Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

Ieo said:
It may be "a locked in ecosystem", but it's THEIR ecosystem...they can do with it as they please. It may not be what YOU want, but it's THEIR product, and to use it you must agree to THEIR terms.

If you don't like it, use windows. Or, do what I did: bite the bullet and get one of the new, more affordable macs.
Click to expand...

this is the dumbest argument i've read so far. you do realize that companies ARE NOT allowed to do whatever they want right? why do you think MS has gotten in trouble so many times for attempted monopolization??? finish high school first before trying to make an argument again.
 
AMD CPUs never were supported by Apple, yet OSx86 runs on AMD CPUs. Most modern graphic cards, network cards, wifi or bluetooth chips weren't supported by Apple, yet they work fine with OSx86. Most USB webcams aren't supported by Apple, yet they work on OSx86. And it'll be the same the Atom CPU.

The OSx86 are just more innovative when it comes to state of the art hardware than Apple ever was. I'm glad these OSx86 guys are bringing these things to MacOS.
 
bigandy said:
....I reckon it's because they're fed up of people Hackintoshing.
Click to expand...

I doubt Apple cares. If they did, we'd have known via cease-and-desists and other forms of legal action.

A fair percentage of Hackintoshes are probably running legally purchased copies of OS X and I doubt anyone at Apple is complaining too loudly about that extra revenue. Likewise, the more people use OS X, the more familiar and/or dependent they become on it and the more likely they are to purchase an Apple product in the future. It's been theorized that early pirating of Windows contributed to its rapid adoption and widespread usage.
 
Eidorian said:
Have you noticed the increase in negative mindshare lately?
Click to expand...

I am willing to bet that if you ask the average consumer what "Atom" was (outside of the science vernacular) or what a hackintosh is, or even what OSX86 is, they would look at you and think you are speaking greek to them. Most people have no idea about these things. If they are Mac users, they have one of Apple's products. They don't care.
 
Hardware design company

NC MacGuy said:
I think there's been quite a few sales of OSX to hackintoshers.
Click to expand...

Apple thinks of itself as a hardware company. This is although they only design & not build other than some of the Intel Mac Pros. This means that using OSX in any computer other than one sold by Apple, if if Apple makes no similar model is stealing a sale from Apple. Probably the lack of a suitable Mac model keeps more people from purchasing a Mac than does the whole Hackintosh community of users. The Hackintosh User is actually more of a die hard Mac User than those that just buys the models that Apple contracts with others to build.
 
gnasher729 said:
Your brother-in-law bought a copy of Snow Leopard that is licensed to upgrade Macintosh computers from Leopard to Snow Leopard. The price is calculated based on what the license allows you to do: It is set under the assumption that the purchaser has paid Apple lots of money for a Macintosh computer, and that the purchaser is upgrading a computer from Leopard to Snow Leopard, so the price is not for Snow Leopard itself, but for the difference between Leopard and Snow Leopard.

So what your brother-in-law is doing is a classical case of rationalising, nothing more. He is lucky that Apple changed MacOS X just to not work on an Atom processor; they could have changed it to return the IP address of every computer running MacOS X on an Atom processor back to Apple.
Click to expand...

Wow. And Apple could do what with his IP? Absolutely nothing. Apple is not big brother. Sometimes you fanboys amaze me.

Also, the post you are quoting made no distinction between the upgrade disc and the full box set so you're simply assuming that he went the upgrade route. You know what they say about assuming...
 
wildmac said:
As soon as it's 1/2 the weight of the MacBook, with a 10" screen or so, sure, I'll get one!
Click to expand...

not likely to happen methinks. better start hacking son.

or stay out of date.... up to you. im glad apple have done this. the amount of Hackintosh users who claim "they bought their copy of OSX" is ridiculous. O know many hackintosh's and NONE have bought a copy. They used torrent sites.
 
mytdave said:
Apple just slapped the hackintosh community, and they have a right to do whatever they wish with the product they create, but make no mistake, it was not accidental. :(
Click to expand...
Building a hackintosh used to take time and a lot of effort. The reason Apple is resorting to this now is simply because it has become far too public and easy to accomplish. You can thank Psystar for this move.

All I can say is we're lucky Apple isn't going to greater measures to protect their intellectual property. Who here wants to see OS X come with "Apple Genuine Advantage"?
 
inkswamp said:
A fair percentage of Hackintoshes are probably running legally purchased copies of OS X and I doubt anyone at Apple is complaining too loudly about that extra revenue.
Click to expand...

Hahaha. You *almost* made me spit my lunch all over my screen when I read this. Really, you did. Is this some sort of joke? You really mean to tell me you think a decent percentage of OSx86 users are running purchased copies? Wow, thats a good one.

And Apple doesn't make much from OS sales. Its the hardware, I don't think they are glad a few hackintosh users are spending $35 on an OS.
 
thejadedmonkey said:
Also, the post you are quoting made no distinction between the upgrade disc and the full box set so you're simply assuming that he went the upgrade route. You know what they say about assuming...
Click to expand...
The box set contains the following...

  • iLife '09 (sold separately for $79)
  • iWork '09 (sold separately for $79)
  • Snow Leopard (sold separately for $29)
The Mac Box set is sold for $169. If you purchased each separately it would cost you $79 + $79 + $29 = $187. Hey look you are actually getting SL at a price below the stand-alone copy by buying the box set.

You aren't paying more for SL in the box set, it isn't sold or priced as a full version... it is still sold and priced as an upgrade. You still are receiving a benefit at the expense of Apple by using the box set on non-Mac hardware.
 
shawnce said:
You aren't paying more for SL in the box set, it isn't sold or priced as a full version... it is still sold and priced as an upgrade. You still are receiving a benefit at the expense of Apple by using the box set on non-Mac hardware.
Click to expand...
And we all know one of the main reasons people build hackintoshes is because they think Apple hardware is too expensive. You just KNOW they are doing the right thing and spending $169 on the box set. :rolleyes:
 
true

zweigand said:
Building a hackintosh used to take time and a lot of effort. The reason Apple is resorting to this now is simply because it has become far too public and easy to accomplish. You can thank Psystar for this move.

All I can say is we're lucky Apple isn't going to greater measures to protect their intellectual property. Who here wants to see OS X come with "Apple Genuine Advantage"?
Click to expand...

That's a good point. I would much rather see 'easy hacking' go away than to have an "AGA" or "MGA" scenario.
 
Eidorian said:
Have you noticed the increase in negative mindshare lately?
Click to expand...

What negative mindshare?

You mean the record Mac sales, record iPhone sales, skyrocketing customer satisfation, all in a recession?

This hacky-toshy business doesn't leave the Mac fansite bubble. No one else cares.

The whole Google Voice fiasco barely made a dent in the public consciousness. it's as if it barely registered. You think Apple dropping support for a processor that doesn't even have anything to do with Macs, and only really affects people (a minority) who are contravening Apple's policies is going to register with the average user?? You've got to be kidding. Most people don't even know or care what an Atom processor is, and aren't going to care. This is just more Apple internet fansite crap. It's cool to discuss it here but it in no way shape or form represents reality.

And tell the average paying Apple customer (the majority) that some guy is pissed because he can't get a hacked copy of OS X to run on some netbook, and at best, they won't give a damn, and at worst, they'll regard the whole situation with contempt.
 
As much as I like Apple, they've gotten pretty crappy with locking devices lately. iPod Touch no file transfer, disk mode or Bluetooth beyond headsets. iTunes locking media that can be played or transferred no matter how legal. Charging for software upgrades to unlock "features" that have existed since purchased. Shuffle needing special Apple part to change a song. The list goes on.

I've spent a small fortune on Apple products and eaten enough of their no choice, glassy screens, FW coming and going, crappy batteries, etc. to not feel the least bit guilty using a legitimate copy of purchased software on a device/non_apple I purchased that they don't make a competing product for.

Think Different - yeah, your different's hanging.
 
pdjudd said:
What do you mean? All intel macs can run snow Leopard and Leopard just fine. I have no idea what you are talking about with the "latest and greatest requirement.


No, not buying is exercising consumer choice. I have never argued otherwise. Apple, nor anybody else, holds a gun to your head and forces you to upgrade. They may create incenitives (like depreciating support for older OS's), but they cannot force you to buy something.

Now if you want to enter into licensing agreements with Apple (which you have to to use their software).



That doesn't change anything. It doesn't matter if a fee occurs or not - software that is distributed is licensed.
Click to expand...

I was replying to your statement about Apple making money from the hardware which is why they sell the OS for so cheap. And that using a hackintosh denies Apple the money that they would have gotten from a hardware sale. What I was implying is if that was the case then they wouldn't allow older macs to upgrade to the new OS because they are losing money on hardware there too (by us not upgrading when new hardware comes out).
 
diamond.g said:
I was replying to your statement about Apple making money from the hardware which is why they sell the OS for so cheap. And that using a hackintosh denies Apple the money that they would have gotten from a hardware sale. What I was implying is if that was the case then they wouldn't allow older macs to upgrade to the new OS because they are losing money on hardware there too (by us not upgrading when new hardware comes out).
Click to expand...

All well and good if they produced anything similar.

Since they deem it a market not worthy of their holier than thou hardware, they would make nothing if I used 7 instead of the money I paid for OSX.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back