Intel Atom Still Unsupported on Mac OS X 10.6.2 Seeds

[econgeek]

https://www.macrumors.com/2006/04/12/asustek-supplying-13-3-macbook/

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090715PD217.html

Yeah, doesn't even address the issue. Nobody disputes that Apple has their machines made in asia and that they use Intel and NVidia chips.

This is pointless because you don't know the difference between putting commodity high level components like motherboards and powersupplies in a box and designing a motherboard, software to exploit chip features, and designing integrated circuits, whether they be ASICs, FPGAs or higher level chips.

Since NVIDIA and INTEL are in the box its exactly the same computer to you.

OH, and its true, Atom didn't change, but the OS's use of the CPU DID CHANGE. That's my point. The OS is designed with the expectation of more capable CPUs. Making the atom involved some compromise.

IT doesn't matter- to you it was made by intel so its the same. OS X was hacked to make it work in the past, therefore it should in the future without additional hacking?

Whatever. I'm done.

You've been rebutted many times and saying otherwise won't change that. Get over it.

Yeah, with assertions like this that are not supported. I love how you guys just presume your conclusion, assert it and think its a rebuttal.

 

[Cave Man]

Whatever. I'm done.

Promise?

Yeah, with assertions like this that are not supported. I love how you guys just presume your conclusion, assert it and think its a rebuttal.

Whoops! I guess not.

 

[ToM7]

dude? wt....? what this ugliest thing ?.. what is suppose too mean ?..
yak dont like it at all

 

[Wakashizuma]

Bottom line-- dozens of responses and nobody has yet attempted to rebut me.

This means the people mischaracterizing me, etc, really don't know enough to make an argument on the issue.

But this lack of knowledge doesn't stop them from attacking me.

Which is natural since they can't attack my arguments.

Its religious.

Its mac vs pc ignorance all over again and the typical myths you see from PC trolls.

Only in a Mac forum. And these people think they're Mac users because they ran a script to install OS X on commodity hardware.

That's it, I'm sold. Apple really SHOULD remove support for Atom in Snow Leopard. Supporting the hackintosh community is just encouraging you all. At least before the price barrier kept most of the lowest common denominator crowd out of the market.

Dude, you need a MAJOR Chill Pill

Yeah we know the hardware in mac is special. Those Core 2 Chips in macs have a secret quad core mode that only starts to work when the Apple logo is shiny

Considering your major blunders in the thread and you replying every 2 second in this thread, I'd rest a little instead of making a clown out of myself

Go play with your iPod HiFi

 

[dgdosen]

Ah, I actually understand electronics and computer systems design, therefore I'm a troll.

I see.

That's great! Anybody with a EE degree probably does understand the innards of a PC better than me. I'm not arguing that.

Computer component manufacturers are taking the complexity out of building systems. Look at Intel building a system on a chip. It even includes what you did in your vaunted video card soldering years ago! I know someone who worked on ARPANET, yet he doesn't get Twitter, and thinks anybody using it is a fool! He certainly is close-minded, yet he does understand it.

Apple doesn't do anything more magical with those components when they're in a MacBook that you couldn't do if those same components were in a netbook or generic case.

That's why we have hackintoshes that can run Snow Leopard and Core Animation, Grand Central - and XCode with the iPhone SDK! - because those innards are pretty darn close.

 

[CQd44]

What I learned today:

the i5s and i7s in iMacs are magically different than those found in Dell computers.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

That's great! Anybody with a EE degree probably does understand the innards of a PC better than me. I'm not arguing that.

Computer component manufacturers are taking the complexity out of building systems. Look at Intel building a system on a chip. It even includes what you did in your vaunted video card soldering years ago! I know someone who worked on ARPANET, yet he doesn't get Twitter, and thinks anybody using it is a fool! He certainly is close-minded, yet he does understand it.

Apple doesn't do anything more magical with those components when they're in a MacBook that you couldn't do if those same components were in a netbook or generic case.

That's why we have hackintoshes that can run Snow Leopard and Core Animation, Grand Central - and XCode with the iPhone SDK! - because those innards are pretty darn close.

Got my CEET in 2004

 

[calderone]

Yeah, doesn't even address the issue. Nobody disputes that Apple has their machines made in asia and that they use Intel and NVidia chips.

This is pointless because you don't know the difference between putting commodity high level components like motherboards and powersupplies in a box and designing a motherboard, software to exploit chip features, and designing integrated circuits, whether they be ASICs, FPGAs or higher level chips.

This is what you haven't made a case for. Until you give a full run down of say the LogicBoard of any Apple computer, and show that it is indeed of higher quality or that Apple is getting higher binned Intel chips or higher bin of any chips your claims are empty.

I fully understand what the difference between a low quality component and high quality component is, having built my headphone amps and the like.

Unless it is shown that Apple is using components or materials in their boards and support circuits it is simply a conjecture to suggest that they *may* be of higher quality.

 

[Eidorian]

Yeah, doesn't even address the issue. Nobody disputes that Apple has their machines made in asia and that they use Intel and NVidia chips.

What was your dispute then about the ordering of components and their assembly across the floor from other vendors?

This is pointless because you don't know the difference between putting commodity high level components like motherboards and powersupplies in a box and designing a motherboard, software to exploit chip features, and designing integrated circuits, whether they be ASICs, FPGAs or higher level chips.

Intel processors, Samsung RAM, nVidia graphics, and storage devices. Isn't this what everyone else is using? Doesn't Apple provide the Boot Camp drivers as well to enable their use in Windows?

The board layout and design might be different but it's still ordered and assembled the same. How are Apple's processors and hard drives better than the identical models everyone else uses?

Since NVIDIA and INTEL are in the box its exactly the same computer to you.

Other than the ability to run OS X or not, I'm going to say yes it's the same computer on identical hardware.

OH, and its true, Atom didn't change, but the OS's use of the CPU DID CHANGE. That's my point. The OS is designed with the expectation of more capable CPUs. Making the atom involved some compromise.

IT doesn't matter- to you it was made by intel so its the same. OS X was hacked to make it work in the past, therefore it should in the future without additional hacking?

Whatever. I'm done.

Can you tell us what changes were made in 10.6.2 that disabled the Atom support then? It worked in the past and it doesn't now.

Yonah is much older than Atom and even lacks 64-bit. Is its use disabled as well now?

 

[balamw]

This is pointless because you don't know the difference between putting commodity high level components like motherboards and powersupplies in a box and designing a motherboard, software to exploit chip features, and designing integrated circuits, whether they be ASICs, FPGAs or higher level chips.

............

OH, and its true, Atom didn't change, but the OS's use of the CPU DID CHANGE. That's my point. The OS is designed with the expectation of more capable CPUs. Making the atom involved some compromise.

You're neglecting a couple of key issues.

1) Apple has made 32 bit Intel Macs with less horsepower than Atom in the original Yonah based iMacs and MacBooks. I know. I own one. It would be news to me if they discontinued support of my Yonah iMac in 10.6.2.

2) I wish Apple really did use "server grade" hardware. They claimed they did when they introduced the Time Capsule, but it has been shown to be demonstrably false given the failure rate of the devices. Mine has yet to fail, but MANY of them have.

B

 

[Wakashizuma]

What I learned today:

the i5s and i7s in iMacs are magically different than those found in Dell computers.

That's the Apple logo unlocking those magical features

 

[Eidorian]

You're neglecting a couple of key issues.

1) Apple has made 32 bit Intel Macs with less horsepower than Atom in the original Yonah based iMacs and MacBooks. I know. I own one. It would be news to me if they discontinued support of my Yonah iMac in 10.6.2.

Yonah is more powerful for performance but Atom has a few additional instruction sets, select models have Intel 64 support, and it uses tons less power. You make sacrifices in performance for that. It's still great for the netbook crowd.

There might be some deeper register set beyond SSE2/3/4 that 10.6.2 requires but no one has provided proof besides it's broken on Atom now. For what reason I don't know but it's a big PR mess for Apple. Otherwise Intel x86/64 is still Intel x86/64 regardless of what Apple does to OS X intentional, malicious, or not.

2) I wish Apple really did use "server grade" hardware. They claimed they did when they introduced the Time Capsule, but it has been shown to be demonstrably false given the failure rate of the devices. Mine has yet to fail, but MANY of them have.

B

I saw a consumer level Western Digital Green drive in the last Time Capsule take apart.

 

[dgdosen]

1) Apple has made 32 bit Intel Macs with less horsepower than Atom in the original Yonah based iMacs and MacBooks. I know. I own one. It would be news to me if they discontinued support of my Yonah iMac in 10.6.2.

That's for sure! I have a 12" Powerbook because I like the size, and my tiny little Netbook blows it away as far as speed and performance are concerned. It's what? five years old?

 

[balamw]

10.6.2 is out, so I guess we'll see.

Yonah is more powerful for performance but Atom has a few additional instruction sets and select models have Intel 64 support.

There might be some deeper set beyond x86/64 or SSE2/3/4 that 10.6.2 requires but no one has provided proof besides it's broken on Atom now. For what reason I don't know but it's a big PR mess for Apple. Otherwise Intel x86/64 is still Intel x86/64 regardless of what Apple does to OS X intentional, malicious, or not.

I saw a consumer level Western Digital Green drive in the last Time Capsule take apart.

Yeah, sorry it was my last Windows box (P4 2.8 GHz) not the iMac that was equivalent in performance to Atom. It was also my understanding that the Atom instruction set was a superset of the instruction set of a Core Solo.

B

 

[dgdosen]

Here's what I learned today -

- Apple has every right to remove Atom support from the OS, especially since they're not using it. I would like to know if that saved them anything, or if it was code added to protect their OS, just as they do with the Palm-Pre in iTunes.

- Dell/HP has the right to build a netbook using ULV chips, suitable for hackintoshing. If Apple doesn't build a Netbook that runs the full OS, I hope one of those third parties sees and fills the niche. If Apple can sell "refurbed' too-big-for-my-need-Airs for <$1000, Netbook manufacturers can do it for <$500.

 

[zweigand]

10.6.2 is out, so I guess we'll see.

Finally …a post worth reading.

 

[merneric]

I don't know...I thought this thread was pretty entertaining. Definitely helped kill some time, and provided a lot of good chuckles.

Thanks econgeek for an o/w boring afternoon.

 

[NoSmokingBandit]

It's really amazing to me that people have such strong opinions about the computer industry and don't seem to really have a basic grasp of how computers work or what goes into them.

Apple NEVER SUPPORTED the Atom processor, officially, so there's no way they could "drop support" for it.

Its amazing that you dont understand how processors work. There is no such thing as Atom support. If the cpu can run x86 code then it will work. Apple doesnt go out of their way to write extra code to make osx work on Atoms. The only way to keep osx from running on an Atom is some kind of synthetic limitation. They dont just stop supporting it, they have to actively put measures in place to kill it.

 

[alent1234]

Its amazing that you dont understand how processors work. There is no such thing as Atom support. If the cpu can run x86 code then it will work. Apple doesnt go out of their way to write extra code to make osx work on Atoms. The only way to keep osx from running on an Atom is some kind of synthetic limitation. They dont just stop supporting it, they have to actively put measures in place to kill it.

you're wrong

Intel disables features on what it considers low end CPU's. for the desktop all CPU's are Xeon's are when they are produced. after they are binned, there is a process to disable VT, cache and whatever depending on the product line it's destined for. and a speed rating is assigned.

 

[balamw]

you're wrong

Intel disables features on what it considers low end CPU's. for the desktop all CPU's are Xeon's are when they are produced. after they are binned, there is a process to disable VT, cache and whatever depending on the product line it's destined for. and a speed rating is assigned.

Yes, but the point is that SL can't just be optimized for the latest Xeons and such, it must still support processors like Yonah without all those features like that in my iMac. Those core features are common to all x86 processors.

I've been told it works on Yonah based Macs, so it shouldn't be long before we know for sure if the released version of 10.6.2 runs on Atom or not.

B

 

[bartzilla]

A "windblows" machine isn't a Windows machine unless it has windows installed. It's all the same hardware. Maybe this is a bit complicated for you? Probably best you just stick with your current line of nonsense.

HACKINTOSH: BAD!
WINDBLOWS: BAD!
APPLE: <3!

You do realise that the net result of debating with fools and/or trolls is that they just drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience right?

 

[djellison]

And that %10 is irrelevent, eh? And all cpus and graphics chips have only one mode and all the software uses them the same way, right?.

So the Apple logo unlocks some special secret mode that only exists just for Apple to use that, astonishingly, in like for like benchmarks, shows the CPU and GFX power of like for like hardware being so close to identical across the two platforms as to be not worth mentioning.

You're talking utter nonsense. Absolute nonsense.

 

[OllyW]

I've been told it works on Yonah based Macs, so it shouldn't be long before we know for sure if the released version of 10.6.2 runs on Atom or not.

Confirmed, the answer is NO.

 

[RazHyena]

See, this is what I get for feeding trolls. I guess to your level of understanding a PC is exactly like a Mac. So go away, and run windows.



I see, not even going to respond to the substance, just ignore it, change the subject, but be sure to pretend like I didn't answer your question. Must be nice to live at that level of self delusion.



So, tell me what netbook has all that. I'd love to hear about it. I'll be sure to remind you that I'm still waiting for you to answer this question.



No, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and fed the PC troll. Now I'm just going to mock you since I can't take you seriously.

Heh....wow. Entertaining. Carry on...

 

[lavrishevo]

Can't go to 10.6.2 on my Netbook

This is disappointing news. I own two Mac's but I recently installed 10.6.1 on my Acer Aspire One Netbook because I would choose OS X any day over every version of Windows. 10.6.1 runs fantastic so I can't complain about that but I do wish they maintained the support for the Atom processor. Maybe some custom kernals will fix this in the future.