3 ms·
You know if your did less FUD there's a chance people may actually engage in a conversation with you. Anyone from enterprise knows his much of a timesaver amt
by animalnewbie 7y ago
You know if your did less FUD there's a chance people may actually engage in a conversation with you.
Anyone from enterprise knows his much of a timesaver amt is. I make a call andi don't have to wait for the IT dude to appear on my desk- he clicks a few buttons from his desk and my problem is fixed.
- RandomTisk 7y agoWhy do we need ME for that?
- gowld 7y agoActive Management Technology (AMT) is built on top of Intel ME. ME lets a trusted party control the computer without letting every peer control the computer.
- kelnos 7y agoI think the point is that all of this can be implemented purely in software that runs at the OS level, or even application level. There's no need to put this in a place where it's difficult to update/patch, and is entirely opaque and user-hostile to the point that the actual end-owner of the hardware can reasonably be sure they know what it does and can control what it does. In other words: I don't want a backdoor into my system that I can't examine or disable.
- gggmaster 7y agoAMT is not available with their Z, B and H chipsets. Leave us with only the downsides.
- Karunamon 7y agoWhy does that technology, with attendant attack surface, need to be in consumer chips on consumer motherboards? Besides, we already had a solution for this. It can be provided with add-in cards.
- rolph 7y agoone thing that comes to mind is that the consumer-based wedge of the pie is handled as an enterprise deployment of its own managed by intel.
- zzo38computer 7y agoOK, but the user with physical access should have the option to disable it (without damaging the rest of the system).