backtop


Print 51 comment(s) - last by sebmel.. on Nov 12 at 11:11 AM

After much fluctuation in early builds, Apple's latest OS update does kill Atom support

Apple has long fought its customers' wish to allow free installation of OS X on custom hardware.  It has tried a variety of techniques to try to deter them from such practices, but have been unable to stop the Hackintosh community from thriving.

With its latest update to Snow Leopard OS X 10.6.2, some developers noticed that Apple had killed support for Intel Atom processors, likely in a move to squash the growing Hackintosh netbook movement.  Many users had been creating OS X netbooks, as OS X's lean footprint worked well with the systems' limited resources.

A report on a later build indicated that Atom support may have been restored.  However, the final release now indeed appears to have killed Atom support.  OSXDaily reports that Hackintosh forums are "blowing up with problems of 10.6.2 instant rebooting their Atom-based notebooks."

Currently it's mission success for Apple, but that may not last for long -- hackers are already working to produce a modded 10.6.2 kernel with Atom support restored.  For now, OS X hackers suggest those with Atom Hackintoshes don't update their machines.

The update available here is a good idea, however for those with non-Atom Hackintoshes or normal Macs.  It provides a very important fix to a critical bug where Snow Leopard would accidentally delete user's account data, including their documents, music, pictures, and downloads.  The update weighs in at 473 MB.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Oh well....
By brshoemak on 11/10/2009 2:33:46 PM , Rating: 5
Figures. I just picked up a Dell Mini 10v, 2GB of memory and Snow Leopard. Of course, I have absolutely no intention of upgrading the memory to 2GB, installing Snow Leopard and only upgrading to 10.6.1 as it would violate the EULA of Mac OS X and frankly I would hate to upset Steve Jobs.

If anyone asks, I bought Snow Leopard so I could use the DVD as a coaster because I like my coasters to have pictures of white kitty cats looking back at me.




RE: Oh well....
By Yawgm0th on 11/10/2009 2:53:45 PM , Rating: 2
Give this man a 6.


RE: Oh well....
By MonkeyPaw on 11/10/2009 2:57:24 PM , Rating: 2
Don't worry, Apple continues to battle with a community that has more total time and resources to undo whatever Apple puts in place. Putting OSX on a netbook is not a "casual copy" issue like lending your buddy the upgrade DVD (which Apple has never attempted to prevent). So what does Apple really hope to accomplish? They might start making enemies of the people who are digging down to the code level--those are dangerous enemies to have.

Not that I'm excusing this activity, but I never understand why you'd go after a crowd that would otherwise not pay for your products. What I really find odd is why Apple had official Atom support in the first place. They have no Atom products, and have always claimed that netbooks are junk--maybe they just feel burned that netbooks are selling so well?


RE: Oh well....
By reader1 on 11/10/09, Rating: -1
RE: Oh well....
By weskurtz0081 on 11/10/2009 3:59:36 PM , Rating: 5
This is about how much sense you make reader1.

http://dsfv.schnuerpel.eu/sense_this_picture_makes...


RE: Oh well....
By Marlonsm on 11/11/2009 12:25:56 PM , Rating: 2
He doesn't make that much sense...


RE: Oh well....
By weskurtz0081 on 11/10/2009 4:01:06 PM , Rating: 2
Plus, you think people who are in the market to buy Apple's "affordable" tablet are going to be the same people that would buy a netbook and install OSX on it? Really? Come on man, I am sure you can do better that that!


RE: Oh well....
By Proxes on 11/10/2009 4:44:19 PM , Rating: 5
Apple's 1984 commercial should have had Steve Job's face on the big screen.


RE: Oh well....
By damianrobertjones on 11/11/2009 6:42:46 AM , Rating: 1
Once again, if Apples tablet sells I'll shake my head and cry.

Other than me, I know no one with a tablet or umpc/mid. Not one. I own/have owned an Asus R2h, Samsung Q1 Ultra, Tosh M400 and Tosh M750. Eveyone states 'Ohh that's nice' when they see/saw them, but still wouldn't buy.

Then again, people would buy melted butter if it was from Apple


RE: Oh well....
By frobizzle on 11/11/2009 8:03:46 AM , Rating: 2
Pirks?? Is that you again??


RE: Oh well....
By nafhan on 11/10/2009 4:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
why Apple had official Atom support in the first place
If I had to guess it's more along the lines of removing inherent functionality by specifically checking for the Atom and then disabling the computer if it's running one, as atom based systems are just a supported chipset (945G) plus an x86 processor.


RE: Oh well....
By GreenEnvt on 11/10/2009 10:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
not always 945gc, there are also Nvidia ION based atom systems out there.


RE: Oh well....
By sebmel on 11/11/09, Rating: 0
RE: Oh well....
By KGBird on 11/10/2009 3:08:09 PM , Rating: 3
Right about this time (or maybe a year or two ago) a more rational company would have said to itself "Hey a lot of people really want to buy our OS and just our OS. Maybe we should sell it to them. We could make gobs of money!"

Seriously, does Apple make so much on the markup of the hardware that they can't implement a business model based on the OS alone, or at least give the customer the option of purchasing hardware+software or just software?


RE: Oh well....
By Bateluer on 11/10/2009 3:12:30 PM , Rating: 1
When Jobs retires, I suspect Apple will likely begin another long slow decline like the one they were in before he took over.


RE: Oh well....
By BrandtTheMan on 11/10/2009 3:19:03 PM , Rating: 2
This scares me... I'm a big apple hater. I hate them and their business practices with a passion. However, I love the competition they have given to M$ and/or linux&UB. This can only benefit us the consumer. If they fade when he retires be prepared to fork over your wallet.


RE: Oh well....
By ExarKun333 on 11/10/09, Rating: -1
RE: Oh well....
By EasyC on 11/11/2009 12:10:39 PM , Rating: 1
And I would download BitTorrent again :)


RE: Oh well....
By Keeir on 11/10/2009 5:19:23 PM , Rating: 2
You know, something people seem to forget about business is

Its not your Revenue
Its not your Profit
Its you Profit/Investment that determines if a Business is "good"

I agree though, I wish Apple would sell a "Hand's Off" Edition where they would not support you being foolish, but whoose really going to buy that? It would probably take a billion dollar revenue stream to really get Apple interested... do you think 10 million people would buy Apple OS software?


RE: Oh well....
By Akrovah on 11/10/2009 7:56:22 PM , Rating: 2
While I can;t speak for the other 9,999,999 people, I'd probably pick up a copy of a non locked Mac OS, just to see and play with, you know?


RE: Oh well....
By segerstein on 11/11/2009 5:29:30 AM , Rating: 2
This .2 update is not about unofficial hardware not being supported by Apple Inc., it is more like throwing rocks under the feet of those who dare to install OS 10 on unofficial hardware.


I'm surprised an Atom can even run OSX
By Bateluer on 11/10/2009 3:13:48 PM , Rating: 2
The N270 machine I had last year was next to useless. I don't see how that POS is going to run a modern beefy OS.




RE: I'm surprised an Atom can even run OSX
By ExarKun333 on 11/10/2009 3:38:17 PM , Rating: 2
It's a Netbook dummy.


RE: I'm surprised an Atom can even run OSX
By Bateluer on 11/10/2009 4:33:47 PM , Rating: 2
Yes . . . my N270 was in an EeePC. Sold it because couldn't do more than run XP and a single word document.


By MonkeyPaw on 11/10/2009 5:32:22 PM , Rating: 2
Running an OS is not a demanding task for a CPU. Vista and Win7 run just fine on netbooks, so long as you have sufficient RAM. A gaming machine it isn't, but for cheap computing, netbooks aren't so bad.


RE: I'm surprised an Atom can even run OSX
By Runiteshark on 11/10/2009 8:41:49 PM , Rating: 3
Sounds like you suffer from a case of retarded

My girlfriend has been running her 1Ghz 4G surf with a piece of crap celeron without issues.

She overclocked it to 1ghz and is running a super trimmed down version of XP at around 340mb installed (not including the page file).

If she can use that just fine, and the 270 don't work for you, sounds like you're doing it wrong.


RE: I'm surprised an Atom can even run OSX
By Alexstarfire on 11/10/2009 10:17:10 PM , Rating: 2
I don't want to call BS, but how did you get XP down to 340 MB installed and retain all the functionality and compatibility? I got it to about 1.5 GB or so while retaining everything useful, but not lower than that without sacrificing. Granted I'd have to reinstall to tell you what it is on a fresh install. I've installed a lot since then and the Windows folder is about 2.5 GB now.


RE: I'm surprised an Atom can even run OSX
By johnsonx on 11/10/2009 11:42:43 PM , Rating: 2
nlite


RE: I'm surprised an Atom can even run OSX
By Alexstarfire on 11/11/2009 2:06:12 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, I'm quite familiar with the program, but that wasn't my question. He said 340 MB installed, not just 340 MB on the installation disc. Unpacked the disc is far bigger than that.


By darkhawk1980 on 11/11/2009 6:59:29 AM , Rating: 2
How do you think people manage to get a full XP installation onto USB drives? (dating back 3 or 4 years ago where 2 GB drives were the most you could get)

There are ways to get XP much slimmer. Search around, you'll find it. Don[t be afraid to Google. Or Bing if thats your thing.


By Bluestealth on 11/11/2009 11:35:37 AM , Rating: 2
I think perhaps you are including the swap file, which is pretty big on most systems. Take that, system restore etc... out and its pretty small, on my very stripped down install for a internet/email pc it fit on a mini-CD, that was still including a lot more than it needed btw. I had space left over for some extra programs.

The largest thing on any OS CD now is printer and scanner drivers I think. If you only need one or two... you can get a really small image.


By Boze on 11/11/2009 10:27:37 AM , Rating: 2
Wow, if your girlfriend ever breaks up with you, I'm totally going after. A girl that nerdy has to be hot.


Why in the eff...
By Motoman on 11/10/2009 3:22:21 PM , Rating: 2
...doesn't Apple just sell it's OS openly, for installation wherever you want it. Like on your Dell.

Apple's OS marketshare would probably skyrocket, and drag along with it the itty-bitty Apple software catalog.

They have the right to do whatever they want to with it. But it seems moronic not to just let people buy it and use it that want it.




RE: Why in the eff...
By Camikazi on 11/10/2009 3:30:51 PM , Rating: 2
They make their money on the overpriced hardware, which is why the OS is 30$, plus opening the OS means having to support a HUGE amount of hardware, which frankly I'm not sure they can do.


RE: Why in the eff...
By Yawgm0th on 11/10/2009 3:59:30 PM , Rating: 1
I've said it before and I'll say it again: They would make much, much more money in the OS market.

An OS sells in higher volume than a computer and at a much, much higher margin. Apple would have 2000% - 5000% profit margins on OS X licenses vs. 50% to 150% on Macs, and the OS will sell at least ten times the volume, even if prices are raised substantially. The hardware business will see a small decline, but not enough to be unprofitable or for the company to be less profitable as a whole.

The wonder is that Apple can do all this without actively supporting hardware. There is this fallacy out there that Microsoft spends lots of time and money supporting hardware. Hardware supports itself. Vendors (almost) never release hardware that doesn't work on Windows. If Mac had a bigger market share, the same would be true. They're similar enough at this point that most vendors already support Mac.

Hardware vendors would come out of the woodwork to say their stuff works with Mac. At least a few of the big OEMs might start selling their own Macs. Yes, once again this would cut into the hardware business, but it would still be more profitable than what Apple does now.

At the very least, fighting the Hackintosh community is a terrible business decision. I would conjecture that 90% of the users of Hackintoshes will not buy a "real" Mac under any circumstances. Even if half of them pirate the OS, enough profit would be made on the other half to more than make up for the small sales loss on the other 10%.

Of course, I'm making up those numbers. But Apple doesn't have any numbers to the contrary, and I think my assumptions are reasonable in this case.


RE: Why in the eff...
By jonmcc33 on 11/10/2009 4:22:14 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
They would make much, much more money in the OS market.


I assume you mean open PC market? If they just sold their OS on the shelf then they probably wouldn't sell much as people avoid that section of the electronics store.

They can't open up to the PC because then they would need to support 10X more hardware and then still lose out in competition to Microsoft for the software.

Mac is just like Linux regarding usefulness. If it weren't for the Apple logo then nobody would be buying a Mac to begin with.


RE: Why in the eff...
By reader1 on 11/10/09, Rating: -1
RE: Why in the eff...
By weskurtz0081 on 11/10/2009 4:55:18 PM , Rating: 3
You still haven't yet explained to me, even though I have asked multiple times, how Mircosoft is a monopoly.

You really don't make any sense at all man. Dell, Acer, HP, have higher revenue than Apple. So, by your standards, since they are poor companies, Apple must also be a poor company right?

Clearly, you are not capable of backing yourself up by participating in a conversation, hence the post and run tactics that you on a regular basis. It would be nice if you would stop trolling and actually contribute to the forums with thought out posts that actually make sense and are coherent.


RE: Why in the eff...
By weskurtz0081 on 11/10/2009 5:27:38 PM , Rating: 2
You still haven't yet explained to me, even though I have asked multiple times, how Mircosoft is a monopoly.

You really don't make any sense at all man. Dell, Acer, HP, have higher revenue than Apple. So, by your standards, since they are poor companies, Apple must also be a poor company right?

Clearly, you are not capable of backing yourself up by participating in a conversation, hence the post and run tactics that you on a regular basis. It would be nice if you would stop trolling and actually contribute to the forums with thought out posts that actually make sense and are coherent.


RE: Why in the eff...
By Sazar on 11/10/2009 6:14:41 PM , Rating: 2
Speaking of poor companies, wasn't it Microsoft that bailed out Apple with a "loan" of sorts?

Just wondering.

And by the way, the hardware in current Macs is the same as in regular "pc's". There is nothing high-quality about it. It is just advertised as being more desirable. The old, all-in-one Macs on the other hand were pretty awesome.


RE: Why in the eff...
By Einy0 on 11/10/2009 6:11:55 PM , Rating: 2
I agree 200% the anyone who says the contrary is an idiot. The computer geeks would be the first to play with the OS and figure everything out so that everyone else who wanted it would have a good experience. I don't see Dell and HP ever selling OSX pre-installed. People who know what hardware to buy to build top of line PCs would. Enthusiasts if you will... If you want a pre-packaged PC with OSX then you get it from Apple. Hardware is a low profit margin sector of computers. Has been for a while now. I doubt that will change. Software on the other hand can make gobs of cash. Look at M$ for example. Every Mac user I know raves about Apple software. They must be good at something...


RE: Why in the eff...
By sebmel on 11/11/09, Rating: 0
RE: Why in the eff...
By sebmel on 11/11/09, Rating: 0
By johnbuk on 11/10/2009 5:18:16 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
It provides a very important fix to a critical bug where Snow Leopard would accidentally delete user's account data, including their documents, music, pictures, and downloads.




By Boze on 11/11/2009 10:35:28 AM , Rating: 2
That statement in your title is technically accurate, because Windows Vista never had a bug that allowed a Guest account to delete all your user data. Snow Leopard never had the problem of keeping user data secure from deletion. :)


Isn't this illegal?
By BigToque on 11/10/2009 3:57:13 PM , Rating: 1
Didn't Microsoft or Intel get in trouble before because they were making things only work with Intel CPU's when AMD CPU's ran the software just fine?

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I swear that preventing software from running on certain hardware that was fully capable of running it has come up before.




RE: Isn't this illegal?
By DarkElfa on 11/10/2009 4:47:48 PM , Rating: 4
Illegal? No, but it is a shitty, control freak thing to do. Apple does not want the people to realize that you can have just as fine an Apple experience on a 300 dollar netbook as you can on a 999 dollar Macbook. Apple pretends they are in competition with Microsoft but its just not the case. Apple fears actual competition when its on the same level as themselves. Restriction always equals fear in business. If they won't let you run a competing piece of software on their devise its because they're afraid they won't be able to compete. apple doesn't compete with anyone and won't until they open up their software to any platform that wants to use it. When they do that I'll start to actually pay attention to their commercials.


Never say never.
By TEAMSWITCHER on 11/10/2009 4:58:59 PM , Rating: 1
Apple may one day decide that it's product portfolio is diverse enough to sell Mac OS X for the PC as a stand alone product. Right now they are satisfied with growing Mac Hardware sales. It may someday happen, and on that day Microsoft's stock price is going to nosedive.




RE: Never say never.
By Leper Messiah on 11/10/2009 7:10:37 PM , Rating: 1
and then it'll come back up as soon as the market share of OSX rises enough for hackers to actually give enough of a shit to program viruses for it, and everyone realizes that most of OSX's superiority comes from the fact that almost no one runs it.


Not Worth Reading
By hiscross on 11/10/2009 10:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
Apple Refuses to be Dell. And that is a good thing.




More juvenility from Mr. Mick
By sebmel on 11/12/2009 11:11:43 AM , Rating: 2
What we do know is that Mick doesn't have any inside information from Apple.

This article is paranoid conjecture. Apple has never "supported" Atom processors because it has never built a machine using one.

It is true that Mac OS 10.6 kills support for PPC processors but Mick wants to rile the PC community so he's stirring the angst over Atom.

A much more likely explanation for the breaking, re-creation and breaking again, of Atom COMPATIBILITY is that Apple simply isn't testing against CPUs they don't use. The obvious evidence, for anyone without Mick's agenda, is that Mac OS 10.6.2 update didn't break all 'hackintoshes'.




“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith














botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki