 https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-2700K-vs... But then Ryzen came out and the very next model (released in the same year) was already a ~23% improvement. https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700-vs-Intel-Core-i7-8700/3887vs3940 https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700-vs-...
- ethebubbeth 8y agoThe "Ryzen forced Intel to get off their asses" portion is definitely in full effect here. It got Intel to move from 4 to 6 cores on the *700 i7 part. However, both in the SC Mixed results on the benchmarks you linked, and in individual benchmarks at Anandtech ( https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2255?vs=2127 https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2255?vs=2127), the single threaded results track previous generations. Intel still had to go wide to increase performance due to competition from AMD. They didn't increase generational improvement on their individual cores.
- overcast 8y agoThe 2008 MacPro was $3000 at the time, and was actually an outrageously good deal. A pair of the Xeon CPU's were roughly the same cost retail, nevermind the rest of it. Judging by the existing trash can one, it will be ridiculously overpriced this time around.
- ken 8y agoThe 2008 Mac Pro cost only $2299: https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_pro/specs/mac-pro-quad-core-2.8-2008-specs.html https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_pro/specs/mac-pro-qua... Even accounting for inflation, that's under $2700 today. And the only reason my 2008 is still "workable" is because I used a third-party tool to enable me to run a recent macOS installer. Apple's official macOS installer refuses to update a 2008 Mac Pro beyond OS 10.11 (El Cap, 2015), even though the hardware is perfectly capable of running newer versions.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- andrewstuart2 8y agoFWIW, it takes a lot more engineering to squeeze high-end components into a tiny case. I would there to be a much lower form-factor tax to pay on a Pro. That said, I'll probably always build my own just for the upgradeability and performance angle.
- overcast 8y agoNo one asked for a $10,000 small as humanly possible trash can. What pro user cares about how small their desktop machine is? All we wanted was the cheese grater with upgrade components. Unfortunately for them, I'll be building another machine this time around. Especially since I've moved all of my dev environments, and resource intensive tasks to PC.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- andrewstuart2 8y agoWhat I meant was that I would expect the Pro to have a much smaller form-factor tax than a Mac Mini. Your $2k price point is probably not directly comparable to the price ranges you'd see from a larger case.
- kalleboo 8y agoThe iMac Pro starts at $5000. I'd expect the Mac Pro to start somewhere around there. At the very cheapest, $4000 since you don't get a screen.
- macintux 8y ago> “This could be an attempt to grab more market share from the independent repair providers. Or it could be a threat to keep their authorized network in line. We just don’t know.” Good grief. "Apple adds systems integrity hardware to reduce the risk of local compromise" becomes "Apple is out to destroy your repair business" because reasons.
- izacus 8y agoBoth sentences can be true. They might even both be intentional.
- andrewstuart2 8y ago"... and as a bonus, it will help bring more of the hardware repair business in-house."
- tinus_hn 8y agoWell, it’s Apple so it gets clicks!
- agoodthrowaway 8y agoThee articles are getting ridiculous. I recall the complaints about 3rd party repairs to the fingerprint reader on iPhone. I never understood the spin that Apple is blocking repairs on the device. The fingerprint reader is used to unlock sensitive information and make payments. Locking that prevents all kinds of Backdoor hacks around fingerprint security.
- alphabettsy 8y agoThis doesn’t seem like a very big deal. Unless I read it wrong this only applies to repairs that could interfere with the operation of the T2 security chip, but I’ve only ever had my Macs repaired by Apple or authorized third-parties when I couldn’t do it myself so maybe it’s just me not seeing the issue.
- simongr3dal 8y agoI agree. Even in Denmark where Apple doesn't have any officials stores, there are still plenty of small tech repair shops that replace phone screens, and from what I've noticed at least 50% of those are Apple Authorized Service Providers who are able to repair any Apple product and also provide the service free of charge if you are under warranty.
- Wowfunhappy 8y agoIs there a technical reason why the T2 chip can't be disabled wholesale for situations like this? Obviously, this would disable features like touch ID, but that seems like an okay trade off.
- Tsiklon 8y agoAs I understand it - the T2 chip is also the storage controller for the Flash storage used in these new machines, so if it were disabled you'd have to use external storage.
- dunham 8y agoThat's interesting - are the encryption keys for the storage in a secure enclave then?
- alphabettsy 8y agoYea. https://www.apple.com/mac/docs/Apple_T2_Security_Chip_Overview.pdf https://www.apple.com/mac/docs/Apple_T2_Security_Chip_Overvi...
- SEJeff 8y agoAnd by blocking some third-party repairs, it is also making it harder to replace components with "backdoored" ones like the "big back" bloomberg article posted recently. These types of changes at their core are good, even if they're annoying.
- 21 8y agoIf all the apple shops in the world will get that tool, you can assume anybody capable of a hardware backdoor will also have access to it and a way to use it without raising flags (presumably the tool will phone back home for authorization).
- SEJeff 8y agoHence me saying it makes it harder, not that it makes it impossible.
- fraudsyndrome 8y agohttps://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/22/aws-ceo-jassy-follows-apple-calls-for-spy-chip-story-retraction.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/22/aws-ceo-jassy-follows-apple-... Apparently that was debunked.
- SEJeff 8y agoI realize it was debunked, but the core attack vector still exists. This type of thing makes it harder (but definitely not impossible) to pull off.
- mrobins 8y agoThe newest Above Avalon podcast makes the case that Apple is embracing secondhand markets and key to that is increasing device longevity. If it’s true they’re thinking about devices as likely to have multiple owners it makes sense to take precautions against hardware backdoors. https://www.aboveavalon.com/podcast/2018/10/26/above-avalon-episode-135-the-gray-market-factor https://www.aboveavalon.com/podcast/2018/10/26/above-avalon-...