[Cadaver]

OK, I saw this mentioned in someone's blog this morning. Now, I know blogs are like a**holes - everyone's got one. But, this guy brings up an interesting point. And no, I no longer have the link available (but I think it was linked on MacSurfer's main page).

Anyway, this guy suggests that Apple intends to shut-out the CPU upgrade business (for which we know Apple isn't fond of) by utilizing the DRM features of Intel's new CPUs to essentially lock the CPU to the machine. Pulling the CPU and replacing it with a faster one wont be possible like it is on any old Intel- (or AMD-) based PC. Or even like it is on a G4 tower.

Anyone think this is possible/probable? Would Apple be shooting themselves in the foot (or someplace else) if they tried this? I personally think if Apple did this, they'd be shunned by nearly all hardware-afficianados.

We already know now that many of Apple's machines aren't really upgradable - and we accept that. But often that was (is) due to the cost of designing upgrades for a small market and making them affordable. But now, with Apple moving to Intel, we have a way to finally upgrade our machines potentially very easily, just as many PC-users do. But what if Apple cuts out ALL processor upgrades for EVERY (Intel) machine by utilizing Intel's DRM?

Could any computer company really want to go back to the days of 100% closed machines? I take that back... they may want to, but can their consumers afford such a move in today's ecomony? Would this be a seriously bad move for Apple?

...or it it not a big deal? Is it nothing new compared with what we have today? The G5 machines aren't processor upgradable (yet, as far as we know). No one buys an iMac or Mac mini expecting to upgrade it significantly. Is there really no story here? Is this guy just spreading more FUD??

Discuss.

[qnxde]

Maybe they'll use DRM to also lock out non-apple peripherals and non apple software too. Bye Bye xmms, and hello itunes!! I will be forced to buy an iSight because my USB cam won't work! they already tried to make it not work in ichat, lock out could be next!! i wonder if iterm will stop working, i dont like terminal.app and i hope my entourage doesnt stop working either!

Oh noes!!

[Millennium]

There was a time when I'd have thought Apple would never even consider doing a thing like that. I'd point to the iPod, and the fact that its "DRM" consisted of an easily-hackable invisible folder, as evidence.

That said, times have changed. I wouldn't put it past Apple to consider it, since Steve has always been a huge fan of the closed-box concept (he thinks it makes things simpler). Before now, though, I wouldn't have thought Apple crazy enough to let that idea go beyond just another of Steve's crackpot pipedreams. Now I'm not so sure.

[turtle777]

Cadaver, welcome to last months discussion.

That DRM might have something to do with it was mentioned in many places, and even discussed here.

-t

[Randman]

And no one knows for sure.

[BasketofPuppies]

Does it matter?

Apple and other computer manufacturers have been able to use more physical means to prevent people from installing processor upgrades for more than twenty years.

[JoshuaZ]

This was like sooo last month. ::rolls eyes::

[Cadaver]

Originally Posted by turtle777

Cadaver, welcome to last months discussion.

That DRM might have something to do with it was mentioned in many places, and even discussed here.

-t

ok,ok... maybe its old news. But I guess I didn't see the thread or read every post.

Anyway... for those who missed it the first time....

[:XI:]

They don't even need to involve DRM. They could get the chips packaged in such a way as to make off the shelf Pentiums physically incompatible.

[Eriamjh]

If Apple wanted to lock out upgrades, they would just solder the micro to the mobo.

[Superchicken]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

If Apple wanted to lock out upgrades, they would just solder the micro to the mobo.

Exactly. Check out the Power Macs for the longest time you've been able to upgrade the processor cause it makes sense to have that option in those Machines. There is room to put the processor on a daughter card, etc. In an iMac it makes more sense to just have the thing soldered into the mobo (least I think that's how the G5 ones are correct me if I'm wrong). I don't imagine Apple wants to piss off people. That said Apple tends to only lock you out from crappier options. For example no Windows Media in iTunes, no junky USB cams with iChat. Steve's a quality snob. I doubt that so long as processor upgrades don't diminish the quality of Macs they'll at least be available in some machines.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Cadaver

ok,ok... maybe its old news. But I guess I didn't see the thread or read every post.

Anyway... for those who missed it the first time....

And how would that keep hackers from modifying OS X for Intel to run on off-the-shelf Intel PC ?
DRM is not crack proof either, but a DRMed processor serial and the same embedded in the OS would make it a heck more complicated...

-t

[Superchicken]

Originally Posted by turtle777

And how would that keep hackers from modifying OS X for Intel to run on off-the-shelf Intel PC ?
DRM is not crack proof either, but a DRMed processor serial and the same embedded in the OS would make it a heck more complicated...

-t

My bet is they wouldn't tie it to the OS, but rather to the mother board. They're not going to customize every OS Install for one specific serial number. My bet is they'll do what requires the least effort for them to stop casual piracy.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Superchicken

My bet is they wouldn't tie it to the OS, but rather to the mother board. They're not going to customize every OS Install for one specific serial number. My bet is they'll do what requires the least effort for them to stop casual piracy.

No, they won't. They will have a number series in the OS, and the Intel processor has to have a serial number in that series. With this, they could use standard Intel chips and boards, and still get it locked as much as possible.

-t