Louis Rossman on soldered SSD

[120FPS]

I don't think Louis Rossmann is a grifter. I don't think he's motivated by views or anything like that, like some people are suggesting in this thread. My main problem with Louis and the right to repair movement in general is that they pretend to be all about choice and freedom but they just won't let people exercise choice. Some of us are fine buying a new laptop if the current one breaks before it's expected (a excuse to buy a new toy, yay). Some people are fine with AppleCare. People who care about the stuff that Louis cares about can buy a Framework Laptop. The market has an answer, but has Louis stopped advocating for any of the stuff he advocates after the Framework laptop was released? No, because this is not about choice, this is about control.

I also love that I can get my parent a tablet without side-loading where he can't possibly install any crap and I hate that the EU is going to force Apple to allow side-loading, because I'm going to have to deal with that mess. I'm sure Louis thinks this is a great thing, but the reality is that right now in the EU you can choose if you want a phone/tablet without side-loading or one that allows it, and that choice is being taken away. This is progress, for Louis.

And yes, personally, I like the idea that you can get a phone that becomes a useless brick if it's stolen. That means if I get an iPhone for a relative they would be less likely to be the victim of an assault. Louis calls having this opinion spreading FUD, but it's my legitimate opinion. Zealotry in any form is so frustrating. Louis just can't fathom that somebody could legitimately have a different set of priorities. Just now in his Youtube timeline he posted "Hopefully you all have better luck than I spreading the message of repair and fighting FUD when it comes up in your own lives than I did!".

Louis, we want freedom of association and trade. We dislike you because you are an anti-freedom advocate, and that's one of the worst things one can be.

What he is advocating for doesn’t remove any choice for you, feel free to buy that new laptop if you want. Feel free to buy AppleCare, feel free to go to an Apple Store for all your repair needs. For those that have invested in running macOS, iOS, iPadOS etc they have no real easy alternative than to buy Apple hardware so that point makes no sense. Just because one company offers this solution doesn’t make it cancel out everything else.

Your parents don’t have to side load apps if the App Store icon is right there for them. Apple could easily make it a toggle switch in settings (or some other solution) that people have to allow apps from outside the App Store.

We? I think you mean you

 

[throAU]

why don't we do this in the auto industry?

It's coming.

It should be here already, there's a heap of sensitive data in a modern car that nefarious types would love to get hold of. Why do you think GM is trying to kill CarPlay? Because THEY want the location data, not a third party.

Race direction types are already doing it in motorsport too, where teams on control engine management had worked out they could use essentially "malicious" (in terms of the sanctioning body) sensors to lie to the control computer to "fudge" having additional inputs into the computer that were not permitted. E.g., you might have wheel speed sensor that also contains an inertial platform and modifies it's "wheel speed" input to the computer based on lateral G)

So what did they do? digitally signed, approved sensors.

 

[ArkSingularity]

It's coming.

It should be here already, there's a heap of sensitive data in a modern car that nefarious types would love to get hold of. Why do you think GM is trying to kill CarPlay? Because THEY want the location data, not a third party.

Race direction types are already doing it in motorsport too, where teams on control engine management had worked out they could use essentially "malicious" (in terms of the sanctioning body) sensors to lie to the control computer to "fudge" having additional inputs into the computer that were not permitted. E.g., you might have wheel speed sensor that also contains an inertial platform and modifies it's "wheel speed" input to the computer based on lateral G)

So what did they do? digitally signed, approved sensors.

That's a scary thought. Makes me miss simpler times.

 

[Pedro147]

@l.a.rossmann 1st: keep up the great work!
2nd: from your experience, is there anything to prolong or minimize the risk of a SSD failure/short on a A2141? Besides keeping it in a drawyer…

You can put conformal coating around the one or two NAND voltage regulators to minimise the chance of 12v going into the 2.5v NAND supply voltage line due to moisture ( the number of regulators depends on the storage size of the machine) There is also the fact that there are a limited number of rewrite cycles that these NANDs can perform before dying so see 12m 50s in this excellent iBoff Mat video

 

[throAU]

That's a scary thought. Makes me miss simpler times.

Basically, you can't trust individual components.

In the times we live in, there is plenty of malicious or fraudulent hardware out there and blindly trusting third party components (any vendor) leaves the platform open to various attacks.

Apple are a bit more paranoid than other vendors about this (and maybe in this respect a little ahead of the curve, which imho is a good thing) - but make no mistake, malicious/trojan/fraud hardware components are definitely out there. Can you imagine what would happen (in terms of damage to Apple's reputation, etc.) if somebody's bank account got raided because a customer (or third party repair shop) had installed a knock-off touchID sensor that allowed virtually any fingerprint to unlock or authenticate transactions on the device.

e.g., during onboarding of a fingerprint it just stored the data in-sensor for replay by anyone to unlock the device later?

 

[ArkSingularity]

Basically, you can't trust individual components.

In the times we live in, there is plenty of malicious or fraudulent hardware out there and blindly trusting third party components (any vendor) leaves the platform open to various attacks.

Apple are a bit more paranoid than other vendors about this (and maybe in this respect a little ahead of the curve, which imho is a good thing) - but make no mistake, malicious/trojan/fraud hardware components are definitely out there. Can you imagine what would happen if somebody's bank account got raided because a customer had installed a knock-off touchID sensor that allowed virtually any fingerprint to unlock or authenticate transactions on the device.

e.g., during onboarding of a fingerprint it just stored the data in-sensor for replay by anyone to unlock the device later?

I mean, it's a matter of trade offs with anything of this sort. I understand people wanting to be a little careful with it (and that's important, I will agree) but some of the decisions that Apple has made regarding to this have had concerns raised about them by some very credible people in the industry for several years.

1) Many components, such as hall effect sensors (sleep sensors which detect when the macbook is closed) or screens/displays aren't exactly going to be a security risk. There is no reason to disable sleep or true tone functionality if these things are replaced.
2) If a customer DOES want to get things such as a fingerprint scanner replaced, I'm of the opinion that they should be displayed a warning if it is a third party sensor and be able to override it with their iCloud password. However, this sort of thing is an easily preventable problem simply by making official parts more easily accessible. Many of the reasons that independent repair shops are unable to use the official Apple tools for this is because they've been raising concerns about unrealistic requirements (such as not even being able to keep some of the most common repair parts in stock, which forces them to wait several days after diagnosing a device and placing a repair order in order to order the part that is required, significantly delaying the repair for a crucial device for the customer.) These sorts of things make it very difficult for authorized repair shops to stay in business, which is why many people in the repair industry have been raising concerns for years.
3) Even the power chip, which is a common failure part on some of the more recent MacBooks, has been specifically adjusted such that common power chips in the industry won't be compatible. Apple actually created a new part number recently and specifically adjusted the pin layouts (or the addressing to the system, unsure of which) to be incompatible with the old chips WITHOUT changing anything else about it, then forced the manufacturer of this chip to not sell to anyone else aside from Apple (essentially blocking out anyone who would want to do a board level repair of this chip, since Apple themselves won't perform this repair and will simply charge the customer for a new logic board instead). There was no reason for this, aside for blocking independent repairs.

There are, of course, plenty of situations where it DOES make sense to lock things down. The T2 chip is a perfect example of this, and is something that frankly nobody outside of Apple has any business repairing or touching. My opinion is that these things should be taken on a case by case basis. There are some things where it makes sense for Apple to lock things down and say "nobody outside of Apple is ever touching this". For other things, I don't think independent repair shops are really the enemy.

I suppose there's nothing stopping me from taking my car to a shady auto shop with a 1.3 star rating that is known for purposefully installing tires that blow up exactly 50 miles down the road, but if I were to knowingly go to such a place (and the reviews would reflect it if someone were doing this), I suppose I would be assuming the risk and would take that responsibility upon myself.

Speaking of the auto industry, I actually worked in this industry for several years, including for vehicle service departments, until I left and became a software developer. I've seen some weird, weird things. A very large manufacturer, which I won't name for privacy reasons (don't want to spill too much personal info about where I've worked, but they were a large American manufacturer), was notorious for making it so that headlights couldn't be replaced easily by any third party and had to be replaced as an entire assembly, which required purchasing significantly more in terms of parts and forced them to perform much more labor for what was essentially a wear part. The same arguments have been used for these (they last longer, etc), but yet many people still came in to get them serviced for very high prices. It's a trend that didn't make a lot of sense and only ended up costing the customer in the end, when there was no reason that it couldn't have been designed in a much more serviceable way (as it used to be, when you would simply screw in a headlight in your driveway. There's no reason we couldn't design LED-based systems that work the same way.)

Of course there are trade offs all around. Not EVERYTHING should be accessible for just anyone to touch. But I've long been of the opinion that we should discuss some of the ways this sort of thing is locked down now. Some of the parts that were locked down quite simply didn't need to be locked down, and that's largely been my position on a lot of this.

 

[Fluttershy462]

There’s no way to defend these ****** practices. Listen to Rossmann.

 

[throAU]

3) Even the power chip, which is a common failure part on some of the more recent MacBooks, has been specifically adjusted such that common power chips in the industry won't be compatible. Apple actually created a new part number recently and specifically adjusted the pin layouts (or the addressing to the system, unsure of which) to be incompatible with the old chips WITHOUT changing anything else about it, then forced the manufacturer of this chip to not sell to anyone else aside from Apple (essentially blocking out anyone who would want to do a board level repair of this chip, since Apple themselves won't perform this repair and will simply charge the customer for a new logic board instead). There was no reason for this, aside for blocking independent repairs.

Funny you bring this one up as there's been a bunch of side-channel attacks recently on CPUs to extract secret key information via power management manipulation/measurement

e.g., just last week

New Collide+Power side-channel attack impacts almost all CPUs

A new software-based power side-channel attack called 'Collide+Power' was discovered, impacting almost all CPUs and potentially allowing data to leak. However, the researchers warn that the flaw is low-risk and will likely not be used in attacks on end users.

www.bleepingcomputer.com

i.e. potentially, malicious power management chip measures your CPU power consumption and leaks private key information. Once someone has your private key (for a certificate, key based auth, etc.) they can impersonate whatever the key is used for.

 

[ArkSingularity]

Funny you bring this one up as there's been a bunch of side-channel attacks recently on CPUs to extract secret key information via power management manipulation....

That has to do with undervolting, which is prevented on x86 CPUs via plundervolt patches without having to lock down the power controller circuits on the motherboard.

Also, it's not really possible to prevent all hardware related attacks. At some point, if someone wanted to try to get under your car and do something malicious, they could. We try our best to prevent it, but not too many people are replacing tiny chips on a computer for the sake of hacking into things. It's a very low risk attack vector that is very unlikely to affect the vast, vast majority of consumers. (Some folks, e.g. government officials, might need additional security, but they are going to have their own more-locked down solutions for many of these things already.)

(Also, if Apple wanted to, they could solve this problem by making the authentic chips that they use available for sale. They could even employ a great deal of additional serialization and require Apple Configurator with iCloud identification to ensure that unauthorized people weren't touching it. The company that makes these chips would sell them, but Apple has specifically prevented them from selling this chip, even to reputable independent repair shops that would go through this process. Apple themselves won't replace this chip either, and will simply resort to replacing the entire logic board for a much higher fee.)

 

[throAU]

Also, it's not really possible to prevent all hardware related attacks. At some point, if someone wanted to try to get under your car and do something malicious, they could. We try our best to prevent it, but not too many people are replacing tiny chips on a computer for the sake of hacking into things. It's a very low risk attack vector that is very unlikely to affect the vast, vast majority of consumers. (Some folks, e.g. government officials, might need additional security, but they are going to have their own more-locked down solutions for many of these things already.)

(Also, if Apple wanted to, they could solve this problem by making the authentic chips that they use available for sale. They could even employ a great deal of additional serialization and require Apple Configurator with iCloud identification to ensure that unauthorized people weren't touching it. The company that makes these chips would sell them, but Apple has specifically prevented them from selling this chip, even to reputable independent repair shops that would go through this process. Apple themselves won't replace this chip either, and will simply resort to replacing the entire logic board for a much higher fee.)

It's a non-zero attack vector that can be mostly mitigated fairly trivially. You can limit the effectiveness of hardware attack by controlling the hardware. It's much easier to exploit hardware if you can plug in/attach/replace parts with malicious components. E.g., the long-running console mod-chip scene.

Also, Apple "could" do that at the cost of maintaining a seperate supply chain (production/supply of third party spares, maintain a department for key activations, validation, vetting third party repair shops, dealing with the inevitable customer complaints from third party repairs not to standard, etc.), etc.

Or they could just ... not, and save the money.

Also, the attack I linked wasn't intel specific, and wasn't plunder volt... and was used as an illustration of the TYPE of attack that is being discovered these days.

 

[ArkSingularity]

Also, Apple "could" do that at the cost of maintaining a seperate supply chain (production/supply of third party spares, maintain a department for key activations, validation, vetting third party repair shops, dealing with the inevitable customer complaints from third party repairs not to standard, etc.), etc.

Or they could just ... not, and save the money.

Apple has actually spent a lot of time (and money) designing these systems to be much more difficult to work on, creating entire supply chains of parts that are exclusive to them (even so far as to get large numbers of parts that previously existed in the open market to be slightly modified in a trivial way to break compatibility). They've also designed systems in such a way that even replacing very commonly replaced components such as batteries or butterfly keyboards was a very time consuming effort that was often even done at a loss by their service centers.

I don't doubt that money plays a part, but their decisions to lock things down to save money? That sounds like a stretch.

 

[Finurliig]

He goes into M1/2 macs using NANDs that are different from any other computer, how they short to ground, and if your SSD dies, you can't fix it unless you're willing to spend around $1,000 on a repair. He gets really detailed on the engineering, and it's pretty crazy what Apple is doing, to save a few bucks during the manufacturing process.

.....aaaand he's right, again. Of course.

The reason for this user-hostile approach is prob purely financial: they want to prevent user from upgrading their SSD:s themselves.
Apple is heavily overcharging for their SSD:s they charge at least double the price compared to equvalent PC components, with no performance advantage whatsoever to justify it.
If people could swap out SSD:s themselves, they would lose millions in revenue, hence their aggressive stance.

What baffles me about Apple is not how these people are pissing their customers right in the face like this, but rather how their loyal fanbase respond: by gaping their mouth, swallowing it and calling it rain.
And these guys will run to the apple store and buy the next product that comes out, and the next, and the next, because they are so accustomed to macOS and so heavily invested in apples ecosystem of apps that they just cannot switch to PC.

We need legislation to fix this kind of abuse. Perhaps it's time to revive that discussion, and tell apple inc to either behave, or pack their **** and get out of the US and EU?

 

[maflynn]

but rather how their loyal fanbase respond

People take criticisms against a trillion dollar company personally, because they themselves bought that and an attack on apple is an attack on their purchase decisions. These sort of threads turn into a echo chamber where many people come out of the wood work to irrationally defend apple. I personally see Apple a corporation that has one goal - to make money for its shareholders. Now they do so, with some pretty great products, but their priority is for their owners not me.

 

[120FPS]

People take criticisms against a trillion dollar company personally, because they themselves bought that and an attack on apple is an attack on their purchase decisions. These sort of threads turn into a echo chamber where many people come out of the wood work to irrationally defend apple. I personally see Apple a corporation that has one goal - to make money for its shareholders. Now they do so, with some pretty great products, but their priority is for their owners not me.

I find it strange as it’s not like people want Apple to disappear most just want them to be more ethical. Especially when customers bought into their products at a time when it was all upgradable, no one signed up for what they are doing now.

People put a certain level of trust that a company with a walled garden approach will behave responsibly and not just decide to get one over on people trapped in the welcoming web they wove earlier. Expecting that people uproot everything (especially in regard to communications that you close off to others) and move to another platform is not a realistic alternative.

 

[TMRJIJ]

How would a female student have a bomb? That is highly unlikely, and not worth locking down a entire school for...they were just on drugs probably.

Not sure. That's what the general consensus was. Other students were saying she made a bomb threat and shared screenshots of her posts, the facility was saying it was a gun threat (probably more likely) with more screenshots. Police just said 'destructive device' (whatever that means). She must've been saying a lot of crazy stuff online.
I think she was more likely threatening to shoot up the school but 'most' people at the time were saying it was a bomb. Classes were canceled that morning and nobody wanted to go outside.

 

[HawkTheHusky1902]

Not sure. That's what the general consensus was. Other students were saying she made a bomb threat and shared screenshots of her posts, the facility was saying it was a gun threat (probably more likely) with more screenshots. Police just said 'destructive device' (whatever that means). She must've been saying a lot of crazy stuff online.
I think she was more likely threatening to shoot up the school but 'most' people at the time were saying it was a bomb. Classes were canceled that morning and nobody wanted to go outside.

I think it was just drugs.

 

[TSE]

This dude needs therapy and discover deep down his Freudian childhood traumas why he hates Apple so much it seemingly takes 90% of his mental capacity on.

Or taking a step back you can recognize his audience wants him to bitch about Apple, warranted or not, and it makes him money.

Probably a case of both.

 

[SymeonArgyrus]

Most people don't upgrade their computers.

Most people don't do it, don't know how, don't care. They treat them just like cars - drive them with minimal maintenance until something catastrophic breaks and then replace them, or replace them every X years whether they need to or not.

I say this as someone who has upgraded plenty of computers. As someone who would love to be able to upgrade the storage in a few of our Macs (work and home). My first Mac was a Iicx that I rebuilt from a pile of random parts. I had two Sawtooth G4s that ended up massively upgraded Frankenstein machines. I have built plenty of PCs for gaming and other uses.

I would suggest this: Apple isn't making design choices about upgradability out of greed. Apple is giving *Most* of their customers exactly what they want - a sleek machine that is very reliable and makes a statement. Apple believes the SoC approach is the way to do that, and this is clearly part of their design ethos. yes, the ethos is framed in a commercially successful way, but that doesn't make it inherently greedy.

As far as repairs, they are also selling us the experience: Your Mac is magical. Your Mac shouldn't break; if it does, you should bring it in to Apple, and they will fix it. Magically, if possible. You walk away with a smile on your face.

Fixing it outside the White and Golden Oak rooms of peace and happiness means Apple can't guarantee it will work as intended, so they prefer you don't repair it at all. They can't protect the Apple brand, if you do. If the procedures are hard or the components expensive, it will cost the customer more than they want to pay, and the independent tech shops will bad mouth Apple; if it is easy to do incorrectly, customer's will get back not-fixed machines. If repairs are done by 17 year old know-nothings who are rude, customers won't be happy. And do you know where all that unhappiness lands? On Apple. Yes, tech nerds are mad about repairability, but ask a random Starbucks squatter or grandparent or third year college student with a Mac about it. Do you think they give a hoot? No.

Whiny tech nerds on Youtube are not going to change their beliefs. Even a percentage of their best/most loyal customers being concerned won't change it. They are doing what seems the best for the widest portion of their customer base.

 

[AgeOfSpiracles]

no one signed up for what they are doing now.

I've had two macs a 2016 MBP and a 2021 MBP. I suppose I could have upgraded the ssd in the 2016, but I didn't. I was well aware of the nature of AS macs when I chose the 2021. So yeah, I went into this just like Sokath; his eyes uncovered.

 

[BigMcGuire]

I've had two macs a 2016 MBP and a 2021 MBP. I suppose I could have upgraded the ssd in the 2016, but I didn't. I was well aware of the nature of AS macs when I chose the 2021. So yeah, I went into this just like Sokath; his eyes uncovered.

Great great TNG episode. Love the reference.

Also very happy with my AS Mac. Best computer I've ever used since I started using computers in the 90s as a kid.

 

[Romain_H]

I hate that the EU is going to force Apple to allow side-loading, because I'm going to have to deal with that mess.

That is not what the EU legislation says. Also, you don't HAVE to install other app stores if you don't care. Your dad should be safe

 

[3166792]

I am factually incorrect

 

[120FPS]

I've had two macs a 2016 MBP and a 2021 MBP. I suppose I could have upgraded the ssd in the 2016, but I didn't. I was well aware of the nature of AS macs when I chose the 2021. So yeah, I went into this just like Sokath; his eyes uncovered.

Nice job selecting part of the quote out of its context. If you are a recent Mac user from 2016 and a Touch Bar mac was your first Mac then fine you signed up for it.

 

[120FPS]

This dude needs therapy and discover deep down his Freudian childhood traumas why he hates Apple so much it seemingly takes 90% of his mental capacity on.

Or taking a step back you can recognize his audience wants him to bitch about Apple, warranted or not, and it makes him money.

Probably a case of both.

Funny how you respond with personal attacks on someone’s mental health, it says a lot about you when you don’t engage with what he’s actually saying.

 

[HDFan]

The Mac line is insignificant both to Apple's bottom line and in the wider computing space. Nobody uses Mac. They are "boutique" and there's room in the PC market for things like that. If you want to look for lack of repairability and modularity in computing, look to the Chromebook space where they have more than triple the market share.

In the U.S.:

Windows 57% dropping
Mac OS 29.62% rising
Chrome 7.47% rising slowly
Linux 2.5%

Apple's macOS has been steadily gaining ground on Microsoft's Windows for more than a decade and the stats don't really tell the full story

Microsoft’s Windows has always dominated the desktop OS space globally, as the operating system is widely available with many PC manufacturing partners such as Dell, HP and Lenovo. However, a recent trend shows that Microsoft's Windows has steadily been losing ground in the US, due to the rise...

www.patentlyapple.com