Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by WilHarris, 2 Oct 2006.
Nice article and I'm definately looking forward to trying out AMT myself, as it could save me countless hours each week.
What's the keep the AMT technology from being accessed remotely by a nefarious website? I can see this bieng left in it's default setting by clueless home users and being used to really screw up computers in new and exciting ways. I'm sure Intel has given this some thought, but have they said anything about it?
Sounds vaguely like that Blue Pill hack that could have basically been the worst security flaw in known history...
Thought we were not meant to that yet... Thou i thought it was a quad core processor.
They said they couldn't tell us until the IDF, which has happened - so now we know!
No big suprise though really guys
Aight nice and subtle way of saying it then...
With the AMT could it be possible to run an older version of windows (95/98) to run some older games incompatible with XP and probably the same again with Vista.
I've been excited about hardware virtualization technology for a while now. AMT doesn't really have the same effect on me, though... maybe I need to actually see it in action, and have my fears allayed on the security side?
All sound very interesting, on the VM side wonder what will happen if/when running multi os on one system becomes the norm... thinking Microsoft/Apple EUL.
Why would you run 8 game servers each in a different VM when you could just run 8 instances in the one install anyway? Surely there wouldn't be any speed improvements.
Looking at that server, is it the s5000PAL? (I think I have the right model number)
What has been the opinon at Bit about it so far?
Smashing article Will, definitely excited about VT, it would speed my change to full linux up greatly.
Because we can
Not with AMT, but with VM it sounds like it should be possible
Last time I read about iAMT, it was in the same articel as EFI. Does iAMT requite EFI, or is it more BIOS/firmware independant a bit like IPMI?
One part of the article got me thinking.
I can see this creating an even bigger divide between those in the know and those who aren't.
As it is, most generic (ie clueless) PC users manage to break PCs in ever more ingenious ways yet if all they have to do is sit back while someone remotely fixes their screwup, they're going to be less inclined to try to not mess up or learn what the problem is.
The largest security vulnerability in any large network is the users.
The only way I see to cure this is education.
Virtualisation could cause users to care even less and hence cause even more issues?
Then again, the thought of a fresh OS install every time you double-click a file sounds like it could be very helpful too...
Well, aside from "because they can", it also helps to compartmentalise each server so that a problem with one game server only affects that particular VM, rather than causing every server to crash and burn.
Separate names with a comma.