|
 |  eWeek -
Nov-03-2009Apple Splits With Atom Support?(topic overview)
CONTENTS:
SOURCES
FIND OUT MORE ON THIS SUBJECT
Apple's latest update to Mac OS X - 10.6.2 - is set to remove support for Intel's Atom processor, breaking hackintosh netbooks. Apple is making moves to block the use of third party hardware, with its latest update to Mac OS X Leopard - 10.6.2 - removing support for Intel's Atom processor. The Atom chip is, of course, a staple of inexpensive netbook devices from a range of manufacturers - some of which enterprising hackers discovered were close enough to a Mac in hardware terms that they could run Mac OS X and be turned into so-called 'hackintosh' machines. While an official Apple netbook is unlikely to ever see the light of day, many Mac OS fans found the combination of portability with their favourite operating system a big enough draw to skirt the legalities of running Mac OS on non-Apple hardware. [1] Mac OS X is designed and supported to only run on Apple's machines, but a notable percentage of the netbook community has shoehorned the operating system into their modest portables. Thanks the Apple's use of Intel hardware, certain models of netbooks ''' such as Dell's Mini 9 and 10v ''' are fairly comfortable running Mac OS X. But Apple doesn't seem to be impressed, if signs from an early Snow Leopard beta update are to be believed. According to this post on InsanelyMac forums, a developer build of Snow Leopard 10.6.2 is incompatible with netbooks running the Intel Atom. Melkort, a programmer known for his works on the Dell Mini netbooks, wrote in the MyDellMini forum, "It does turn out that the 10.6.2 kernel reboots before it's finished loading (before the bsd subsystem is initialized I believe).[2]
The new version is said to be made to detect the Atom and keep OS X from running on it. The report comes from users who are currently running OS X on those very same netbooks, via the OS X Daily site, which reported, "You can't help but suspect this move is Apple's attempt at shutting down the growing and popular Hackintosh Netbook community, since Apple has no product line that runs the Atom itself. Mac OS X runs absolutely flawlessly on much of the PC Netbook hardware, once it's configured you wouldn't know you'''re not on a Mac. It is almost certainly not unrelated. Apple has always been tenacious about defending their intellectual property rights, and this is especially true of OS X, as witness the Psystar series of infringement lawsuits by Apple. This move is surely aimed directly at stopping the unlicensed use of OS X on Atom netbooks. Apple, of course, has a perfect right to protect their patents and copyrights, not to mention their investment, in the OS X operating system.[3] When Mac OS X 10.6.2 comes out, the rumor is that the the new version of the Apple operating system will no longer run on the Atom processor, insuring that it can't be used on certain netbook computers. A so-called '''Hackintosh''' community has grown up around some netbook PC computers that can easily be made to run OS X. Most of those systems are based on Intel's Atom processor. Since Apple's change to Intel-based hardware, there is little physical difference between personal computers from Apple and those from other PC manufacturers. Getting some of those Atom-powered netbooks to run Apple's operating system is fairly simple, though it does violates Apple's terms of use.[3] OS X Daily reports on a discovery that Apple's latest developer build of Mac OS X 10.6.2 disables support for Intel's Atom processor. While Apple's exact motive for the change is unknown, the result is that users who have modified their Atom-powered netbooks to run OS X will be unable to easily apply the 10.6.2 update should the change remain in effect for its public launch. You can't help but suspect this move is Apple's attempt at shutting down the growing and popular Hackintosh Netbook community, since Apple has no product line that runs the Atom itself. Mac OS X runs absolutely flawlessly on much of the PC Netbook hardware, once it's configured you wouldn't know you're not on a Mac. Apple had apparently initially envisioned using the Atom platform in its tablet computer project, but dissatisfaction with the performance of the platform reportedly led to the company's purchase of ARM chip designer P.A. Semi in early 2008 and a shift to that company's technology for the tablet.[4] The biggest change is the removal of support for Intel's low-power Atom processor, which has never been used in any official Apple device. Any hackintosh netbook upgrading to Mac OS X Leopard 10.6.2 will find their system no longer boots. While the update isn't yet live for download - the news regarding its removal from the kernel build is taken from the latest developer build - it makes sense from Apple's perspective: the company has long held to the claim that installing its operating system on any hardware which it has not personally approved is against the terms and conditions of the licence, to the extent of suing companies that offer systems with legally purchased retail copies of Mac OS X pre-installed. Do you believe that this move from Apple is a dirty trick, or does the company have the right to remove support for non-authorised hardware without warning? Share your thoughts over in the forums.[1] The folks at Boing Boing even maintain a char t showing which netbooks are most compatible with the operating system. It looks like that could be about to change, because there are reports that OS X 10.6.2 will feature a number of changes in the way the operating system interacts with the CPU and one effect is that the new version of OS X will not work with machines using Intel Atom processors. It's not clear whether this is an intentional move by Apple to discourage people from installing OS X on netbooks or if it's just a side effect related to other changes. OS X 10.6.2 isn't officially available yet, but it's in the hands of some developers already, and according to StellaRolla, netbook hackintoshers may want to stick with version 10.6.1 when the update is available. If you're using OS X Leopard 10.5.8, there's'' a goo change you'll want to hold off on updating to 10.5.9 when that update is out, as it's likely to have problems as well. Of course, the OSx86 community is full of hackers with bright ideas, so this may just be a temporary roadbump for hackintosh netbook enthusiasts. It's too early to say for sure.[5] According to various OS X coders who have been seeded the new developer build of OS X Snow Leopard 10.6.2, the update kills all support for Intel's Atom processor, the go-to CPU for most of the netbooks out there. That's a bizarre move by Apple. It implies a couple of things: the first is that Apple is not intending on using the Intel Atom CPU in any of their future products, so if Apple does release a netbook, it will use an entirely different chip. It's war on the streets between the Hackintosh community and Apple from here-on-out, at least as far as netbooks are concerned.[6] It has been reported that the upcoming update (10.6.2) for Mac OS X Snow Leopard disables support for the Intel Atom processor, as Apple look to prevent the use of the software on unauthorized PCs and netbooks.[7] Reports have confirmed that, although the Mac OS X 10.6.2 update isn't out yet for Snow Leopard, it does kill support for the Intel Atom processor. Mac OS X running on this architecture can only be what is known as a "Hackintosh" (a non-Apple computer running Mac OS X by means of hacks), as Apple hardware doesn't include the Atom processor, be it the notebooks, or the desktop Macs. Mac OS X 10.5.9 (whenever it's out) may also include the road block.[8] Apple has now announced that the next version of Snow Leopard, OSX 10.6.2 will no longer support Intel Atom processors. Why is this significant? The Atom processors are what power the Netbook family of computers and by removing this support, Apple is trying to kill off the Hackintosh, a term that affectionately refers to a netbook computer that is running OS X. There's a lot of debate on the blogosphere with people on both sides of the fence, some believing Apple has a right to protect their technology while others take a differing view that the company should stay out of this and just sell Apple software.[9] Reports suggest Apple is killing support for Intel Atom chips with the latest software upgrade to Snow Leopard. According to the Apple-focused blog OS X Daily, Apple is expanding its 'Mac software on Mac hardware only' fight beyond iTunes and Palm Pre compatibility in onto the chipset: The company is supposedly ending support for the Intel Atom processor, which is used on netbooks.[10]
According to several Apple enthusiast sites, including OS X Daily, at least one developer has claimed that the still-unfinished Mac OS X 10.6.2, the next scheduled update for Snow Leopard, will prevent the operating system from running on netbooks powered by Intel's low-priced Atom processor.[11] Numerous sites are reporting that the last developer seed of 10.6.2 breaks compatibility with machines that utilize Intel's Atom processor. While none of Apple's current hardware makes use of the Atom, the software change throws a wrench into the upgrade plans of those Mac OS X users that run the operating system on third-party hardware. (Machines running OS X on non-Apple hardware are commonly called Hackintoshes because of the "hacking" necessary to get the OS running properly.)[12] The upcoming release of Mac OS X 10.6.2 will remove support for the Intel Atom line of processors from Mac OS X. This is of no concern to people who install Mac OS X on Apple-labelled computers, but for those of us who decide to exercise our rights as consumers by installing Mac OS X on non-Apple labelled computers should surely take notice: this practice is quite popular among netbook owners, such as the Dell Mini machines. Reports of developer builds of Mac OS X 10.6.2 killing Atom support have been around for a while, but it's now pretty much confirmed. It turns out Apple has been meddling with the information related to processors, and one result of that is that machines with Atom processors are unable to boot Mac OS X. This leaves Atom users with the following two options, an easy one and a hard one.[13] Reports are surfacing that Apple is planning to strike back at the Hackintosh netbook community, by disabling support of Intel Atom processors with the forthcoming Mac OS X 10.6.2 update. Personally, I'''m surprised it has taken the company this long to take action, especially for a company that guards its IP so vociferously. There is a large number of users that use their beloved netbooks with Mac OS X as a genuine alternative to Windows Linux distros.[14] Presumably, Apple has used the CPU ID to spot what the OS is being booted on and stop the process if it detects an Atom CPU. Whether this has been done intentionally to stop netbook hackintosh builders - who can still use 10.6.1 - or cloners like Psystar, or is even an unintentional byproduct of another 10.6.2 feature, isn't known. Nor is it known if other Intel CPUs have also been shoved out in the cold. Perhaps Apple has decided that an End-User Licence Agreement that forbids the installation of Mac OS X on any computer that doesn't carry an Apple label - you can see our Apple-labelled Sony Vaio one here, courtesy of Apple's own stickers - isn't strong enough to put off the small DIY clone community or those interested in cloning for profit. It's all a bit sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut, of course, since, especially as far as the hackintosh community goes. We doubt Apple is losing serious sales numbers as a result of these folk. It's surely better for Apple to sell a copy of Mac OS X than have one of these guys run Linux or Windows on a machine Apple's going to make no money out of one way or the other. Perhaps it simply sees these hackers as the thin edge of a wedge, especially if it gets as easy as creating a hackintosh is these days. Or Stell may simply have got his or her wires crossed.[15] " violations of the federal antitrust acts have damaged and will damage Psystar in its business and property because they deny Psystar business that otherwise would go to Psystar by creating doubt about the legality of Psystar computers running Mac OS X Snow Leopard," the company's lawyer's contended. "The items of damage to Psystar include damage to Psystar's business reputation and to the reputation of its products and sales lost that could have been made absent Apple's attempts to restrict Mac OS X Snow Leopard to Macintoshes." Psystar asked Hoeveler to slap an injunction on Apple that would prevent the California computer maker from "representing that Psystar's making and selling such computers is other than perfectly legal." Elsewhere in the amended complaint, Psystar mentioned the moves it has recently made to license its cloning-capable technology to other computer makers, and to sell a utility, dubbed Rebel EFI, that lets owners of generic PCs install and run Apple's Snow Leopard. Psystar launched Rebel EFI two weeks ago. Psystar maintained that Rebel EFI and its cloning technology are legitimate uses of software, and again said that both simply use features of Snow Leopard that Apple had purposefully included in its new OS.[11] In an amended complaint submitted last Thursday, Psystar asked U.S. District Court Judge William Hoeveler to rule that it is legally allowed to sell machines with Apple's Mac OS X 10.6, aka Snow Leopard, pre-installed. "A declaration by this Court of the legal rights of Apple and Psystar with respect to Psystar computers running Mac OS X Snow Leopard would clarify, to put it bluntly, the legality of Psystar's business -- and would remove the substantial negative effect on Psystar's business of continued uncertainty and legal wrangling between Apple and Psystar," the Florida clone maker said in the revised complaint filed in Miami, Fla. federal court.[11]
Granted, Snow Leopard (aka, Mac OS X 10.6) wasn't that shiny in the first place, as I wrote here at the time. Apple itself calls this version "refined, not reinvented" and sells it for the low, low price of $29. After two months of using Snow Leopard every day on a roughly three-year-old iMac, how do I appreciate this update? Not all that much, honestly. Some of its improvements have grown less noticeable over time, one problem has become a little more objectionable and one promised improvement has yet to surface. Take Snow Leopard's changes to the Dock : While I find its scrollable "Grid Stack" pop-up listings of the Documents, Applications and Downloads folders' contents a big upgrade over Leopard's less flexible interface, I never use its "Dock Expose" preview -- clicking and holding an application's Dock icon to see thumbnail images of its open windows just takes too long. The Quick Time X video player has also been somewhat of a non-entity, perhaps because most of the time I don't do anything with a video clip but watch it inside a browser window -- and that works about the same as ever in this new software.[16] The only reason for Apple to kill Hackint0sh support is losing potential software business. Potential here means, if Apple launches its Apple netbook or tablet in future, users would already be using Snow Leopard on netbooks. Whichever strategy Apple chooses, it's not going to be end of Mac OS X on netbooks.[17] One blogger is stating that the new beta seed of Mac OS X 10.6.2 (Snow Leopard) no longer supports the Intel Atom chipset, used by almost all netbooks and notebooks customarily used for hackintoshing. Hackintoshing is the installation of the Mac OS on a piece of non-Apple hardware, such as a netbook. Users often claim that they do this because Apple thus far refuses to release a ultra-portable or netbook version of their popular MacBooks.[18] Apple has stepped up its war of attrition against Hackintosh rebels by disabling support for Intel's Atom processor in the next version of Snow Leopard. "It's not out in the wild yet, but 10.6.2 has been confirmed to kill support for the Intel Atom processor," reported OS X Daily. "This is especially important for Hackintosh users who have hacked various Atom based netbooks to run Snow Leopard."[19] According to OS X Daily, Snow Leopard version 10.6.2 will end support for Intel's Atom processor. This is an unfortunate blow to Hackintosh users who run OS X on netbooks, which are largely Atom-based. Those users will have to stick with an older copy of the Mac operating system, such as 10.6.1 (the latest Snow Leopard version) or 10.5.8 (the current Leopard release), as it is assumed that 10.5.9 will also bring the same Atom incompatibilities.[20]
Bad news for those running Snow Leopard on their netbooks - Apple is reportedly pulling another Palm Pre, cutting off the operating system's support for the Intel Atom processor. Apple hasn't commented on the action, which OS X Daily dug up via its sources.[21] According to OS X Daily, Apple's upcoming OS X 10.6.2 update prevents Snow Leopard from running on computers that use Intel's Atom CPU. If true, that would make it incompatible with the vast majority of netbooks in one fell swoop. I don't want to assume that the OS X Daily story is the real deal until it's received independent confirmation, and even if it is true, it's possible that there's an explanation that has nothing to do with Apple's attitude towards Hackintoshes. If Apple does want to foil Hackintoshes, this would be a good way to go about it. (Of course, it's entirely possible that Hackintosh makers will simply hack OS X 10.6.2 further to reintroduce Atom support.) OS X Daily wonders whether Apple might move against Hackintosh netbooks because it's getting ready to introduce a tablet.[22] Apple may not want people to have a choice between a $700 iTablet and a $300 netbook running OS X. Disabling support for Atom processors would be an elegant way to nix this competition, as Apple's tablet device is rumored to run an ARM based processor designed by engineers from Apple acquisition P.A. Semi. In the meantime OS X Daily advises anyone who has hackintoshed a netbook to stick with their current version of Snow Leopard or Leopard until a workaround is discovered.[23] Apple appears to be removing support for Intel Atom processors in the forthcoming 10.6.2 patch for Snow Leopard. OS X Daily is reporting that the update kills support for the processor, which is primarily found in netbook and nettop computers.[24] Apple is preparing to release update 10.6.2 for its Snow Leopard OS, which will apparently disable support for the Intel Atom processor popular with inexpensive netbooks. It's also suspected that Apple may be wanting to phase anything out that may come in to competition with its Apple Tablet, expected to launch next year. Originally it was thought the Tablet would run on the popular Intel chipset, but Apple ditched the idea to build its own ARM-based processors instead - the company responsible for many of the processors we see in smartphones and other internet tablet devices on the market. This is not the first time we've seen Apple fiercely defending its software from unauthorised installs - it has even been known to take the matter to the courts, as it did with company Psystar over its $50 software hack.[25]
Have you ever heard of the Hackintosh Netbook community? I know you do because netbooks run better (at least this is what I've heard from some users) on Mac OS X than on Windows XP. Apparently, Apple will not support Intel Atom processors anymore beginning with Mac OS X 10.6.2.[26] The current developer build of OS X -- 10.6.2 -- will not run on the Intel Atom processor commonly used in netbooks that ship with Windows or Linux, according to an account in Wired, attributing the report to a hacker named Stellarola. "One of the effects of this is Apple killing off Intel's Atom chip." Stellarola suggests that while most Hackintosh users should stick with 10.6 for now, they might try upgrading to 10.6.2 if they're running an older or modified kernel, according to OS X Daily.[27]
According to users at OS X Daily, Apple have blocked Atom processors from running OS X 10.6.2 correctly, in a move that is being seen as a strike against not only those individual consumers using the software on non-official machines, but against companies such as Psystar who attempt to sell OS X based non-Apple computers. ''Apple does not have any Atom machines in its own line-up, and if recent rumors are true are unlikely to have any Intel Moorestown based machines at any point in the near future.[28] Over the past couple of years, computing enthusiasts have installed the Apple OS X operating system on many Atom-powered netbooks, but it looks as though Apple is fed up with that kind of tinkering. Apparently, among the many changes in OS X 10.6.2, one of them stands out - it will no longer enable the operating system to function with computers running on Intel Atom processors. No idea on whether this is intentional on Apple's part or otherwise.[29] Rumours are circulating that the forthcoming Mac OS X 10.6.2 update will prevent the use of Apple's operating system on hardware based on Intel's Atom processors.[30] If true, this will result in Atom-based Hackintoshes to cease functioning if updated to 10.6.2. In the summer of 2005, Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced that the company would no longer use PowerPC processors in their machines but instead use Intel x86 based processors. This meant that Mac OS X was coded for x86 enabled machines and left many wondering if the Mac operating system would be enabled to function on basic beige PC machines.[31]
The trend of using non-Apple computers to run Mac OS X has been increasing alongside the prominence and availability of netbooks, a category into which Apple hasn't forayed. Poor people, plebians and tightwads have been flouting Apple for a while, running Apple's precious shiny silver operating system on Dells and HPs, but it looks like Apple's planning on throwing a wet blanket on these shenanigans. Although it's not clear that this was necessarily Apple's intent, it will certainly solve Apple's Hackintosh problem.[32] The publication also hypothesized that Apple was attempting to "shut down" the "growing and popular" Hackintosh Netbook community.'' "Mac OS X runs absolutely flawlessly on much of the PC Netbook hardware, once it's configured you wouldn't know you're not on a Mac. Whatever the reason, Apple is unlikely to pause its offensive against the rebellion - whose ranks were recently bolstered by the introduction of Psystar's $50 Hackintosh patch. It should be noted that Psystar's Darwin Universal Boot Loader supports additional operating systems, including Windows 7, XP, Vista and various Linux flavors.[19] While the use of Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware is forbidden by the licence agreement (something that's being tested by Apple's court case against Psystar ), a fair number of enthusiasts have installed Mac OS X on netbooks. The Dell Mini 10v has been a popular choice for this exercise. It seems that among other changes, 10.6.2 takes a closer look at which CPU is installed, and as a result the updated OS won't run on an Atom. Whether this is a deliberate plan or an example of collateral damage remains to be seen.[30] It is indeed true that OS X will run just fine on some netbooks if you install the right drivers and ktexts, but Apple's EULA has always specified that the license was applicable only to Apple hardware. There have always been processor types specified in OS X and that have to be worked around now for those who want to use an Atom or similar non-Apple-adopted processor, so this is likely no more than a hiccup on the road for the OSX86 crowd. It raises the question: is it time for Apple to sell a license for non-Apple hardware -- priced accordingly of course -- for those people who want OS X on platform types Apple has not yet adopted, like the netbook? The only reason OS X is not on my Eee is that I want to comply with the licensing terms.[33] Stopping the low lives like Psystar trying to make a quick buck off Apple's and the open source hackintosh community's hard work is one thing but actively stopping the hackintosh community isn't so great. A lot of people that have hacked OS X onto their PCs in the past have gone on to buy genuine Apple hardware after all. I'm hoping that this is just a case of something breaking while they've updated other things. The rumors were that they originally wanted to use the Intel Atom platform but decided they didn't like the performance and so bought out PA Semi to make their own chips.[2]
The company has nothing to lose as it doesn'''t manufacture any products using the Atom chip. If true, it would also highlight that the company has no such products on their roadmap. Does this mean the rumoured Apple tablet will not be powered by Intel'''s low-power Atom line after all? It could mean that Apple will be designing its own ARM-based processor following the $278 million buyout of fabless chip designer P.A. Semi. For those of you currently with Hackintosh netbooks, we'''d suggest sticking with Mac OS X 10.6.1 until we have confirmation.[14] While conspiracy theorists might answer "yes", it seems unlikely that Apple would target the subset of Hackintosh owners that are using Netbooks with Atom processors. When we asked our source, they said it was more likely that support was taken out during code optimization, particularly optimization for SSE4, which the Atom does not support. Is this disappointing? Sure. Is this the end of Mac OS X on Netbooks? Probably not.[12]
Apple has axed support for Intel's Atom processor from the as-yet-unreleased Mac OS X 10.6.2, it has been claimed.[15]
The original report confirming the "death" of Atom in 10.6.2 stems from Stell's Blog, which writes that, "In the current developer build of 10.6.2, Apple appears to have changed around a lot of CPU related information. One of the effects of this is Apple killing off Intel's Atom chip." Mac OS X 10.6.2 Build 10C531 was seeded to developers last week and they were asked to continue to focus on graphics drivers, as well as on TrackPad preferences and the ability to create virtual machines. The report also includes options (alternatives) for those enjoying the benefits of using a hacked computer with Mac OS X installed. One of those is, "Stay with Leopard 10.5.8 (10.5.9 might have the same effect as 10.6.2)," the blog's author says.[8] A COMPUTER TRAINING COMPANY in Docklands, Australia saw its telephone bill increase by more than tenfold after it installed the latest version of Apple's Mac OS X. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Melissa Foote, principal of Total Business Service and Training, her outfit experienced some major problems because of the way that Snow Leopard backed up data and synchronised it. She was talking to Apple about possible redress, but remains concerned that other network administrators are suffering the same issue but might not realise they have problems until they get their phone bills.[34] It's now been almost two months since I reviewed Apple's Snow Leopard version of Mac OS X -- enough time for Apple to have shipped its first major patch to that operating system, and enough time for any new-release shininess to have dulled.[16] Many Hackintosh solutions do involve downloading illegally cracked copies of the operating system, but Apple clearly isn't too concerned about Snow Leopard piracy -- the £29 upgrade edition of Mac OS 10.6 contains no copy protection and can be used for a clean install on any compatible Mac. It all seems pretty unlikely to us -- unless… Stopping Mac OS from running on netbooks would make sense if Apple is readying a similar product of its own.[35]
If you configured your netbook right and Mac OS X runs smooth on your machine then you will definitely want to upgrade to 10.6.2, but sadly, Apple has a problem with you. The Cupertino-based company is probably jealous that you can make a less than $500 product that is not garbage and with rumors about the Apple Tablet circulating around the web, it's obvious to me that Steve Jobs doesn't want heavy competition.[26] If 10.6.2 disables support for Atom-based netbooks, the hacking community will undoubtedly find a way around Apple's coded defense. When they do, Apple will find a way to disable that new hack, and it will likely become a continuous loop of cat and mouse. Some who have installed Mac OS X on netbooks may be comfortable with constantly hacking their machines to run OS X, but I think that many users will likely grow tired of fighting the code to enable it to work.[31] Apple may be reluctant to launch a netbook and given their financial success selling mid- to high-end notebooks we can't really blame them has spawned a busy community of Hackint0sh creators, many of whom turn to humble Atom-based netbooks such as the MSI Wind for use as donor machines for OS X. ''All that might change, however, with the news that Apple have tweaked Mac OS X 10.6.2, their upcoming operating-system update, to prevent installation on Atom-based computers.[28]
There's an interesting article up on Slashdot right now about Apple and Psystar (again. ). Only this time, it seems Apple is making the claim that the act of loading Mac OS X into RAM alongside any third party modifications renders it an "unauthorized copy". Obviously, they're referring to modifications relevant to the Psystar case, but taken the wrong way, this could imply that anyone who installs 3rd party software that uses items like kernel extensions to enhance functionality would effectively be running a pirated copy of Mac OS X upon rebooting their system.[36] If you run Mac OS X on a non-Apple labelled computer, then you know what the risks are. Just as much as you have the right to use the software in any way you deem fit, Apple has the right to alter its software in any way it deems fit.[13]
Apple's End User Licence Agreement (EULA), which anyone who has ever installed OS X will have read, understood, and digitally signed (what do you mean you just kept clicking the next button?) states that it is illegal to install Snow Leopard, or any other flavour of OS X, on anything other than an Apple branded computer. We have neither the space, nor the inclination, to get into the legal ins and outs of this particular argument in the context of this article, so let's just all agree that, legally, it's all a bit iffy. Whether it's against the law or not, the Hackintosh community is a force to be reckoned with. Every move Apple makes to stop this loose alliance of hackers from making OS X accessible to all is quickly countermanded. Such is the extent of the support offered by the likes of Hackintosh.com, it is now difficult to find a modern computer platform which won't run OS X, albeit after quite a bit of complicated poking about in the machine's operational innards.[37] The vast majority of OS X netbooks are running pirated versions of OS X Leopard or OS X Snow Leopard. Apple isn't going to lose any software sales by disabling Atom support but they will certainly reduce the number of pirated copied of their software being downloaded.[2] As netbooks have grown more popular, and with Apple's insistence to not cater to that particular market by not producing a Mac netbook, some users have successfully installed Mac OS X Snow Leopard on Atom-based netbooks, the Dell Mini 10 for example.[31] The part of Mac OS X Snow Leopard that Psystar interacts with is within the open-source portion of Mac OS X and makes use of features of Mac OS X Snow Leopard designed to allow software developers to extend Mac OS X Snow Leopard to work with different hardware."[11] "Psystar's position with respect to Mac OS X Snow Leopard is analogous to that of a person developing a software application to run on top of Mac OS X Snow Leopard," the company's lawyers argued. "Just as Microsoft writes Word to run with Mac OS X and Google writes its Web browser Chrome to run with Mac OS X, Psystar writes its software to run with Mac OS X Snow Leopard.[11]
Mac clone maker Psystar has seen the brunt of Cupertino's struggle, having been engaged in lengthy court battles over the selling of unauthorized systems with Mac OS X. In October, Psystar began selling a $50 software hack that allows users to install Snow Leopard on some Intel-based PCs.[20]
Nothing about a previous OS is mentioned anywhere. Bottom line is it's a fully licensed copy, and purchasing and installing it one time (or five times in the case of the family pack) is not stealing. Stop calling this an upgrade only. It's not. I understand Apple's desire to keep OS X limited to their own hardware. The EULA is intended to prevent people like Psystar from making a dime on Apple's IP. Does Apple care about home enthusiasts getting the OS on unauthorized systems? Highly unlikely, if those enthusiasts are handing over $30 for the Snow Leopard disc. It's $30 in their pocket they wouldn't have had, to entertain someone's harmless fun.[33] I guess if you really want Apples to be dumbed down computers otherwise maybe a little bit of customizability is a good thing. Apple has already blocked hardware, it was bought up in their case with Psystar. I'm just going to say that Windows 7 has been running nicely and also Ubuntu Netbook Remix on my EEE has been a dream especially with the 9.10 update did this morning. Since Apple is going to slap people around with a large patch stick to get them to buy hardware then maybe it's time to look other places to get your needs met. I'll try to keep it simple so the mouth-breathing Apple haters have a prayer of getting this. Cost aside, Apple makes the best integrated computer products, hardware and software, on the market. (This may be a matter of my opinion, but it is also the opinion of just about every respected computer or electronics rag out there.) In order to offer this, they invest significant R&D into the design of these products, which includes the OS. In order to make this investment, they need to turn a profit (they are quite profitable, in case you haven't heard). In order to protect that investment and make a profit from it, Apple takes steps to ensure that their OS is only run on Apple hardware, as hardware sales are the means by which they turn that profit.[38] Windows 7 has even been installed on an old P2 266 with 96MB of ram - Google it. Yet Apple wants to bash Microsoft and talk a bunch of crap - their latest Mac Pro shipped with THREE hardware issues! Lame as hell, especially when you're gouging the consumer and emptying their pockets so that they can feel "cool". Now they're going to brick peoples computers - the people who are so dedicated to Apple's OS that they want to run it on their own hardware. They brick your phones add computers, and yet people will continue to support them like zombies. For the record, why the hell is Wired putting so many advertisements and "pro apple" articles up? Seriously, its damn annoying.[38] @margellen - Yeah, how about Microsoft teams up with ONLY eMachines and you HAVE to buy an eMachines computer to run Windows? Get real. While I don't understand why anyone would like to run an inferior operating system that wasn't designed for the masses and only helps to deepen Apple's own pockets, it seems illogical that they would block people from running their OS on other hardware, because at least people are BUYING their OS. Same goes for iTunes, why block it? If people are using it, they're likely purchasing music through it as well. Apple's business model is flawed, they're alienating their customers and pissing people off left and right.[38]
A copy of OS X and an netbook probably isn't. Now at this point people start to mumble something about buggy whip manufacturers, but guess what, that's a poor analogy. Buggy whip manufacturers went out of business because people didn't want their stuff. If Apple goes under it will be because people want their stuff but don't want to pay. Even more irritatingly these tend to be the same sort of people who are outraged when some company uses Linux and doesn't make the source code available. Yeah, I know the GPL is a copyright license not an EULA. But in both cases people are using something in a way that the copyright holder has explicitly forbidden. Either you can have a copyright free world, in which case you can run OS X for free and keep your Linux fork closed source, or you live in a world with copyright where both things are illegal. That being said I don't really like Linux or OS X. Still if you do, it seems like you need to follow the terms of the license the code is under.[33] You said it brother. I'm not sure that they needed to do this, netbooks are still a pretty small market share, and netbooks running OS X are a tiny fraction of that. It probably isn't hurting OS X sales. Having said that, Apple doesn't design their OS to run on things they don't control, and it is their OS, so I'm not sure why there is so much outrage at this decision. Perhaps the thing that we should be getting out of this is not that Apple is a bad company, but rather that this likely means if Apple does release their long rumored tablet - it won't be Atom powered.[20]
Over the past two years pretty much every major PC maker with the exception of Apple has released a netbook. Most of them use Intel Atom processors. You know what? It turns out it's actually not that difficult to install Apple's OS X operating system on most of those Atom-powered netbooks.[5] I don't think Apple did it just to block hacked netbooks. Rumor has it their tablet was originally going to run an Intel Atom, hence the support for the processor. If they aren't going to use Atom processors in any of their hardware, they have no reason to bloat the OS to support it at the software level.[2] The forthcoming OS update will not run on the Intel Atom processor, a rather petty move from Apple which, if true, will break many netbooks which have been hacked to run as more than passable Macs. This news comes from Stellarola, the hacker who helped us out extensively with the original (and still the best) Gadget Lab hackintosh.[38] There's a rumour circulating on tech news web sites that the next update to Mac OS Snow Leopard, 10.6.2, disables support for Intel's Atom processor. Mac OS 10.6.2 is only available to developers as a beta release at the moment, and the Atom news comes from a single, small blog post by one them.[35] Well, if there won't be a workaround that will allow you to upgrade to Mac OS X 10.6.2 then you should stick to Snow Leopard 10.6.1 or Leopard 10.5.8 because 10.5.9 will also kill Atom processors support when available.[26] If you have an unauthorized Atom system, users are advised to not upgrade to Snow Leopard Mac OS X 10.6.2, until details have been confirmed regarding the issue.[7]
The Atom 330, the dual core desktop variant of the Atom line, was not properly supported from Mac OS X 10.5.7 and up; you had to turn off HyperThreading in the BIOS to even get Mac OS X to boot at all. Of course, Apple has no obligation whatsoever to look out for Atom users, as the company does not ship this type of processor in any of its machines.[13] A lot of tutorials are available on the net which allow users to run Mac OS X on cheap notebooks. Apple does not allow running their Mac OS X to run on non-Apple hardware.[39] The move would highlight Apple's ongoing attempt to prevent users from running Mac OS X on unpermitted hardware.[20]
Once we re-enabled the kext, things returned to normal speeds. Deleting the file completely resulted in slower speeds once again. AppleIntelCPUPowerManagement.kext enabledNormal speedAppleIntelCPUPowerManagement.kext deleted18% slowerAppleIntelCPUPowerManagement.kext installed but disabled via secondary kernel extension18% slower With such a performance hit when running a hacked Macintosh, the Apple Tax takes on new meaning. Other notebooks may have similar performance penalties due to power management idiosyncrasies--the difference was never noticed because no one tried creating a '''Hacked Mac on a Mac.''' When Wired Magazine tried running Mac OS X on their MSI Wind, they noted that OS X ran faster on the netbook than Windows XP did.[2] Installing OS X on third-party hardware is nothing new. The combination of super low-cost hardware with extreme ease of installation, however, have led many to turn their netbooks into rogue Macs.'' Apple has rarely been supportive of attempts to hack its hardware and software, as the long cat and mouse game of iPhone jailbreaking and its lawsuit against Mac clone maker Psystar make clear. This move may be more than just ''general animosity towards hackers, however.[23] Today, running OS X on a wide range of non Apple hardware is very popular, and usually quite simple to do. Apple has their reasons for not moving into the software business. They might be quite valid, but I don't believe it has to do with profitability, at least not directly. Apple doesn't really care if they sell hardware or software. They care about selling an image, a lifestyle, a brand. Nobody really buys a Mac because it's more useful than the alternatives.[33] Your intensity and hyperbole are amusing at least. Apple a monopoly? with less than 10% or the computer market? That's preposterous. Apple is a HARDWARE COMPANY they write software to run on THEIR HARDWARE - not someone else's hardware. That is their RIGHT as a company. If someone wants to sell OS X for other hardware they need to work something out legally with Apple.[38] More people would be able to afford it while being able to eat at the same time. It will be a cold day in hell before Apple allows their OS to be sold standalone. As of now their OS is meant for a niche set of hardware that they specify and control. They don't have the infrastructure or drivers in place to handle the sheer multitude of hardware out there. While OS X is a fantastic OS in it's own right. The moment you put it in the same playing field (hardware and software) as Microsoft, it's going to implode.[36]
I can run Windows 2000 on it, and I'm pretty sure Microsoft didn't have software support for the Atom designed into it, since it predated it by more than half a decade. It should work out of the box. Maybe it's deliberate (most likely), or maybe Apple just never bothered to test with it (unlikely, but possible). Either way, it's Apple's OS, and they can do what they want with it. I don't understand why people think somehow they have a right to tell Apple what they should do with something they created. They own it, the public doesn't. Whether or not it's good for them in the long run though, is another question. Normally, when companies try this type of thing, it backfires and ends up being short-sighted.[2] "If Apple was to try and support every processor and/or piece of hardware that Windows attempts, The apple user experience would be as pathetic as the windows user experience". Hmm. pathetic for you? or for whom? many people have great experience with Windows interface, software quality and quantity, choice of hardware, etc. Again that proves that Apple doesnt want people to know the mediocre OS they have (yes They have problems with 64 DRIVERS on their close ecosystem! and their "64 bit OS" runs as 32 bit OS by default). No, those are not the reasons, they want to lock the OS to keep their overpriced hardware business running.[40] @steve "Apple chooses not to support certain processors or hardware for quality control reason". when did Apple gave support for fans of the OS that wanted it in another hardware (not Apple's). Remember people installing it in another hardware DO LIKE the OS, so why cut them off if is not costing them nothing? Because Apple is NOT a software company, is a hardware company, they want you to buy their overpriced computers, not to use the OS.[40] Why would Apple cut off support for a processor? Well, the company doesn't currently manufacturer any systems that use the Intel Atom. Like the Palm Pre/iTunes syncing issue and the suits against Psystar, this just seem to another way of ensuring that the company's software stays tied exclusively to its hardware.[40] Why would Apple cut off support for a processor? Well, the company doesn't currently manufacture any systems that use the Intel Atom. Apple's actions could be seen as either preventing users from creating their own "Hackintoshes," or as a legitimate step against piracy.[21]
Should Mac OS 10.6.2 really drop support for Intel Atom processors, it could well be the strongest evidence yet that an Apple tablet is on the way.[35] In the current developer build of 10.6.2, Apple appears to have changed around a lot of CPU related information. One of the effects of this is Apple killing off Intel's Atom chip. That's it -- there's no other supporting evidence, nor does there appear to be confirmation from anyone else with access to Mac OS 10.6.2. This hasn't stopped the story from spreading like wildfire, though. Given Apple's cat and mouse tactics with Palm over the Pre's ability to sync with iTunes, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that it's planning on stopping Mac OS 10.6.2 from running on the Atom processor (although how this could be technically achieved is open to question).[35]
Sadly, Apple is looking to stop all that: according to Wired.com the latest update includes a modification to the kernel which restricts the processor types on which Mac OS X is capable of running.[1] You putting a physical fence on your physical property that you own, to stop someones dog from taking a crap on your lawn, is fine. By installing Mac OS X onto machines that Apple didn't make, the people are NOT CRAPPING ON APPLE'S LAWN. It doesn't affect the OS, it doesn't affect anyone else running the OS. Its people with machines that they bought, putting a copy of OS X that they bought onto it. Can Apple block people from using their OS on netbooks? Yes, they have the CAPABILITY to.[38] Apple coded Mac OS X to only work on Apple branded machines, but online hacking communities have since been dedicated to altering the code to enable Mac OS X to work near flawlessly on non-Apple branded computers, otherwise known as Hackintoshes.[31]
If Apple had to support the breadth of legacy hardware that Microsoft has to and include a ton of 3rd party drivers, I'm sure Mac OS X would look a lot more rickety.[20] The Apple software license does not allow Mac OS X to be used on hardware that is not "Apple-labeled."[10]
Wow, talk about missing the mark by a mile. This has absolutely nothing to do with their stuff being secure or stable, because their OS is designed, refined, and tested for Apple hardware ONLY. Of COURSE they are controlling in their hardware, IT IS THEIR HARDWARE, and it is their sole reason for being in business! I find it laughable that you say they can't handle what they put out, when their software is run on their hardware (as intended) there's no handling problems. It's when yahoos get a cheap version of the Mac OS and try to run it on foreign hardware that the problems occur - which, by the way, is exactly what this move is trying to curb. You may not like it because you can't just do whatever you want and you hate restrictions, but it's a smart move on Apple's part.[20] Since my review ran, I've discovered another weird conflict with a third-party program: the PhotoStitch panorama-assembly tool included with Canon's cameras no longer works. Canon deserves most of the blame -- this application, which looks like a refugee from Mac OS 9, should have been updated long ago -- but the Snow Leopard installer offered no warning about this problem, and Apple's list of incompatible software has yet to mention it. My biggest Snow Leopard disappointment, though, has to be the crash protection allegedly built into its Safari Web browser.[16] With all the hoopla surrounding the release of Windows 7 Apple's recent OS upgrade has gone largely unnoticed. If you're thinking 'new system software cool, but how much space does it need?' then to the good news is Mac 10.6 Snow Leopard takes up less room than its predecessor.[41] The more important difference I would point to is architectural: OS X enforces a proper separation between the OS, applications and each user's data and settings, while Windows largely does not. That's why OS X doesn't need app installers or uninstallers and Windows does. That's also why Snow Leopard's default reinstall preserves your applications, files and settings in place and Windows 7 can't do those things. I'm not doing anything "wrong" to find Windows awkward and inconvenient compared to OS X in these matters--even if I also don't think Apple moved the chains much with Snow Leopard.[16] Apple's new installation routine for Snow Leopard (Mac OS X 10.6) improves upon Leopard's (Mac OS X 10.5) Easy and Advanced installation choices.[42] I still consider Mac OS X a more pleasant software environment than Windows. I also still think Snow Leopard will bring worthwhile changes over time, both as successive bug fixes address its flaws (the next big one is supposedly due this month ) and as third-party developers write new software to take advantage of its foundation-level improvements.[16] The NeoOffice 3.0 update adds a number of new features, including Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard (32-bit version only) support and native file locking support for local and networked volumes.[43]
Stell recommends Intel Atom Netbook users to stay on Hackint0sh OS X 10.5.8 version (Leopard) since 10.5.9 might have the same effect as 10.6.2 or OS X 10.6.1 (Snow Leopard). Other options include using "stock 10.0.0 kernel or modified Snow Leopard kernel".[17] Any netbook user running Snow Leopard is being advised to stick to version 10.6.1 until a workaround is sorted by the Hackintosh community - something OS X Daily doesn't expect will take too long.[25]
If you have a Hackintosh Netbook you will not be able to run Mac OS X 10.6.2 on your machine. At the moment users of the Hackintosh Community didn't announce that they found a workaround, but StellaRolla points to the fact that you can "stock 10.0.0 kernel or use modded Snow kernels."[26] If you have been thinking that Mac OS X runs just on Mac machines, then say hello to Hackint0sh Netbook community. This hacking community makes Mac OS X run on non-Apple hardware and every possible Intel Atom-based netbook. Stell's blog first came up with the information about Mac OS X 10.6.2 developer build that had different CPU related information.[17]
The processor is used widely in the small and inexpensive netbook category of Windows computers, which are also widely hacked to run Apple's OS X operating system.[23] Like the new Windows 7, the latest version of Apple's OS X operating system for Macintosh computers focuses on better performance rather than the eye-catching features we normally expect from Apple.[44] Even before the launch of Windows 7 on October 22nd, the operating system was predicted to become something bigger than Apple's Mac OS X by some analysts.[45]
You may "still consider Mac OS X a more pleasant software environment than Windows" but don't suffer the same short-term memory loss that many Apple fans seem to suffer from when it comes to writing about all things Apple.[16] Apple has decided to kill the growing Hackint0sh community with the upcoming Mac OS X 10.6.2 update.[17] Apple is reportedly breaking Hackintoshes -- meaning netbooks illegimately installed with Mac O S X -- with its latest update to Leopard.[27]
Why did you buy the MBP if you're pissed at people who hacked SL on a netbook? Besides, a MBP vs. Netbook shouldn't even be attempted to compare, apples vs. oranges. The main good thing (IMHO) about OS X is the way apple know the exact hardware configurations of all target machines; loose this and that's their main advantage over windows gone.[36] I don't see why Apple would do this, they could simply program some kind of performance disadvantage for hardware falling under an apple-non-proprietary class of drivers then promote their operating systems as holding a major advantage while running on apple machines. That way, Apple could still make decent sales on their os software, while at the same time encouraging users to shift over to apple on the next computer purchase.[23] Why can MS make profits that dwarf Apple's without profiting from hardware? (MS's net profit last quarter was down 32% but still over 3 times that of Apple's which was up). Using the example of Apple's attempt to sell System 7 to Mac clone makers as evidence that they cannot survive as a software company is not fair. System 7 was 1) a piece of crap and 2) not able to run on PCs, i.e. 90%+ of computers could not use their product back then even if they wanted to.[33] Do we buy a Jeep and then expect a Toyota dashboard to fit in? No. I have no interest in entering the pissing contest that happens between the mac fanboys(if you get into a discussion on the internet arguing about an OS that lasts longer than 2 comments, then sorry but you're a fanboy)and critics of Apple but why was Microsoft a monopoly when all it did was make software? It stands to reason that Apple should be the target of an antitrust probe when you look at the fact that they have their feet in both pools, limit the use of generally available software to mobile OS(if you can run a store on Windows then you should be able to run it on Pre), etc. I get the whole "subsidized by hardware" thing, but they're also subsidized by the agreement MS had to sign at the behest of the Justice Dept in '98 which resulted in MS owning non-controlling dividend free stock in Apple.[38]
Apple timed the release of Snow Leopard very well and got the price right. Most users don't understand that the price of OSX is subsidised by the price they paid for their hardware (and boy did they pay for it) and just see the low price of Snow Leopard compared to Windows. Microsoft doesn't have to convert them entirely anyway, since most of them have PCs as well, or run a copy of Windows on their Mac. The netapps statistics have an American bias as far as I remember, since most of the sites they glean numbers from are American.[46] "Stay with Snow Leopard 10.6.1," is another option / restriction, one that shouldn't be too hard to endure for now, since 10.6.2 isn't even out yet. As a last resort, if the user simply can't resist updating to 10.6.2, they can "either the stock 10.0.0 kernel or use modded Snow kernels," another piece of advice on behalf of Stell goes. OSX Daily chimes in saying, "You can't help but suspect this move is Apple's attempt at shutting down the growing and popular Hackintosh Netbook community, since Apple has no product line that runs the Atom itself."[8] If only Apple could release special netbook version of Snow Leopard to run on Intel Atom netbooks, Windows 7 would have tough time.[17]
Snow Leopard requires at least 1GB of memory before it can be installed and it will only run on Macs that use Intel processors rather than the old PowerPC processors that Apple used until about three years ago.[44] Hi I am a Mac user with Snow Leopard and the Apple MobileMe service and I have not had this problem. MobileMe is also an optional pay for use service, it is not included as part of Snow Leopard, the users with this problem just have the wrong folders set to sync. Secondly the title "Snow leopard drives up Aussie phone bills" is inaccurate as it is the Internet Service Provider fees that go up, not phone bills as such. Perhaps they are billing their internet and phone one the same account, but it is still their internet bill going up not the phone bill. My other comment about not upgraded the training computers to Macs because of this seems odd, as MobileMe is not part of Snow Leopard and as such would not effect them. If they did purchase the MobileMe service for each machine and set it up incorrectly then that would be another story, but at no fault of Apple or Snow Leopard.[34] The problem was that Snow Leopard insisted on backing up several gigabytes of data daily to synchronise the Mac's data using Apple's MobileMe. That's a subscription service where users store backup data at a remote 'cloud' facility over the Internet. Australia's dominant telco and ISP, Telstra apparently charges subscribers based upon the amount of data transferred over their broadband links. A Mac user at home, she noticed her phone bill was also higher than normal, which she also attributed to the software upgrade to Snow Leopard.[34]
"Mac users are getting a product that right now Apple doesn't provide -- a netbook," said Volchok. "I know someone who made one of these using an HP notebook. He couldn't get the'sleep' function to work, so it drained the battery. He said it works perfectly on a Dell." The trouble is, these machines do not make a very good netbook. "It's a bad idea, because you can't replicate how tightly the OS is integrated into the Mac hardware, so you don't get a smooth experience," Volchok said.[47] Cupertino has never been amused but has turned a mostly blind eye to the practice'''until now. It is unclear just HOW incompatible the new OS X beta is with Atom chips, but certainly at least the functions that required unofficial KEXT files to function, such as Sleep Mode, won'''t work any more. Apple has made clear they will not be using Atom chips for any devices (preferring ARM chips for mobile computing) so there is no reason for them to strive to support them. The question is whether they spiked Atom support intentionally or if it just happened. Since we seem to be on the cusp of an Apple Tablet, I would have to say they DID break hackintosh possibilities with malice aforethought. Apple will want to make sure that anyone who craves a smaller Mac-based device pays the (no doubt hefty) price for this new product.[18] Whether Apple's move to exclude the Atom crowd from the party is part of a bigger plan, or just sour grapes, only time will tell. What is certain, however, is that if a new Apple ARM-based pocketable PC is on the horizon, and the Cupertino Cabal is trying to kill off the Hackintosh pretenders to make way for a new incumbent, it will have a fierce battle on its hands. It doesn't matter how much CPU interrogation the off-the-shelf OS X installer carries out.[37]
There's a large and growing community of modders that build "hackintoshes" that run the OS. The tech company has a reputation for heavy-handed comedowns on these groups, including a whole pile of legal threats to Psystar - a company that sells custom-made Apple machines. This move is regarded by many to be an attempt to shut down the hackintosh community in the same way. Groups of modders invariably move faster than big tech companies, so it's unlikely that it'll be long before a version of the 10.6.2 patch that works absolutely fine on Atom processors is found in the wild.[24] Apple is not going to sell the OS by itself. I don't know why this has to even be repeated, but Apple is a hardware company and to sell boxed copies of OSX than ran on generic hardware would simply be shooting themselves in the foot. None, of all those who arise Phoenix-like every few months or years, lamenting the state of the OS world they find themselves in, you may notice, wants to buy the Apple hardware to run OSX on. Apparently, the natural conclusion goes right over their heads. they are not Apple customers. They seem to think that paying for a retail copy of OSX would make them Apple customers. They are wrong; that would make them Microsoft customers, because Microsoft is the vendor that uses sales of stand-alone OS's as it's business model.[33] Now that Apple releases an OS dirt-cheap it''s no wonder people will try to install it on a piece of hardware which isnt Apple. The chance this happens increases even more thanks to Apple refusing to provide the mass. Ofcourse you could say. well its Apple if you don''t like it don''t buy it. What right has Apple to tell me on which equipment I can install it? Apple is being attacked on all sides due their closed model which is kind of odd as I remember in the old days that users would scream their lungs out about MS doing exactly the same. Apple sure produces something nice but its rediculous that they lock in their user-base as much as they do and lock-out their developers equally as bad. I am not defending Apple at all but why should they start selling a standalone OS? It's up Apple's execs to decide what they should make and what they should TRY to sell.[36]
Right now Apple doesn't do any of that serial key, activation, or other call home bullshit. Asshat behavior like yours is going to drive them to either doing something irritating along those lines, or simply pricing a standalone copy of OS X at an obscenely high price and then just sell "upgrades" or some other such nonsense to force the tie to a piece of Apple hardware. If you don't like their terms, don't buy it, that simple. It isn't like the standard EULA where they hide terms until post sale, the Apple hardware requirement is put out there up front.[33]
"With a Mac, the software works perfectly with the hardware, but that's not so with something you 'Frankenstein' together. It's like if you put a Mustang engine in a Yugo. Volchok noted that the iPhone doesn't run the full OS X, and he considers the iPhone close to being the perfect computer for its simplicity and ease of use.[47] OMG i R 1337 becAuSe i U53 a MAC!!1! Only stupid, uninformed baboons use Macs. Anyone with half a brain will realize Windows 7 is far superior to OS X - AND it's compatible to run on almost ANY hardware configuration.[38]
Apple may be suing Mac clone merchant Psystar, but its policy towards individuals who install OS X on non-Apple hardware to create "Hackintoshes" seems to have been to ignore them rather than to frustrate them. That may be about to change.[22] Apple doesn't sell any machines that have Atom-based processors, and the licensing agreement explicitly says that OS X is not permitted on hardware that's not sold by Apple.[24] If OS X were to go mainstream as a stand alone OS then it would probably be Apples version of XP (2001 version). It's one thing to decide not to release a netbook but it's something else entirely to specifically block the netbook processor.[36] In truth, there's little reason right now for Apple to release a netbook: OS X works just fine on most of them, with a little out-of-EULA hacking. That might all be about to change.[6]
There are already suggestions that it might be possible to come up with a modified or custom kernel to keep Mac OS X running on Atom netbooks (another strategy would be to stick with 10.6.1), but the additional effort involved is likely to discourage at least some potential 'Hackintosh' users.[30] OS X Daily further speculates that 10.6.2 may be an effort to cripple Atom-based Hackintosh systems in anticipation of the long-rumored Apple Tablet. No matter Cupertino's motive, here's a heads up: if you're running OS X on an Atom, it's probably best to avoid 10.6.2 until a workaround is available.[20] Far, Apple has done nothing to the code in order to prevent Hackintosh installations. Florida based hack company Psystar has continuously sold unauthorized Hackintoshes for over a year and Apple has decided to fight them in court. Up until this point, the court battle with slack-jawed company Psystar has been Apple's only defensive against the Hackintosh community. As OS X Daily reports, Apple may finally be fighting Hackintosh installations by altering its own code.[31]
Apple is under no obligation to allow you to run OS X on anything other than a Mac. A point on that profitability: they make a tidy sum of money targeting the small, high end niche that they already have.[38] Apple's software runs great on most any PC, and OS X is quite a nice environment.[33] Maybe so, but the number of folks in the world who are willing to go through the effort of putting OS X on a PC must be one-tenth of one-percent of the market that Apple would like to capture with a tablet. It would be nice to think that the two platformsif you can call Hackintoshes a platformcould quietly, unofficially coexist.[22]
Complaining about Apple will not hurt them, but withholding your funds from them sure as hell will. Well, if the 40 people in the world who realize that they can install an os that didn't come on their computer and think that OS X is worth installing withhold their funds then.[33] The Nokia vs. Apple suit my well be worth billions of dollars. The whole combined mess makes one wonder, though, if Apple has much of a reason to pretend they are righteously indignant about people '''stealing''' OS X when Apple may well be guilty of stealing billions from Nokia. That suit has yet to be settled, of course, and Apple may be completely innocent.[3]
Come on. I know people on /. want to be able to put OS X on any computer. but is this really a surprise ? This isn't much of a story, it's just another excuse for the licensing/purchasing/monopoly/first-sale debate we have in every Apple article.[33]
I know macs are supposedly more user friendly (or so I've heard), but I couldn't stand having to use what apple decide I must. If people are pissed at Microsoft for monopolising the OS market, just imagine if apple manage to take a hold with their uber locked systems, only apples OSs, only apple hardware. no thank you! One company can't possibly be make the best everything.[20] Apple is a jerk of a company that can't handle what it puts out. Of coarse they are going to prevent the use of there os on Atom, thats how they make all there money. not through the sale of the os but the sale of the hardware as well. Imagine if Microsoft did this, here ya go win7 but you have to buy all the hardware from us and we are going to inflate the costs to you our customer. it just wouldn't fly. The only reason that Apple can do it is nobody really cares they have crap for market share on the PC world no matter how good there Iphone and Ipod do. Just shows that Apple is afraid of what might happen to its view of being "secure" or "stable" if it is being put on a system that hasn't been hand put together by them. It is apple being controlling in their hardware and not allowing customization.[20] "You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so." If Apple wasn't so relatively small to Microsoft, this would be considered anti-competitive practice. Heck, didn't Microsoft get sued a while back for packaging a proprietary WEB BROWSER with their OS? Now Apple is essentially packaging an entire computer with their OS (or an OS with their hardware, depending on perspective).[38]
The atom is a very limited, 32-bit CPU which lacks many of the instruction sets of modern CPUs. If Apple updated their OS to take advantage of these modern features, it could break compatibility with the low-end atom (which Apple has never used and therefore doesn't care about). Now, if the update just looks at what CPU is used and shuts off if it's an Atom, then you make a valid argument. If this is an update to improve the OS, and doing so breaks compatibility by necessity, then there is no problem. Apple shouldn't stop people from using their legitimately purchased software however they want, but Apple also does not have to go out of their way to make their software support other systems. I see your argument but its not that OSX has improved its ability.[5] Based on information provided by one of the blog's inside sources, known by the username ?StellaRolla?, the software update for Apple's Snow Leopard operating system, 10.6.2, blocks support for the Atom chipset.[10] The company hopes to integrate the software with video games, social networks, mobile applications and other services, to make PayPal "easier for you to use." Apple is thwarting hackers and netbook afficiandos by upgrading its Snow Leopard operating system.[48] According to the amended complaint, Psystar has been damaged by Apple's legal maneuvers in a case being heard in a California federal court. That lawsuit was filed by Apple in July 2008, when it accused Psystar of copyright infringement and other violations of the law. That case is slated to go to jury trial on Jan. 11, 2010. Psystar wants Hoeveler to make Apple stop saying that it's illegal for Psystar to purchase Snow Leopard on the open market, then use those copies to install the operating system on the computers it sells.[11]
Just ask The Onion, and when you're done, have a butchers' at the latest market-share statistics. Apple's Leopard operating system failed to make significant in-roads against even an ailing Windows Vista, and we're not so sure Snow Leopard, despite its claimed improvements, has what it takes to topple Windows 7.[49]
Netbook users often hack the Snow Leopard operating system in order to run it on netbooks, making the small machines run like Mac's rather than factory mini-computers.[48] @kibaruk. People might want to have a second or third PC they use for basic stuff, like word processing and the like, and would rather not have a hodge-podge of different operating systems to contend with. This is especially true for the techno-challenged. If they get used to the Mac OS and then want to get another PC, but don't want to pay out the nose for a system that only needs bare minimum specs, I can see why they would definitely want to run the Mac OS on a netbook.[20] Why would people use Mac on netbooks? If you want Mac you buy a mini mac or something like that. isn't it supossed to be best for media editing and stuff like that (Netbooks are a lot cheaper, but Mac doesn't really make up for the hardware they have). I don't think it will be a great idea.Apple should spread it's OS t low end PCs.[20]
Why. If people are paying to buy Mac OS to put on these netbooks, Apple will lose out financially if they stop this.[1]
The latest seed could change before being released as an actual update. Stella knows what he's talking about (he's one of the guys behind the OSx86 method for easily installing the Mac OS on non-Apple machines), and recommends keeping your frankenmacs loaded with 10.6.1 for now. This wouldn't surprise us, especially as Apple seems to have gotten a taste for locking out unauthorized hardware with the Palm Pre cat and mouse game.[38] Part of what makes the Mac so great is that Apple is able to custom design the OS and the hardware to work well together.[23] The only way Apple can say that OSX is more stable than Windows is by severely limiting the hardware to a very small subset of what's available. If they opened up OSX so that is was installable on any x86 platform, they'd suffer from the same problems as Microsoft (if not worse, because at least MS has been used to writing an OS that will work on millions of combinations of hardware for the last 15-20 years) - and that way they wouldn't be able to stand on the moral high ground and thumb their noses at Microsoft. It's ironic that Apple most famous ad campaign, the 1984 hammer ad, was all about sticking it to the corporate man.[1] What if car manufacturers said, "Your Ford car won't drive unless you have a Ford engine in it. Or your GM won't drive unless you have a GM engine in it." Not only does that reduce the customers ability to customize their car, it kills off any engine manufacturers marketing their products as an alternative to the stock components. The problem isn't that Apple is bundling hardware and software together, it's that they're saying the software won't work unless you have the hardware. They're not blocking it by architecture, which would make sense if there was some architectural weakness that could cause their OS to crash; they're blocking it by BRAND. -[38] By stopping others from using there OS you'll have to settle for there grand old monopoly, and im betting overrpriced versions. I have no problem with Apple doing this. It's not part of their business model to sell their software separately from their hardware.[20] Is Apple is baiting Psystar? Apple doesn't have to support any processor it doesn't sell as part of its product line. Psystar's business model is infringing on Apple's IP. They will try to hack the new OS, and maybe Apple has legal reasons for wanting them to do it? It might conflict with statements made by Psystar in their own defense.[22] Apple has no product in the market that uses the Intel Atom processor. This processor range is popular in the netbook models available in the market.[39] I'm looking into it, but the 10.6.0 / 10.6.1 kernel works fine with 10.6.2." Apple has a history of blocking out unauthorized uses of its software (just see what the company has done to lock out Palm Pre and iTunes syncing), so it's not surprising if Hackintosh netbooks were targeted for termination in the upcoming update. Those running Hackintoshes with Intel Atom CPUs should beware of the 10.6.2 update.[2] Jack Bronsky on VIA Nano 3000 Series processors unveiled said: 2 Ghz L3100 Nano + Ion 2 netbook no larger than. Bob on Hackintosh Netbooks RIP? Apple rumoured to disable Intel Atom support said: Well such is the spread of Wintel.[14] I don't think Apple did it just to block hacked netbooks. Rumor has it their tablet was originally going to run an Intel Atom, hence the support for the processor.[2]
APPLE HAS REMOVED all support for Intel Atom processors from the latest developer build of Snow Leopard, according to a blog post by Stellarola.[37] Bad news for those running Snow Leopard on their netbooks--Apple is pulling another Palm Pre, cutting off the operating system's support for the Intel Atom processor.[40] Users who are running a hackintoshed netbook with Intel's Atom processor may want to be careful next time an update for Snow Leopard is pushed out.[23]
Reports are coming in that the newest developer seed of 10.6.2 puts a halt to Hackintosh users that are running the Mac OS on an Intel Atom processor.[12]
According to OS X Daily, users have found that the latest developer preview of the 10.6.2 update disables support for Atom processors.[23] Why support a processor where the OS has never been released on (I think). Its really just a waste of space if they had no plans to release on ATOM processors. Although if it's not running OS X, I guess it still could have Atom, but it looks unlikely.[36]
With Linux that means publishing your code and with OS X it means running it on Apple hardware.[33] Current advice to Hackint0sh users is to stick with OS X 10.6.1 and wait for the developer community to tweak Atom-blocking out of future versions of the OS. ''Apple themselves are yet to comment on the rumors.[28] The summary then goes on to speculate about the improbable and impractical wet dream of the writer that Apple should start licensing OS X to generic PC makers, completely ignoring the economic realities involved.[33] However apple will never sell OS X alone. That would mean that would mean that they would have to raise the cost; in order to try to offset what they would lose on their pc's.[36]
Why do you pay 29 euro/usd anyways for what MS calls a servicepack? The whole pricing comparison between MS/Apple always boggled my mind. MS makes an OS release every 4 years and the in between updates are for free while Apple touts that their OS only costs 30 usd/euro, a small detail they leave out is that every minor update/bug-squash runs you another x euro.[36] Apple is not in the market of selling an OS that is supposed to be installable on any system you want. It's designed to run on the hardware they sell, and that's it. Does Apple have any Atom based computers? No, so why does this even matter? Seriously.[38] I've also been assuming that the tablet OS would be a variant of the iPhone OS, with a new UI template based on screen size. I honestly don't see the advantage of running full OSX on an Apple tablet (whether it's 5" or 10"), and given that the iPhone OS seems to run well enough on the iPhone, the Atom CPU simply doesn't have a good enough CPU performance to power usage ratio or whatever to be worthwhile.[36] I most likely does not have an Atom CPU but is something similar so it makes a lot of sense to lock Atom out. Don't get me wrong the news of Atom being locked out of SL is both great news and quite bad ones. For one the tablet is very likely to be running a full blown version of the OS but on the other hand Apple is most definitely going to position it in a price range above that of netbooks if they are making sure that netbooks are nor supported.[36]
Paying a premium for hardware that you will only use 15% of is a pure waste. This is where Apple needs to get in gear. They are missing out on the huge netbook market, and throwing this fancy touch tablet at the market will get some wow factor, but still be far more costly than a netbook-ish system NEEDS to be. The fact that many are running their OS on a netbook and are satisfied enough with the functionality to keep running it, speaks volumes regarding what consumers want. They need a Macbook Lite, not a flashy gimmicky tablet.[20] As for the article, just brining to light more of Apple's anti competitiveness, and while hackintoshing does encourage more people to use OSX it doesn't encourage people to buy it, even using a legal copy with other hardware is against the EULA, so whats the point, may as well pirate it. Jobs: "we aren't going to make a netbook, we just don't see a market for these 'crap' computers."[2] With a Mac, everything you get is well worth the relatively small difference in price. I can't tell you how convenient it's been to make an appointment at the Genius Bar and get any issues I've had taken care of immediately. I've seen Apple Store employees go out of their way to help people with things that aren't really what they're there for. I've seen people bring their machines to an Apple Store surprised that it finally died after 10 years of use, whereas with any other PC maker they'd be use to just replacing it with a new machine every 2 years or so. I know more than a few people who had to buy a new machine every year while in school, and I know even more people who have used the same i/Power/MacBook throughout their academic careers and beyond. Have people had great experiences with their PCs? I'm sure some have somewhere, but I've never been one of those people and I haven't met one. BMW has every right to say that they won't support putting one of their engines in a kay car.[6] The brand new 27" iMac is suffering from major problems with video graphics while Windows 7 operating on the same machines is working fine. According to Apple bulletin boards, users started to notice that their Macs' pretty screens were running movies in browsers that were choppier than the North Sea in winter. With no help from Apple, Mac Fans have been trying to piece together what could be causing such a kerfuffle.[50] While it looks the same on the surface, Apple has completely rewritten the Finder, the part of the operating system that displays the contents of the hard disk on the computer screen, in order to make it run much more smoothly. The main area in which we noticed an improvement was when using the Quicklook option that allows users to quickly peek inside files and preview their contents without actually opening them. When a user hits the space bar to activate Quicklook the preview window pops up more quickly, even with complicated files such as video clips. It can also browse through long documents containing multiple pages, which is handy when you are looking for specific information. Other options, such as Exposé, which neatly organises all the open windows on the screen, also respond more quickly and smoothly. There is one big new feature but it's mainly suitable for business users.[44] Well, Apple does make a majority of their money on hardware sales, not their operating system. As far as they're concerned, they consider their OS more of a feature of their computers rather than a public platform.[2]
Sounds like a bad marketing move to me. It just makes Apple look more like the bad guy, and I can't imagine that there are very many "Hackintosh" users. I feel like, if Apple wants to gain a bigger foothold on the computer market, they need their software to get around as much as possible. It's all fine by me though, I'm really not a big Apple fan. @Treeski: But if they do allow it, they would loose a lot, the Mac bussiness is not on software, it's on pricy hardware.[20] At which point they could refuse to sell the update to anyone who hasn't registered their purchase of an Apple computer. Currently that's a hassle they prefer not to make their users go through, but if they had no other way to limit distribution to owners of Apple computers supported by that update, that would certainly be an option. At which point you wouldn't be able to legally run their software because you wouldn't be able to buy a copy except on eBay secondhand (and you know how well that would work).[33]
If you had linked me to any other site that doesn't go out of its way to paint apple as the winner in every case that comes up it might have had credibility. I'm certain there are cases where Apple IS right but no one ever bats a 1,000 unless they're sleeping with the commissioner's daughter, and the commentary on the ad campaigns kind of betrays the writer's obvious partisan status in this new OS Wars(It's sad that I remember the console wars, isn't it?). My PS3 disks won't play in my XBOX360, does that mean Microsoft is blocking Sony customers? Why can't I order a beer at Friendly's? I cant but Jaguar rims on my Geo! damn you 5th lug nut, you blocked me! Just because Apple can let their software to be used on other platforms, doesn't mean they have to. I'm sure it's way easier to QA their new OS their one platform instead of many.[38] Try any cell phone aside from android. Microsoft sells software, Apple sells hardware, they just have different business models. It sucks that Apple did this, but I would say they have every right to do it if they chose, and as a company they are doing amazingly right now. They are making a killing selling expensive machines in a recession. I would also be very surprised if hackintoshes were more than a tiny amount of the market, its still too difficult for most consumers.[1] The software is what makes the Apple products so desirable. Why should Apple let other companies use their software, thus making deleting their products appeal. It's very smart business to do so if you want to sell hardware, Especially if you are a hardware company.[38] Why does Apple lock everybody out? Simple, Apple is a HARDWARE company. They produce the software for their hardware, not some other company's product.[38]
Pretty informative. This alteration of their OS is different from their proprietary iTunes because it appears to be trying to kill off the Intel chip. Not that Intel is in danger of collapsing because of it, but it seems like Apple felt threatened by an alternative product bursting their little bubble of overpriced hardware.[38] Imagine you are Apple: for Macintoshes, you get almost all of your profit from selling hardware, not from selling OS upgrades. (Not to mention there is nothing that prevents people from installing a single copy of the OS on multiple pieces of hardware - there is nothing like what MS does with Windows installs that cripple the system without a valid license installed.)[18] Some people may like the Apple OS, but prefer the more customizable hardware you can get from other places.[38]
Your comment is awaiting moderation. This always amazes me. Apple limits the hardware that you can run their OS on and then calls it'superior' to anything else. That would be like making gasoline that only fueled 1% of the cars on the road and calling it a superior grade of gasoline because the car does not break down.[6]
Install it on your PC and find out why!". They had the perfect opportunity to release OSX into the open market to run on any PC when PC users were disheartened by the dog that was Vista. It seems now that Apple is fighting fires rather than going out there and saying "Yes, we have a better OS than Windows.[20] Snow Leopard also synchs with Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 opening it up for business users who can't break away from the office. It's the first OS offer 64-bit processing and to run exclusively on Intel Macs.[41] Snow Leopard now allows Macs to work with the PC-based Microsoft Exchange Server e-mail system that is used by many businesses. Its new 'autodiscovery' option allows the Mac's Address Book, Mail, and Calendar programs to automatically connect to Exchange Server running on an office network. That means people can take their Macs to work - as long as their IT departments allow it - and easily exchange emails, contacts and calendar details with PC-using colleagues.[44]
Apple adds a new service to Snow Leopard, the Mobile Access server. A "VPN-less" authenticated/encrypted entry method that's designed to sync iPhones, Mac clients, to their address books, mail, and other internal resources.[42]
Apple is currently engaged in a war of compatibility with Palm and, if the developer build of Snow Leopard version 10.6.2 is any indication, the Atom processor is next on the smack down list.[36] As reported from Apple Insider, it is thought that Apple are keen to put an end to the growing 'Hackintosh' Netbook community that has been making use of altered copies of Snow Leopard.[7] If you're running Leopard or Snow Leopard on a "hackintosh" netbook, don't allow it to upgrade to Snow Leopard 10.6.2, or Leopard 10.5.9. The core kernels in those update kill off support for Atom-based netbook CPUs, which is almost certainly the processor inside your netbook.[51]
Just like in Leopard, Safari will stop responding to any input a second or two before the cursor changes into the dreaded "spinning beach ball of death," and then the only thing I can do is wait for the browser to snap out of it. At least Snow Leopard's Activity Monitor utility now breaks out the processor and memory footprint of each plug-in, so I can accurately condemn Adobe's Flash plug-in for its appetites. A few Snow Leopard users have discovered a much more serious problem: a rare but gruesome bug, still fixed, that caused Snow Leopard to wipe out all of their data after somebody else logged into the Mac using its Guest Account option.[16] The conclusion can only be that it is a driver problem within Snow Leopard which is not controlling the big iMacs' graphics hardware properly. One user thought his 27" iMac was having major performance issues and not just with Flash. iPhoto slideshow transitions are choppy, Pandora streaming music skips and cracks up, game performance is slow, iMovie videos are crap (audio and video lags) - it's a real mess. He said he had sat with Apple Care for hours, cleaned up libraries, zapped the PRAM, reinstalled the OS; but it's still not fixed.'' He thinks they are just defective.[50]
With the nov 6 release of the droid out goes the iphone and att with it - with the 2010 release of google os outgoes snow leopard as well. I think Apple is being mind controlled by Google at this point, oh well fuc em.[38] What do you do if you are on a limited budget but want Snow Leopard in your pocket? Well, as far is Apple is concerned, you'll have to break the law.[37]
Network World - On the surface, Apple's Snow Leopard Server feels like a $499 maintenance release, but underneath, there's much more -- improved performance, more polish and new apps focused on collaboration and content sharing.[42] "Stole" my ass! I'm not sure where all the Apple FanBoys came up with the myth that the $29 Snow Leopard disc is an "upgrade." (Note, I'm a fanboy; I am currently typing on my new 27" iMac).[33] Apple said I'd be able to claw back seven gigs, but out of the box I got back just over half of that and that rose by another two after I hunted out a few now-redundant versions of programs that I'd shifted about and the upgrade couldn't find to delete. Apple has complexly rewritten Snow Leopard's Finder, while it looks the same it's a and faster slicker interface that know offers a scrolling folder preview similar to that offered in iTunes and Safari 4.[41] Compare that you Apple who allow you to upgrade to Snow Leopard for $30. This is supposed to be from Leopard because they offer a Tiger pack with iLife and iWork, but realistically I do not think they care because they did not implement anything to stop you.[23]
@JZ, wasn't the Snow Leopard upgrade a service pack that cost about the same? Funny how when Apple does it, it's okay.[36]
Apple may be planning to block at least some Intel-based computers from running Snow Leopard, if reports on the Web today are to be believed.[11] Softpedia would also consider the possibility that Apple is just focusing on optimizing Snow Leopard for customers and current Apple-branded hardware.[8] We tested Apple Snow Leopard on two Apple-supplied servers, an older one that's been in the lab as a test unit, and a newer XServe with 8GB of DRAM, SSD 128GB boot drive, three SAS secondary drives in RAID 5 configuration; twin GBE ports, two 2.6Ghz Intel quad r-core 64-bit CPUs.[52]
The GeForce 9400, and its mobile version, the 9400M, offer a lot more than Intel'''s mobile chipsets. That'''s particularly true in the area of graphics performance, be it for entry-level desktop PCs, multi-use computers, '''home cinema''' boxes, or laptops/notebooks. Apple, by the way, made its position clear, going so far as to totally abandon Intel'''s integrated chipsets in its MacBook line of notebooks. Beyond standard desktops and notebooks, Nvidia is aiming at the netbook and nettop market'''a lucrative one in tight economic times like these. To go after that market, Nvidia developed its Ion platform.[2] Because Ion'''s future is not as rosy as we may have made it sound. That'''s not because of any technological shortcomings, but rather because of the position Nvidia is in, where Intel is concerned. By launching Ion, Nvidia has just stirred up the tranquil waters of the placid pond Intel has planned for itself this year. The netbook wave in 2008 was really more of a tidal wave, and it filled Intel'''s pockets, since they were the exclusive supplier of the components. Even during an economic crisis, 2009 is looking like another good year for netbooks and nettops, and Intel won'''t want to let anyone else have a piece of this very large pie. According to certain persistent rumors'''which Intel is denying'''Intel is trying to put a lock on the market by refusing to sell Atom processors independently of its 945GC (or GSE) chipsets (Ed.: although, to be fair, Intel insisted to us at CES that it'd absolutely sell Atom by itself). For each Ion computer built, the manufacturers would have to pay for an Intel chipset they wouldn'''t use. That additional expense might be enough to dissuade manufacturers from getting on the Ion bandwagon, especially in the netbook market, where every dollar counts. That'''s not all. Intel also plans to renew its basic Atom platform, dumping the weak 945 chipset and replacing it with the GN40, derived from the G45. With its 45 nm fabrication process and resulting low power consumption, HD video decoding capabilities, better 3D performance and more, this new platform could pull the rug out from under the Ion platform.[2] Intel plans to introduce Atom CPUs for cellphones. It seems to me that Intel needs to do something better than the Atom if they want to compete with ARM based CPUs. They may possibly turn to Samsung for their mobile processors since that Is who they have used for mobile devices. It is easy - if apple will ever made a netbook, it will be in so distant future, that it will not be the Atom. That is not so strange - in few months we will have here the descendant (codename Pineview), and there are also some interesting competitors. Apple has a power to push intel to create something special for them only (as they did it for Apple Air processor). They didn't push Intel for anything, they just got their hands on the ULV thin C2D's before anyone else, stop reading marketing blurbs they are all lies.[36]
Says Stell: "In the current developer build of 10.6.2, Apple appears to have changed around a lot of CPU-related information. One of the effects of this is Apple killing off Intel'''s Atom chip." It's not at all clear from that what Apple might have done to "kill off" the Atom chip, which is designed to be as fully x86-compatible as any of the Core 2 Duo processors a lot of genuine Intel-based Macs are based on.[15]
If there were a technical reason why Atom processors could not run the software I would be OK with that, but it seems rather Microsoftian to block processors not used in Apple machines.[23] How can you end what never was? Apple didn't "split" with the Atom processor. It never overtly supported it in the first place, and ships no hardware using it.[10] It was bound to happen the moment Apple moved to the intel platform and started using commodity hardware. What this article is saying is that Apple will not consider a low-cost low-power computer with an Atom inside it.[33] According to the influential Stell's Blog, "In the current developer build of 10.6.2, Apple appears to have changed around a lot of CPU- related information. One of the effects of this is Apple killing off Intel's Atom chip." In general, these Hackintosh computers are built in order to provide a product that's lacking in Apple's lineup, said Mike Volchok, founder of Mike's TechShop in Manhattan.[47] Aaron Camm on Hackintosh Netbooks RIP? Apple rumoured to disable Intel Atom support said: The dim hope of an apple.[14] Apple might have decided to disable Intel Atom support to prevent unauthorized installations on netbooks.[39]
Word on coder street is that the upcoming revision of OS X will kill support for Intel's little powerhouse. That could certainly change before it hits the world at large, but we wouldn't bet on it. If you're viewing this on an netbook install of your own devising, you may be stuck at version 10.6.1 (or earlier) for awhile -- or you may need to do a little custom kernel building.[36] Don't forget that OS X has none of that Genuine Advantage DRM malarkey attached to it. If you can download an ISO file and burn a DVD you can install it (Don't do this at home kids. It's against the law). The upshot of all of this is that - armed with a £250 netbook, some slightly dodgy software written by a bunch of self-styled modern day Robin Hoods, and a wanton disregard for the laws of whichever land you happen to be reading this in - you could have a neat little device which runs what many consider to the the most complete and useable operating system currently available.[37] The forthcoming Mac OS X 10.6.2 will update nearly 150 components of the operating system and address issues with the Dock, ColorSync, QuartzCore and graphic driver components.[14] As for Mac OS X, the operating system only holds about 5.27% total market share. Within a few months, it's almost inevitable that we'll see the Vista follow-up surpass Mac OS X market share. We'll definitely keep following this one.[45]
Mac OS X is continuing to increase in market share, despite an explosive start to life for Windows 7.[46] The source of the information appears to be Stell's Blog, which says that, for now, options revolve mostly around not updating to Mac OS X 10.6.2 or, if still running Leopard, avoiding Mac OS X 10.5.9 once that hits, as it is likely to cause similar issues.[12] If anyone could run Mac OS X on a realy low price PC then Mac gets nothing back.[20] Hackint0sh community basically comes up with hacks to install Mac OS X on every possible netbook, with fixes and patches of course.[17] The NeoOffice developers have announced the release of version 3.0.1 of NeoOffice for Mac OS X. NeoOffice 3.0.1 is a free open source office suite based on OpenOffice.org version 3.0.1 and includes many of the most commonly used features in Microsoft Office.[43] If you want to legally use Mac OS X, you have to do it officially by purchasing a Mac.[31] The latest Mac OS X build was pushed to developers a few weeks ago and it should soon be available for the masses.[26] The suite is one of the most stable office suites for Mac OS X and shows significant speed improvements compared to OpenOffice.[43] NeoOffice 3.0.1 is available to download for Mac OS X 10.4 or higher.[43]
By default it worked just fine, and is working just fine for many people currently using OS X on the Atom. No, this is a case of deliberately disabling a working feature for the express purpose of forcing you to buy their hardware over another's.[33] Apple has recently been sued by Nokia, who claims that the maker of OS X has been guilty of infringing on a variety of Nokia cell phone patents for the last couple of years.[3] If you want to run OS X - buy a Macintosh. Otherwise stick to Windows and complain about Microsoft's Monopoly - and crappy software or run Linux or DOS.[38] Windows 7 Upgrade Woes Mount: Endless Reboots and Product Key Problems Microsoft message boards are active with users complaining of upgrade problems related to Windows 7. Consumers Won't Pay $120 for Windows 7 Upgrade We've gotten used to free or cheap software, so Microsoft should offer some deals for its newest OS.[27]
Did you ever consider that perhaps Apple chooses not to support certain processors or hardware for a quality control reason (i.e., user experience on an Apple product)? If Apple was to try and support every processor and/or piece of hardware that Windows attempts, the Apple user experience would be as pathetic as the Windows user experience.[40] With more fuel firing the boiler, the Windows 7 juggernaut picks up speed. You can complain all you want about "evil Apple" locking things down to their specific hardware configs for profit and thats fine - its a valid complaint when the hardware is essentiall the same as what they put in their machines. Complaining that they "broke" something on hardware they dont technically support internally is ridiculous.[38]
Good old controlling Apple. When will mac tards ever learn? It is NOT a better OS than windows 7.[21] Connectivity was tested with Windows XP SP3, Vista SP2, and Windows 7 RTM, as well as client Macs using Apple's MacOS 10.5/10.6 on PowerPC and Intel, and connectivity with Ubuntu 9.02.[52] I like Safari on the Mac although I hate it, like most Apple software, on Windows, but I've started using Opera and Firefox on my Mac because Safari is truly annoying.[16] Apple has always been like this however they've gotten much, much worse since the introduction of the iPod. It's to the point where I'm seriously considering moving to Windows 7 after 15 years of being on the Mac.[36]
As much as I loathe Apple and their practices, it's understandable (if you're a Mac fanboy) to limit their OS from untested platforms. Their whole business model revolves around perception as in Macs are fast and they just 'work' (and thus needs the premium price). This propaganda will continue as long as Apple are in business.[2] Apple did try selling their OS to run on other platforms. That nearly put then out of business. I think they have a good clue what will work for them and for their customers.[33]
You could almost make an ISO of OS 10.6 and install it on any apple computer since Apple has nearly no OS license security. I think Apple is just trying to cut down on their pirated OSX since a majority of the hackintosh users are not using store bought OSX.[2] @gimpymw: Despite having the "superior" argument, you are the only one degenerating the comments into ridiculous insults. How does buying an Intel machine, buying an Apple OS, and trying to make the two compatable make a person "slackjawed?" It would seem that they're a little bit less ignorant than the person who allows a company to make all the decisionsabout their computer for them.[38] The problem was so bad that the company was considering reverting to the older version of the Mac OS, version 10.5. It was planning to upgrade some training computers from Windows XP to Macs but has put that on hold.[34] To get the most out of your study (in computer science) you need to work with a decent versions of software other thanExpress editions. We all know students need money to finance their studies, etc. I know that not every student does have an ac.cuk account, but I don't see Apple selling their Macs for fifth of its value to students.[1] I think it's hilarious. Most software developers try to sell as many copies of their product as possible. Apple actively tries to PREVENT people from buying and installing theirs.Hey, I'm a mac, and I hate the poor and middle class.[2] Every company has a business plan. Just because Microsoft sells standalone operating systems doesn't mean that Apple should too! Just because Apple has it's own retail stores doesn't mean that Microsoft. well you get the point. Obviously both Microsoft and Apple are good at what they do. As long as they stick to what they do well, they are both going to be doing fine. Apple likes to keep it's products niche with higher revenue margin and Microsoft likes to cater to the masses. There are obvious advantages/disadvantages to both those strategies, but the last thing each company needs to do derail from their business plan.[36] What? Apple produces Apple Products and doesn't want its operating system being installed in inferior hardware.[38]
Apple doesn't need to support that. I have no illusions that Apple is responsible for anything I've done with that netbook and expect no support from them. I do NOT expect them to actively and purposefully sabotage that system, however. I've long loved Apple products, but if they continue down this road, they will be losing a customer. Their products are nice, but there are as nice or nicer systems available for far less money and that offer far more freedom of use. When I begin upgrading my systems next year, I'll have to take a long look at what they're doing.[38] Apple's products are universally acclaimed for their wonderfulness and gorgeousness -- except in the real world, where people use computers for actual work and not just for messing around.[49] @technophile - Way to be very shortsighted. In the long run, how many people are still going to be buying Apple products when they've heard of how Apple alienates their fanbase? Word of mouth can be a bitch, and if you brick someones phone or computer, you can bet your sweet ass they're going to be pissed and tell their friends what a d-bag Apple is.[38]
A. Single Use License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, unless you have purchased a Family Pack or Upgrade license for the Apple Software, you are granted a limited non-exclusive license to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-branded computer at a time.[38] You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computers at the same time."[38]
To make Apple software available to everyone would dilute the brand. It's not special if everyone can have it. My friends who are "Apple guys" spend a great deal of time talking about how different their system is, highlighting the (mostly trivial, from a functional stance) things that set it apart from the masses. Owning Apple makes them feel special, like they are somehow superior for buying Apple. This is a hugely valuable resource for Apple, and I think they would be foolish to risk compromising the culture they've created. In my opinion, this is the true reason you will not likely see Apple software available on normal computers.[33]
When people ask me why I refuse to give any money to Apple, I just refer them to articles like this. I bet that if they put all of the money the spend on anti-everyone-else campaigns, they would be able to produce the same quality hardware and software at a cheaper price.[18] Apples who business model seems to treat customers with contempt. Force them to use iTunes, force them to keep their iPhone with one provider (no SIM change), force people to use certain hardware if they want their software. People say that MS used to abuse it's market position.[1] Apple purposely sabbotages software, for no other reason, than to block other hardware vendors from its use. THIS IS ILLEGAL and no other makers of software are allowed to do this. This is exactly why I use Ubuntu.[38]
I do wish Apple would loosen up on iTunes, though. There are lots of people who don't want to buy an iPod but might not have a problem buying DRM-free music from iTunes if they could sync it with their player. While Apple certainly has the right to limit what devices can use iTunes, I think they're being shortsighted here. Does iTunes require you to have a device to download music from iTunes? If not, why prevent syncing? If so, they're just cutting off potential revenue by preventing non-iPod users from buying media from iTunes.[18] That's why they're protecting their revenue. It's not rocket science. When Apple's competition makes changes to protect their revenue stream, like implementing WGA, people have fits, saying that the competition should be spending their resources fixing bugs rather than trying to block people out. When Apple's competition locks out pirates from installing patches and fixes, people have fits saying that the competition is exposing their users to viruses, data loss, etc. Apple has commercials making fun of how their competition for diverting resources (money) from fixing problems to other areas just to protect their revenue stream, and they are cheered for it. Apple does what they criticize the competition for, and they are justly protecting their revenue stream.[36]
Anyone doing this type of hacking is not part of Apple's "fanbase", moron. The problem with people like you is you think this is all public domain. Keep following the sheep with you Micosoft BS. If Apple is so inferior, it shouldn't bother you at all that they block a-holes like you from hacking their OS.[38]
If Apple could charge $400 for MacOS X, perhaps it'd be worthwhile. The problem is that the people who loudly proclaim they'll happily pay for a license will probably hide back into their basements, and pirate a copy instead, because the price they were willing to pay was the one subsidized by "vastly overpriced" hardware.[33] Buy a REAL mac if you want quality. Apple doesn't want people going out and installing OSX on UNAPPROVED hardware - so when it breaksdown they blame Mac, Not themselves or the hardward. Yes This is Apple protecting the brand, and of course their wallets Buy Mac, be happy, stop using sub-standard hardware to save a few bucks.[38] Get real people. macs are no better, and Apple is NOT your friend. They are lining their pockets with your Christmas money because they are over charging for their hardware.[21]
I don't get Apple. It's not like they manufacture the hardware! They're just a system builder just like any other oem (Dell, HP, you name it) and they put on their own OS.[1] Besides, Apple has never supported hackintoshes in the first place. They have no responsibility to anyone running the OS on non Apple hardware.[23] Apple went towards usability and a very limited set of hardware. It's much easier to go from a large hardware ecosystem and focus on usability (since the hard part is done). It substantially more difficult to go from having a very easy and good OS to start with and then expanding the hardware ecosystem dramatically (mostly because you risk stability doing so).[36]
Good move Apple. Way to ensure that those who may have been considering trying out the OS, and then possibly buying one of their rather expensive (but good looking) machines, now wont. If anything that has just cost them consumers. Now someone has to hack the kernel so so they live up to the name HACKintosh and reverse the changes those particular bits of code.[1] The other option involves using the "stock 10.0.0 kernel or modded Snow kernels." We can only assume that involves learning what that actually entails, or at least finding someone who actually knows what they are doing. Our sources tell us that this setback isn't exactly major, and that the folks who maintain these types of projects shouldn't have a difficult time restoring functionality. While this setback could be considered inconvenient by some, the bigger question is whether this is a result of Apple trying to crack down on individuals running Hackintosh machines.[12] We easily installed the new Address Book Server, updated Mail, a new Mobile Access Server, WiKi service, an iCal(endaring) server, iChat server, filesharing and backup server (an update to Apple's Time Machine software).[42] The software in question is only a developer build, and it still might change before Apple releases a real update. Apple has already drawn fire lately for actions such as blocking Palm Pre users from iTunes a nd banning Google Voice users from its App Store. With Apple refusing to release an affordable low-end mobile PC of its own, hacked netbooks from Dell and other manufacturers have been turning into an increasing popular alternative in the Macintosh community.[27] In September, the USB-IF later rebuked Palm for for using a workaround to sync the Pre with iTunes. The battle took another turn last week, when Apple's iTunes 9.0.2 update, pushed into the wild on Oct. 29, again prevented Palm Pre users from syncing their smartphones with iTunes. Palm's webOS 1.2.1 update, released in early October, had allowed Palm Pre users to sync fully with both Microsoft Exchange 2007 and iTunes.[10]
In addition you can liberate videos from your hard drive as QuickTime X easily converts video for playback on iPod, iPhone computer or Apple TV. It shows Apple recognises that more and more users are using their computers for video download and playback. It's not all about looking good and turning your computer into a video player.[41]
When I purchased a netbook last year, I chose to put OS X on it so that it would work better with my existing computers and network.[38] Why you would want to waste time putting OS X on a netbook is a big question to me.[38] There are plenty of objective measures of performance that show OS X ahead, like startup times or the number of clicks it takes to unmount a flash drive.[16] You own it, just like I own my copy of OS X. Don't get started on the "so you think you have the right to give away copies?" crap because no one's saying that.[33]
You can't legally buy OS X for something other than a Mac. It doesn't have to get to the EULA, its clearly stated on the outside of the box.[33] While we're not quite at the point in which Windows 7 beats OS X in market share, it sure is approaching.[45] Am about to purchase OS X 10.5 for my MSI Wind netbook intended as a trip take along.[8]
A Palm Pre that can sync with iTunes is an obvious competitor to the iPhone, but a £300 netbook that can run Mac OS is most definitely not a competitor to a £799 MacBook.[35] Right now I want an affordable mid-range tower than can drive quad monitors, a netbook and a low cost laptop to round out my computing nirvanna. Apple's cheapest unit that can drive quad monitors is $2500 (ouch), they don't even make a netbook and their low cost laptops start at $1000 (with non-user replaceable batteries, no less). If I complain about this in the usual Mac circles, the Mac faithful make it very clear that I'm simply not in Apple's target market and I should deal with it. To this point I've resisted that idea, but I'm starting to see that they're right.[36] Apple is obviously trying to shutdown the Hackint0sh fever on fast selling netbooks. It's been long rumored for coming out with a Mac Tablet which eventually is being pushed to next year 2010.[17]
The rumors we'''ve heard that Apple may be planning to use Ion as the foundation of the next Mac minis or Apple TVs are very interesting. Let'''s hope that many other manufacturers are thinking along those lines, and that they will launch innovative products too.[2] The clone maker's designs had to be approved by Apple. At least some were required to use Apple motherboards. PowerComputing showed at trade shows several models in development that would have taken the Mac to new markets--but they could not get permission from Apple to sell them.[33]
Advanced connections can be completed through Apple's L2TP/IPSec-based (or old-fashioned PPTP) VPN connectivity. Another new app, the iPhone Configuration utility, can provision and synchronize a fleet of iPhones. As we don't use iPhones, we were unable to test the Mobile Access Server's iPhone accessibility and the applications sadly don't work with other mobile operating systems, although third parties may be able to offer this for other phones in the future. It's the first time any of the operating system vendors have paid much attention to fleet mobile/cell provisioning, aside from RIM's primitive BlackBerry message servers.[42] Eventually some clever clogs will write new KEXT files or work arounds to make hackintoshing possible again, but does anyone really want to see yet another cat and mouse game between Apple and hackers. It seems to be there must be people at Apple who do nothing all day but try to break hacks at this point, between the ongoing war with the iPhone Dev Team, and of course the battle against Palm over iTunes.[18] Apple makes premium products for people who care less about price than aesthetics and functionality, so building an entirely new product line down to a price is, quite frankly, never going to happen.[37] There's very little that Win\Linux\Mac can do that Win\Linux\Mac cannot, certainly not enough to justify the premium pricing. People buy Apple because they like to own Apple, they like to be an Apple guy or whatever they call themselves. This is a very powerful thing, and Apple is making extraordinary profits on slightly above average products by perpetuating the Apple culture.[33] I think it's hilarious. Most software developers try to sell as many copies of their product as possible. Apple actively tries to PREVENT people from buying and installing theirs.[2] Even that BS EULA only requires Apple-branded hardware. Any lawyers care to offer evidence that my Apple-brand (by me) HP Mini 10 doesn't count? Is "Foo-branded" a term of legal art meaning "branded by Foo" as opposed to "branded as Foo"? I'm clearly not trying to sell it as an authentic Apple product, and I'm not aware of any restrictions that would keep you from labeling your Chevy as a Ford so long as you don't try to misleadingly sell it as such.[33]
Apple learned it's lesson in the 90's when it licensed MacOS. While the hope was that the licensees would expand MacOS market share, it instead only whittled away at Apple's own market share. I was an example myself - I have a PowerComputing system lying around somewhere - and it was a sale that would have gone to Apple were they not in existence. As long as Jobs is at the helm, this will never happen. He's made it very clear that Apple doesn't sell hardware or software, but rather the full experience provided by very good integration between the two.[33] @Brian Heater: Your poorly written comment ". this just seem to another way of ensuring that the company's software stays tied exclusively to its hardware" is nothing but a jab at Apple.[40] "I think I'll just stick to 10.6.1 when the update rolls around, I have a lot of confidence in the Hackintosh community so I imagine there will be a workaround rather quickly." Like the Palm Pre/iTunes syncing issue and the suits against Psystar, this just seem to another way of ensuring that the company's software stays tied exclusively to its hardware.[21]
Distributing a program for the purpose of circumventing copy protection, even if it was found through reverse engineering. is not. If a large corporation wanted to put Mac OSX on all their internal computers, and was OK with doing internal support on non-Apple hardware, they could modify the distribution and use it internally, but it'd have to be for internal use only, and telling someone else how to do it, selling the software to do it, etc, might run afoul of the law.[33] If apple followed microsoft and how they let any machine use its software, they would have more then just what is it now 10% of the market.[5] Don't use the Apple software if you don't like it. No one misled you about this.[33]
The anticipation is natural: netbooks are one of the few computer markets besides tablets that Apple hasn't infiltrated, and the earliest netbooks even looked like tiny, low-grade MacBooks. Steve Jobs has gone on record saying that the iPhone is Apple's netbook, implying both that he doesn't totally understand what a netbook is and that Apple's not working on one.[6] The fact that you and a few others wish Apple would start supporting more platforms is nice but really doesn't mean squat. Did you guys really expect Apple to stand still and NOT protect their assets when they are being constantly attacked by companies like Palm and Psystar? Plus Apple is about to release a table with is more or less a netbook.[36]
Sounds like apple Block Pre from itunes, block google voice from app store, block netbooks from osx. Limit customer options to just the ones you can overcharge them for.[38]
If the hobbyists can make that much progress, Apple could obviously do a much better job. If they could seriously challenge Windows with a strategy like this, I think it could be far more lucrative than the hardware profits they reap from their 10% marketshare.[33] Now DoubleTwist syncs with many devices as well (though now with more capability in OSX, more Windows support is coming.) This is what makes me scratch my head a bit about Palm - they know this, their team is filled with engineers and coders who worked at Apple, they could easily write their own sync app for the Pre. (Though maybe they are just waiting to get it right and have just been using iTunes until they're ready.) That's good to know. If Apple publishes the APIs for iTunes, I guess that's one less place to criticize their lack of openness.[18]
Depends on what you call a customer. They have NO RIGHT to tell me what I can or can't install their OS on. They try to with EULAs, but it wouldn't hold up in court if they tried to sue over it. As long as someone is paying Apple for the OS, then they're a customer.[33] You mean Apple OS + ARM Processors ?? Wow. "smartbooks" may just become more relevant.[14] Just because Apple's first attempt to license the OS was unsuccessful doesn't mean that it can't work now, if it were executed properly.[33] If it works for you, you buy; if not, you don't. If you're a big enough customer, maybe you can negotiate if it's worth it to the vendor. Starbucks isn't going to change their roast recipe because my wife finds their coffee too strong and, as long as they feel their model works at making them money, their renumeration and hiring practices also aren't likely to change significantly because somebody has a problem with it. That's the way business works. As long as Apple continues making a lot of money by successfully positioning themselves as a premium vendor, they're not going to change to accommodate you if it's going to cut into their healthy profit margins. While it's best to keep your customers happy, you are not part of Apple's targeted customer base. That's their decision to make.[33] The only difference is that Aston would probably just write the Monte Carlo off as 'cute' and move on instead of trying to find ways to make the motor mounts somehow impossible to install in any other car than an Aston. The only problem is, and Apple has yet to learn this yet, that there will always be a way as long as there are people around who care to find a way.[2]
People buy Apple hardware because of the software. This is not by accident, it's not a secret, and it's been going on three decades now.[33] I could be wrong and have misundestood exactly what patent infringements Nokia were suing for though. This is pure futility on Apple's part. While Apple does more than its fair share of things to piss people off, attempting to circumvent perfectly functioning and legitimately purchased and installed software is going too far. It won't matter anyway.[3]
Apple sucks. They will still get people using there PCs and there phones why. no clue i guess the apps are worth the high prices.[38] Why don't you guys just buy a Macintosh? Then you won't have all these complaints. Apple is trash, they want to lock everything down and force everyone into using their proprietary hardware setups.[38]
As if Apple stopped hackintoshers from running OSX on AMD hardware or even processors without required instruction sets (various SSEs).[36] Now that Macintoshes run on normal PC hardware, Apple could just expand the range of supported chipsets/hardware and certify systems from major OEMs to be MacOS compatible.[33] Apple AGAIN breaks the Copyright Misuse Doctrine by sabotaging code to exclusively run with 1 vendor's hardware.[5]
I do not think it means what you think it means." Apple's mandate that OSX shall only be used on their hardware is perfectly within their right as a company. It's no different than McDonalds insisting that only McDonalds "meat" be used on a BigMac. Or Coca-Cola insisting that Coca-Cola shall only be sold in a container or from a dispenser that says "Coca-Cola". Or Ford insisting that only Ford engines be used in Ford cars. It goes on and on.[38] Doesn't matter i hear the android is coming and i cant wait. Since Apple is a HARDWARE company, first and foremost, I applaud them for taking steps to protect their sales from hackers.[38]
Not true. That the majority of Hackintoshes seem to be for market segments Apple has no presence, or are explicitly refusing user demand, in, then it's hard to see how anyone could argue they "must" be "eating into Apple's hardware sales".[33] Apple's Backup application used to be a great added value for.Mac/MobileMe users and a convenient way for all Mac users to do backups. It has grown very long in the tooth and needs to be made relevant again.[53] Atom is just as fast as Pentium M's now in use by millions of happy users. This is obviously not about performance. Apple makes these decisions to protect its market.[37] Next, give me Quickpicks for programs currently in use by typical Apple users. Remove the backup options for Internet Explorer and add programs such as Firefox and Quickbooks. While you are tweaking the code, make it easy for users to back up their Preferences directory. Sure, it's not that hard to do it manually, but the average Apple user doesn't realize how critical preferences are.[53]
THAT is probably an even better case for misuse by Apple. Though Apple has not gone out of their way to support other systems, they HAVE gone out of their way to block ther systems. Their specific use of the EFI chip for installation sabotage is yet another example. They actually admitted that there is sabotage code in the installation to prohibit others use.[5] Apple Backup is still a nifty way to back up critical files to your MobileMe account, or any hard drive you can mount, and I personally use it every day to back up my most critical files.[53]
Either way, we're thinking that if Apple ever gets around to making a netbook it probably won't be an Atom-powered one.[36] Apple: Open mouth, insert foot, repeat. Well such is the spread of Wintel (even Linux @ low price couldn't compete) due to its compatibility that it'll be difficult for Apple to come out with an aggressively priced model so early on into the netbook space.[14] Apple is a business to make money. To make money they produce superior products. When you go into an Apple store, it's packed! Apple knows what it's doing and it's doing it well.[38] Part of it is protecting the r/d and part of it is quality control. Apple can't guarantee its products if they are running on piece of shit Dells etc. If you put a BMW engine in your Ford Focus I don't the BMW dealer is going to want to work on it. Newsflash to those whining about Apple's decision: OSX is their product. They can do whatever they want with it. That includes breaking unauthorized products. If those actions have a negative impact on their market share and/or profitability, then that is a decision made by Apple's management to which the shareholders will hold them responsible.[38]
It wasn't sold to work on random hardware. It was sold to work on hardware that Apple sells.[33] For what? apple doesn't have to support hardware it doesn't want to.[33] Really we need sane copyright laws, yes, Apple should be allowed to block Atom CPUs but I should be able to hack in support if I feel like it.[33] In the current developer build of 10.6.2, Apple appears to have changed around a lot of CPU related information. One of the effects of this is Apple killing off Intel'''s Atom chip.[38]
I've also found Snow Leopard to be buggy and unreliable compared to other Apple releases. [16] I walked across the street to the Apple Store the day Snow Leopard was released, and paid $49 for my 5-user Family Pack edition.[33] Reading the customer feedback on Apples web site Snow Leopard got 3 out of 5 stars.[46]
While the upgrade will render Snow Leopard useless on netbooks, older versions of the operating system will still run on netbooks.[48] If you have a Mac that fits the bill then Snow Leopard is a worthwhile upgrade that will make your Mac run more smoothly and efficiently.[44] After you install Snow Leopard on your Mac the display on the screen will look the same as it did before - in fact, you might be wondering why you bothered to pay £25 for the 'upgrade' at all.[44]
I have tons of space on my MobileMe account, so I might as well use it. Best of all, it's a free program with a MobileMe subscription. In the move from.Mac to MobileMe and from Leopard to Snow Leopard, the development of this utility has seemingly stopped.[53] Not happy with Snow leopard. After upgrading two Mac's (2009 MacBook white/ Mac Mini 2009) I had major problems with internet slowdowns and this was with Airport or Ethernet. I even tried a Clean install twice but no resolution of these network problems.[16]
I'd skipped Snow Leopard's predecessor Leopard so 10.6 is probably more of a technology jump for me than it is for other people. Features such as Time Machine backup and Expose are new to me, but apparently the former has been sped up and the latter has now been incorporated into the Dock task bar.[41] News flash: that $29 upgrade price does not cover the cost of developing Snow Leopard.[38]
Even went out and bought a new router! I have three Windows 7 computers using same network with no problems. Just waiting for 10.6.2 release to see if it has patches for this problem. My biggest problem w/Snow Leopard (although this may also be present w/Tiger and/or Leopard) is that I can't use multiple profiles w/Firefox 3.5.4.[16] It's not just OSX which has updates, Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7 all have updates from time to time, as do Linux distributions. Technically this could affect her whatever OS she uses. If she's on such a low usage allowance maybe she should look at either increasing her usage allowance with the ISP or change the ISP if possible. If not, why not implement an caching proxy server which caches the updates (IPCop with Update Accelerator for instance) or download the update packages and burn them to disc (if possible).[34]
Is there a way to turn off what information a motherboard supplies to the OS in the BIOS? There are a load of options that sound like it might but nothing concrete that I can think of. I still think its ironic that OSX is "exclusive". If microsoft starting building its on machines and Windows was exclusive, their would be law suits left right and center.[1]
Now Apple started to pay Google (AdWords) to show their advertisement for Windows7 keywords. It seems like Apple thinks Windows 7 is a challenge for them.[23] Well. That was never really likely was it? I'm not saying Mac users are like cultists, but if one of them offered me some Kool-Aid, I'd politely decline. That will be the best assessment of the effect of Windows 7.[46] @simplyphp: The only "stupid, uninformed baboon" here is you. It's kind of amusing to see the same antiquated, hypocritical rants about how Mac users are elitist about using a certain piece of hardware. Often times than not, it's a PC fanboy (keyword: fanboy) I see ranting against mac users, pretending like anyone besides themselves care about how many additions they make to their tower case or how much they can overclock their rig. There are a lot of legitimate criticisms in this thread, but yours isn't one.[38] I know that takes time, and I hope to see even better software sooner than later. It is basically impossible to test a new OS against every possible combination of third-party apps and the hardware they could be using.[16]
The latest figures released by Net Applications show that Windows 7 already boasts 3.67% of the operating system market. That figure has grown from 1.99% since the day Windows 7 launched. The majority of those Windows 7 installations will still be on the free Release Candidate software, although the figures suggest that many people are being tempted to upgrade to the new operating system.[46] We'll make the sweeping assumption that anyone who is willing to break the law by installing OSX in contravention of Apple's EULA will probably be the kind of cove who won't be too bothered about paying for the operating system in the first place.[37]
Computerworld - The Mac clone maker that's been battling Apple for more than a year in federal court last week asked a judge to rule that its business is legitimate, and to stop Apple from saying different.[11] I have a 3.6ghz i7, ddr3, 1TB, better than mac gfx card all for $830. It's far quicker than the dumb 3 year old tech, core 2 duo they put in for all of 2009 so far. Hackintosh on this pulverizes any imac out there. Even if I don't OC, it's at least 50% quicker. Go ahead and tell me about the dumb mini which as far as I'm concerned an outdated door stop. Proof that i7 is far better is that Apple will eventually put them in. They are late as always.[21] Doubtlessly, the Hackintosh community will find work arounds, Apple will patch them, and so on.[6] Apple's target market aren't going to put up with the kinds of shenanigans it takes to get a hackintosh running, whether or not they pull this kind of stuff.[33] If you want to have a hackintosh, then you need to understand that from time to time, Apple is going to break your compatibility.[23] I have more faith and respect in the OSx86 community than Apple. They are quite capable to come up with in a fix, and in a very short time period. When our courts side with abusive companies, someone has to stick up for the unrepresented others who have been disrespected by both Apple and Psystar. If hackintoshers have paid for a OSX licence does that not make them perfectly safe under the terms of copyright? This is just another underhanded attempt by Apple to ringfence their profit margins and stifle any competition.[3] If that doesn't convince you Apple Backup needs updating, then I'm not sure what will. Apple, it's time to update Backup, and here's what I want on the feature list.[53] YES, apple patches all the time. That's why SL has all their security updates.[21]
"This is not a business model I have ever heard of." That lack of knowledge might have something to do with why Apple just had their best quarter ever, and you're sitting in your mom's basement eating bags of cheetos.[38] You can't always get everything you want and sometimes you have to make a decision on what's more important to you. Apple has basically made it clear they are only interested in doing business with those people willing to accept their business model.[33]
I do find amusing the comments that the hackers make at other websites. They all start with the phrase, "Apple has no right." The biggest is that Apple has no right to protect themselves from people who would steal from them. The second is that the EULA is nothing but a contract and contracts are meaningless in America. That contract binds Apple, but not the hackers.[37] The third is that Apple gave up the right to protect, themselves, long ago, by not acting against Hackintoshes. The fourth is that Apple is morally reprehensible when it starts protecting its rights. This is when they say the phrase, "How dare Apple do this." They are acting like snotty kids who's long suffering parents have laid down the law. They deserve a whipping at the minimum.[37]
By extension of your example, Apple has the same right to decide what CPUs it will and will not support.[6] Good for Apple. As a business, Apple has every right to defend its intellectual property, its potential earnings and assets.[31]
You and your hacked netbook mean exactly nothing to Apple. To those that are whining about some sort of monopoly, I'm reminded of Inigo Montoya, "You keep using that word.[38] The toothy Internet has gnawed their nails over the possibility of an Apple netbook ever since the first Asus Eee PC netbook slunk out of Korea.[6]
The Address Book server app, which allows multiple computers to share contacts, is new. It joins with directory services (Apple's Open Directory, and Microsoft's Active Directory via open source Samba) rather than be an extension of Open Directory.[42] I really wish Apple would focus a little bit more attention on budget computers but then again my wish really doesn't change the company policy.[36] On July 15, Apple updated iTunes, and the newest version prevented the Palm Pre from syncing with Apple's proprietary music app. In August, Palm filed a complaint with the USB Implementers Forum, a nonprofit corporation founded by the group of companies that developed the Universal Serial Bus specification, charging that Apple is infringing on its trade by not allowing the company's smartphone, the Pre, to connect to Apple's popular iTunes application.[10]
Reports attributed to Cupertino insiders said, however, that Apple engineers were entirely underwhelmed by the performance of Chipzilla's diminutive processor platform. Underwhelmed, in fact, that Steve Jobs got out his cheque book and snapped up chip designer PA Semi, a company that specialises in making the most of Brit chip shop ARM's low draw yet very capable CPU blueprints.[37] Well, Apple says that's not allowed. Since Apple is relatively small, the effect of this move is relatively small, but if a larger company were to do this, you can see how it would negatively affect the market for alternative systems.[38]
Apple needs to update this program. Or, if they are abandoning it, they need to say so. It is dishonest the way they are doing it now.[53] They blocked hardware - in this case, the Atom processor. That's not the same as "stop the support" of the hardware. They went out of their way to make sure it didn't work. That's different from dropping drivers or support.[33] No promises were made, express or implied, that it would work on Atom processors. It is an express case of disabling things so you can't use it in a certain manner. Hello! That's what the whole Free Software thing is about.[33] Basically someone noted that a lot of stuff in the kernel has changed so that the Atom processor that developer was using no longer works after the build. They list three work around methods. There is no inside information that this is an intentional attempt to block Atom processors as the summary's wording strongly implies.[33]
The Atom processor is most commonly used in Netbook computers, the low power, small sized, budget laptops that are becoming more and more popular.[12]
Looks like it, though why there is this uproar over a rumour is beyond me. Having run OSX on a netbook I found it ill suited in its current iteration so having the Atom dropped is pretty much a non-issue for 99% or the market.[36] StellaRolla recommends staying with 10.6.1 (or 10.5.8 if you're running Leopard on your Hackintosh, sine 10.5.9 will likely have the same Atom problems) for the time being, otherwise you can try upgrading to 10.6.2 but run an older or modified kernel.[40] Granted I have simple needs,, but I have an iMac and just upgraded to Snow Leopard and everything I run works just fine. That's all I really need or expect.[38] If REAL users, not propeller heads, had tested Snow Leopard and MobileMe there would have been far fewer problems.[16] Address Book is compatible with Zimbra open source e-mail, and is modeled after WebDAV, as an XML-based extension of the venerable vCard. It stores vCards outside of the directory service. The Address Book server isn't backwards compatible with Leopard, because the protocol it's based on, CardDAV, didn't exist when Leopard was developed. Users can merge their contacts into the server easily enough -- if they're Snow Leopard users.[42]
The update, which was released in beta format last week, will bring around 150 component updates to Snow Leopard.[7] Of course, it is also unacceptable that there are still bugs and even new ones in Snow Leopard.[16]
There's been a glitch between Firefox's libsqlite and the version installed in OS X for a while -- there used to be a work-around but now you can't seem to do anything with the profile manager at all. [16] Let us see if your OS really is superior. I use both Mac and PC systems so I am familiar with the benefits and detriments of each system.[6] You leaches who want a free ride can either buy a Mac or write your own OS if you don't like it and stop your constant whining like a sick puppy.[38] Is there a way to turn off what information a motherboard supplies to the OS in the BIOS? There are a load of options that sound like it might but nothing concrete that I can think of.[1] I mean Microsoft has come a long way from being a closed dark corporation that crushes any company trying to compete with it; to a company who's open to other vendors and developers. Like the latest move to allow users to choose what media player or internet client to use and not force them to use MS produce.[1] I mean Microsoft has come a long way from being a. corporation that crushes any company trying to compete with it. the latest move to allow users to choose what media player or internet client to use and not force them to use MS produce. WTF are you talking about??? Are you even on this planet? These comments show a complete lack of appreciation of what is actually occuring out there. These are but a few. Do your homework before you make such outrageous statements.[1]
Imagine if Coca-Cola/Pepsi said, "Ok, Coke/Pepsi can only be sold with meals containing hot dogs, because otherwise the taste of the food ruins the drink experience." Doesn't that sound familiar? Not only would this reduce their profits from restaurants considerably, the user would be restricted from experiencing their soda the way THEY want to experience it. Or, for a more direct analogy, what if Microsoft partnered with Intel and added a term of service to their agreement, "You can only use Windows on Intel-based computers." That would screw AMD. You know what that's called? Forming a monopoly.[38]
Microsoft is able to make massive profits selling mainly software. software that a user can run on any machine they want to run it on. They do not make money on hardware.[33]
Replaced a machine every year while in school? You know people who replace a machine every 2 years or so? Whoa! I've never seen anything like that from all the users, both experienced and inexperienced. If they're replacing their system every year, then they're doing something seriously wrong. Abusing their computer much? Using the dvd tray as a cup holder? Most people will not spend the money replacing a system every 2 years much less every year.[6] This kind of idiotic entitlement mentality is fucking things up for everyone. Those using the GPL have no right to tell me that I can't close their source and resell it like I want. Why is it that people are so happy to violate licenses to get what they want, then scream and bitch when someone else violates licenses to get what they want? It blows my mind that this crap is modded insightful.[33]
They ought to start wondering why it is that many of us give fuck-all about their precocious shite hardware and realize it's the operating system people are after.[33]
What Psystar is doing is not competition. It is piracy and theft. If they really wanted to compete, they would have to produce their own hardware and their own OS, not use others'.[31] WHATEVER OS you use, you shouldn't upgrade in a business environment until you've fully tested it.[34] The easy option is to simply stick with 10.6.1 for now; maybe a future update will reintroduce Atom support. Another, more involved option is to upgrade to 10.6.2, but use an older kernel, or maybe even a custom kernel with Atom support. All this really doesn't surprise me.[13] If that's true then the initial support for Intel Atom likely wouldn't get updated and so could break with an update of something else. That's what I hope's the case anyway.[2]
I would think it would be quite high in which case this is a bit silly - particularly as support for the Atom isn't going to make their OS any less stable.[1] OSX will run on Atom CPUs just fine. This isn't about "support" it's not like I could walk into a Genius bar with a Dell mini for support. It's not like there were specific Eee patches being released by bemused devs in Cupertino. They went through code and are specifically REMOVING support.[36] The removal of the Atom support is likely another cat and mouse game with the likes of Psystar more than it is with the home enthusiast community.[33]
Support for the Atom processor on Hackintoshes may, or may not have been killed on purpose.[8] Unveiled a few weeks ago, the Ion reference platform consists of a case containing a pico-ITX motherboard with an Nvidia 9400M chipset and the de rigueur Intel Atom processor.''[2]
The requirements on my retail box state that it requires a "Mac computer with an Intel processor." That's it.[33] '''Winning''' would be a good word to describe how we feel about the Ion platform Nvidia has put together. They'''ve come up with the ideal complement to the Intel Atom processor'''putting the two together results in a system that'''s extremely compact, very affordable, and impressively flexible. In the space taken up by a carton of cigarettes, they'''ve put a complete PC (except for the external power brick) capable of handling the vast majority of the tasks we want today'''s computers to perform. This includes Web browsing and office applications, of course, but also occasional games'''even recent, demanding titles'''and even HD video playback. From this point of view, Ion is not very far from being the ideal home theater PC'''one that can finally find a home in most living rooms without being an eyesore because of its size, and without being a nuisance because of its noise level.[2] Install it on your PC and find out why!". I am with him. but still I never really liked Atom. it's just too small. Also my first Atom experience was so damn bad that I have ever bought any netbook containing atom since.[20]
Unfortunately, Time Machine backups are not off-site and don't protect you against an on-site disaster. When I previously covered some online off-site backup solutions, Apple's backup utility was not one of them. [53] Last week, Apple announced an iTunes upgrade, version 9.0.2, which was subsequently determined to break the Palm Pre Sync Feature.[9] After the applications are installed, we had to configure service, users, groups, and the like on a fresh installation, but an upgrade from Leopard requires little settings work.[42] Initially the thought was that it was probably some cheap Chinese component which was failing or overheating. However when Windows 7 appeared on the scene and users started installing it using Boot Camp, they discovered, much to their horror, that the Microsoft product was driving their iMacs better.''[50] Windows PC users can hold their heads up high again - after the Vista fiasco Microsoft needed a big win, and Windows 7 might just be the ticket.[21]
Someone posted a link to a different stats site that showed Mac share up in the USA but in fact it had dipped.2% worldwide since the launch of Windows 7. It changes day to day. [46] Mac market share grew from 5.12% in September to 5.27% in October - a modest increase, but one that suggests that the launch of Windows 7 isn't tempting the Mac faithful so far.[46]
The company has stated that it has no interest in the low-cost netbook market, but it is strongly suspected of having a tablet Mac in the works. [35] Most onsite backup solutions are not free. I use ChronoSync which works great, but it's a paid app. Through a recent Mac bundle, I acquired Super Flexible, which is also a paid app.[53] That is their advantage and their disadvantage. More people would try OSX if they didn't have to use it on a Mac.[36] I still wonder, however, how people can be 'unaware' of the Guest account problem. Do these people depend on TV for their Mac information?! There are simply too many, friendly, helpful, well-informed Internet forums available to depend on rare and irregular non-computer publications. If these people take the time to read this site, they certainly have time to get competent information in a much more timely manner.[16]
Had to get new software for my ElGato EyeTV, and the patch got my HP printer running again. Now I just need to get VMWare 3 (I shot you an e-mail about their asinine upgrade problem).[16]
None at all. They simply decided to sabbottage code to prohibit installation on specific hardware. This, by definition, is violation of the Copyright Misuse Doctrine. They basically have, and continue to do so, with itunes and the Palm pre. They cant sue Palm, because Palm has every right to use a distributed software.[5] Hmmm, approving 100,000 apps is your example of being draconian? Suing a company that is trying to destroy their business model and profit from a operating system they didn't write is somehow bad? And now blocking companies from benefiting financially from software they didn't write, yeah, wow, so evil.[36]
We also tested upgrade time from OS 10.5.8 to 10.6.0, and found it to be short. [52] I actually think it makes sense that the MacOS X incremental upgrades are cheaper and the up-front costs of the hardware are higher.[33] Seriously, if you want to run MacOS X so much, buy a MacOS box sized for your needs. You can multi-boot or virtualize Linux, Windows or any other O/S you care for.[33] With Expose click and hold on an open application icon in the Dock and all that apps' open windows will display onscreen. Another major new innovation is QuickTime X.[41]
You never code in support and it doesn't work on certain hardware? No big deal. Hell that's the case for a ton of stuff on Hackintoshes already - people don't bitch because their sound card or NIC doesn't work - they generally go out and buy one that's noted on the net as working. [33]
SOURCES
1. bit-tech.net | Mac OS update breaks hackintoshes
2. Apple Blocking Intel Netbook CPUs in Mac OS X? - Tom's Hardware
3. New OS X won't support the Atom - MAC.BLORGE
4. Apple Disabling Support for Intel Atom Processor in Latest 10.6.2 Build? - Mac Rumors
5. Rumor: OS X update kills Intel Atom compatibility
6. Apple to kill Hackintoshed netbooks in Snow Leopard update ''' Computer Chips & Hardware Technology | Geek.com
7. Snow Leopard Mac OS X 10.6.2: Update disables Intel Atom support : Product Reviews Net
8. Mac OS X 10.6.2 Kills Atom Support - Hackintosh - Snow Leopard developer builds confirm sad news for hacked Mac OS X users - Softpedia
9. Apple OS X 10.6.2 Disables Intel Atom Support
10. Apple Splits With Atom Support?
11. Psystar begs judge to rule it's legit
12. 10.6.2 kills most Netbook love - Ars Technica
13. Snow Leopard 10.6.2 Drops Atom Support
14. Hackintosh Netbooks RIP? Apple rumoured to disable Intel Atom support | Netbook Choice
15. Apple said to have axed Atom support from OS X 10.6.2 ''' Register Hardware
16. Faster Forward - A second look at Apple's Snow Leopard
17. Techtree.com India > News > Hardware > Mac OS X 10.6.2 kills Intel Atom Support
18. No More Hackintoshing? | Mobility Site
19. Apple drops Atom bomb on Hackintosh netbook rebels
20. Apple to disable Atom support with OS X 10.6.2? - TechSpot News
21. Apple Update Reportedly Breaks Atom Support - Reviews by PC Magazine
22. Hackintosh Trouble? | Technologizer
23. Upcoming Snow Leopard Update Disables Atom Processor Support
24. Snow Leopard update removes Intel Atom support
25. Apple Snow Leopard update kills off netbook support - technology news - Stuff.tv
26. Apple's Mac OS X 10.6.2 Snow Leopard To Kill Intel Atom Processors Support SoftSailor
27. Apple Kills Hackintosh Netbooks with Snow Leopard Update - PC World
28. Apple blocking Atom support in OS X 10.6.2 - SlashGear
29. os-x-1062: pages tagged with os-x-1062
30. iTWire - No Mac OS X 10.6.2 for Atom netbooks
31. Mac OS X 10.6.2 To Block Support For Atom-based Hackintoshes? | Nillabyte
32. Apple whacks the Hackintosh
33. Slashdot Apple Story | Mac OS X 10.6.2 Will Block Atom Processors
34. Snow leopard drives up aussie phone bills - The Inquirer
35. Is Apple's rumoured Hackintosh block an opening salvo for the iTablet? - Mobile Computer Mag
36. Apple killing Atom support, dreams of netbook hackintoshers in next Snow Leopard release?
37. Apple hobbles hackintoshes - The Inquirer
38. Snow Leopard Update Blocks Intel Atom, Kills Hackintoshes | Gadget Lab | Wired.com
39. Mac OS X 10.6.2 to disable Intel Atom processor support!
40. Apple Snow Leopard Update Kills Atom Processor Support - Gearlog
41. Review: Apple OS 10.6 - gadgets - technology | Stuff.co.nz
42. Apple Snow Leopard Server: Faster, smoother
43. NeoOffice 3.0.1 adds Snow Leopard support - The H Open Source: News and Features
44. Apple OS X Snow Leopard - 03 Nov 2009 - Computeractive
45. Windows 7 Surpasses 3% Market Share Point | Erictric
46. Mac keeps growing despite Windows 7 surge | News | PC Pro
47. Why Won't Apple Support Intel's Atom? - Mobile - IT Channel News by CRN
48. Apple Reportedly Pitching $30/month Apple TV Subscription: MediaBytes with Shelly Palmer November 3, 2009 | MediaBytes with Shelly Palmer
49. Snow Leopard vs Windows 7: How the Apple has fallen - Crave at CNET UK
50. Snow Leopard glitch means Windows 7 runs faster - on Macs
51. Don't Upgrade Your Hackintosh Netbook Just Yet - NetBooks - Lifehacker
52. How we tested Apple Snow Leopard Server - Network World
53. Is Backup on Apple's Back Burner or Simply Abandoned?
GENERATE A MULTI-SOURCE SUMMARY ON ANY SUBJECT
Enter your search query below. WAIT 10-20 sec for the new window to open.
Get more info on Apple Splits With Atom Support? by using the iResearch Reporter tool from Power Text Solutions.
 |
|  |
|
