Interesting that you say this. On my Win 7 box at work flash is great but on my Mac Pro flash sucks. I wonder if blaming Adobe for everything is wrong.
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.
Workaround Restores Mac OS X 10.6.2 Compatibility With Intel Atom Processors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Interesting that you say this. On my Win 7 box at work flash is great but on my Mac Pro flash sucks. I wonder if blaming Adobe for everything is wrong.
Flash is an abortion on Linux. - Simple Proof.
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/96509133/m/556009441931
Certainly you should blame Adobe for Flash's failings on OS X and Linux.
The code is optimised for Windows. Hence it works well on Windows, and is poor on pretty much any other OS.
That said the latest Flash Beta *does* seem to run better on my MB than it used to. Still not as well as it does when boot camped into 7 but my Mac doesn't sound like Concorde on full reheat any more when watching videos in YouTube.
The code is optimised for Windows. Hence it works well on Windows, and is poor on pretty much any other OS.
That said the latest Flash Beta *does* seem to run better on my MB than it used to. Still not as well as it does when boot camped into 7 but my Mac doesn't sound like Concorde on full reheat any more when watching videos in YouTube.
Yeah, but what if you're surfing the web and hit a page with Flash on it?
I have the impression that the Macintosh version of Adobe's Flash, for reasons that probably involve utter stupidity somewhere, use whatever CPU resources your computer has with no positive effect at all. So whether your CPU runs at 1 GHz, 2 GHz, or 20 GHz, Adobe's Flash will suck it all in. On the other hand, that means you don't _need_ a powerful CPU for Flash.
True the kernel is open source. But modifying 3 bits of an Apple originated BINARY, is indeed creating a derivative work out of copyrighted material (the binary). The source code is another matter altogether.
But what has been done is legally a classic case of copyright infringement.
So, a DMCA violation isn't about "asking for money". It's about breaking copy protection methods, among other things.
How much RAM you got, cos it runs perfectly fine on my developer-centric 2.16GHz MB/@2GB RAM?
And when I say runs fine, I mean with a 1GB RAM Windows VM running and Safari/Mail open on the Mac side of things.
apple
This should tell everyone that apple doesnt care about the little people only the rich and famous who can afford thier high price macs look at their so-called blackfriday add only the rich and famous LONG LIVE HACKINTOSH which will eventually bring apple down its the little people that matter
This should tell everyone that apple doesnt care about the little people only the rich and famous who can afford thier high price macs look at their so-called blackfriday add only the rich and famous LONG LIVE HACKINTOSH which will eventually bring apple down its the little people that matter
Umm....okay sure.
I'm converting my HP mini to 10.6.2 as soon as I get a new SSD. I'm doing it for fun, not to eff over Apple. I already have an iMac G5 (which is breaking down from the power supply issue finally) soon to have a new iMac after this years January conference. I also already have a MacBook. I paid for a family pack and I intend to use them all. I personally don't see a problem with doing so. Apple initially did something similar to this hack before they were officially Intel powered. They just took their code, modified some of the kexts to make everything work right and went about their way testing the waters with the Intel chipsets before the new OS was released to the public.
Also, the reason this only took 2 days, was because people who are developers leaked it so people could start working on it.
What poor third world country are you living in, where you are "rich" if you can afford a MacBook?
Wrong
What this actually tells us is that OS/X is inferior OS not only incapable of supporting different CPU architectures but even incapable of supporting slight variations of the same architecture (x86).
What this actually tells us is that OS/X is inferior OS not only incapable of supporting different CPU architectures but even incapable of supporting slight variations of the same architecture (x86).
Some people in this thread have mentioned that Windows 7 is better on Atom powered laptops than OS X is. Having recently hackintoshed my Asus 1000HE, and being pretty happy with it, I'm just curious as to how exactly Win 7 would be a better experience on my netbook.
I enjoy it on my 1008ha but only because its not really suitable for OSX. The one thing about W7 that i don't like is the display driver resets quite abit (like once every 2 hours). Although not universal amongst GMA950 netbooks, its not uncommon. I get about 5 hours light surfing battery life.