Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

Mac OS X 10.6.2 Confirmed to Drop Support for Intel Atom Processors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
50,466
11,854
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png

OS X Daily confirms widespread reports of the loss of support for Intel's Atom processors in the Mac OS X 10.6.2 update released yesterday, confirming on-again, off-again claims of the change in developer seeds of the update. Given that the final public release of 10.6.2 is labeled Build 10C540, the same as the most recent developer seed that reportedly lacked Atom support, it comes as no surprise that the public release carries the same change.
If you have an official Apple Mac then go right ahead and update to Mac OS X 10.6.2, but if you have a Hackintosh Mac Netbook... well you will want to hold off. It has been confirmed that the final release of 10.6.2 kills Intel Atom support officially. Hackintosh Guru StellaRolla reports:

"The netbook forums are now blowing up with problems of 10.6.2 instant rebooting their Atom based netbooks."
Intel's low-power Atom processors are widely used in netbook computers, a market segment in which Apple does not currently compete. Netbooks have been popular targets for users to modify into "Hackintoshes" to run Mac OS X, providing users with a low-cost Mac solution in a small form factor machine.

It is unclear why Apple has chosen to remove Atom support from OS X at this time, although speculation has centered around the possibility that the company is attempting to make it more difficult for users to build their own netbook Macs ahead of a launch of the company's much-rumored tablet device. Apple had been rumored to be looking to adopt the Atom platform for its tablet, but the company's April 2008 acquisition of low-power ARM chip design firm P.A. Semi signaled a shift toward a possible future in-house chip design for the device.

Article Link: Mac OS X 10.6.2 Confirmed to Drop Support for Intel Atom Processors
 

ri0ku

macrumors 6502a
Mar 11, 2009
952
0
how many news posts have to be made about this already.... -_- We get it ...10.6.2 will not work with an atom cpu... we got it the last 3 times...

I dont see the big deal... 10.6.1 works fine on the wind
 

NC MacGuy

macrumors 603
Feb 9, 2005
6,233
0
The good side of the grass.

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2009-11-09 at 10.53.42 PM.jpg
    Screen shot 2009-11-09 at 10.53.42 PM.jpg
    100.1 KB · Views: 388

iammike1

macrumors 6502a
Oct 25, 2007
740
15
O'fallon IL
Don't know why some people think Apple should continue to support an processor they have obviously chosen to not use in any of their products.

Your (and mine) Hackintosh's are not supported by any means. Get used to it.
 

leonstafford

macrumors regular
Nov 8, 2007
101
0
Kyoto, Japan
there will always be a way around these things, but since 10.6, I've been getting tired fiddling with hackintosh installs and being scared of updates, etc..

am looking at linux alternatives for Mac software to at least cover my lifestyle apps... I found the new Picasa from Google is a decent match for iPhoto, though linux version lacks facial recognition found in Winblowz version...

I still need a Mac for iPhone dev, so they may get a sale from me there, but likely in the form of a 1st gen Intel :apple:Mini , which can double as a slick media center :cool:
 

ValSalva

macrumors 68040
Jun 26, 2009
3,746
201
Burpelson AFB
I wonder how many lines of code were used to 'support' Atom processors. It's too bad Apple feel they need to remove this.

As so many here have stated, it's a trivial number of people who Hackintosh their netbooks. What did Apple really stand to lose by leaving in Atom support?
 

BeyondtheTech

macrumors 68020
Jun 20, 2007
2,124
632
I still need a Mac for iPhone dev, so they may get a sale from me there, but likely in the form of a 1st gen Intel :apple:Mini , which can double as a slick media center :cool:

Hear, hear. I might have to pick up a clearance, refurb, or used Intel-based MacBook just so I can continue development on the go.
 

CptnJustc

macrumors 6502
Jan 19, 2007
285
83
I wonder how many lines of code were used to 'support' Atom processors. It's too bad Apple feel they need to remove this.

As so many here have stated, it's a trivial number of people who Hackintosh their netbooks. What did Apple really stand to lose by leaving in Atom support?

Their choices are to either continually spend resources ensuring that Atom support works, or to keep a chunk of possibly broken code around in their OS until the end of time. Neither really sounds attractive, if they've decided not to use Atom in anything.

I have no idea how many resources it might have taken, though, so it's hard to say if it was reasonable to keep it in as a hedge against the possibility they'd pick up an Atom in the future.
 

likemyorbs

macrumors 68000
Jul 20, 2008
1,956
5
NJ
Hmmm ... I guess that they stopped supporting it so that PEOPLE WOULD STOP STEALING THEIR OS ... LMAO :D:D

People like you are so ignorant. Why do you assume that people who hackintosh steal the OS? My brother in-law wants to hackintosh his laptop, so he bought a copy of snow leopard straight from apple. stupid assumption. also, i could have "stolen" snow leopard on my regular mac, and many do. as a matter of fact i did, but i wanted a real one so i bought it and reinstalled it. but its not fair to assume that people in the hackintosh community pirate more than people with genuine macs. i have a macbook but every single piece of software is pirated except the OS, so figure that one out....
 

UnreaL

macrumors newbie
Aug 31, 2006
25
0
I don't even own a netbook, but still I am outraged that Apple could take this step.

This is a step further towards a locked in ecosystem, stifling creativity, competition. Even a monopoly like Microsoft would not dare take action like this. Bundling software, restricting hardware (this and the Palm devices with iTunes), and in the iPhone's case even restricting software (I refer to browsers). I fear we are replacing one evil with an entirely worse one.
 

sva

macrumors regular
Oct 8, 2007
131
0
Wales, near England.
Shame, but I'm happy to stay on 10.6.1 for what I use my Dell mini. I don't want to be messing with any kernel hacks.

Why wait until .2 though? Wouldn't it have made more sense to do it from the get-go on SL?
 

mrr

macrumors 6502
Apr 19, 2008
309
289
Damn. No more cool NETBOOK Hackintoshes.

How about a 10" MacBook Air ?
 

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
Canada
I don't even own a netbook, but still I am outraged that Apple could take this step.

This is a step further towards a locked in ecosystem, stifling creativity, competition. Even a monopoly like Microsoft would not dare take action like this. Bundling software, restricting hardware (this and the Palm devices with iTunes), and in the iPhone's case even restricting software (I refer to browsers). I fear we are replacing one evil with an entirely worse one.

What creativity? What competition? Atom processors have nothing to do with currently shipping Macs! Do you plan on "competing" with Apple by releasing your own home-made and hacked "Unreal" line of netbooks or something?? You call getting OS X to run on some POS netbook "creative"? Are you kidding me??

The vast majority of Apple's market has no problem with this - they don't know, they don't care. Are you now going to advise them that they should, based on some abstraction you dreamed up?? How have Atom processors affect the lives and prodctivity of paying Mac users who have consented to all the agreements associated with running OS X on Apple hardware? Their inclusion was likely as much accident as anything else. Do you think I'm now going to care about someone who is tinkering with OS X and voiding all support and ties with Apple? $2,100 Canadian says that you figure very low on the scale and as a consumer I care even less about you than Apple. Nothing personal, but my money puts me waaaay ahead of you in terms of who has the right to complain about Apple.

And besides, Apple can't argue in good conscience against Psystar in court while allowing individuals to run OS X on unauthorized hardware and doing nothing about it. At least this is in line with the spirit of Apple's policies and saves them from hypocrisy in front of Psytar. And this is assuming Apple deliberately target hackintosh users, which so far has not been proven conclusively.

Who the hell gives a damn about Atom support when shipping Macs have nothing at all to do with them?? It's a netbook processor! Apple's system has always been closed, and if you want to talk "creativity", look no further than Apple's walled garden! Seems to put the rest of this bland, half-asleep industry to shame, now doesn't it.

Apple owes hackintoshers absolutely nothing, and really, hackintoshers should consider themselves lucky they're able to get OS X running on unauthorized hardware at all. YOU ARE UNSUPPORTED BY APPLE. You have no right to make any demands of them. Updates are not guaranteed to support hardware other than what they are designed for.

Hey, tinker away all you want - you're lucky you're able to, but when Apple does something you don't like, don't go crying about it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.