Apple Disabling Support for Intel Atom Processor in Latest 10.6.2 Build?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/02/apple-disabling-support-for-intel-atom-processor-in-latest-10-6-2-build/)

OS X Daily reports (http://osxdaily.com/2009/10/31/hackintosh-netbook-users-take-note-snow-leopard-10-6-2-update-kills-support-for-atom-processor/) on a discovery (http://stellarola.tumblr.com/post/225234492/10-6-2-kills-atom-and-other-news) 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. Maybe it's in effort to kill the Atom Hackintoh Netbooks in anticipation of the rumored Tablet? Or maybe it's something totally unrelated?Apple had apparently initially envisioned (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/21/apple-to-adopt-intel-ultra-mobile-platform/) 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 (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/04/23/apple-to-acquire-chipmaker-p-a-semi-for-278-million/) in early 2008 and a shift to that company's technology for the tablet.

Article Link: Apple Disabling Support for Intel Atom Processor in Latest 10.6.2 Build? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/02/apple-disabling-support-for-intel-atom-processor-in-latest-10-6-2-build/)

[thecartoonguy]

It was bound to happen. :rolleyes:

[Kilamite]

Hope there is a reason other than just to force people to buy the iTablet..

Though it would make sense if they were entering the netbook market with something killer, and a low cost version.

[stridemat]

Apple are getting twitchy about it eating in to their profit for the tablet no doubt.

Can see no other reason for it as they have 'allowed/ ignored' it for so long.

This is bad news for me as I was thinking of buying a small netbook and installing OSX.:confused:

[iSee]

This seems in-line with the way Apple keeps disabling Pre synching in iTunes.

I feel vaguely concerned by this, but I guess Apple's within their rights to stamp out pirates. Running Mac OS on non-Apple hardware strikes at the heart of Apple's business model, so I guess they can't just ingore it.

[flopticalcube]

This is bad news for me as I was thinking of buying a small netbook and installing OSX.:confused:

I was too but the reports of poor battery life in hackintosh netbooks put me off. I will go for a dual boot W7/Ubuntu 9.10 UNR instead. Maybe even apply a Leopard theme so I'm at home.;)

If all else fails, there's the $699 MacBook refurbs.

[Tilpots]

At least they're getting the message that people are willing to buy sub $500 hardware.:rolleyes:

[stridemat]

Ubuntu is starting to impress me now, I need some more info before changing to it but from what I read it runs very well on a HP mini 10. Whats compatibility like with popular file formats?

I might just wait for this tablet though.....

[notjustjay]

This seems in-line with the way Apple keeps disabling Pre synching in iTunes.

I feel vaguely concerned by this, but I guess Apple's within their rights to stamp out pirates. Running Mac OS on non-Apple hardware strikes at the heart of Apple's business model, so I guess they can't just ingore it.

The interesting thing is the timing. Apple disables the Pre very quickly, with every new update of iTunes. But they've been ignoring the hackintosh netbooks even though they've been going on for about 2 years now.

Why suddenly care so much about disabling them?

(I hope, as others have said, it's because the upcoming Apple device is imminent.)

[macduke]

This seems in-line with the way Apple keeps disabling Pre synching in iTunes.

I feel vaguely concerned by this, but I guess Apple's within their rights to stamp out pirates. Running Mac OS on non-Apple hardware strikes at the heart of Apple's business model, so I guess they can't just ingore it.

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

[Eidorian]

Chances that the tablet is x86 after this? :rolleyes:

[rwilliams]

There will be a way to get around this. There always is.

[spazzcat]

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

Unfortunately, you can't do whatever you want when you buy software. You know that whole EULA thing. Right or wrong you don't really own the software...

[guzhogi]

Before you flame me, please read my whole post.

On the one hand, I kind of wish Apple would open up Mac OS X so people can use it on non-Apple hardware. This would greatly increase choice and possibly marketshare.

On the other hand, I've heard Apple makes most of its money from hardware sales, which means opening up to other hardware could drastically lower profits. Also, making drivers & stability for all the possible hardware configs will be a lot of work.

Unfortunately, you can't do whatever you want when you buy software. You know that whole EULA thing. Right or wrong you don't really own the software...

That's correct. You're just licensing it.

[zombitronic]

I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Then do what you want. Nobody is coming to your house to shut down your Hackintosh or stop you from doing whatever it is you're doing that the government doesn't approve of.

You can't blame a company for doing what's in its best interest.

[tofagerl]

Seems like a relatively simple (part) solution to a huge problem. Logical, in other words.

Though it kind of sucks for the CUSTOMERS.

[xlii]

I think this move is just part of Apple's legal battle with Psystar. You could argue in court that since Apple allows people to put OSX on non Apple computers (hackintosh), then Psystar should be able to sell computers that run OSX just like HP, Dell, etc does. I don't think this move stops here. It's just that disabling support for the Adom is the easiest to do.

[Winni]

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

I'm with you there. And I doubt that Apple's EULA is legal - at least not in Europe.

[xlii]

I think this move is just part of Apple's legal battle with Psystar. You could argue in court that since Apple allows people to put OSX on non Apple computers (hackintosh), then Psystar should be able to sell computers that run OSX just like HP, Dell, etc does. I don't think this move stops here. It's just that disabling support for the Adom is the easiest to do.

Just want to clarify... of course HP, Dell, etc don't build computers so you can run OSX on them. I'm sure they would prefer you not to run OSX on their machines. Psystar's reason for existing is to profit off of the desire to run OSX on cheaper PC hardware.

[Winni]

You can't blame a company for doing what's in its best interest.

That must explain then why Apple and Microsoft are getting sued on almost a daily basis. Customers - and smaller companies - also have rights, it's just that the big bullies Microsoft and Apple ignore them wherever possible - because that's in their best interest.

[Bubba Satori]

The North Korea of the computer world strikes again. :mad:

[Eidorian]

It's just that disabling support for the Adom is the easiest to do.Can you elaborate on this?

[brygruver]

That must explain then why Apple and Microsoft are getting sued on almost a daily basis. Customers - and smaller companies - also have rights, it's just that the big bullies Microsoft and Apple ignore them wherever possible - because that's in their best interest.

Your "rights" are to choose. If you don't like the Apple End User License Agreement or the decisions they choose to make with THEIR Operating System, you have the "Right" to switch to Windows or Linux.

[Chekote]

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

Apple makes money on their hardware, not their software. OSX is just an incentive to buy Apple hardware, which is why they don't let you run it on non-apple machines.

If apple allowed OSX to run on other hardware, they wouldn't make any money. They practically give the OS away.

While what you're doing is technically not "piracy", you *are* in breach of the EULA that you agreed to when you installed the software. If you don't agree with Apple's methods, then don't use their software.

Apple are the ones who invested all their time and money in creating this software, and they can do whatever they want with it, regardless of how "evil" you think it is. Your freedom comes in your choice of whether or not you use it. It doesn't mean you can violate the EULA.

[*LTD*]

Apple's numbers dont suggest the "hackintosh community" has any bearing whatsoever on Mac sales. They're inconsequential from a market perspective. And they have no voice because they're circumventing Apple's rules. And when it comes to the Psystar case, it miht not reflect too ell on Apple that Apple is actively pursusing Psystar while taking no measures of their own to at least make a show of putting in place mechanisms that prevent unauthorized use elsewhere. Apple's not going to actively go after hackintosh users legally, but there's no reason thehy shouldn't make it more difficult for others to circumvent Apple's measures.

Again, if it won't reflect in the numbers, it won't really matter. All of this assumes the update actually breaks compatibility or otherwise disable's support. So far it's unsubstantiated.

Hackintosh hobbyists have always operated outside of Apple's rules and have been unsupported and unendorsed by Apple, save for acting as guinea pigs by testing new and different hardware, perhaps. They're aware of the risks. Now they might actually materialize. Apple is within their rights.

Whatever happens, the bulk of Apple's market will baerly notice. Hackintoshes are an enthusiast phenomenon confined to small corners of the internet. It's unauthorized tinkering. Unfortunately, there aren't enough hackintosh users to make a market impact one way or another, but there certainly are enough to make Apple seem hypocritical when it comes to enforcing its own policies.

This is just a rumour for now, anyway, But it's no big deal. Hackintosh users will find a way around this, should it materialize. They've been doing exactly that up until now.

Some of them, however, might actually have to get a Mac like the rest of us.

As for the netbook market, Apple missed nothing. They completely crushed the notion of missing anything about it. Apple bypassed the entire netbook market and no one even cared. What did consumers do? Hand them more record quarters. In a recession.

So much for netbooks.

[weckart]

At the same time as this news leaked out, others were posting that the latest build of 10.6.2 available was running fine and dandy on their netbooks. Depends upon who you want to believe.

[The Samurai]

Agree with most on here, I guess its related to the upcoming 'tablet'ish' device rumoured for next year.

I've always been really close in getting a cheapo netbook and then putting OSx on it - but then it just bogs me down with all the hassle i'm going to have to go through. Then came the iPhone.

[Stately]

Before you flame me, please read my whole post.

On the one hand, I kind of wish Apple would open up Mac OS X so people can use it on non-Apple hardware. This would greatly increase choice and possibly marketshare.

On the other hand, I've heard Apple makes most of its money from hardware sales, which means opening up to other hardware could drastically lower profits. Also, making drivers & stability for all the possible hardware configs will be a lot of work.

It would definitely lower profits, the hardware and software go hand in hand, quality paired with quality. I believe it would lower market share, as it would cheapen the brand. Apple doesn't need to cater to everyone in that way. To me that would show some sort of desperation on Apples part and for what? I don't want to run SL on a Vaio, it's just weird. Like I said quality begets quality, both hardware and software complement each other accordingly. To pull them apart and mix and match just doesn't make sense. It's like taking a Rolex face and putting a plastic swatch watch band on it.

[lifeinhd]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11a Safari/525.20)

*Removes Dell Mini 10v from Christmas wish list*

[MalibuMatt98]

Is this a sign that the possible forthcoming table will run OS X?

[SpinThis!]

If apple allowed OSX to run on other hardware, they wouldn't make any money. They practically give the OS away.


Exactly, clones circa 1997 anyone? Or Snow Leopard would cost instead more like $350 if it was sold standalone. then you get a completely new group of whiners... "OS X isn't worth more than Windows 7... wtf are Apple smoking." People would pirate it and move on with their lives and Apple would fall into a death spiral again.

[Stately]

Then came the iPhone.

Nuff said. :D
Now get ready for the tablet . .

[convergent]

These kinds of conversations always amaze me. We're developing more and more a world culture of entitlement. The companies are bullies and we are the victims. This is ridiculous. A company develops something and sells you the right to use it, with conditions. You buy it. You don't like the conditions. So you then claim the company is a bully. Can't people act like intelligent adults anymore?

The reason Apple is Apple is because they sell whole solutions. The micro-second that they start breaking that model, their brand will be ruined permanently. Do you think you won't hear complaints from everyone on the planet that they are having problems getting OSX to work on brand xyz hardware? Of course you will... because everyone feels entitled. There is no way Apple could sell it as an "at your own risk" solution, because they would get hammered daily for problems ... some of the same problems Microsoft has by trying to boil the ocean and run on every piece of hardware known to man. So IF Apple allowed their software to run on other hardware, then they would have to support it. That isn't free. In fact, it would cut deeply into their ability to provide the excellent support they do today on their own hardware, and would cause their whole experience to go down hill fast and/or become much more expensive.

Apple sells whole solutions. You don't like that, then don't buy Apple. It has pros and cons, like everything. But whatever you decide, please stop WHINING about Apple being a bully, or whatever.

I still say the best solution to all of this is for Apple to release a license of OSX that they allow to run on 3rd party hardware, and set the price at whatever the current price is for the most expensive Mac Pro. So you can buy it, if you want to pay for it. They can produce a half dozen copies of it so they have one in stock in their inventory, one at Amazon, one at MacMall, etc. Then they can nail everyone to the wall that tries to run the version licensed only for Apple hardware on their 3rd party hardware.

[dvkid]

I feel vaguely concerned by this, but I guess Apple's within their rights to stamp out pirates. Running Mac OS on non-Apple hardware strikes at the heart of Apple's business model, so I guess they can't just ingore it.

It concerns me, as well. But if Apple were to let the Psystar/Hackintosh crowd move forward unchecked, the retail price of each OS X upgrade will balloon. If the hardware and OS is no longer a bundle, then sales of the OS will have to make development financially viable without the subsidy of hardware, which would be sucky for all of us who own Apple hardware.

[jav6454]

Like Agent Smith said before me:

"It's inevitable"

[Rot'nApple]

"...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 (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/04/23/apple-to-acquire-chipmaker-p-a-semi-for-278-million/) in early 2008 and a shift to that company's technology for the tablet.

So this was all for the "Apple Tablet", no PA Semi/Apple brand ARM chips for the next revision iPhone? Does this mean PA Semi chips can't be used for any future iPhone models? Anyone??

[unrose]

It's nice to play amateur intelligence analyst, but doesn't the simplest answer seem to be that they probably thought they were going to be using Atom at some point, or even had prototypes built with Atom, so they had to code support. Then, they made a decision to not go with Atom in said product (or, probably, ever) and so it makes sense to stop spending time and money supporting that chipset.

It's not a competitive play, because netbooks running hackintosh are not a competitive market for them. It's too tiny, too unsupported, to janky for them to care to kill it, and nothing but an advertisement for getting a real mac to anyone who has gone through the trouble to install on a piece of crap netbook anyway.

Atom support doesn't hurt them enough to spend money to kill it. Nor does it help them enough to spend money to continue to support it.

P.S. I used to work for a business partner of Lenovo, in such a capacity that I was privy to early product knowledge. Companies are glad just to be able to get decent products to market, they don't have time to worry about any clandestine anti-hacker backdoors.

[Peace]

Hope there is a reason other than just to force people to buy the iTablet..

Though it would make sense if they were entering the netbook market with something killer, and a low cost version.

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

There will be a way to get around this. There always is.

Seems like a relatively simple (part) solution to a huge problem. Logical, in other words.

Though it kind of sucks for the CUSTOMERS.

I'm with you there. And I doubt that Apple's EULA is legal - at least not in Europe.

That must explain then why Apple and Microsoft are getting sued on almost a daily basis. Customers - and smaller companies - also have rights, it's just that the big bullies Microsoft and Apple ignore them wherever possible - because that's in their best interest.

The North Korea of the computer world strikes again. :mad:


This is one of the main reasons Apple should have NEVER switched to the Intel platform.

And a testament to the fact that MacRumors is becoming an arm of the hackintosh community.

[rols]

+1 for the first 2/3 of that post. Windoze suffers from trying to run on everything from a phone to a cray (well not quite, crays are too smart to run that OS) and mac doesn't have that problem, nor does it want it. I think the sell the hardware, sell the software model is great for apple and I'm happy if they just keep doing it.

I don't agree with the last 1/3. Apple shouldn't venture anywhere near trying to license OSX on anything other than totally controlled hardware, it's the very edge of a very steep and very, very slippery slope. Not for any money, you do it, someone buys it, now you're supporting it, let alone the 1000s of copies which get out there pirated and now the messageboards are full of 'oz eks sux becoz I d/led it for free from siberpnk and it wont run on my dell 386'. Stuff like that just hurts your reputation.

These kinds of conversations always amaze me. We're developing more and more a world culture of entitlement. The companies are bullies and we are the victims. This is ridiculous. A company develops something and sells you the right to use it, with conditions. You buy it. You don't like the conditions. So you then claim the company is a bully. Can't people act like intelligent adults anymore?

The reason Apple is Apple is because they sell whole solutions. The micro-second that they start breaking that model, their brand will be ruined permanently. Do you think you won't hear complaints from everyone on the planet that they are having problems getting OSX to work on brand xyz hardware? Of course you will... because everyone feels entitled. There is no way Apple could sell it as an "at your own risk" solution, because they would get hammered daily for problems ... some of the same problems Microsoft has by trying to boil the ocean and run on every piece of hardware known to man. So IF Apple allowed their software to run on other hardware, then they would have to support it. That isn't free. In fact, it would cut deeply into their ability to provide the excellent support they do today on their own hardware, and would cause their whole experience to go down hill fast and/or become much more expensive.

Apple sells whole solutions. You don't like that, then don't buy Apple. It has pros and cons, like everything. But whatever you decide, please stop WHINING about Apple being a bully, or whatever.

I still say the best solution to all of this is for Apple to release a license of OSX that they allow to run on 3rd party hardware, and set the price at whatever the current price is for the most expensive Mac Pro. So you can buy it, if you want to pay for it. They can produce a half dozen copies of it so they have one in stock in their inventory, one at Amazon, one at MacMall, etc. Then they can nail everyone to the wall that tries to run the version licensed only for Apple hardware on their 3rd party hardware.

[namoeg]

These kinds of conversations always amaze me. We're developing more and more a world culture of entitlement. The companies are bullies and we are the victims. This is ridiculous. A company develops something and sells you the right to use it, with conditions. You buy it. You don't like the conditions. So you then claim the company is a bully. Can't people act like intelligent adults anymore?


People are not used to having conditions attached when they actually buy something. If you lease a car, you cannot do what you want with it. Buy that car, and you can suddenly take a lot of liberties. This is how people think, as this is what they are used to.

The problem here may be that the concept of a software license is still alien to many. They don't get it. They skip the legalese when installing software, and I don't even blame them.

Sure, there are those who know exactly what it means to violate the terms of a software license. This is not so much the case for others. For them, "I bought it, I can do what I want with it!" is the only thing that makes sense.

[*LTD*]

It's nice to play amateur intelligence analyst, but doesn't the simplest answer seem to be that they probably thought they were going to be using Atom at some point, or even had prototypes built with Atom, so they had to code support. Then, they made a decision to not go with Atom in said product (or, probably, ever) and so it makes sense to stop spending time and money supporting that chipset.

Interesting. Seems like a valid argument.

[savoirfaire]

Oh, well - if that means my eeePC is stuck on 10.6.1, it's not that big of a deal. Honestly, I wouldn't even be dealing with a hackintosh if Apple would put out a more affordable portable laptop. I like the MacBook Air, but it's hard to justify the price...

[Stately]

It has pros and cons, like everything.



And I have yet to find a real issue with Apple other than design change of a product when I've already fallen in love with a particular design. But that all comes with advancements in technology. If this happens you wait it out a bit, cause they are aces in design. It's usually not so crazy anyway and you get used to the new look and feel of whatever it is i.e. the iphone. I loved the original as far as texture and shape and hated this new design at first. I now realize that this is far more practical and the design is still better than anything out there.

[Rot'nApple]

Doesn't killing off the netbook hackintosh models are only to make way for Apple "approved" net products, such as the rumored tablet? Why a a mini-dell running OS X when you can have a "mini" Apple 'whatever' running OS X? At least the two stories, rumored tablet and nixing support of Intel Atom Processor, might make some sense.

Apple is just re-creating a market, maybe?!

[Riemann Zeta]

I don't know if this one is actually true. It makes little sense that support for a typical x86 chip would be removed in an x86 operating system. The Atom has everything that the Mac OS 10.6 kernel theoretically needs to run, including SSE3 and PAE--it should just work for 10.5/10.6 installs.

And besides, even if this is true, the hackintosh community has gotten OS X builds to run on all sorts of different x86 flavors from AMD that aren't specifically supported (and actually work a little differently than Intel's x86 instantiation), so adaptation to this should be no problem.

For example, if Apple was queer enough to add in some sort of "if detectCPU() == "IntelAtom", then fail" logic into the kernel boot process, the hackintosh community will make sort work of it.

[guzhogi]

I'd be interested in seeing how Mac OS X will do if Apple opened it up to non-Apple hardware. I know Apple's revenue will tank, but it would be interesting (not necessarily good or bad, just interesting) to see how many copies of OS X will be sold. Not saying this is a good or bad thing, just something that might be interesting to see.

[Bubba Satori]

Apple computers for the rich of us.

[corinhorn]

At least they're getting the message that people are willing to buy sub $500 hardware.They already knew this, but Apple has chosen not to cater to that particular market.

[namoeg]

Apple computers for the rich of us.

Yeah, but... I just don't buy the idea that Apple would really go so far in order to shut down the Hackintosh users. They are not even a blip on the radar screen, are they? Also, given how dedicated the Hackintosh users are to working around their many issues when trying to get things to work, I bet a workaround is already being considered.

[Stately]

I'd be interested in seeing how Mac OS X will do if Apple opened it up to non-Apple hardware. I know Apple's revenue will tank, but it would be interesting (not necessarily good or bad, just interesting) to see how many copies of OS X will be sold. Not saying this is a good or bad thing, just something that might be interesting to see.

That being said, I think there would actually be a huge amount of people switching over. People don't want problems, they want ease of use, along with aesthetics. Apple offers both.

[DipDog3]

I guess I won't be upgrading my Hackbook any time soon! :mad:

[Edmar]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

It's Apples software which is suppose to be installed only on Apple branded hardware. I do not see why people are upset. Maybe they didn't read the EULA.

[namoeg]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)

It's Apples software which is suppose to be installed only on Apple branded hardware. I do not see why people are upset. Maybe they didn't read the EULA.

If you're building a Hackintosh, you already have disregarded the EULA. So the EULA doesn't even enter the discussion for them. If the 10.6.2 change is real, then it becomes a real inconvenience for some Hackintosh users, though I am sure they'll find a way around it.

[felt.]

this is great news, I was gonna buy a dell mini 10v for fun..thanks apple for saving me money, love you guys.. :apple:

[Jason Beck]

I would probably expect an Apple Netbook soon. ;)

[swagi]

The North Korea of the computer world strikes again. :mad:

Well, they stop support for a processor type, they have not sold and actually don't plan to sell anymore. Wow, what a story.

Wish we had the same vigorously shouted out arguments with dropping PPC support - any other frustratd G4 users here?

[DipDog3]

If you're building a Hackintosh, you already have disregarded the EULA. So the EULA doesn't even enter the discussion for them. If the 10.6.2 change is real, then it becomes a real inconvenience for some Hackintosh users, though I am sure they'll find a way around it.

Just save the old kext and copy it to the new 10.6.2, that should solve the problem. :rolleyes:

[uberamd]

This is one of the main reasons Apple should have NEVER switched to the Intel platform.

And a testament to the fact that MacRumors is becoming an arm of the hackintosh community.

I can't help but agree to both. The intel switch has been good in respect to the fact that you can now run Windows on a Mac, etc. However this whole Hackintosh movement where they want OS X for $30 to work on any hardware is stupid.

MacRumors does seem to be transforming into an arm of hackintosh.

[*LTD*]

I would probably expect an Apple Netbook soon. ;)

Tablet. ;)

[FoxyKaye]

Won't this just make Leopard (10.5.8) the OS of choice for Atom hackintosh netbooks? From what I've seen, the performance gains between Leopard and Snow Leopard on Atom are minimal. Plus, the Atom is only a 32-bit processor anyhow.

I suppose I'll just keep my Mini 9 with Leopard - it seems that by the time major application developers stop supporting 10.5.8, it will be time to replace the Mini anyhow.

Although Ubuntu is looking better and better - that would give it some extended life as well.

Like others have said, I'm surprised it took Apple this long. I wonder if they're going to do the same for Leopard and couch it as a "security update?"

[dagamer34]

Man, I was just about to purchase this too : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883103234

[dagamer34]

Won't this just make Leopard (10.5.8) the OS of choice for Atom hackintosh netbooks? From what I've seen, the performance gains between Leopard and Snow Leopard on Atom are minimal. Plus, the Atom is only a 32-bit processor anyhow.

I suppose I'll just keep my Mini 9 with Leopard - it seems that by the time major application developers stop supporting 10.5.8, it will be time to replace the Mini anyhow.

Although Ubuntu is looking better and better - that would give it some extended life as well.

Like others have said, I'm surprised it took Apple this long. I wonder if they're going to do the same for Leopard and couch it as a "security update?"

Atom in nettops is 64-bit. Atom in netbooks is 32-bit though (no idea why they removed support for it).

[Tilpots]

They already knew this, but Apple has chosen not to cater to that particular market.

We call this "particular market" the Hackintosh netbook community. If Apple doesn't see it as a threat, why go through the trouble of disabling it?

[Stately]

Tablet. ;)

Can't wait. ;)

[Scottsdale]

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

You obviously care or you wouldn't have replied as you did. On the same note, if you pay for the software, there is no reason you cannot install it wherever you see fit. Apple will eventually lose those battles too.

[*LTD*]

I can't help but agree to both. The intel switch has been good in respect to the fact that you can now run Windows on a Mac, etc. However this whole Hackintosh movement where they want OS X for $30 to work on any hardware is stupid.

MacRumors does seem to be transforming into an arm of hackintosh.

Well, they break the EULA, get a free ride for a while, and then when they get to the end of it they cry foul. Sorry, no free lunch.

And if EULAs are suddenly meaningless to them (because it happens to be convenient in their case), the majority of software manufacturers (including MS), and anyone who depends on the integrity of IP law to make a living would have something else to say.

[*LTD*]

We call this "particular market" the Hackintosh netbook community. If Apple doesn't see it as a threat, why go through the trouble of disabling it?

Makes them look hypocritical in front of Psystar, when they're not taking steps to deal with infringement from other channels. Apple doesn't need to go after hackintosh users legally, but allowing them a free ride without sending a message now and then doesn't help Apple's cause.

[Ironduke]

yeah thats the style steve spank that atom netbook azz

[uberamd]

And if EULAs are suddenly meaningless to them (because it happens to be convenient in their case), the majority of software manufacturers (including MS), and anyone who depends on the integrity of IP law to make a living would have something else to say.

Thats so true. So many Hackintosh people say "Well the EULA is bogus, it's my software I can do whatever I want with it because I said so! Screw the EULA!" That is entirely comical. I don't agree to the speed limit signs so I think I will drive as fast as I freaking want. Any fine I receive is also bogus so I think I won't pay it. That is the mindset of Hackintosh people.

They are very good at convincing themselves what they are doing is legal and morally right.

[lwongveros]

These kinds of conversations always amaze me. We're developing more and more a world culture of entitlement. The companies are bullies and we are the victims. This is ridiculous. A company develops something and sells you the right to use it, with conditions. You buy it. You don't like the conditions. So you then claim the company is a bully. Can't people act like intelligent adults anymore?

The reason Apple is Apple is because they sell whole solutions. The micro-second that they start breaking that model, their brand will be ruined permanently. Do you think you won't hear complaints from everyone on the planet that they are having problems getting OSX to work on brand xyz hardware? Of course you will... because everyone feels entitled. There is no way Apple could sell it as an "at your own risk" solution, because they would get hammered daily for problems ... some of the same problems Microsoft has by trying to boil the ocean and run on every piece of hardware known to man. So IF Apple allowed their software to run on other hardware, then they would have to support it. That isn't free. In fact, it would cut deeply into their ability to provide the excellent support they do today on their own hardware, and would cause their whole experience to go down hill fast and/or become much more expensive.

Apple sells whole solutions. You don't like that, then don't buy Apple. It has pros and cons, like everything. But whatever you decide, please stop WHINING about Apple being a bully, or whatever.

I still say the best solution to all of this is for Apple to release a license of OSX that they allow to run on 3rd party hardware, and set the price at whatever the current price is for the most expensive Mac Pro. So you can buy it, if you want to pay for it. They can produce a half dozen copies of it so they have one in stock in their inventory, one at Amazon, one at MacMall, etc. Then they can nail everyone to the wall that tries to run the version licensed only for Apple hardware on their 3rd party hardware.

Thanks for the level-headed and most rational post I've read on this topic so far. I have been itching to respond to some of the posts here, but you've basically put down what I've been thinking. People forget that they are acquiring an RTU (right to use) license, they are NOT purchasing the software per se! Apple has every right to put conditions on the use of this license - if you don't like it, don't buy it. Welcome to the free world where supply and demand determine the success of a product...

[!¡ V ¡!]

Apple's numbers dont suggest the "hackintosh community" has any bearing whatsoever on Mac sales. They're inconsequential from a market perspective. And they have no voice because they're circumventing Apple's rules. And when it comes to the Psystar case, it miht not reflect too ell on Apple that Apple is actively pursusing Psystar while taking no measures of their own to at least make a show of putting in place mechanisms that prevent unauthorized use elsewhere. Apple's not going to actively go after hackintosh users legally, but there's no reason thehy shouldn't make it more difficult for others to circumvent Apple's measures.

Again, if it won't reflect in the numbers, it won't really matter. All of this assumes the update actually breaks compatibility or otherwise disable's support. So far it's unsubstantiated.

Hackintosh hobbyists have always operated outside of Apple's rules and have been unsupported and unendorsed by Apple, save for acting as guinea pigs by testing new and different hardware, perhaps. They're aware of the risks. Now they might actually materialize. Apple is within their rights.

Whatever happens, the bulk of Apple's market will baerly notice. Hackintoshes are an enthusiast phenomenon confined to small corners of the internet. It's unauthorized tinkering. Unfortunately, there aren't enough hackintosh users to make a market impact one way or another, but there certainly are enough to make Apple seem hypocritical when it comes to enforcing its own policies.

This is just a rumour for now, anyway, But it's no big deal. Hackintosh users will find a way around this, should it materialize. They've been doing exactly that up until now.

Some of them, however, might actually have to get a Mac like the rest of us.

As for the netbook market, Apple missed nothing. They completely crushed the notion of missing anything about it. Apple bypassed the entire netbook market and no one even cared. What did consumers do? Hand them more record quarters. In a recession.

So much for netbooks.

Good argument and I agree with you. That being said :apple: always downplays any niche sector and later on releases a product to compete in the same niche sector that they deny having no interest in competing in. This is typical :apple: secrecy 101. For example, stating that smartphone and any type of Newton device was not a market they were interested in, then rumours of a smartphone and years later voila the iPhone and iPod Touch. There is little to no evidence that they will release or not some form of an internet based tablet that will either run the iPhone OS or Mac OS X.

Remember during one of the invitations to the WWDC events they had a SF Golden Gate bridge splitting into two directions, I believe and many have also on this forum is that iPhone OS is a lite Mac OS X, and for mobile devices this is the approach :apple: have already decided on. They would not invest so much into the iPhone OS only to release and support the iPhone and iPod Touch. Think iPhone, iPod Touch, :apple:TV and quite possibly an :apple:Tablet.

[Rocketman]

There is a real difference between the variety and authority of control various governmental layers are having on us, virtually all of which are objectionable and anti-constitutional, and what Apple, a private commercial firm is doing.

Without getting into the whole EULA thing, Apple owns a commercial property known as an operating system. If Apple did not couple its hardware with its software for a variety of purposes including its business model on pricing, the ability to offer a partially closed environment to simplify debugging, and others, it may and likely would charge more for the OS. In fact I think they should charge a HIGH price for its shrink wrapped OS. ONLY offer low cost upgrades to known serial numbered pieces of hardware.

But until it does, when you buy it you are not buying ownership. Property can be sold, rented, leased, or given. They chose to lease it to you, not to sell it to you.

However open you feel things should be they are closed despite you. You are NOT buying a copy of a piece of software to do with as you wish. You are leasing it for use on a particular range of hardware.

May I get a copy of some IBM or Catia $50,000 piece of software and run it for free on my mom's PC? I think not. Hey if I can, send me an external HD. :D

Rocketman

[HLdan]

I certainly hope this is Apple's attempt to get rid of these hackintosh people. It's bad enough they come here and brag about what they've created with non-Apple hardware as if they have the full rights to do it. :rolleyes:

[localoid]

This story is much ado about nothing...

Simply install a "non-vanilla" (modified) kernel and Atom-based Hackintoshes will continue to work with 10.6.2.

[thetexan]

This will make Microsoft happy. People will be left with the decision either to buy an $1100 laptop from Apple or spend $200 on Windows 7 to use their current hardware. I've used Windows 7 and OS X, and I just have to say I really like Windows 7 a lot.

[!¡ V ¡!]

Thanks for the level-headed and most rational post I've read on this topic so far. I have been itching to respond to some of the posts here, but you've basically put down what I've been thinking. People forget that they are acquiring an RTU (right to use) license, they are NOT purchasing the software per se! Apple has every right to put conditions on the use of this license - if you don't like it, don't buy it. Welcome to the free world where supply and demand determine the success of a product...

I purchased my NetBook for experimenting with, I am installed everything from Linux, Windows, Mac OS X on it. I use it for learning purposes. If you are counting on a NetBook to put food on the table, then one has they priorities upside down and installing Mac OS X on a NetBook is the least of ones problems. :p

[hkim1983]

Since this thread has already gone off-rail as is, I'd like to ask a question: how well does OS X actually run on the netbook platform? I tested Win 7 on a netbook, and I found the performance to be too sluggish for me to give it any consideration (even for the purposes I had in mine). Does OS X run that much better?

[uberamd]

This will make Microsoft happy. People will be left with the decision either to buy an $1100 laptop from Apple or spend $200 on Windows 7 to use their current hardware. I've used Windows 7 and OS X, and I just have to say I really like Windows 7 a lot.

I love when people compare a NEW $1100 Mac to a $200 refurbished eeePC with a 4GB SSD (show me other $200 NEW options for Netbooks). My god the bias and BS flying from you is amazing.

[Bubba Satori]

$35 billion in the bank doesn't go as far as it used to.

[Erwin-Br]

Very petty move from Apple, and not very good PR.

Who knows how many Hackintosh users will eventually move to a real Mac? Not everybody can spend $500 or more to try a new Operating System. I mean, I bought a mini in 2006, but if I didn't like OSX I would've wasted a lot of money. Quite a risk for people who don't have a big wallet.

[Bueller007]

Apple's numbers dont suggest the "hackintosh community" has any bearing whatsoever on Mac sales.

This statement is pure idiocy.

Just because Apple sales have been going up doesn't mean that "Hackintoshes" haven't had an adverse impact. The question is "Would sales have increased even more if there were no Hackintosh community?"

I'm not sure there's an easy answer to that question, although it's hard to imagine that Hackintoshes haven't had at least some impact.

[*LTD*]

Thats so true. So many Hackintosh people say "Well the EULA is bogus, it's my software I can do whatever I want with it because I said so! Screw the EULA!" That is entirely comical. I don't agree to the speed limit signs so I think I will drive as fast as I freaking want. Any fine I receive is also bogus so I think I won't pay it. That is the mindset of Hackintosh people.

They are very good at convincing themselves what they are doing is legal and morally right.

They have a cavalier atttiude about it because they know they can get away with it, and when enough of them do for long enough, they've convinced themselves over time that their *particular* form of infringement is legitimate. Although one wonders what else they're doing along the same lines.

They're breaking software license agreements. It's just that simple. Software license agreements are fundamental to the sale, purchase, and use of software. Simply because the legal consquences can't be meted out all the time and in every case does not make them any less valid, and in fact companies are within their rights to enforce them any time they please. In this case, Apple isn't even bringing any legal consequences to bear on hackintosh users! Just making it a bit harder for them. And they respond by crying foul??

[!¡ V ¡!]

This will make Microsoft happy. People will be left with the decision either to buy an $1100 laptop from Apple or spend $200 on Windows 7 to use their current hardware. I've used Windows 7 and OS X, and I just have to say I really like Windows 7 a lot.

With the release of Win7, I am now happy that I can use two decent Operating Systems. Though my primary is Mac OS X, I have no regrets to use Win7 if need be. Bliss and harmony is achieved. :)

Now if Linux can have something comparable and things will indeed get very interesting.

It seems with Win7 MS has gotten is right, I was amazed to find that the firewall and other security features were activated, though I still install an AV just to be on the safe side. Only time will tell. :)

[uberamd]

Very petty move from Apple, and not very good PR.

Who knows how many Hackintosh users will eventually move to a real Mac? Not everybody can spend $500 or more to try a new Operating System. I mean, I bought a mini in 2006, but if I didn't like OSX I would've wasted a lot of money. Quite a risk for people who don't have a big wallet.

Then go to the damn Apple store and try a machine. The argument that Hackintosh use leads to Apple purchases is just another justification by the Hackintosh community to make themselves feel like they aren't breaking the law. The average Mac owner has never touched a hackintosh and never would care to.

I hate reading these BS arguments. Its pathetic.

[CyberBob859]

Man, I was just about to purchase this too : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883103234

Yup, you were looking at the same hardware I was looking at - Nvidia ION using Dual Core Atom 330.

So much for my hopes of a 11" OS/X laptop using ION at $700. I was thinking of trying the HP Mini 311 using Snow Leopard:

http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptop/hp-mini-311.aspx

[HLdan]

Seems like a relatively simple (part) solution to a huge problem. Logical, in other words.

Though it kind of sucks for the CUSTOMERS.

You care to explain how this sucks for the "CUSTOMERS"? What customers? The hackintoshers aren't customers, buying a $29 SL DVD and then hackining is totally against the license, these are not customers Apple wants. I just love how the hackintoshers call themselves "LEGIT" by actually buying a copy of OS X. Funny, what they are doing with it is NOT LEGIT.
Also, gimme a break, the majority of hackintoshers aren't even "CUSTOMERS", they are torrenting Leopard and SL so they aren't paying for crap. :p

[AidenShaw]

Windoze suffers from trying to run on everything from a phone to a cray (well not quite, crays are too smart to run that OS)...

Perhaps you should check your facts before making random statements. ;)


Cray CX1 with Microsoft Windows HPC Server 2008

Cray and Microsoft have partnered extensively to create a superior out-of-the-box
experience for the HPC user. The Cray CX1 system ships pre-configured with
Windows HPC Server 2008 along with installation routines that make configuration
and setup a simple and straightforward process.

http://www.cray.com/Assets/Images/products/cx1_photo.jpg

http://www.cray.com/Products/CX1/MicrosoftHPCServer2008.aspx

It's a baby Cray, only 64 CPUs with 384 GiB of RAM....

[macshill]

The North Korea of the computer world strikes again. :mad:

That made me chuckle because it's soooo true. ;) :apple:

[JAT]

Can't people act like intelligent adults anymore?


I'm sorry, but you are going to have to cite an instance of people acting like intelligent adults once before.

[blackcrayon]

Since this thread has already gone off-rail as is, I'd like to ask a question: how well does OS X actually run on the netbook platform? I tested Win 7 on a netbook, and I found the performance to be too sluggish for me to give it any consideration (even for the purposes I had in mine). Does OS X run that much better?

Runs very well on a dell mini 9 with 2GB of RAM and a reasonable SSD (i have a runcore in mine which are much faster than the ones that shipped with it).

In Leopard just about everything works perfectly except for external monitor support, but there are workarounds for that. Performance is fine for something with a small screen- web browsing, light games, email, etc (the keyboard is rather small though, better on the mini 10v.)

I honestly don't find myself "waiting" for any of the types of things i would want to do on a netbook in the first place.

[*LTD*]

Very petty move from Apple, and not very good PR.

The bulk of Apple's market won't even notice. It's all about numbers and sales, and this move will have as much effect on Apple's numbers as Apple ignoring netbooks: zero.

[Riemann Zeta]

'd like to ask a question: how well does OS X actually run on the netbook platform?
Surprisingly well. As long as you have the netbook hardware upgraded to 2GB of RAM and a faster SSD (say a Runcore or other faster option), Mac OS runs very well. Then again, I found Windows 7 to also run extremely well, as long as you have at least 2GB of RAM.

[rstansby]

Seems like a relatively simple (part) solution to a huge problem. Logical, in other words.

Though it kind of sucks for the CUSTOMERS.

Customers of another company, many of whom don't even pay for OSX when they install it on their (non-apple) computers.

Then there are the true customers of Apple, who have had an easy ability to install operating systems without a bunch of copy protection. If Apple is forced to implement tougher copy protection (to stop people from stealing OSX) then all of the people who buy Apple computers will pay the price.

[!¡ V ¡!]

This statement is pure idiocy.

Just because Apple sales have been going up doesn't mean that "Hackintoshes" haven't had an adverse impact. The question is "Would sales have increased even more if there were no Hackintosh community?"

I'm not sure there's an easy answer to that question, although it's hard to imagine that Hackintoshes haven't had at least some impact.

Do you not believe that :apple: had not considered the possibility when they moved to the x86 architecture. They knew the risks (risc), as the x86 community is larger and one day sooner or later clones will surface. They have lived through this scenario.

If :apple: did not know, then this is the least of they problems. :p

[petermcphee]

It's nice to play amateur intelligence analyst, but doesn't the simplest answer seem to be that they probably thought they were going to be using Atom at some point, or even had prototypes built with Atom, so they had to code support. Then, they made a decision to not go with Atom in said product (or, probably, ever) and so it makes sense to stop spending time and money supporting that chipset.

It's not a competitive play, because netbooks running hackintosh are not a competitive market for them. It's too tiny, too unsupported, to janky for them to care to kill it, and nothing but an advertisement for getting a real mac to anyone who has gone through the trouble to install on a piece of crap netbook anyway.

Atom support doesn't hurt them enough to spend money to kill it. Nor does it help them enough to spend money to continue to support it.

P.S. I used to work for a business partner of Lenovo, in such a capacity that I was privy to early product knowledge. Companies are glad just to be able to get decent products to market, they don't have time to worry about any clandestine anti-hacker backdoors.


Well said. Intelligent, logical, succinct. Are you sure you belong here?:D

[greenmeanie]

So are you saying if you buy one license of WIn SERVER you should be able to install it as many machines as you want?


IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

[MrCrowbar]

Weren't Hackintosh users the perfect beta testers for an upcoming Atom based Apple product? I don't think that Apple does not care about the Hackintosh group but they keep an eye on the problems people have with OSX running some different hardware. If Apple released an Atom based computer now, you'd know it'll work well because all those OSX netbooks work well.

I guess Apple just abandoned the Atom now because the PA Semi acquisition is paying off with something better and they're putting their ultra mobile resources into that.

I for one love having a main computer where I do just everything. Having a desktop as a main computer and a netbook for on the go doesn't cut it for me, I want all my files, settings, applications, etc on the same machine because syncing can be a real pain. The iPhone is just fine for the calendar and address book, and the Mac mini works well as a server and media center (hooked up to the TV). My main computer is this 13" Macbook Pro and it was a black Macbook before that. Compact enough to always have with me, powerful enough to do everything I need. And yes, I have backups, backups of these backups and remote backups of the really important stuff. Couch and Bathroom Computing are awesome!

[uberamd]

I honestly don't find myself "waiting" for any of the types of things i would want to do on a netbook in the first place.

I haven't found anything I would rather do on the Mini 9 (which has the worst keyboard in the world) that I wouldn't rather do on my MacBook Air. Maybe its because I am a grown man (21 years old) and don't find tiny computers with cramped keyboards and terrible trackpads enjoyable for anything.

[baryon]

I'm just thinking, that Apple makes an awesome OS and only a small amount of people get to use it because not everyone can afford a Mac, so they have no choice but to buy a low end PC. If Apple made a PC compatible version of OS X, and sold it at a higher price (because OS X is cheap since you pay for hardware), maybe OS X would spread to every PC and everyone would be using OS X instead of Windows... And then Apple would be rich enough to make cheaper Macs, so eventually everyone would buy Mac hardware as well... In this sense, OS X would be directly competing against Windows... Because right now, it's not, since it only runs on certain hardware, and Windows runs on all hardware.

Then of course I know, this would involve Apple having to deal with all sorts of compatibility issues, and OS X might end up looking like Windows... So maybe that's why they don't want OS X to run on anything but a Mac.

[Grimace]

The netbook makers (Dell, HP, Acer, etc.) now feel even MORE pressure to keep prices artificially low on their laptops - because they pushed the netbooks to stay afloat (read: barely treading water) in the recession.

The flip side is that unhappy customers (those unhappy with their netbook experience) might not go back to those same manufacturers for their next purchase. For some people, they are great, but a lot thought that netbooks would be almost the same as a legit laptop. That reality check doesn't help the current netbook makers down the road when people are looking to replace machines.

[*LTD*]

Then of course I know, this would involve Apple having to deal with all sorts of compatibility issues, and OS X might end up looking like Windows... So maybe that's why they don't want OS X to run on anything but a Mac.

Someone gets it . . . ;)

[mpuck972]

Apple is the new Microsoft.

The honeymoon is over now that Apple is turning into the corporate giant that most of it's peacenik fans loathe.

[Mark Booth]

Apple OS X's Terms Of Service state that you are not allowed to run the software on anything except genuine Apple hardware. I fail to see why that is so difficult to understand. Apple has the right to do anything it wants to prevent the TOS from being violated. In fact, Apple has an OBLIGATION to its shareholders (hey, I be one of those) to stop and prevent it. No matter how miniscule the impact, allowing the OS to be run on non-Apple hardware DOES cut into Apple's profits.

Mark

[sjo]

The interesting thing is the timing. Apple disables the Pre very quickly, with every new update of iTunes. But they've been ignoring the hackintosh netbooks even though they've been going on for about 2 years now.

Why suddenly care so much about disabling them?



premium priced netbooks that could have been designed just as well by apple are becoming available only now. change the logo and remove the mouse buttons from nokia booklet, install osx and you have genuine looking and feeling maclet.

[uberamd]

I'm just thinking, that Apple makes an awesome OS and only a small amount of people get to use it because not everyone can afford a Mac, so they have no choice but to buy a low end PC. If Apple made a PC compatible version of OS X, and sold it at a higher price (because OS X is cheap since you pay for hardware), maybe OS X would spread to every PC and everyone would be using OS X instead of Windows... And then Apple would be rich enough to make cheaper Macs, so eventually everyone would buy Mac hardware as well... In this sense, OS X would be directly competing against Windows... Because right now, it's not, since it only runs on certain hardware, and Windows runs on all hardware.

Then of course I know, this would involve Apple having to deal with all sorts of compatibility issues, and OS X might end up looking like Windows... So maybe that's why they don't want OS X to run on anything but a Mac.
If Apple made OS X for the PC, you would run into problems. Too many hardware variables to account for, driver issues, etc. Installing OS X on a hackintosh can be an incredible pain.

If you can't afford a Mac, don't use OS X. You are not entitled to running OS X. BMW makes sweet cars, but that doesn't mean I am entitled to one if I can't afford one. People have a skewed sense of entitlement when it comes to digital items.

[DavidSan]

I'm with you there. And I doubt that Apple's EULA is legal - at least not in Europe.

Sadly, Europe is not a country. It has so many different laws, that what might not be legal in Spain, might be legal in Swedden, and in some circumstances might be legal in Norway...

So do not say EULAs are not legal in Europe. You only need one little country where EULAs are legal to counterexample. And there are.

[likemyorbs]

I'm with you there. And I doubt that Apple's EULA is legal - at least not in Europe.

At least not in Europe????? Oh yeah i forgot the EU has given themselves the right to tell companies how to do their business, i wouldnt be surprised if the EU tried to sue apple for this actually, just like they did with microsoft automatically including IE with windows. silly europe....

[kingtj]

I mean, let's see. Apple already considered OS X on the Atom processors, but decided the performance wasn't good enough for them. So then people start installing it on Atom based platforms anyway, in violation of Apple's EULA.

If I was calling the shots at Apple, I'd probably do this same thing. I mean, why encourage people violating the EULA and loading the OS onto non Apple approved hardware, especially when you know for a fact that your OS doesn't perform really well on that particular processor? All it does is make OS X look inferior, when people see it under-performing on some slow Atom-based bargain netbook.

Fact is, determined hackers will just apply more hacks/patches to the OS to remove the code preventing it from running on the Atom, and they'll get it going again. I'm sure Apple knows this too. But sometimes, you just have to put up enough little barriers like this to get the message across that using your product in that manner is a *hack*.


This seems in-line with the way Apple keeps disabling Pre synching in iTunes.

I feel vaguely concerned by this, but I guess Apple's within their rights to stamp out pirates. Running Mac OS on non-Apple hardware strikes at the heart of Apple's business model, so I guess they can't just ingore it.

[hkim1983]

Runs very well on a dell mini 9 with 2GB of RAM and a reasonable SSD (i have a runcore in mine which are much faster than the ones that shipped with it).

In Leopard just about everything works perfectly except for external monitor support, but there are workarounds for that. Performance is fine for something with a small screen- web browsing, light games, email, etc (the keyboard is rather small though, better on the mini 10v.)


Surprisingly well. As long as you have the netbook hardware upgraded to 2GB of RAM and a faster SSD (say a Runcore or other faster option), Mac OS runs very well. Then again, I found Windows 7 to also run extremely well, as long as you have at least 2GB of RAM.

I wasn't aware you could upgrade the ram on netbooks to 2 GBs, perhaps that was the primary factor in my very disappointing Win7 run (on netbooks). Thanks for the input.

[*LTD*]

No one, that is, NO ONE, selling computers or software in the current market is interested in seeing a legal precedent set that blows a hole in the principle of the EULA.

[ux4all]

This might be so obvious to most, but to me it was an epiphany. PC has to try and make a ton of different hardware work. Apple has to force a single piece of hardware to work.

Is Linux the middle ground, where not all hardware works, but enough to make it 80% coverage?

Not sure why Apple would bother with this. Just don't answer the support tickets and they won't create overhead.

One of our friends just mentioned it was probably to screw over Psystar somehow.

[JAT]

I'm not sure there's an easy answer to that question, although it's hard to imagine that Hackintoshes haven't had at least some impact.
Impact on what?


As for the netbook market, Apple missed nothing. They completely crushed the notion of missing anything about it. Apple bypassed the entire netbook market and no one even cared. What did consumers do? Hand them more record quarters. In a recession.

So much for netbooks.
You're thinking like an investor, which isn't appropriate for this thread. And it's questionable that your viewpoint is correct even from an investor standpoint. Netbooks have also handed amazing sales quarters to the companies making netbooks. Despite Amazon reviews of many of them. The comparison ought to be netbooks to the MBA, because they didn't bypass the netbook, they just made a 1990s-esque super-high-priced model. Steve made a full-size-screen laptop with mostly netbook-level specs, and priced it higher than the same-size MB/MBP. Asus and others made them cheaper in price, lower in specs, and won. It was an error, IMO. If the MBA was a bit smaller or slower, whatever needed to reduce cost enough, at least one model, and priced at $800 or below, it would've joined the netbook craze and probably surpassed the MB/MBP sales. Esp if it had standard Apple reliability.

[kingtj]

Honestly, I'm not even willing to go quite as far as you have, below. I don't know that people have such a "skewed sense of entitlement when it comes to digital items". I think it's very arguable that digital items are inherently different, by the mere fact that a person can obtain one without taking one away from a physical inventory someplace. It's like the old Thomas Jefferson saying on copyright .... that lighting your candle from the flame of mine diminishes neither.

However, I *do* think a company has every right to place restrictions on how they *intend* for someone to use their virtual product. They have every right, by extension, to deny a person any support for such a product when it's not used according to the terms they outline. That's why I have no qualms with Apple coding artificial limitations into their software products. It's good business sense to put up some "speed bumps" - so it's not such an "easy road" to take, to use the product in an unintended way.



If you can't afford a Mac, don't use OS X. You are not entitled to running OS X. BMW makes sweet cars, but that doesn't mean I am entitled to one if I can't afford one. People have a skewed sense of entitlement when it comes to digital items.

[MH01]

I certainly hope this is Apple's attempt to get rid of these hackintosh people. It's bad enough they come here and brag about what they've created with non-Apple hardware as if they have the full rights to do it. :rolleyes:

Why get rid of them? The more people that use OS X and praise it the better.

Heck Apple cannot even make the Iphone hack proof, they have no hope with OS X.

And to be honest the ones that want to run a hackintosh on one of these Atom Pcs are better off running Leopard. SL is a real dog right now.

[flopticalcube]

I wasn't aware you could upgrade the ram on netbooks to 2 GBs, perhaps that was the primary factor in my very disappointing Win7 run (on netbooks). Thanks for the input.
Some do, some don't. Some provide an access panel, some require disassembly.

[JAT]

Sadly, Europe is not a country. It has so many different laws, that what might not be legal in Spain, might be legal in Swedden, and in some circumstances might be legal in Norway...

So do not way EULA is not legal in Europe. You only need one little country where EULAs are legal to counterexample. And there are.

You might want to start checking the news every few years. :rolleyes:

[sneeks]

I had OS X running on my Dell Mini 9 but I removed it in favour of Windows 7 which suits the hardware much better and runs better too.

[Mattie Num Nums]

KDE 4.4 Netbook Edition will be out soon.

[MH01]

Sadly, Europe is not a country. It has so many different laws, that what might not be legal in Spain, might be legal in Swedden, and in some circumstances might be legal in Norway...

So do not way EULA is not legal in Europe. You only need one little country where EULAs are legal to counterexample. And there are.

Really? Heard of the EU?

[blackcrayon]

I haven't found anything I would rather do on the Mini 9 (which has the worst keyboard in the world) that I wouldn't rather do on my MacBook Air. Maybe its because I am a grown man (21 years old) and don't find tiny computers with cramped keyboards and terrible trackpads enjoyable for anything.

Hehe, no one said they would rather do something on a mini 9 than a macbook air... If i had a macbook air i probably would not also have a mini 9 :)

Hell, i would rather work on my Mac Pro with 2 giant screens than on this Macbook Pro. I would rather work on this Macbook Pro than I would on a mini 9. And i would rather browse the web on the mini 9 than do it on my iPhone...

[Padraig]

Sadly, Europe is not a country. It has so many different laws, that what might not be legal in Spain, might be legal in Swedden, and in some circumstances might be legal in Norway...

So do not way EULA is not legal in Europe. You only need one little country where EULAs are legal to counterexample. And there are.

Yeah, but that's ignoring the supranational Law of the European Union and it's primacy within member states.

Was toying with the idea of buying a Dell 1010 last night for a hackintosh, this won't stop me but does add a layer of hindrance to the process.

[Stately]

In this sense, OS X would be directly competing against Windows... Because right now, it's not, since it only runs on certain hardware, and Windows runs on all hardware.



Why would Apple want to directly compete with Windows? They don't have to. It's very obvious that they are in the lead by far. Everyone for as long as I can remember, has been trying to keep up with THEM. So the desire to directly compete with Windows doesn't make sense. It is noted by most people that Microsoft NEEDS to directly compete with Apple. If your running a race and you are dusting the competition, would you slow down so that you could pose more of a challenge for yourself or (to bring it back to App/Mic) continue your natural progression and continue to evolve. If Windows put out a cleaning cloth, should Apple? In other words, Apple does what it does and I must say, in a very superior manner. They don't really have comp.

[CQd44]

Wait, so apple was unhappy with Snow Leopard's performance on atom processors, yet Windows 7 runs surprisingly smooth on them? Hmm.

[cumanzor]

Wow, stop crying. This was just to be expected.

What I'm wondering is, how different, architecturally speaking, is the Atom from other x86 processors?

[Stridder44]

Then of course I know, this would involve Apple having to deal with all sorts of compatibility issues, and OS X might end up looking like Windows... So maybe that's why they don't want OS X to run on anything but a Mac.

/thread

This, coupled with 'the iTablet is coming out soon', are probably the two main reasons for this action from Apple. I guess we can assume they'll never release any hardware using Atom proc's.

[Marx55]

Apple should make a small and pocketable full Mac, like the OQO or the Vaio P. 350 g would be awesome. No more than 600 g. Video-out and USB 2 ports for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations from NATIVE files. Thus, an Intel Atom is required instead of the ARM processor.

[jon08]

Lol, who cares about Atom... just release the damn 10.6.2 already Apple!!!:rolleyes:

[CQd44]

Lol, who cares about Atom... just release the damn 10.6.2 already Apple!!!:rolleyes:

Dual core atoms are pretty capable processors for light-computing. You know, browsing the internet, youtube, and typing up notes. Not too much beyond that. That's just what they were made for.

[markm49uk]

This is one of the main reasons Apple should have NEVER switched to the Intel platform.

And a testament to the fact that MacRumors is becoming an arm of the hackintosh community.

100% agree with you - it's sad that we appear to have an entire generation now who believe they had the god given right to be able to demand anything and expect that entitlement to be free of charge.

From a performance point of view I am glad they went Intel but as for these freeloaders well....

[MH01]

Why would Apple want to directly compete with Windows? They don't have to. It's very obvious that they are in the lead by far. Everyone for as long as I can remember, has been trying to keep up with THEM. So the desire to directly compete with Windows doesn't make sense. It is noted by most people that Microsoft NEEDS to directly compete with Apple. If your running a race and you are dusting the competition, would you slow down so that you could pose more of a challenge for yourself or (to bring it back to App/Mic) continue your natural progression and continue to evolve. If Windows put out a cleaning cloth, should Apple? In other words, Apple does what it does and I must say, in a very superior manner. They don't really have comp.

Apple is ahead of M$? I guess you have not been in many offices... Actually what is this based on? Also have you ever used a mac in a corporate enviroment? They crap themselves just as often as PCs. Though i must admit that macs are great at home.

[SpinThis!]

I still say the best solution to all of this is for Apple to release a license of OSX that they allow to run on 3rd party hardware, and set the price at whatever the current price is for the most expensive Mac Pro.
I agree with the rest of your post which I'm not quoting but I'm not sure how this solution would benefit anyone. So, who develops the Mac compatible drivers, if any? Does Apple leave that up to the peripheral manufacturers? If Apple doesn't, then what happens when regular consumers who buy the software (or even pirate it) call up Apple and complain the 3rd party printer or scanner they bought doesn't actually have Mac OS X drivers? Or Journalists get their hands on this $3000 license and review it and say it's overpriced. Apple loses both ways here. And the hack community flourishes because they now have an "official" product which they'll pirate anyway.

Apple's profitable because there's so many variables that get eliminated by making the whole widget.

[mrr]

Total drag. I have a hacked MSI Wind and love it.

It wouldn't hurt if Apple had a 10" MacBook Air.

But they have nothing. Not even an external Bluetooth keyboard for their iPhone.

[lex750]

Apple's EULA in NOT A LAW. It's an agreement between you and Apple. If you decide to break that agreement that's your business. If Apple (not it's fanboy agent base) decide to challenge it (which they won't do, except to companies like Psystar) that's Apple's business. Apple is not stupid enough to become like the RIAA.

I've own Apple products for over 10 years and to be honest with you the only good thing about a Mac is OS X. Apple's PC's which is what they are, a Personal Computer, are overpriced hardware that is made from the same stuff all other PC's are made from. Without OS X, Macs would be just like any other PC on the market. It's the OS stupid!

Apple's attempts to block upgrading to 10.6.2 or any other future updates is futile. Anyone with an Atom based PC can upgrade to 10.6.x then just use the previous 10.0.0 kernel, and or wait for the hacked kernel to be developed.

Apple should spend more time working on fixing their half baked 10.6 OS and their funked up new iMacs.

[sneeks]

100% agree with you - it's sad that we appear to have an entire generation now who believe they had the god given right to be able to demand anything and expect that entitlement to be free of charge.

From a performance point of view I am glad they went Intel but as for these freeloaders well....


I ran a Mini 9 with Leopard but I'm hardly a Freeloader when it comes to Apple products. I own a iPhone, Apple TV, Time Capsule, Airport Express, iMac 20" and a 13" MacBook Pro! Owning a Hackintosh does not automatically mean you are robbing Apple of sales.

[ValSalva]

This is just like iTunes and the Pre syncing issue.

Although OS X is not free, Apple surely doesn't even break even with its development costs.

iTunes is designed at a loss to further sales of Apple hardware (iPods).

OS X is designed at a loss to make sales of Apple hardware (Macs).

Why should other companies selling hardware (netbook makers, Palm) benefit from Apple's software without incurring any of Apple's software development costs?

[Shivetya]

Unfortunately, you can't do whatever you want when you buy software. You know that whole EULA thing. Right or wrong you don't really own the software...

EULA's like theirs won't stand up in court. As exampled by a recent case where someone was selling their old copies of a well known software package on EBAY. The company in question tried to use both their EULA and the DMCA to prevent such sales.

[ajbrehm]

This seems in-line with the way Apple keeps disabling Pre synching in iTunes.

I feel vaguely concerned by this, but I guess Apple's within their rights to stamp out pirates. Running Mac OS on non-Apple hardware strikes at the heart of Apple's business model, so I guess they can't just ingore it.

Apple are within their rights to support or not support whatever CPUs they want (within the limits of their promises).

Running Mac OS X on a non-Apple computer is not "piracy", btw. For all we know somebody might have legally bought a copy of Mac OS X and installed it on a non-Apple computer.

It's a violation of the licensing terms, but only in countries where the licensing terms mean anything. It's not "piracy".

(Must have been quite a shock when more and more ships were attacked off the coast of Puntland and governments all over the western world realised that not a single "anti-piracy" law of the last two decades equipped anyone to handle the situation.)

[paduck]

Unfortunately, you can't do whatever you want when you buy software. You know that whole EULA thing. Right or wrong you don't really own the software...

I think that there is a distinction between a violation of the End User License Agreement (EULA) and outright software piracy which means you basically steal the product without paying for it.

Nevertheless, it does clearly go against the grain of the Apple Ecosystem - but it is a risk assumed by those who choose to build their own systems. You can't very well ask Apple for support when things don't work.

[DavidSan]

Really? Heard of the EU?

EU might be a country some day. They are working on it... But these days, it is not. EU has ease many things (like going from one country to another, one currency, etc.), but the Law situation in EU is not many different than it was before in many legal aspects.

Germany is still Germany, and it has its laws, and Norway is Norway and it has its laws, and so on.

[Bafflefish]

As for the netbook market, Apple missed nothing. They completely crushed the notion of missing anything about it. Apple bypassed the entire netbook market and no one even cared. What did consumers do? Hand them more record quarters. In a recession.

So much for netbooks.
Wow, reek of much fanboism?

While I don't believe Apple should enter the netbook market (at least not the portion of the market that deals with <$400 hardware), trying to brush off the netbook market simply because Apple doesn't partake of it, is naive at best.

Netbook sales *far* outpace regular notebook sales, and that percentage is only going to grow. And as each successful new generation of computer hardware comes, netbooks (just as all other hardware) will continue to become more and more powerful.

[DavidSan]

Apple is ahead of M$? I guess you have not been in many offices... Actually what is this based on? Also have you ever used a mac in a corporate enviroment? They crap themselves just as often as PCs. Though i must admit that macs are great at home.

Even though, I did not write the previous post. I must say your answer is bougs. Market lead is defined by markets. You are right, Macs are not in good position in corporate environments.

However, Macs are number one in many different markets, for example: pre press, publishing, digital media, audio productions and home users.

Now, the fact that most computers (these days) are bought by corporations, certainly gives a Microsoft a lead in terms of raw sales and penetration. But it does not mean, Microsoft is number one in all markets.

[*LTD*]

Wow, reek of much fanboism?

"Fanboism" or not, it's true. Call it what you like.

[CQd44]

"Fanboism" or not, it's true. Call it what you like.

But netbooks sell like hotcakes :confused:

[lex750]

Why should other companies selling hardware (netbook makers, Palm) benefit from Apple's software without incurring any of Apple's software development costs?

Why should Apple make a killing on the iPhone without paying Nokia for its Millions of dollars spent on development?

Old Chinese Proverb: "He who steals from a thief, has a hundred years of pardon."

[Peace]

Wow, reek of much fanboism?

While I don't believe Apple should enter the netbook market (at least not the portion of the market that deals with <$400 hardware), trying to brush off the netbook market simply because Apple doesn't partake of it, is naive at best.

Netbook sales *far* outpace regular notebook sales, and that percentage is only going to grow. And as each successful new generation of computer hardware comes, netbooks (just as all other hardware) will continue to become more and more powerful.

LTD wasn't brushing off the netbook market. Apple just doesn't see the necessity in participating in that defined segment.

[Wotan31]

Apple makes money on their hardware, not their software. OSX is just an incentive to buy Apple hardware, which is why they don't let you run it on non-apple machines.
x2. Not surprising at all that they want to stop people from violating the EULA and running their software on 3rd party hardware.

Plus the whole point of Snow Leopard is to be smaller, faster, more efficient, etc. hence the reason for eliminating PPC support. If they no longer plan on using the Atom processor, I'm GLAD they're removing the support for it, as it falls in line with that same ideology. Plus the percentage of Mac OS users who have an Atom based "Hackintosh" is minuscule in comparison to the total Mac OS market, so they're not losing any market share.

[Eidorian]

But netbooks sell like hotcakes :confused:The margins aren't high enough though. That's the only thing that matters around here.

[MH01]

EU might be a country some day. They are working on it... But these days, it is not. EU has ease many things (like going from one country to another, one currency, etc.), but the Law situation in EU is not many different than it was before in many legal aspects.

Germany is still Germany, and it has its laws, and Norway is Norway and it has its laws, and so on.

No it will never be a country. And no, they are not working on it. Not everyone has the Euro....

This might help,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eu


Not even going to try to explain how EU laws work, Read this and then feel free to post.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_European_Union

[DavidSan]

EULA's like theirs won't stand up in court. As exampled by a recent case where someone was selling their old copies of a well known software package on EBAY. The company in question tried to use both their EULA and the DMCA to prevent such sales.

That was a completely different situation. Completely. Do not confuse things. The seller of those items was not violating EULAs, since he/she was not the End user and it was proved in court. The matter was about selling old (and used) software licenses, not about if licenses and EULAs were valid or not.

[Clive At Five]

They have a cavalier atttiude about it because they know they can get away with it, and when enough of them do for long enough, they've convinced themselves over time that their *particular* form of infringement is legitimate. Although one wonders what else they're doing along the same lines.

I purchased OS X but installed it on my own a hardware profile which better fit my needs as a user.

I also hacked my RAZR so I could put my own ringtones on it. And by "my own," I actually mean music that I created, not copyrighted music that I copied from my iTunes library.

I also purchased Vista, yet proceeded to install the hacked and modified "Vista Black" because I didn't want MS breathing down my neck with all the "Genuine Windows" and authentication BS.

Am I legally wrong? Yes.

Am I ethically wrong?

It's not a matter of entitlement or cavalierness. I fully acknowledge that I am not in compliance with the various EULAs in these scenarios. I just think they're ridiculous. As long as I am not truly damaging or abusing their products, I honestly don't see the ethical problem.

-Clive

[flopticalcube]

EU might be a country some day. They are working on it... But these days, it is not. EU has ease many things (like going from one country to another, one currency, etc.), but the Law situation in EU is not many different than it was before in many legal aspects.

Germany is still Germany, and it has its laws, and Norway is Norway and it has its laws, and so on.
Norway is not part of the EU. The EU does have its own currency and laws and a parliament to create them although it is a fairly weak and ineffectual establishment.

[Stately]

Apple is ahead of M$? I guess you have not been in many offices... Actually what is this based on? Also have you ever used a mac in a corporate enviroment? They crap themselves just as often as PCs. Though i must admit that macs are great at home.

It's based on my experience as well as others personal experiences with Macs. From aesthetics to performance they handle themselves well. I'm not debating conking out in a physical sense, due to overuse or anything, because any computer will eventually do that. Microsoft's OS, the main thing they are known for, is a joke. Sorry but that's something that everyone knows. It's not like I'm making up some new theory that no one has heard of before. If Windows is beating out Mac as far as OS revenue it's solely because Mac is not going to bow and make their OS available for real PC use cause there isn't any pressure to. Why because Macs OS is better. Macs are quality all around. I don't hear any complaints from those who own macs . . I rarely hear anyone complain and give their Mac back.

[MH01]

Even though, I did not write the previous post. I must say your answer is bougs. Market lead is defined by markets. You are right, Macs are not in good position in corporate environments.

However, Macs are number one in many different markets, for example: pre press, publishing, digital media, audio productions and home users.

Now, the fact that most computers (these days) are bought by corporations, certainly gives a Microsoft a lead in terms of raw sales and penetration. But it does not mean, Microsoft is number one in all markets.

Home users??? Are you serious? You actually think that Apple is leading the home user market? Hate you break the bubble for you, most people use PCs.

[flopticalcube]

The margins aren't high enough though. That's the only thing that matters around here.
It has been noted that they are razor thin in some cases. Its tough to see how they can make money on a $350 netbook in the retail chain. Apple is used to 30%+ margins so 5% is not a business they want, I guess.

[Bafflefish]

"Fanboism" or not, it's true. Call it what you like.
What's true about it?

Absolutely nothing. Should Apple go into the $400 or less netbook market? No, I don't think so, but I think that solely because Apple wouldn't have any where near the profit margin on each system sold, and so investors wouldn't be appreciative. If they did enter that market though, they would sell *a lot* more systems, and that means a larger user base, understand?

Could they do a $600 netbook? Probably, but once again, profit margins would still be low compared to what their making on the likes of the MB and MBPs. I think it would be beneficial for them to do it.

To be honest, the only ones I see opposing it are the Apple "elitists", the ones who you can occasionally see mocking even the likes of the MacBook since it's "only" $1000, since they want to believe that Apple is this high-priced status symbol.

But no matter what your reality distortion field may lead you to believe, the netbook market is huge, and in line for much greater growth than the standard laptop market, Apple's systems included. Fans can sing all the want about the increased number of systems sold by Apple, but it doesn't come anywhere close to the number of netbooks being sold each year.

[cumanzor]

Microsoft's OS, the main thing they are known for, is a joke. Sorry but that's something that everyone knows. It's not like I'm making up some new theory that no one has heard of before.

That's honestly a problem of perception, made much much worse by Vista (even though Vista helped in lot of areas like usability and security).

You should give 7 a try. ;)

[MH01]

It's based on my experience as well as others personal experiences with Macs. From aesthetics to performance they handle themselves well. I'm not debating conking out in a physical sense, due to overuse or anything, because any computer will eventually do that. Microsoft's OS, the main thing they are known for, is a joke. Sorry but that's something that everyone knows. It's not like I'm making up some new theory that no one has heard of before. If Windows is beating out Mac as far as OS revenue it's solely because Mac is not going to bow and make their OS available for real PC use cause there isn't any pressure to. Why because Macs OS is better. Macs are quality all around. I don't hear any complaints from those who own macs . . I rarely hear anyone complain and give their Mac back.

Have you actually used Win 7? I have yet to run into an issue with it, the same cannot be said about SL, I've gone back to leopard while everyone completes the beta testing, maybe by 10.6.4

All you need to do is look in the forums here, you will see plenty of people complaining. Just go to the iMac forum, seems there is a number of issues effecting it.

No OS or system is perfect, for one 1st gen apple products tend to have issues, and frankly SL should be been tested more. The long beta release of win 7 worked for M$ this time.

[KurtangleTN]

Apple should focus on fixing 10.6.1's dog like performance before they put time and effort into Hacintoshes.

My iMac was perfect on 10.6.0 and like most Apple updates now it's a minefield.

For a company that has such a limited hardware lineup you'd think that updates would be a relatively easy thing not to mess up, but no.

[Bafflefish]

LTD wasn't brushing off the netbook market. Apple just doesn't see the necessity in participating in that defined segment.
The way I read his post regarding Apple and Netbooks, made it sound like this:

"If Apple doesn't think the netbook market is worth going into, then netbooks must not matter."

Perhaps I'm mistaken (or maybe it's just because I don't drink the Apple coolaid - a little too sweet for my tastes ;) ), but that's how it came across.

[Eidorian]

It has been noted that they are razor thin in some cases. Its tough to see how they can make money on a $350 netbook in the retail chain. Apple is used to 30%+ margins so 5% is not a business they want, I guess.I wonder what it is on this little bugger (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883103228).

Anyways, disabling Atom support is something rather drastic. It's Intel x86/64. It's not PowerPC or AMD. You have to narrow it down to a specific processor line from Intel. What's next? You're only allowed to use the processors that your Hardware ID shipped with?

[markm49uk]

I ran a Mini 9 with Leopard but I'm hardly a Freeloader when it comes to Apple products. I own a iPhone, Apple TV, Time Capsule, Airport Express, iMac 20" and a 13" MacBook Pro! Owning a Hackintosh does not automatically mean you are robbing Apple of sales.

Yes but I imagine that you are the exception to the rule in terms of the hackintosh scene - I just can't believe that the majority of them actually purchase a copy of OS X.

[batchtaster]

Good. Hackintosh is a blight. Everyone I know who has/uses it has a pirate copy. I wouldn't be so bothered if they weren't goddamn rubber-necking looky-loos who have no interest in supporting the platform in any manner and are just looking for a "free" toy to play with, and actually bought a copy. Oh, and then they ask me for a copy of iLife. ***** that. You buy a copy, fine, do whatever. But they're setting up an entire infrastructure/industry around stealing software, then undermining Apple's wishes that money not be stolen out of their pockets, and then complain that Apple should really just open it up to the whole PC-luvin' world. That eternal sense of unjustified entitlement.

It's like, you keep breaking into my house and stealing my stuff, so I put up an electric fence, guard dogs, etc, but you break through those, pretending all the while that it's okay if you do because of some imaginary rationalization you've bome up with, and all the while it's my fault because it wouldn't be a problem if I just left my door open so you could help yourself, because you know better about how I should handle my own stuff than I do.

What is Apple supposed to do? Say, oh, okay, it's alright if you use it because you claim that you bought a copy, but without any method of proving so, or any process to check these pirates, any way of separating the pirates from the people who claim not to be. Of course not. Apple knows that it belongs on their hardware.

[DavidSan]

Home users??? Are you serious? You actually think that Apple is leading the home user market? Hate you break the bubble for you, most people use PCs.

"Most people" is a general term that it does not imply home users.

Most people use computers just to do the work they need to do on their jobs. If an enterprise requires its employees to use Windows software to access the Windows System on it... they will use Windows. And if they need to work from their homes, they will buy a Windows machine. It is not a home market, it is just what they need to work, and it is an extension of their works. Most people, after they finish their work, do not touch the computers anymore.

And, since Apple has sell a lot of computers, and it is reaching 10% market share, and it is obvious that Corporate America is still Windows world, pre press and publishing have not significantly work,where do you think Apple is selling? Individuals and home users.

In fact, in the 80's there was a slogan: Companies buy IBM [PC], people buy Apple [Mac].

[bruinsrme]

I purchased OS X but installed it on my own a hardware profile which better fit my needs as a user.

I also hacked my RAZR so I could put my own ringtones on it. And by "my own," I actually mean music that I created, not copyrighted music that I copied from my iTunes library.

I also purchased Vista, yet proceeded to install the hacked and modified "Vista Black" because I didn't want MS breathing down my neck with all the "Genuine Windows" and authentication BS.

Am I legally wrong? Yes.

Am I ethically wrong?

It's not a matter of entitlement or cavalierness. I fully acknowledge that I am not in compliance with the various EULAs in these scenarios. I just think they're ridiculous. As long as I am not truly damaging or abusing their products, I honestly don't see the ethical problem.

-Clive

Ethically wrong, I don't think so but I could be wrong in my thinking.

If you sell it I could see that being illegal. But for personal use, I see no issues. But I am sure others do.

[Bafflefish]

That's honestly a problem of perception, made much much worse by Vista (even though Vista helped in lot of areas like usability and security).

You should give 7 a try. ;)
It's funny, but I think in the long run Vista was a good thing - it helped Microsoft see a lot of areas where they made mistakes, and it also bought time for manufacturers and developers to write drivers and software that worked properly with it. Thus, by the time Windows 7 came out, you had a lot greater support than what otherwise would have been present.

[flopticalcube]

I wonder what it is on this http://www.jdoqocy.com/image-3160356-10521304little bugger (http://www.jdoqocy.com/click-3160356-10521304?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16883103228).

Anyways, disabling Atom support is something rather drastic. It's Intel x86/64. It's not PowerPC or AMD. You have to narrow it down to a specific processor line from Intel. What's next? You're only allowed to use the processors that your Hardware ID shipped with?
Neat isn't it? I have an Asus 1008ha on the way to play with. At these prices, anyone can afford a computer to surf/email/word process and those of us who can afford it can have a few toys. I personally like the netbook segment because I can buy a cheap portable and not *freak out* if it breaks. I can easily afford to upgrade it every year without having to worry too much about resale value.

[Stately]

That's honestly a problem of perception, made much much worse by Vista (even though Vista helped in lot of areas like usability and security).

You should give 7 a try. ;)

True, haven't tried it. Maybe I will just to see what's going on but I am content with my Leopard. :D

[JollyRogers]

Long time Linux/Unix user here... I tried OS7 on a performa back in mid 90's and hated it. I used windows at home from the early days and gave it up at XP and switched to Linux. I am also an IT person, I get really tired of dealing with windows issues at work, then to turn around and deal with them at home just sucked.

I decided to try OSX (Leopard) on my PC at home. I ran it 3 months and really liked the BSD underpinnings. So now I own a 08 MP, 2 MB's and 3 iPhones. My point is the Hackintosh community is what gave me an opportunity to really try OSX out and see if I liked it before buying. Would have NEVER bought a Mac otherwise... and would still be running a linux distro dual booting to some form of windows for games. Instead I liked it and bought Apple products to run the real thing hassle free for upgrades etc... Apple should not kill anything Hackintosh except Pystar, but then again the OSX86 community will find a way around it regardless.

[Eidorian]

Neat isn't it? I have an Asus 1008ha on the way to play with. At these prices, anyone can afford a computer to surf/email/word process and those of us who can afford it can have a few toys. I personally like the netbook segment because I can buy a cheap portable and not *freak out* if it breaks. I can easily afford to upgrade it every year without having to worry too much about resale value.ION based nettops have caught my eye recently. The ION LE supposedly only supports DirectX 9 but you can hack the drivers to force DirectX 10 support and increase performance. $199 for a tiny, quiet HTPC with the ION LE for playback support is a good deal. Though Windows XP not so much.

I keep up with the Atom based hardware market but I don't have much of a need right now. Maybe if I try to replace my brother's iMac G4 with something cheap.

[cumanzor]

I wonder what it is on this little bugger (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883103228).


Holy crap that thing is only $200???

That's the perfect HTPC, right there!!!

[Eidorian]

Holy crap that thing is only $200???

That's the perfect HTPC, right there!!!It has sold out several times already. It's quiet the popular item with ION LE at that price.

[Clive At Five]

Anyways, disabling Atom support is something rather drastic. It's Intel x86/64. It's not PowerPC or AMD. You have to narrow it down to a specific processor line from Intel. What's next? You're only allowed to use the processors that your Hardware ID shipped with?

Apple would not even have to go that far to disable the hackintosh community. They could simply remove support for any DESKTOP-GRADE CPU. Everything in Apple's product line is either Mobile-grade or server-grade. I don't know about others, but desktop-grade parts and upgradeability is the primary reason I built a Hackintosh.

And if Apple can flip a switch to turn off Atom CPUs, I don't see any reason why they could not flip a switch for the subset of desktop CPUs. That's why this news is so earth-shattering for the OSX86 community.

-Clive

[bruinsrme]

Good. Hackintosh is a blight. Everyone I know who has/uses it has a pirate copy. I wouldn't be so bothered if they weren't goddamn rubber-necking looky-loos who have no interest in supporting the platform in any manner and are just looking for a "free" toy to play with, and actually bought a copy. Oh, and then they ask me for a copy of iLife. ***** that. You buy a copy, fine, do whatever. But they're setting up an entire infrastructure/industry around stealing software, then undermining Apple's wishes that money not be stolen out of their pockets, and then complain that Apple should really just open it up to the whole PC-luvin' world. That eternal sense of unjustified entitlement.

It's like, you keep breaking into my house and stealing my stuff, so I put up an electric fence, guard dogs, etc, but you break through those, pretending all the while that it's okay if you do because of some imaginary rationalization you've bome up with, and all the while it's my fault because it wouldn't be a problem if I just left my door open so you could help yourself, because you know better about how I should handle my own stuff than I do.

Wow, guess my friends and I share the lack of morals and share the same sense of entitlement, thank God....

[goosnarrggh]

Apple had apparently initially envisioned (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/21/apple-to-adopt-intel-ultra-mobile-platform/) 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 (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/04/23/apple-to-acquire-chipmaker-p-a-semi-for-278-million/) in early 2008 and a shift to that company's technology for the tablet.
Little nitpick, lest you be accused of revisionist history: PA Semi's primary product line prior to being absorbed into Apple was low-power PowerPC-derived embedded processors, not ARM.

This is by no means intended to suggest that Apple was or is seriously considering switching back to PPC any time soon. Of course, their primary interest was probably acquiring the talent pool of engineers experienced in low-power processor design in general, not in their recent track record of working with a specific architecture.

[hashholly]

I wonder what it is on this little bugger (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883103228).

Anyways, disabling Atom support is something rather drastic. It's Intel x86/64. It's not PowerPC or AMD. You have to narrow it down to a specific processor line from Intel. What's next? You're only allowed to use the processors that your Hardware ID shipped with?

Apple makes software for the hardware they use, if they do not use Atom Processors (or rather no longer plan to) they don't NEED to support, it's that simple. Its not rather drastic, its just a waste for Apple to support something they aren't using.

If its a simple drop of support than a modified kernel will probably be required for hack's to work, if the new kernel is making calls for specific attributes that the Atom chip doesn't have, well.....just dont update.

[batchtaster]

Apple would not even have to go that far to disable the hackintosh community. They could simply remove support for any DESKTOP-GRADE CPU.

Never mind CPU-typing, they could just go straight to switching on Intel's hardware DRM.

[flopticalcube]

Apple makes software for the hardware they use, if they do not use Atom Processors (or rather no longer plan to) they don't NEED to support, it's that simple. Its not rather drastic, its just a waste for Apple to support something they aren't using.

If its a simple drop of support than a modified kernel will probably be required for hack's to work, if the new kernel is making calls for specific attributes that the Atom chip doesn't have, well.....just dont update.
The drastic part is actually going out of their way to disable its use in OSX. They don't currently support and have never supported Atom CPUs but they do currently work with OSX.

[Xian Zhu Xuande]

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.
You have a license to use it, but it is not yours. You have to use it within the rights of your license. Sure, you can be all pissed off and bent out of shape that you're not 'allowed' to use it in the way you like, but you don't get to ride the high horse on this one. Apple sells OS X to be used within the boundaries of its license agreement.

If you want to run it on a Netbook then just be prepared for the occasional surprise. As long as you're okay with that, the experience should be enjoyable. I like to jailbreak my phone, but I'm not going to rant here about how Apple is protecting its platform, thus causing me to spend more time keeping it jailbroken.

[hashholly]

Good. Hackintosh is a blight. Everyone I know who has/uses it has a pirate copy. I wouldn't be so bothered if they weren't goddamn rubber-necking looky-loos who have no interest in supporting the platform in any manner and are just looking for a "free" toy to play with, and actually bought a copy. Oh, and then they ask me for a copy of iLife. ***** that. You buy a copy, fine, do whatever. But they're setting up an entire infrastructure/industry around stealing software, then undermining Apple's wishes that money not be stolen out of their pockets, and then complain that Apple should really just open it up to the whole PC-luvin' world. That eternal sense of unjustified entitlement.

It's like, you keep breaking into my house and stealing my stuff, so I put up an electric fence, guard dogs, etc, but you break through those, pretending all the while that it's okay if you do because of some imaginary rationalization you've bome up with, and all the while it's my fault because it wouldn't be a problem if I just left my door open so you could help yourself, because you know better about how I should handle my own stuff than I do.

What is Apple supposed to do? Say, oh, okay, it's alright if you use it because you claim that you bought a copy, but without any method of proving so, or any process to check these pirates, any way of separating the pirates from the people who claim not to be. Of course not. Apple knows that it belongs on their hardware.

This. While Hackintoshing in itself is a grey area, the biggest problem is people do not buy OSX to hackintosh, they end up just downloading a torrent, and even if Apple opened up support to all PC's these same people would still illegal acquire OSX.

[DavidSan]

Norway is not part of the EU. The EU does have its own currency and laws and a parliament to create them although it is a fairly weak and ineffectual establishment.

No, Norway is not part of the Eropean Union (EU). But it is part of Europe. In fact, that's the point. Saying something is legal or illegal in Europe is very complicated.

[Bafflefish]

Apple would not even have to go that far to disable the hackintosh community. They could simply remove support for any DESKTOP-GRADE CPU.
The i5 and i7 used in the new 27" iMac is a "desktop-grade" processor ;)

[flopticalcube]

No, Norway is not part of the Eropean Union (EU). But it is part of Europe. In fact, that's the point. Saying something is legal or illegal in Europe is very complicated.
No really. The EU is a legal entity, Europe is a geographic one. Its very simple really.

[Eidorian]

Never mind CPU-typing, they could just go straight to switching on Intel's hardware DRM.

The drastic part is actually going out of their way to disable its use in OSX. They don't currently support and have never supported Atom CPUs but they do currently work with OSX.This is what I was hinting at. I'm surprised that no one else brought it up. That or realized it...

The i5 and i7 used in the new 27" iMac is a "desktop-grade" processor ;)LGA 775, dead socket walking, and LGA 1156 this time around.

[DavidSan]

Ethically wrong, I don't think so but I could be wrong in my thinking.

If you sell it I could see that being illegal. But for personal use, I see no issues. But I am sure others do.

Again, sadly no. If you grow poppies in your backyard, just for for "home heroin consumption" is still illegal. No matter how hard you try to justify it.

[Clive At Five]

Good. Hackintosh is a blight...

I guess I can't speak for "most" hackintosh users, but all the prominent members of the community implore the rest of the community to purchase an authentic copy for every hackintosh they build.

The spirit behind the community is not to undermine Apple, but to offer alternatives to users who have different performance needs than the hardware that Apple offers.

A latent function of the project is to show how well OS X can actually run on third-party hardware. The results are stunning, and make a strong case for the licensing of OS X to third party manufacturers. Whether that model is a fit for Apple is for Apple to decide.

Last on the minds of most of the community is getting OS X for free.

Before you blanket us with blame, you should extend your hatred of pirates to Mac users who pirate iLife and OS X. They exist.

-Clive

[batchtaster]

The spirit behind the community is not to undermine Apple, but to offer alternatives to users who have different performance needs than the hardware that Apple offers.

Spirit or not, that is not your place, or your right.

I'm not entitled to come into your house and sell off some of your stuff just by cutting you in on it afterwards, and without your consent. It's not my crap to be doing anything with.

Neither is Mac OS X yours.

[Povilas]

Is there an Apple product with an Atom CPU? No. Case closed. Thank you.

[DavidSan]

No really. The EU is a legal entity, Europe is a geographic one. Its very simple really.

I understand the differences. But please bear in mind I reply a comment that says EULAs were not binding in Europe. And that's not true, since Europe implies a continent with many different and complex laws.

[bruinsrme]

Again, sadly no. If you grow poppies in your backyard, just for for "home heroin consumption" is still illegal. No matter how hard you try to justify it.

So you are comparing illegal drugs to a piece of software?

I wonder if there are any stats on how many people have overdosed from running OSX on netbooks.

[hashholly]

The drastic part is actually going out of their way to disable its use in OSX. They don't currently support and have never supported Atom CPUs but they do currently work with OSX.

It all comes down to if support for the chip has been disabled specifically or if the new kernel is trying to access specific features/attributes of the CPU that the Atom just doesn't have.

[MH01]

No, Norway is not part of the Eropean Union (EU). But it is part of Europe. In fact, that's the point. Saying something is legal or illegal in Europe is very complicated.

You really really do not understand the concept the EU do you? Try not to confuse continents and countries. Think of Normay as Mexico of the North American continent ;)

[flopticalcube]

I understand the differences. But please bear in mind I reply a comment that says EULAs were not binding in Europe. And that's not true, since Europe implies a continent with many different and complex laws.
No, you were responding to this:
Really? Heard of the EU?

[batchtaster]

Wow, guess my friends and I share the lack of morals and share the same sense of entitlement, thank God....

Prove otherwise. Go on.

Is Apple expected to just trust your word? Everyone in jail claims to be innocent.

[hashholly]

I guess I can't speak for "most" hackintosh users, but all the prominent members of the community implore the rest of the community to purchase an authentic copy for every hackintosh they build.

The spirit behind the community is not to undermine Apple, but to offer alternatives to users who have different performance needs than the hardware that Apple offers.

A latent function of the project is to show how well OS X can actually run on third-party hardware. The results are stunning, and make a strong case for the licensing of OS X to third party manufacturers. Whether that model is a fit for Apple is for Apple to decide.

Last on the minds of most of the community is getting OS X for free.

Before you blanket us with blame, you should extend your hatred of pirates to Mac users who pirate iLife and OS X. They exist.

-Clive

While this may be the intentions of the "powers that be" of the OSX community, im pretty confident if you were to poll the OSX86 you would find most do not buy OSX but pirate it.

[flopticalcube]

It all comes down to if support for the chip has been disabled specifically or if the new kernel is trying to access specific features/attributes of the CPU that the Atom just doesn't have.
Then it would cause problems for the older Core Duos and Core Solos out there as well, which Apple does support.

[Eidorian]

It all comes down to if support for the chip has been disabled specifically or if the new kernel is trying to access specific features/attributes of the CPU that the Atom just doesn't have.I'd like to know the specifics about this as well.

Though we do have support going back to the Core Solo and GMA 950. Even further back to the Pentium 4/D and GMA 900 for the original kit. Atom does have quite the feature set over that older hardware.

[NoSmokingBandit]

Meh. A new kernel will show up soon enough and re-enable atom cpus.

[WardC]

This is going to sound really ignorant of me (because I neither own a PC nor have I ever installed OS X on a PC, ie. constuct a hackintosh)

Exactly how easy is this to do?

Does it require a 3rd party software tool?

Do you just insert the Snow Leopard/Leopard DVD and GO?

Is the process easy enough for a caveman to do it?

---------------------

I know it sounds dumb of me to ask this -- I want answers, not some link to a hackintosh 1-2-3 site. Thanks!

[hashholly]

Then it would cause problems for the older Core Duos and Core Solos out there as well, which Apple does support.

How do you know this for sure?

[hashholly]

I'd like to know the specifics about this as well.

Though we do have support going back to the Core Solo and GMA 950. Even further back to the Pentium 4/D and GMA 900 for the original kit. Atom does have quite the feature set over that older hardware.

I guess the first question i would pose is how do the Pentium 4/D, core Solo, Core Duo, and Atom differ?

[Clive At Five]

The i5 and i7 used in the new 27" iMac is a "desktop-grade" processor ;)

True, it is, forgot about that.

Nevertheless, simply having an i5, i7 or whatever does not satiate my appetite for an upgradeable desktop computer. I need to pick my GPU. I need to pick my RAM upgrades. I need to pick my HDD upgrades, and I don't want a freaking external one... YUCK!

There is something to be said for a modest, desktop-class, modular computer - despite their usually disgusting appearance.

[Eidorian]

There is something to be said for a modest, desktop-class, modular computer - despite their usually disgusting appearance.Oh you.

[flopticalcube]

How do you know this for sure?
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20080302comp.htm
The Intel Atom processor is based on an entirely new microarchitecture designed specifically for small devices and low power, while maintaining the Intel® Core™ 2 Duo instruction set compatibility consumers are accustomed to when using a standard PC and the Internet.

[DavidSan]

So you are comparing illegal drugs to a piece of software?

I wonder if there are any stats on how many people have overdosed from running OSX on netbooks.

No, I am not comparing illegal drugs to software.

I was arguing about the idea that "because I am not doing anything wrong to anyone else it is not ethically questionable or legally punishable".

Which is not what law is about. Read the whole thread before.

[Richard1028]

Somebody high in the food chain was so sure about the Atom that the supporting code was still included in SL. Which means the decision to use Atom processors was, "this close" to being fact. That's pretty freaking scary if you ask me.

If I wanted mid-nineties computing muscle in any device I'd just fire up my Acer tower with its Pentium 90.

Apple really worries me at times. :eek:

[Eidorian]

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20080302comp.htmCome on, it's a low power profile Pentium/M derivation with SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4, and optional Intel 64.

It's an Intel and you can slap a GMA 950 or 9400M G with it.

[farmboy]

You might want to start checking the news every few years. :rolleyes:

:confused: If you're implying that the EU represents a united legal system, you are very, very, wrong, and I check the news every day. Each country maintains different codices/statutes in many areas, with *some* common statutes. Try applying for a patent "in the EU". Then you find out there is no such thing--you have to file in EACH country, in that language, for patent protection.

[DavidSan]

No, you were responding to this:

Which was a response to something I said earlier. Read the whole discussion thread, not just the last sentence. If not, you are going to start arguing about things which are out of context.

In fact, this is a problem with MacRumors system. It only quotes the last response of the thread. It is very easy to loose track of the whole.

[iSee]

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

I don't want to flame you, but I do have a reason I called it piracy, and I'm not talking about violating the EULA.

I called it piracy because, from Apple's perspective, you are taking money out of their pocket when you buy a netbook and put OS X on it rather than buying an Apple computer -- whether you pay for your copy of OS X or not.

That's because Apple doesn't make a significant amount of money developing and selling OS X. (They may in fact lose money on it.) Their real money comes from selling devices. OS X is one of two main ways Apple differentiates their computers from Dell's, etc. If you watch their commercials, you can tell they clearly think it is by far the most important way. (The other way is the design of the physical computer.)

Also, note that when you are buying the full retail copy of OS X, you are always really paying an upgrade price -- that's because all Macs come with OS X, so there's no separate pricing for a true full copy.

If you don't want to call it piracy, that's fine: just give me something better to call it.

[MH01]

There is something to be said for a modest, desktop-class, modular computer - despite their usually disgusting appearance.

http://www.ttlevel10.com/

[BRLawyer]

It was bound to happen. :rolleyes:

And why on Earth should Apple "support" something that is illegal in the first place? Do Atoms exist on Macs? NO. Can OS X legally run on anything else than Macs? NO.

Whoever defends this is a moron or, at the very least, acts in bad faith as the rest of the freeriding pirates out there.

WELL DONE, Apple.

[WardC]

nobody seems to be getting to my simple question. Is this as easy as inserting a Leopard/Snow Leopard disc into a PC and hitting install, and voila!

Or does this actually require a 3rd party tool to tweak the system into being able to install Leopard or Snow Leopard?

I have never done this before and know nothing about the process of getting OS X to run on a PC. As I recall I heard about the "hackintosh" project which required you to use a bootloader tool of somesort to get the OS X to properly install on the PC.

ie. - it will not just install from the disc and run 100% with no "hack" or tweak done to the machine first. Correct?

[flopticalcube]

Which was a response to something I said earlier. Read the whole discussion thread, not just the last sentence. If not, you are going to start arguing about things which are out of context.

In fact, this is a problem with MacRumors system. It only quotes the last response of the thread. It is very easy to loose track of the whole.
Its easy if you clarify your response in the first place. Five words. Europe is not the EU. Too many people use the words interchangeably which is where the problems start.

[flopticalcube]

Come on, it's a low power profile Pentium/M derivation with SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4, and optional Intel 64.

It's an Intel and you can slap a GMA 950 or 9400M G with it.
Yes, a bit cheeky of them to say entirely new architecture.

[Clive At Five]

Spirit or not, that is not your place, or your right.

I'm not entitled to come into your house and sell off some of your stuff just by cutting you in on it afterwards, and without your consent. It's not my crap to be doing anything with.

Neither is Mac OS X yours.

No, but If I sold you a stand mixer and then said you could not use it to mix anything with eggs in it, you'd probably think I was being ridiculous, no?

It's none of my business how you use a product I sell you after the point of sale.

While this may be the intentions of the "powers that be" of the OSX community, im pretty confident if you were to poll the OSX86 you would find most do not buy OSX but pirate it.

Congrats, you caught my words.

I do not know what "most" users do (and neither do you). Piracy is not a requirement of most hacks these days (some of them require a specially modified version, which, when distributed to another user is technically piracy, but again, in those cases, users are encouraged to purchase an "honorary" copy). The piracy problem within the OSX86 community is an independent issue from piracy altogether. Like I said earlier, there are plenty of GENUINE MAC USERS who pirate OS X and iLife as well...

[iSee]

It concerns me, as well. But if Apple were to let the Psystar/Hackintosh crowd move forward unchecked, the retail price of each OS X upgrade will balloon. If the hardware and OS is no longer a bundle, then sales of the OS will have to make development financially viable without the subsidy of hardware, which would be sucky for all of us who own Apple hardware.

That's a good point. We never see the actual full price of OS X because it is bundled into the hardware purchase. The full retail copies Apple sells are actually upgrade pricing. It would be painful if Apple had to jack up the price os OS X upgrades to at least make some money off of people installing it on non-OS X hardware.

By the way, I'm not an absolutist about obeying EULAs. It's just that I think Apple has a right to try to enforce theirs in this gentle way (no one's getting sued here), especially since it cuts directly into how they make their money.

[Clive At Five]

Oh you.
http://www.ttlevel10.com/

Meh, it's okay, but I've elected to put my Abit ATX board into an old Quicksilver G4 case. :D

[bruinsrme]

Prove otherwise. Go on.

Is Apple expected to just trust your word? Everyone in jail claims to be innocent.

What exactly am I supposed to prove?
Entitlement? I guess we never looked at it as entitlement nor expect anything from apple.

My word? Apple hasn't asked me anything.

The good thing is I can occassionaly play with OSX when I feel like it without spending $1000+.

I guess my friends and I will be sporting orange or stripes for jailbreaking and running a hackintosh.

[localoid]

I'd like to know the specifics about this as well.

Though we do have support going back to the Core Solo and GMA 950. Even further back to the Pentium 4/D and GMA 900 for the original kit. Atom does have quite the feature set over that older hardware.

There are more variation re:"features" on different CPU families than the little things like SSE3 vs. SSE2, etc. Access registers, Machine State Register (MSR), etc. may be unique, which is why OSX uses a CPUID check so these differences can be "handled"...

[CQd44]

Apple makes software for the hardware they use, if they do not use Atom Processors (or rather no longer plan to) they don't NEED to support, it's that simple. Its not rather drastic, its just a waste for Apple to support something they aren't using.

If its a simple drop of support than a modified kernel will probably be required for hack's to work, if the new kernel is making calls for specific attributes that the Atom chip doesn't have, well.....just dont update.

I understand that they don't have to support it, but it requires no extra effort to do so. It does take effort to make it not work though, such as "breaking" the Pre's ability to sync with iTunes.

But if it's something like a CPUID check, there's probably a very easy work around.

[RazHyena]

Thats so true. So many Hackintosh people say "Well the EULA is bogus, it's my software I can do whatever I want with it because I said so! Screw the EULA!" That is entirely comical. I don't agree to the speed limit signs so I think I will drive as fast as I freaking want. Any fine I receive is also bogus so I think I won't pay it. That is the mindset of Hackintosh people.

They are very good at convincing themselves what they are doing is legal and morally right.

The real question is why do you care so much what hackintosh users do with their systems? :confused:

[Eric S.]

At least they're getting the message that people are willing to buy sub $500 hardware.:rolleyes:

Apple knows that, but not how to make their standard humongous profit margin in that market.

[BRLawyer]

That's a good point. We never see the actual full price of OS X because it is bundled into the hardware purchase. The full retail copies Apple sells are actually upgrade pricing. It would be painful if Apple had to jack up the price os OS X upgrades to at least make some money off of people installing it on non-OS X hardware.

By the way, I'm not an absolutist about obeying EULAs. It's just that I think Apple has a right to try to enforce theirs in this gentle way (no one's getting sued here), especially since it cuts directly into how they make their money.

Exactly. Even if we, in our wildest dreams, imagined a situation where Apple's huge R&D investment cannot be defended in legal terms under the EULA as well as other copyrighted material, the company is still PERFECTLY allowed to block support for extraneous processors.

Nobody can say anything about it, especially when Apple itself does NOT profess or sell OS X as a hardware-independent piece of software...anyone defending the opposite simply wants the company to die, or to jack up the prices of OS X licenses by several hundreds of dollars.

[weckart]

It has sold out several times already. It's quiet the popular item with ION LE at that price.

Yes, I have the dual-core 330 version on order for the princely sum of £151. Thinking of making it either an XMBC or Plex box stuck on the back of the TV. Acer cannot keep up with demand and the delivery date has slipped twice already.

[ddTaylor]

Unfortunately, you can't do whatever you want when you buy software. You know that whole EULA thing. Right or wrong you don't really own the software...

I think no EULA has been tested in court. There have been limited actions against aspects of the EULA but not he EULA as a whole. The fact that you cannot see or read the EULA until you open or even install the software is dumb - as once the software is opened or installed you cannot return it.

D

[hashholly]

No, but If I sold you a stand mixer and then said you could not use it to mix anything with eggs in it, you'd probably think I was being ridiculous, no?

It's none of my business how you use a product I sell you after the point of sale.



Congrats, you caught my words.

I do not know what "most" users do (and neither do you). Piracy is not a requirement of most hacks these days (some of them require a specially modified version, which, when distributed to another user is technically piracy, but again, in those cases, users are encouraged to purchase an "honorary" copy). The piracy problem within the OSX86 community is an independent issue from piracy altogether. Like I said earlier, there are plenty of GENUINE MAC USERS who pirate OS X and iLife as well...

1. You can't simply compare it to buying a mixer....when you buy a mixer you are buying the actual physical mixer, which much like a toothbrush you can do whatever you want with...when it comes to OSX you are not purchasing software, you are purchasing a license to USE software, in which they have the ability to tell you what you can and can't do with that software license.....think of it more as a drivers license; With one you can legally drive a car, without one you can't, just because you have one doesn't mean you can do whatever you please with it.....drive drunk and your up a shitcreek. Yes i know that law's and EULA's are different, but in the end they are both agreements and if you accept them you should follow them.


I never said piracy was a requirement, but if you think a majority of OSX86 users go to the apple store or apple.com to purchase OSX, then i have some beachfront property in Utah to sell you. OSX86 piracy, is piracy, is piracy, just because some genuine OSX users pirate iLife doesnt somehow make OSX86 any less bad.

[CQd44]

And why on Earth should Apple "support" something that is illegal in the first place? Do Atoms exist on Macs? NO. Can OS X legally run on anything else than Macs? NO.

Whoever defends this is a moron or, at the very least, acts in bad faith as the rest of the freeriding pirates out there.

WELL DONE, Apple.

brb, buying a copy of snow leopard and installing it on my pc and then calling the police to come arrest me for installing a piece of software i bought.

[hashholly]

I think no EULA has been tested in court. There have been limited actions against aspects of the EULA but not he EULA as a whole. The fact that you cannot see or read the EULA until you open or even install the software is dumb - as once the software is opened or installed you cannot return it.

D

False. http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/

[Eidorian]

There are more variation re:"features" on different CPU families than the little things like SSE3 vs. SSE2, etc. Access registers, Machine State Register (MSR), etc. may be unique, which is why OSX uses a CPUID check so these differences can be "handled"...I wonder what deeper requirements 10.6.2 would need for those "differences".

Yes, I have the dual-core 330 version on order for the princely sum of £151. Thinking of making it either an XMBC or Plex box stuck on the back of the TV. Acer cannot keep up with demand and the delivery date has slipped twice already.Keep hanging in there. It looks like a great product.

[NoSmokingBandit]

This is going to sound really ignorant of me (because I neither own a PC nor have I ever installed OS X on a PC, ie. constuct a hackintosh)

Not at all. Hackintoshing is still in the dark corners of the internet and havent really gained much momentum, even among techies.

Exactly how easy is this to do?

It depends on what hardware you are using. I built my latest computer with the sole intention of running osx on it. I installed 10.6 on it and it took me about an hour start-to-finish to get it done. I've done several hacs in the past so i kinda know what im doing, but with the right hardware its incredibly easy to set one up, though i would still not suggest it to a complete tech noob because if something goes wrong its good to know some good troubleshooting techniques.

Does it require a 3rd party software tool?

Yep. The biggest issue with putting OSX on a pc is the boot process. There needs to be a 3rd party bootloader installed for anything to work. Consequently theres a disc called Boot-132. You boot from that cd and it will tell you to swap it out for a retail 10.6(or 10.5) disc. Then it boots into the SL installer and installs SL. You have to boot from boot-132 one more time to get to the osx desktop, then you can install the bootloader to your hdd and start installing drivers for your hardware.

Do you just insert the Snow Leopard/Leopard DVD and GO?

Read^^ ;)

Is the process easy enough for a caveman to do it?

Nope. Perhaps a caveman with a bowtie.
I built my first hac back when Leopard was fresh off the press in 2007 when i was a young 18 year old with no idea how osx worked. It took me a little work but it finally ran. In two years the whole process has made huge steps forward and is much much easier.

There are several idiots guides (http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=181293) that explain every step of the process if you are interested in checking one out just for giggles.

[Clive At Five]

1. You can't simply compare it to buying a mixer....when you buy a mixer you are buying the actual physical mixer, which much like a toothbrush you can do whatever you want with...when it comes to OSX you are not purchasing software, you are purchasing a license to USE software, in which they have the ability to tell you what you can and can't do with that software license.....think of it more as a drivers license; With one you can legally drive a car, without one you can't, just because you have one doesn't mean you can do whatever you please with it.....drive drunk and your up a shitcreek. Yes i know that law's and EULA's are different, but in the end they are both agreements and if you accept them you should follow them.

Okay then, say I write a book, and the EULA for the book says that you can only read it in a Caribou Coffee shop. It's irrelevant to the substance of the book, and it imposes unnecessary restrictions of the use of the book. Yet I make money on the back end because I'm a Caribou Coffee shareholder.

Hey, I wrote the book so if you want to read it, you have to agree to my EULA...

I never said piracy was a requirement, but if you think a majority of OSX86 users go to the apple store or apple.com to purchase OSX, then i have some beachfront property in Utah to sell you. OSX86 piracy, is piracy, is piracy, just because some genuine OSX users pirate iLife doesnt somehow make OSX86 any less bad.

And OSX86 non-piracy is non-piracy. What's your point? There are pirates and there are non-pirates. Just because some people in the state of Utah pirate does not mean we should eradicate the entire state.

By the way, the Great Salt Lake in Utah contains miles and miles of beach...

Sometimes our petty misconceptions cloud our abilities to make sensible judgements.

[madog]

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

I love this.

Yes, you can do anything you want with your purchase! That's America! But, America can prevent you from doing what you're not supposed to do too. Sure, your car might be able to go 200mph, and sure you can drive that fast if you want, but that doesn't mean that the cops won't chase you or take away your car or whatever. You don't really own the road. You wouldn't tell the cop who pulled you over (because you'd get laughed at by the cop), "But this is America, I bought this car, I should be able to go however fast I want! Why make it go 200 if I can't?". Like I said, you can go however fast you want, but they'll try and stop you every chance they get!

You can do whatever you want with Apple's software, that's the beauty of it! Apple can also do whatever they want to prevent you from doing so because technically it is their software that you are purchasing a license from.

Apple is not some big evil corporation for protecting their products, their profit, or their shareholders. They may be big and evil for other reasons, but certainly not for doing what every company and person has the right to do and what all of them do.

[Antares]

What's the big deal about this? Think about the alternative. Should Apple (and every other software maker, by extension) be required to release software that supports every computer processor currently in existence? Of course not. That would be ridiculous.

[Amdahl]

So why does MacRumors say they are an ARM producer? Did I miss something?

Unfortunately, you can't do whatever you want when you buy software. You know that whole EULA thing. Right or wrong you don't really own the software...Except for that recent ruling that found that software that is sold, is sold. Software can't be claimed to be licensed unless the company plans to return the software after the license term is over. So, since OS X is 'retailed,' and not licensed, you can do whatever you want within the law.

[maknik]

Originally Posted by ddTaylor
I think no EULA has been tested in court. There have been limited actions against aspects of the EULA but not he EULA as a whole. The fact that you cannot see or read the EULA until you open or even install the software is dumb - as once the software is opened or installed you cannot return it.

False. http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/

I think a lot of people here don't understand the law very well. Just because Apple says something is the case doesn't make it the case. Otherwise they could just write whatever the hell they wanted on that little print and people would be bound to, say, give their first child to Apple. Why can't they write that? Not (just) because people wouldn't buy the software, but because you can't put that sort of thing in a contract -- can't in the sense that, a lawsuit would contest it and a judge would strike it down. What if Apple put it in right now; there would certainly be a period before a lawsuit -- does Apple own your first child during that period? Of course not: until it has been actually tested in court, a contract with novel characteristics exists in a bit of a legal limbo, not really validated as law. That is how EULA's currently exist in the US. But they have been tested in Europe -- and mostly found wanting. Thus the question of presumption -- what do you presume to be the case prior to the contract being tested in court -- is arguably that those EULA "contracts" are invalid until proven (in court) otherwise. At the very least, simply citing Apple's EULA claims in no way proves that those claims are legal.

To summarize: EULA is not yet law! Not only is buying and installing your OS in a hackintosh not theft, not piracy, and harmless (except to Apple's business interests), it's not even a misdemeanor crime. So far, legally, it's nothing. Even if it were found to be illegal, my personal belief in private property trumps my allegiance to Apple's business interests, so I would defend breaking the EULA -- but luckily, there's nothing yet to break.

(Incidentally, there is a bit of nuance to this: Apple's claims would be much stronger if, like corporations do with Sun or MS, you explicitly signed a contract to license software. That's fairly kosher. So it's not that software can't be licensed per se. Rather, it's the "EU" part of EULA that's at issue -- that consumers are bound by whatever the corporation puts into the fine print merely by having bought the software. That's the part that's iffy and was struck down in Europe. And reasonably so: by that logic, everything we buy could have EULA's attached to it, specifying whatever, say, Target wanted about when and where we could wear their clothes. Perhaps that would be defensible if it was just Target -- but imagine if all clothing manufacturers did it. Agree to their contracts, or go naked... EULA's are very bad ideas.)

[Maserati7200]

IS NOT PIRACY!

I'm getting so sick and tired of people saying that using software that you purchased is piracy. I can do what I want! Get off my back.

I'm usually a rather calm person but the way everyone right now is trying to control my life, from Apple to the United States government, is really starting to piss me off.

Go ahead and flame me, but I could not care less.

You obviously care or you wouldn't have replied as you did. On the same note, if you pay for the software, there is no reason you cannot install it wherever you see fit. Apple will eventually lose those battles too.

Lets say you buy yourself a new car, say an Infiniti G37. It's top speed I'll estimate is 150 MPH. You take that car on a public highway at it's top speed, but the speed limit is 65. A cop pulls you over and gives you a speeding ticket. According to you two, that ticket is bogus because it's your car, and you could do whatever you want with it, right? Those damn cops and the US government trying to control your life!

[hitekalex]

This is one of the main reasons Apple should have NEVER switched to the Intel platform.

We should only be thankful YOU are not the Apple CEO.

And a testament to the fact that MacRumors is becoming an arm of the hackintosh community.

Ohh nooees.. "an arm of hackintosh community".. the horror.. the horror.

[hashholly]

Okay then, say I write a book, and the EULA for the book says that you can only read it in a Caribou Coffee shop. It's irrelevant to the substance of the book, and it imposes unnecessary restrictions of the use of the book. Yet I make money on the back end because I'm a Caribou Coffee shareholder.

Hey, I wrote the book so if you want to read it, you have to agree to my EULA...



And OSX86 non-piracy is non-piracy. What's your point? There are pirates and there are non-pirates. Just because some people in the state of Utah pirate does not mean we should eradicate the entire state.

By the way, the Great Salt Lake in Utah contains miles and miles of beach...

Sometimes our petty misconceptions cloud our abilities to make sensible judgements.

And if i dont agree to your EULA then i dont have to buy it, much like if i dont want to pay $4.00 a gallon for gas i don't have to. No one forces you to purchase a Mac nor OSX so frankly if you don't like the terms of the agreement, dont buy OSX or a Mac. It's that simple. Frankly im tired of people feeling its ok to break the rules because they dont like them, if you dont like the terms of using OSX, use Windows, use linux, go purchase a Dell/HP/Acer.

The point is this is exactly why you will never see OSX licensed to consumers to be used to install on regular PC's. Think of it this way, Apple makes X number of dollars in profit from selling a Mac with OSX, money lost to people pirating iLife is pennies compared to the amount of money they make up in the hardware/software combo. Allow a user to install on a regular pc you lose the hardware/software profit margins, and you also lose a great chunk in profit on software alone when most people will pirate it anyway. Consider how much Microsoft would make on Windows 7 sales if only licensed to the end user versus their current combo of PC manufacturer/End User licensing.

Oh and if we would like to be more specific, if you would be interested in beachfront property along the coastal united states in UTAH, i can sell you that too.

[bruinsrme]

No, I am not comparing illegal drugs to software.

I was arguing about the idea that "because I am not doing anything wrong to anyone else it is not ethically questionable or legally punishable".

Which is not what law is about. Read the whole thread before.

Ok let's say we agree its illegal, what should the penalty be? 5 years in jail, maybe 10? I don't know.

And is apple willing to pay for the cost in enforcing their own EULA on an individual basis?

[DavidSan]

Its easy if you clarify your response in the first place. Five words. Europe is not the EU. Too many people use the words interchangeably which is where the problems start.

My response was clear. The problem is people starting to read the thread from the middle. They start assuming what was said before and end up fighting over things that were understood at the beginning of the thread.

In any MacRumors discussion is the same pattern. A discussion involves around 10 or 12 threads. People do not read the whole threads and start fighting against each other.

In fact, even EU is not uniform in laws. My original answer:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Winni
I'm with you there. And I doubt that Apple's EULA is legal - at least not in Europe.


And I answer:


Sadly, Europe is not a country. It has so many different laws, that what might not be legal in Spain, might be legal in Swedden, and in some circumstances might be legal in Norway...

So do not say EULAs are not legal in Europe. You only need one little country where EULAs are legal to counterexample. And there are.


The vocabulary and what was said fits perfectly into MacRumors forum. But if you reply to "And there are" you are just trolling.

But it is not Macrumors fault either, since this is a comments forum, not a discussions forum. Just bear in mind the limits of the system.

[hashholly]

I think a lot of people here don't understand the law very well. Just because Apple says something is the case doesn't make it the case. Otherwise they could just write whatever the hell they wanted on that little print and people would be bound to, say, give their first child to Apple. Why can't they write that? Not (just) because people wouldn't buy the software, but because you can't put that sort of thing in a contract -- can't in the sense that, a lawsuit would contest it and a judge would strike it down. What if Apple put it in right now; there would certainly be a period before a lawsuit -- does Apple own your first child during that period? Of course not: until it has been actually tested in court, a contract with novel characteristics exists in a bit of a legal limbo, not really validated as law. That is how EULA's currently exist in the US. But they have been tested in Europe -- and mostly found wanting. Thus the question of presumption -- what do you presume to be the case prior to the contract being tested in court -- is arguably that those EULA "contracts" are invalid until proven (in court) otherwise. At the very least, simply citing Apple's EULA claims in no way proves that those claims are legal.

To summarize: EULA is not yet law! Not only is buying and installing your OS in a hackintosh not theft, not piracy, and harmless (except to Apple's business interests), it's not even a misdemeanor crime. So far, legally, it's nothing. Even if it were found to be illegal, my personal belief in private property trumps my allegiance to Apple's business interests, so I would defend breaking the EULA -- but luckily, there's nothing yet to break.

(Incidentally, there is a bit of nuance to this: Apple's claims would be much stronger if, like corporations do with Sun or MS, you explicitly signed a contract to license software. That's fairly kosher. So it's not that software can't be licensed per se. Rather, it's the "EU" part of EULA that's at issue -- that consumers are bound by whatever the corporation puts into the fine print merely by having bought the software. That's the part that's iffy and was struck down in Europe. And reasonably so: by that logic, everything we buy could have EULA's attached to it, specifying whatever, say, Target wanted about when and where we could wear their clothes. Perhaps that would be defensible if it was just Target -- but imagine if all clothing manufacturers did it. Agree to their contracts, or go naked... EULA's are very bad ideas.)

You can break a contract and not be thrown in jail, however you could be sued for breaking that contract.

[Amdahl]

Or Snow Leopard would cost instead more like $350 if it was sold standalone. then you get a completely new group of whiners...
But if Apple were to let the Psystar/Hackintosh crowd move forward unchecked, the retail price of each OS X upgrade will balloon. If the hardware and OS is no longer a bundle, then sales of the OS will have to make development financially viable without the subsidy of hardware

Oh, so you're admitting Apple violates Sarbanes-Oxley, or that the $10 charge for iPhone software updates is just a 'because we can' action?

That is the mindset of Hackintosh people.The mindset of the Hackintosh people is the U.C.C.: Uniform Commercial Code.

[macintouch]

Wow. This is an amazingly passionate topic. As passionate as abortion or gun control. Most of it has been heard and said before but still, I'm in awe how emotional this gets.

Legal or not, Apple will do what they want, and say what they want in their EULA, and there is no stopping them for the time being unless they are struck down by a court of law. Legal or not, people who make hackintosh netbooks will continue making hackintosh netbooks. People circumvented the boot process, I'm sure somehow someway someone will circumvent the processor disabling.

Hacking communities have been around for years and aren't going anywhere. Apple isn't going anywhere either, and I'm sure they won't be changing their policies anytime soon.

[NoSmokingBandit]

What's the big deal about this? Think about the alternative. Should Apple (and every other software maker, by extension) be required to release software that supports every computer processor currently in existence? Of course not. That would be ridiculous.

Thats not really the point. The only inhibitions keeping Snow Leopard from installing on my pc are completely artificial. I dont expect apple to support SL on the cell cpu, ppc, or anything other than the cpu arch they so choose, but the only reason it doesnt install on my pc is because apple put in a synthetic restriction to kill compatibility for the sole reason of forcing me to buy their overpriced hardware and contribute to their record quarterly profit.

What you are asking is similar to the BS argument "360 games cant play on my ps3! OMG IS THE SAME THING." But its not the same thing. 360 games cant physically run on a ps3. The processor has no idea how to handle the instructions in the 360 game's binaries. However, my core2quad can run the osx kernel just fine with 0 modifications. The only reason it doest work is because apple added a few lines of code that arent essential to the function of the OS.

[hitekalex]

Apple OS X's Terms Of Service state that you are not allowed to run the software on anything except genuine Apple hardware. I fail to see why that is so difficult to understand.

This is called "tying" and it has questionable legality, particularly in European Union countries. If an EULA contains illegal clauses such as this, it makes it legally invalid.

[Amdahl]

You care to explain how this sucks for the "CUSTOMERS"? What customers? The hackintoshers aren't customers, buying a $29 SL DVD and then hackining is totally against the license, these are not customers Apple wants. I just love how the hackintoshers call themselves "LEGIT" by actually buying a copy of OS X. Funny, what they are doing with it is NOT LEGIT.
Also, gimme a break, the majority of hackintoshers aren't even "CUSTOMERS", they are torrenting Leopard and SL so they aren't paying for crap. :p

They are no less legit than the Tiger users who are buying it, as recommended by Walt Mossberg in the Wall Street Journal.

No matter how miniscule the impact, allowing the OS to be run on non-Apple hardware DOES cut into Apple's profits.That isn't true. Even Microsoft realized tolerating a certain amount of piracy is good for business. The same is true in Apple's case. Their sales are generally increased. An exception would be on something like the Mac Pro, where power users realize how overpriced they are and go Hackintosh instead.
clarify: I am speaking to products, like OS, that have a network or lock-in effect, not to all types of digital products. Piracy of games or media is quite different.

Somebody high in the food chain was so sure about the Atom that the supporting code was still included in SL. Which means the decision to use Atom processors was, "this close" to being fact. That's pretty freaking scary if you ask me.
If I wanted mid-nineties computing muscle in any device I'd just fire up my Acer tower with its Pentium 90.
Apple really worries me at times.
That is prudent planning, not scary. If they have a problem with whatever their Plan A chip is, they need a Plan B.

[DavidSan]

Ok let's say we agree its illegal, what should the penalty be? 5 years in jail, maybe 10? I don't know.

And is apple willing to pay for the cost in enforcing their own EULA on an individual basis?

That's a whole different matter, because punishment is relative to many circumstances. There are many things involved, like if you did it because you did not know, or you did it o purpose, and if it is civic or criminal matter, or many, many things.

But, there are two things that it is important to bear in mind:

1. How easy or how difficult it is to break the law does not make it legal.

If you put a hundred locks in your front door or if you put ten locks, it does not matter. If a burglar breaks in it, it has to be punished. Even if you left the door opened.

2. The enforcement of the law and the law are two different matters.

Just the fact, that is very expensive, or practically impossible to catch you, it does not make you innocent.

[*LTD*]

... .. ..

I think a lot of people here don't understand the law very well. Just because Apple says something is the case doesn't make it the case.

No, but an EULA is an agreement. It's an agreement between the user and manufacturer. That has legal implications as well. An EULA isn't just there for fun and games. You read the EULA and click "agree", you've entered into a contractual relationship with Apple. You break the contract, and Apple has rights to exercise available legal remedies.

Otherwise they could just write whatever the hell they wanted on that little print and people would be bound to, say, give their first child to Apple.

Now you're taking it to extremes with poor analogies. There's a a set of reasonable limits that Apple adheres to and that other manufacturers adhere to.

Why can't they write that? Not (just) because people wouldn't buy the software, but because you can't put that sort of thing in a contract -- can't in the sense that, a lawsuit would contest it and a judge would strike it down. What if Apple put it in right now; there would certainly be a period before a lawsuit -- does Apple own your first child during that period? Of course not: until it has been actually tested in court, a contract with novel characteristics exists in a bit of a legal limbo, not really validated as law. That is how EULA's currently exist in the US. But they have been tested in Europe -- and mostly found wanting. Thus the question of presumption -- what do you presume to be the case prior to the contract being tested in court -- is arguably that those EULA "contracts" are invalid until proven (in court) otherwise. At the very least, simply citing Apple's EULA claims in no way proves that those claims are legal.

Except that legal remedies are open to them in order to enforce the EULA.

To summarize: EULA is not yet law!

No, but it is enforceable under the law, with legal remedies being available to the manufacturer. You can certainly test an EULA for reasonable standards of expectation, but keep in mind that most EULAs meet such standards. Until that standard is tested you're in breach.

Not only is buying and installing your OS in a hackintosh not theft, not piracy, and harmless (except to Apple's business interests), it's not even a misdemeanor crime. So far, legally, it's nothing.

No, it's not nothing. You seem to think an EULA is meaningless. It isn't. It's an agreement, the breach of which makes certain remedies available to the manufacturer. They're not just empty words on a page that have nothing behind them.

Even if it were found to be illegal, my personal belief in private property trumps my allegiance to Apple's business interests

So if it is illegal you'd still do whatever you wanted because you feel you're right? Disturbing.

(Incidentally, there is a bit of nuance to this: Apple's claims would be much stronger if, like corporations do with Sun or MS, you explicitly signed a contract to license software. That's fairly kosher. So it's not that software can't be licensed per se. Rather, it's the "EU" part of EULA that's at issue -- that consumers are bound by whatever the corporation puts into the fine print merely by having bought the software. That's the part that's iffy and was struck down in Europe. And reasonably so: by that logic, everything we buy could have EULA's attached to it, specifying whatever, say, Target wanted about when and where we could wear their clothes. Perhaps that would be defensible if it was just Target -- but imagine if all clothing manufacturers did it. Agree to their contracts, or go naked... EULA's are very bad ideas.)

No one, that is, NO ONE selling computers or software in the current market is interested in seeing a legal precedent set that blows a hole in the principle of the EULA. Crazy.

[WardC]

It's like saying you can buy a flag but you can't burn it.

[VoR]

I wonder how many man hours were utterly wasted on this? Genius...