Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Disabling Support for Intel Atom Processor in Latest 10.6.2 Build?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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
Mark
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
macrumors 68030
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.
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
macrumors 68000
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....
Yep ... I find it hard to get too worried about this.
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*.
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*.
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.
ux4all
macrumors regular
To me Apple is backing themselves into a corner
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.
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.
Impact on what?
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.
re: entitlement
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.
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.
MH01
Suspended
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
macrumors G4
Mattie Num Nums
macrumors 68030
MH01
Suspended
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...
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
macrumors 6502a
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.
Stridder44
macrumors 68040
/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.