> You can argue until you're blue in the face [...] doesn't mean someone who is close to the pain of end users experiencing failure is acting in bad faith by di

> You can argue until you're blue in the face [...] doesn't mean someone who is close to the pain of end users experiencing failure is acting in bad faith by disagreeing with you Since you didn't actually provide any evidence either way (and nobody did to my knowledge) it stands to reason that indeed your only point is to argue. There's no reason to assume Apple introduced something like the T2 chip for any other reason than to offer genuinely useful features to users and profit from it. Genuine criticism should be based on more than "maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong". Otherwise it's just shilling. ...And losing an argument, whether you found it interesting or not. Care to see how others read your "brilliant" maybe this, maybe that "argument"? All manufacturers should offer no features to have no point of failure. Any single addition to any product can only be another point that can fail. Thus it should be assumed by default that this must be the intention of every manufacturer. It even begs the conclusion that all of them are the same so singling one out is purely grudge based.