Re: can't blame the malware
> trying to squeeze every last cent of build cost out of the thing by using components that are ok for normal use, but are inadequate if the thing needs to run at full power for anything longer than short bursts.
This is an imminently sensible thing to do, and I don't think it is part of the problem. There is nothing wrong with a designing a device that is primarily going to display farcebook, some cat videos, the occasional game of flappy birds and maybe the occasional phone call. It isn't designed as a bitcoin miner and therefore doesn't provision the hardware (particularly with active cooling and dedicated hashing chips rather than general purpose CPUs) in such a way to allow it to run at full throttle doing that indefinitely. That doesn't matter. If presented with such a workload, it should power down some of its CPU or GPU cores and reduce the clock frequency when it detects the temperature rising too close to the threshold. If that still doesn't tame the temperature*, it should shut down to prevent damage.
My car may look like a car you can take on the track**, but it is engineered as an urban commuter vehicle. Yes, in can floor the fast pedal if the situation warrants it, but I'm under no illusion what would happen if handed over to a mildly competent racing driver to race on a closed track. After a few laps, the oil (engine or transmission) would hit a threshold temperature, some dash lights would come on, and the thing will go into limp mode until some service centre numpty tells me about voiding warranties. That is not a cost cutting tightarsery, but an engineering compromise. Sure, they could add 14 radiators but every bit you add increases build costs, has ongoing maintenance costs, decreases reliability and adds weight.
*Clearly means that inadequate passive cooling is available.
**Ok, it looks nothing like such a vehicle