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

[Eidorian]

You also missed the fact this is using AMD's low power, barely faster than an Atom 230 Athlon CPU for your quoted UK 299$

The Core 2 Duo is about 3 times faster. The Radeon 3200 HD isn't much to write home about either.

So no, we're still not in Mac Mini territory. Better luck next time.

Heck, even the Athlon Neo X2 dual core doesn't put out half of the performance of a Core 2 Duo chip. Seriously... The Dell Studio Hybrid is the Mac Mini competitor. The Zino is just a netbook turned desktop USFF.

I really wonder how AMD managed to get Dell to buy old 65nm back stock. If it was the Athlon II X2 + 780G we'd have something to talk about against Core 2.

Otherwise the AMD 65nm energy efficient stock is going to kick Atom around without a problem.

 

[AidenShaw]

You also missed the fact this is using AMD's low power, barely faster than an Atom 230 Athlon CPU for your quoted UK 299$

The Core 2 Duo is about 3 times faster....

But people looking at a netbook are looking for portability, not "about 3 times faster".

What's the battery life with the AMD - that's what people in this segment are looking for....

 

[Eidorian]

But people looking at a netbook are looking for portability, not "about 3 times faster".

What's the battery life with the AMD - that's what people in this segment are looking for....

The Zino HD is a desktop. It's split across the Inspiron 300 which is Atom based and the 400 which is based off of Athlon EE and Athlon X2 EE.

 

[NC MacGuy]

But people looking at a netbook are looking for portability, not "about 3 times faster".

What's the battery life with the AMD - that's what people in this segment are looking for....

What he said and on topic.

I have a Rev. A MBA and a Mini 10 Hackintosh. The MBA was $1700 new & is a piece of crap. Sorry but it's true. The Mini 10 Hack is almost as fast in most things, has 3 usb ports, a card reader, upgradeable HDD, ethernet port, 1.3M pixel camera, standard vid. out and an EIGHT HOUR REPLACEABLE battery at $330.

Screw Apple if they don't officially support the Atom. Don't care. Didn't look for any of their support when I chose the red pill.

As long as there are hacks for a work around, I'll keep using them. I had my mini running 10.6.2 3 hours after the software update. Big deal.

They don't support my poor PPC big $$$$$ PowerBooks either. Am I going to raise a stink about that? Don't think so. Am I going to demand that Apple replace my POS MBA Rev. A? Nope. Life goes on in the tech world
EULA shmeula. F' em.

 

[Eidorian]

NC MacGuy did you have a chance to test the battery life under OS X and Windows?

I talked to someone with a Lenovo running OS X and they reported OS X lasted much longer on the battery. I'd just like the verify that.

 

[NC MacGuy]

NC MacGuy did you have a chance to test the battery life under OS X and Windows?

I talked to someone with a Lenovo running OS X and they reported OS X lasted much longer on the battery. I'd just like the verify that.

I get 4-6 hours running Win. 7 and 5 1/2 to 7 1/2 OSX. XP sp. 3 about the same as 7.

 

[Eidorian]

I get 4-6 hours running Win. 7 and 5 1/2 to 7 1/2 OSX. XP sp. 3 about the same as 7.

Thanks.

There's some Apple magic at power conversation that happens regardless of the hardware then.

 

[NC MacGuy]

Thanks.

There's some Apple magic at power conversation that happens regardless of the hardware then.

Now if I could only get 5 hours from my seven hour MBP battery.

Which is at 85% new capacity after all of 3 months and Apple says that's quite normal. F'rz.

I can't kill my Hackintosh battery at a whole day at work but will charge any of my Apple lappys 2-3 times with close to same usage.

 

[newb16]

sorry, but you have that backwards. apple saying you can't install OS X on non-aple machines is NOT anti-competitive. they aren't doing anything to keep you from putting another OS (ie the competition) on that same non-apple hardware. that is what MS got slapped for. they were leveraging hardware makers into agreeing that they would ONLY provide Windows OS on their machines when they were sold. effectively making Windows OS the ONLY option a buyer had to choose from when purchasing a PC (non apple).

How is it different to Apple? You can remove OEM Windows and install linux, bsd or whatever, and you can do the same with os x. And cost of neither oem os x nor oem windows will be refunded.

 

[jimmyjoemccrow]

How is it different to Apple? You can remove OEM Windows and install linux, bsd or whatever, and you can do the same with os x. And cost of neither oem os x nor oem windows will be refunded.

Except people have removed Windows and got their money back. The trick is to remove it before you use it and therefore don't agree to the EULA.

 

[OllyW]

How is it different to Apple? You can remove OEM Windows and install linux, bsd or whatever, and you can do the same with os x. And cost of neither oem os x nor oem windows will be refunded.

It is possible to get a Windows refund, but not always easy.

 

[KnightWRX]

But people looking at a netbook are looking for portability, not "about 3 times faster".

What's the battery life with the AMD - that's what people in this segment are looking for....

We're comparing the Mac Mini and Dell Zino (not that it's much of a comparison). What do netbooks and batteries and portability have to do with it ?

Please, at least follow the game if you intend to play.

 

[NC MacGuy]

We're comparing the Mac Mini and Dell Zino (not that it's much of a comparison). What do netbooks and batteries and portability have to do with it ?

Please, at least follow the game if you intend to play.

Actually the thread is in regards to Apple stopping Atom support in latest software release.

The Atom is used in netbooks that get hackintoshed probably more than any other single PC classification. So batteries & portability are more on topic here than mid level PC vs. Mini banter. The thread has been derailed for pages with the same old PC vs. Mac affordability, specifications, comparisons, etc., etc...

 

[KnightWRX]

Actually the thread is in regards to Apple stopping Atom support in latest software release.

So ?

I don't care what the thread was about 300 posts ago. The post Aiden was replying to was about the Zino vs the Mac Mini. It had nothing to do with netbooks or portability or battery powered computers.

Again, if you intend to reply to a post, please at least be sure to understand what is being discussed.

 

[NC MacGuy]

So ?

I don't care what the thread was about 300 posts ago. The post Aiden was replying to was about the Zino vs the Mac Mini. It had nothing to do with netbooks or portability or battery powered computers.

Again, if you intend to reply to a post, please at least be sure to understand what is being discussed.

I'm well aware of what was being discussed.

You are way off topic.

 

[KnightWRX]

I'm well aware of what was being discussed.

You are way off topic.

How was it off-topic ? The discussion started about Apple removing Atom support from OS X. This changed into Atom is a nice low cost solution Apple doesn't offer, which devolved into Macs are overpriced, which I proved wrong by comparing the Mac Mini to the Dell SFF (Studio Hybrid) and then it came back swinging full circle with a discussion of the merits of the Dell Zino, which some of them are based off Atom to the Mac Mini.

You'd know all this if you actually followed the discussion instead of brute forcing your way into it and pretending to be a moderator.

This is all very still on-topic. Discussions flow and evolve over threads. There is no obligation to discuss the original post and only the original post in any given thread. That's not how forum discussions or even real world discussions work.

And before you ask, discussions about topicality are always on-topic according to netiquette. So even know, we're not off-topic.

 

[NC MacGuy]

Of course, if you compare any 17" notebook and don't actually compare all the specs, the MBP might seem overpriced. However, the MBP 17" only comes in one top of the line configuration.

I hope you enjoy that 699$ 1440 pixels wide 17" AMD notebook with 2 hours of battery life.

How was it off-topic ?

You'd know all this if you actually followed the discussion instead of brute forcing your way into it and pretending to be a moderator.

And before you ask, discussions about topicality are always on-topic according to netiquette. So even know, we're not off-topic.

Sorry to interrupt.
I get you now.

 

[uberamd]

Now if I could only get 5 hours from my seven hour MBP battery.

I'm able to get 8 hours out of my 8 hour 17" MacBook Pro battery. I guess I'm just lucky

 

[NC MacGuy]

I'm able to get 8 hours out of my 8 hour 17" MacBook Pro battery. I guess I'm just lucky

Yes, you are. I haven't tried the 17" but I presently have 2 MBA's, 13" MBP and a unibody 15" MBP in use. The only one getting battery time close to specs is the 15" MBP. I haven't heard of too many complaints of 17" batteries.

The 13" is running a SSD too so it should in theory get better battery life.

 

[Transporteur]

The 13" is running a SSD too so it should in theory get better battery life.

SSDs do not really consume less power than standard hard drives.
Considering the high capacity of the MBP battery (5500mAh) there is no remarkable difference.

BTW: 6-7 hours are quite normal with my 13" MBP (Airport of, BT off, medium brightness).

 

[CQd44]

Yes, you are. I haven't tried the 17" but I presently have 2 MBA's, 13" MBP and a unibody 15" MBP in use. The only one getting battery time close to specs is the 15" MBP. I haven't heard of too many complaints of 17" batteries.

The 13" is running a SSD too so it should in theory get better battery life.

My laptop is supposed to get 5 hours. I got 4 hours with wifi on. I actually don't notice a difference if wifi is off, which confuses me

 

[NC MacGuy]

SSDs do not really consume less power than standard hard drives.
Considering the high capacity of the MBP battery (5500mAh) there is no remarkable difference.

BTW: 6-7 hours are quite normal with my 13" MBP (Airport of, BT off, medium brightness).

That's why I prefaced the statement about the SSD with "in theory."

I can get 6 hours w. wireless off too. Apple is claiming a little better though:

 

[cjmillsnun]

How is it different to Apple? You can remove OEM Windows and install linux, bsd or whatever, and you can do the same with os x. And cost of neither oem os x nor oem windows will be refunded.

It's different in that MS was getting OEMs to add in the cost of a Windows Licence on every PC sold, even if it didn't have Windows. That was what was anti-competetive. The result was that PCs supplied with Linux were more expensive than those supplied with Windows, across a variety of brands.

Apple supply OS X with every Mac. Anything else is your choice.

 

[iigsie]

Guess what buddy, you made the original assertion, you got to back it up, not me. The onus is on you to provide facts when you make absolute statements. If you cannot - admit it. Don't try to redirect things.

you don't have anything either do you to suggest otherwise. Software licensing has been under scrutiny for many years, EULA's such as the one Apple ships with MacOSX clearly breach EU competition law.

ETA: And for the record, I am very familiar with the history of Compaq. Their actions were 100% illegal since they reversed engineered the BIOS, used no IBM code, and legally licensed Microsoft’s intellectual property.

Now you're confusing yourself. Was what Compaq did illegal or legal? And I don't believe Compaq 'licensed' anything from MS, it was just bundled with the hardware.

EDIT: And the clean room approach had little to do with IBM letting go in the end, the other clone BIOS maker Phoenix had a massive legal team behind them that not even big blue could win against. The clean room argument just sounds nice to uneducated judges.

You’re bluffing and I’m calling you. You have nothing.

Another perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black. Admit it, you have nothing either.

 

[iigsie]

How does this have anything to blatantly violating Apples licensing terms and using code that is owned by Apple and redistributing it without consent?

Who said anyone is in breach of Apples licensing terms? If I remove it from the DVD, I haven't agreed to it anyway, and I'm certainly not redistributing it in any way. Reverse engineering or modification of code to allow greater interoperability has been proven to be legally acceptable. Go do some more reading before you spout any more mac fanboy snobbery.