backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 72 comment(s) - last by rcc.. on Nov 11 at 4:39 PM

Hackers of OS X netbooks rejoice, Apple has restored support for Intel Atom processors!  (Source: Stella's Blog)
Latest build revives missing Atom functionality, developer who proclaimed its death apologizes

Apple has long opted for a system of closed computer hardware, disallowing third party OS X computers.  Nonetheless, small companies retailing cheaper OS X boxes have continually popped up, the latest of which is Psystar.  Legal pressure from Apple has typically succeeded in eventually killing such companies, but it typically isn't long before a new one pops up.

Individual users also are forbidden from building their own OS X machines, something that has long irritated enthusiasts who like Apple (largely graphics professionals).  However, for years rebellious customers have created "Hackintoshes" -- custom built computers running OS X.  Among the most popular recent builds are netbook Hackintoshes, as OS X, like Linux tends to run rather lean (Snow Leopard uses ~225 MB of memory when active), perfect for an ultraportable PC with minimalist hardware.

Several sources had broke news that Apple had killed support for Intel Atom processors in the latest developer build of OS X 10.6.2, presumably in an attempt to stop the spread of netbook Hackintoshes.

Among those that first posted the news was Stell's Blog, the blog of an avid developer and Hackintosh fan.  In a recently posted update he breaks the good news that Atom support has been resurrected "zombie style" in the latest developer build, 10C535.  He writes:
Wow, didn’t expect to get linked all over the internet for this damn post. Anyways, in the latest development build Atom appears to have resurrected itself zombie style in 10C535. The Atom lives another day, but nothing is concrete until the final version of 10.6.2 is out.
For those interested in exploring the world of Hackintoshes, a good place to start is the OSx86 projected, located here.  This project provides on of the web's best sources of software to help you get OS X on your custom machine and also provides a lot of detailed information about what hardware OS X supports, etc.  For beginning users looking for a completely frustration-free installation process, you also might want to check out Psystar's RebelEFI hack, a $50 piece of software that allows ultra-easy installation of OS X on custom hardware.

Comments     Threshold


EU
By R6Raven on 11/6/2009 8:57:15 AM , Rating: 5
So, unless I missed something, I gotta be the one to point out the obvious here. Apple can try to configure its entire operating system to only function on certain hardware without complaints from the EU, but MS offers only their browser in the install package [when they're all FREE to begin with] and they get slapped with a multi-million dollar suit.

Damn you Steve.




RE: EU
By marvdmartian on 11/6/2009 9:11:37 AM , Rating: 2
Proof positive that MS is looked upon as the evil juggernaut (empire?), while Apple is just a small group of fruity people, who will never be any bother. An attitude that probably wouldn't change even if Apple and MS changed places in the popularity ratio.


RE: EU
By reader1 on 11/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 9:52:56 AM , Rating: 5
I am curious, do you know what a monopoly is?


RE: EU
By invidious on 11/6/2009 10:05:12 AM , Rating: 5
Its not important to know what buzzwords mean, its only important to use them in a way that backs your adjenda and makes sense to other people who dont know what it means.


RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 10:13:09 AM , Rating: 2
No kidding..... I think you might be on to something here.


RE: EU
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/6/2009 10:21:58 AM , Rating: 2
He is most likely regurgitating something he read or heard.


RE: EU
By exanimas on 11/6/2009 6:30:23 PM , Rating: 3
Don't you worry about blank, let me worry about blank.


RE: EU
By Myg on 11/6/2009 2:07:12 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds like he's talking about the monopoly guy. The overweight sod never really helped you out when you played, did he?


RE: EU
By themaster08 on 11/6/2009 11:44:38 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
That's why there are no significant new features in Windows 7.

Then what's Apple's excuse with OS X 10.6?


RE: EU
By reader1 on 11/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 12:14:31 PM , Rating: 2
Once again, explain to me....

Do you know what a monopoly is?

AND, how is Microsoft a monopoly?

Or, are you just going to keep avoiding my questions because you have no idea what you are talking about?


RE: EU
By Lifted on 11/6/2009 12:36:17 PM , Rating: 4
He is avoiding your questions because he is trolling. Oh, and welcome to the internet. ;)


RE: EU
By skirvmi on 11/6/2009 2:19:30 PM , Rating: 2
EU monopoly or US monopoly? EU defines their monopolies based on the size of the company. US considers a company a monopoly if it tries to prevent competition.

The real drawback of a monopoly is not always lack of innovation. The main problem is monopolies utilize a different price structure and goods cost more for consumers.

I don't necessarily agree that Microsoft is acting like a monopoly in the strict sense of the term. I do think they are held to a different standard. I guarantee if Microsoft tried something like this, let say having an Intel version of Windows 7 that costs less, they would immediately be brought up on anti-trust charges. For this reason, I think Microsoft avoids anything that could have the appearance of being even a little monopolistic.


RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 2:22:57 PM , Rating: 2
"EU monopoly or US monopoly? EU defines their monopolies based on the size of the company. US considers a company a monopoly if it tries to prevent competition."

Whatever the heck he is talking about, I don't care which one, he just keeps throwing the word around but will never explain how he came to the conclusion that MS is a monopoly.


RE: EU
By heffeque on 11/7/2009 3:06:22 PM , Rating: 2
Try finding a laptop in your everyday store that doesn't have Windows pre-installed (other than Mac laptops). It's pretty f$cking difficult.


RE: EU
By Alexstarfire on 11/7/2009 7:29:46 PM , Rating: 3
What you've got here is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The "Everyday" stores, as you put it, are only going to have what's in demand, which is Mac OS and Windows. Of course, you can't have a demand without offering products. You can find some Linux computers out there. I believe Wal-Mart still sells a couple, but I haven't checked in forever to be honest. The only places you're going to find things beside Windows and Mac OS are when you go into the "mom & pop" stores. They are more specialized and will have just about anything. And usually if they don't they can order/build it for you.

I don't believe that just because places don't sell something makes someone else a monopoly already. It's like saying Nintendo has a monopoly on handheld consoles just because they are one of the only people to make them, other than Sony mostly. Sure, there are others, but they suck and are limited.


RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/7/2009 9:10:44 PM , Rating: 2
So, it's a monopoly if you can't buy it in most every store? Interesting!


RE: EU
By Penti on 11/6/2009 12:22:45 PM , Rating: 1
Nope it don't patents do that. However OS X is advancing just fine. With new technology hitting before it comes to Windows in it's final form. It's however no corporate desktop however much you like neither of them.


RE: EU
By themaster08 on 11/6/2009 1:05:18 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Microsoft's monopoly prevents Mac OS X and Linux from advancing.

The only thing I see preventing anything around here is the Apple hive mind preventing your intelligence from advancing.


RE: EU
By damianrobertjones on 11/6/2009 5:53:04 PM , Rating: 2
If it wasn't for MS, apple probably wouldn't advance at all. Apple 'has' to do something to try and get market share.

Oh yes, sorry, they simply make up fruitcake adverts!


RE: EU
By fsardis on 11/6/2009 12:22:23 PM , Rating: 2
and yet Win7 has far more features than OSX and looks way nicer.


RE: EU
By log on 11/6/2009 2:07:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well, not quite. EU has threatened Apple to remove the iphone from the market if the issue with exploding handsets prove dangerous for consumers.

I don't think that there is a target for specific companies, but larger companies, or ones that have been looked at before, are probably going to be looked at more throughly.


RE: EU
By reader1 on 11/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: EU
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/6/2009 9:26:29 AM , Rating: 5
Yes, restricting to a closed platform creates competition, are you a fucking idiot?


RE: EU
By saarek on 11/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: EU
By MindParadox on 11/6/2009 9:42:26 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Sadly most people that want a hackintosh are also the sort of people that jailbreak their iPhones, cheap skate thieves that only want to steal and not pay for the products that they use.


I'm sorry, you have to be the first literate brain damaged moron I have ever seen capable of exressing their idocy this eloquently.

To remove some of the cushion in front of your face as you fall on it, in order to jailbreak or unlock and iphone, you HAVE TO BUY IT FIRST. oh, and the jailbreaking and unlocking costs money as well in alot of cases.

to build your own hackintosh you have to buy the hardware FIRST then buy the OS.

show me where the thievery is? oh, wait, is it because they don't have any desire to pay at least double the cost for a cumputer they can build themselves?

oh yeah, the Hackintosh software so that you can install OSX? you have to pay for it too unless you want to work harder for the reward(some people like hard work)


RE: EU
By rcc on 11/6/2009 12:49:23 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
show me where the thievery is?


More like breach of contract. As in the EULA or equivalent that they agreed to when they bought the Mac OS??


RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 1:13:55 PM , Rating: 3
Well, his question still stands. He said, show the thievery, which is not the same as a breach of contract. The point was, it was being suggested that he/someone else is stealing, not breaching contract.


RE: EU
By rcc on 11/11/2009 4:39:43 PM , Rating: 2
And I didn't refute his statement.

However, since you brought it up, I for one consider breach of contract a more serious infraction.

Thievery speaks to your morals.

Breach of contract speaks to your honor and your morals.

And yes, I realize I have very old fashioned views.


RE: EU
By smackababy on 11/6/2009 9:44:58 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sadly most people that want a hackintosh are also the sort of people that jailbreak their iPhones, cheap skate thieves that only want to steal and not pay for the products that they use.

Are you serious? So the people who don't want to pay Apple's insane hardware prices, but enjoy their software are criminals now? And those who jail break iPhones to not be locked into AT&Ts terrible service are those as well?

That is just plain ignorance.


RE: EU
By saarek on 11/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 10:16:27 AM , Rating: 2
"Firstly spec for spec Apple's computers are not overpriced and no I am not a fanboy, I happen to own both Apple and Windows based computers, like many I built my own desktop gaming rig and have Win 7 on it."

Really? I have speced out better PC based notebooks that cost 50% of the price of an Apple notebook that has WORSE specs, so you might want to adjust your statement a bit.

Also, there is an entire community that makes apps for jailbreaking an iPhone, so just because you jailbreak it to open it up doesn't mean you are pirating anything.

Just because you know 4 people that do certain things does not mean you can generalize an entire group. Seriously, I am sure you know better than that.


RE: EU
By smackababy on 11/6/2009 10:35:11 AM , Rating: 2
First off, I am glad you've proven your ignorance. Based on a sample size of 4, you've determined the entire population of iPhone jailbreakers and hackintosh owners are criminals.

Secondly, have you seen the prices on Apple computers? Please go find me a spec for spec PC/Mac comparison that are the same price. You can't...


RE: EU
By foolsgambit11 on 11/6/2009 1:00:38 PM , Rating: 2
Well, now, to be fair, I do see a point there. For instance, if I were to market an Xbox 360 emulator or PS3 emulator that would allow you to play games on your computer, MS and Sony would have problems with that, and I think legitimately so, since I would be cutting into their hardware sales. But apparently that's not the case with Apple's products. (I guess there is a difference in that Apple sells OS X separate from the hardware and game systems don't, but in this analogy, I'm comparing OSX to the games, which are 'locked' to the system just like OSX is locked to hardware.)

Therefore, this can all be resolved if we call a spade a spade. Consoles are expected to be monolithic products, computers aren't. Ergo, Macintoshes aren't computers, they're 'computing consoles'.


RE: EU
By Alexstarfire on 11/6/2009 7:08:08 PM , Rating: 2
The reason for them having problems with it stems from more than money. You have to hack those consoles to be able to make emulators. Which is of course against the law.


RE: EU
By foolsgambit11 on 11/7/2009 3:29:12 AM , Rating: 2
Switch that around and it's more accurate. The reason you have to hack those consoles to make emulators is because of money.

And still, how is that different than Apple, where you have to hack things to make it work on non-Apple hardware? The more I think about it, the more I'm coming to realize that Macs are consoles.


RE: EU
By Alexstarfire on 11/7/2009 5:30:32 AM , Rating: 2
I can assure you that hacking consoles came before piracy.

Hacking something is hacking something, that's it. Some console mods are different, like when you need a mod chip, but some aren't. The difference seems to be that you're not trying to get software to work with other software (console situation), but rather get the software to work with the computer (Apple's situation).

I think both are stupid though. You can't stop piracy by just trying to block them, so why bother?


RE: EU
By Flunk on 11/7/2009 6:04:52 PM , Rating: 2
Your comparison is absurd because what you suggest is completely impossible. You can't emulate a PS3 or Xbox 360 on a PC without special hardware (Both user PowerPC derived processors that wouldn't be possible to emulate on a PC that wasn't many times more powerful than existing PCs) that would end up costing much more than the 360 or PS3 hardware. Neither Microsoft nor Sony is making a lot on the hardware, they make all their money on the games.

For these reasons and more, your argument doesn't make sense.


RE: EU
By web2dot0 on 11/6/2009 2:02:53 PM , Rating: 1
They are criminals, because they are breaking the law. Read the EULA.
If you don't like to follow laws, that's fine, but to say that they have a right to run hackintosh's is simply NOT TRUE.

It is what it is, don't sugar coat it.

Are you the same people that believes that you have a right to watch free movies on the internet because movie costs too much to purchase? Just curious.


RE: EU
By StoveMeister on 11/6/2009 5:42:38 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
They are criminals, because they are breaking the law. Read the EULA

Um- not the same. Contrary to what you (and Apple, and Microsoft and a million other software producers) would like to think, a EULA is not the law. Its a contract, and a pretty shonky one at that. In fact I'm unaware of EULA's being tested too much in courts of law because the authors don't seem to WANT them tested. Funny that.


RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 9:45:12 AM , Rating: 2
Tell me this, how is jailbreaking your iPhone stealing?

Also, how is buying a legitimate copy of OSX and installing it on MY pc stealing? I bought everything involved, I paid for it.


RE: EU
By reader1 on 11/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 11:08:07 AM , Rating: 1
I asked this....

"Tell me this, how is jailbreaking your iPhone stealing?

Also, how is buying a legitimate copy of OSX and installing it on MY pc stealing? I bought everything involved, I paid for it."

You responded with this.

"Jail-breaking is wrong for the same reason modding an Xbox 360 is wrong. Apple is right to try and stop it just as Microsoft is right to ban people from XBL for using modded 360's."

I am not sure if you are aware, but these are two different things, and people get banned from XBL not because they are stealing, they get banned because they ruin the XBL experience by cheating in games.

People aren't jailbreaking iPhones because they are trying to cheat in games are rip stuff off, they are doing so because they want freedom of choice. Much of the stuff available in the "other" app stores was developed by someone specifically for that app store (Cydia etc).

Plus, just in case you missed my point above, I said "stealing", you responded with something completely irrelevant to my post. Nice try though.


RE: EU
By reader1 on 11/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 12:13:10 PM , Rating: 1
The point is, it only stop people from playing pirated game online, and it also stops people from cheating. He is speaking specifically about pirating things though, where jailbreaking the iPhone is not a tool for piracy.

The point in jailbreaking the iPhone is that there is a large developer community for jailbroken iPhones, and a lot of those people develop apps for the phones.

How do you propose that ISP's figure out which devices are hacked and which aren't? Do you realize all that will do is drive internet prices through the roof because of the added additional cost in actually rooting out cracked software? Do you think about these ideas before you post them?


RE: EU
By Cheesew1z69 on 11/6/2009 12:45:24 PM , Rating: 1
And if I remember right, this is HARDWARE hack on the XBOX, the IPHONE is SOFTWARE, big difference.


RE: EU
By smackababy on 11/6/2009 1:30:26 PM , Rating: 1
Actually it isn't even a hardware hack for the Xbox. It is flashing the firmware of the DVD drive. And they also ban people who have "modified" HDDs; ones that the person bought the same model for a fraction of the price and put it in the perifial case.


RE: EU
By R6Raven on 11/6/2009 9:39:25 AM , Rating: 2
To your initial remark, touche. But I have to disagree with the fact that doing so in this regard encourages competition.

I think the competition in this case stems from PC manufacturers (like HP) making machines that don't suck, like Acers. If Apple wanted to "compete" with Microsoft, they'd let their OS operate on any number of platforms and let the product speak for itself. Apple proving that they could make a stable, reliable, secure OS that functions on a mix of hardware would cause MS to go back to the drawing board to at least double-check their product, and improve at best, resulting in true competition between the two.

I personally think the fact that they can't contributes to such a column, but that's just me.


RE: EU
By rcc on 11/6/2009 1:21:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If Apple wanted to "compete" with Microsoft, they'd let their OS operate on any number of platforms and let the product speak for itself


Well, there's the problem. Apple really doesn't want to compete with MS on an OS basis, although that's a common misconception. They wouldn't mind supplanting them, but they don't compete. That was a decision they made back in the day of the first IBM PC.

As has been noted elsewhere, MS is a software house, Apple wants to sell hardware.


RE: EU
By invidious on 11/6/2009 10:07:56 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Restricting the Mac OS X to Apple hardware encourages competition, while Microsoft allowing Windows to run on any hardware discourages it.
Please do not procreate until you figure out how to use your brain.


RE: EU
By OrSin on 11/9/2009 11:41:34 AM , Rating: 1
No they would not. The only reason Ms would want to stop it is if the system allow "back up" game to work on. MS only make the xbox console to get money for the game. Sony is pretty much the same, although they did want the last generation to push out blue as well.

The console are their to play the game.


RE: EU
By crystal clear on 11/6/2009 10:00:37 AM , Rating: 2
Yes you missed this-

Apple's marketshare rose from 5.12 percent to 5.26 percent.

Its market share is so irrelevant that its not worth the time & effort of the E.U. commission.

Cannot compare Microsoft to Apple....

Apple is like a fly sitting on the lion's (microsoft) nose.


RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 10:03:23 AM , Rating: 2
Anti-competitive is anti competitive, doesn't matter how big you are as far as the laws are concerned.

The only reason no one does anything about it is because, like you said, they are small potatoes, but it doesn't make it any better.


RE: EU
By reader1 on 11/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 10:20:24 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I do actually. You don't understand the word "monopoly".


RE: EU
By crystal clear on 11/6/2009 10:27:43 AM , Rating: 2
You got a point there, but..

The E.U. commission are fishermen looking out for the prize catch namely the "giant bluefin tuna" (microsoft),they are not interested in the sardines (apple).

The giant bluefin tuna fetches more money in the marketplace.


RE: EU
By weskurtz0081 on 11/6/2009 10:29:29 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah, that's my main point, they are going to where they can get the most money.

IMO, for the EU, it's more about the $$$ than the actual principle.


RE: EU
By Penti on 11/6/2009 12:17:15 PM , Rating: 2
Apple don't sell an OS, OEMs are free to configure Windows any way they like now more then ever, as they can actually not install / or uninstall the browser. If Apple sold it separately they could have some of the same criticism but they don't. You can't create an unfair market with your own software running on your own hardware. Apple can't punish anyone with their software. No OEM will sell a computer without a browser pre-installed. MS don't sell computers. But MS managed to punish for example IBM when they released Win 95 and didn't release the OEM licenses to them until the release day but did release them to their competitors.

MS is the company that has sued companies for using the linux kernel in products so they do deserve some criticism. OS X even licenses the Arial fonts from them. Dominating can be a bad thing. But it is it's competitors that sued MS not the users or EU by them selfs. But companies like Opera don't need to feel disenfranchised anymore when IE can actually be removed from the systems. However MS is still a company holding vital assets which hinder companies from going forward with a lot of stuff. Hinders compatibility and so forth. Now they own VC-1 sits in the AACS LA board, own the vital webfonts, owns FAT32, vfat etc that's vital for compatibility even with Windows, how else would you transfer files from windows to hardware boxes? Like GPS-systems, files for dedicated media players, TV-sets and so on. If a mp3-player, cell-phone etc would use a file-system not supported by windows you couldn't use it with windows OOB.


RE: EU
By ET on 11/6/2009 3:35:58 PM , Rating: 2
I think you're missing several things. First, if you're referring to the Atom issue, you're missing the fact that Apple at no point in time made a product that doesn't run on the Atom. Other than a single person saying this would be the case with a future release, nothing happened.

The second thing you're missing is what the problem is with Microsoft's position. That's using its dominant position in the OS market to muscle out other product producers (browser makers in this case), by bundling a product. That's anti-competitive. You may not agree it's a problem, but it's nothing like what Apple may be doing. Locking an OS to specific hardware is exactly the opposite. In fact, that's what virtually every company is doing with its products. Not to mention that Apple doesn't hold a dominant position in the OS market, so it can't use the position it doesn't have for anything.


RE: EU
By Alexstarfire on 11/6/2009 7:43:55 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry, but I've heard this argument sooo many times and believe it's total trash. Who exactly are they pushing out of the browser market? NO ONE. FF has been gaining traction for years, and we have Chrome, Opera, Safari, and a couple others. On top of that... THEY ARE FREE. Exactly who are they hurting again? That's right, no one. Apple does the exact same thing but what happens to them.... nothing. If you compared the percentage of people who use Safari on Macs to the percentage of people who use IE on Windows you'd probably find a much larger percent for those on Apple's side.


RE: EU
By mellomonk on 11/7/2009 3:10:57 AM , Rating: 2
No, sorry you are incorrect. Read the various accounts on the internet of the history of Netscape. They were nearly wiped off the map simply because IE was the default browser on the dominate OS on the majority of desktops. It is only in recent years as web culture grew and folks became more and more web savy that browser competition has started anew. Even today I am shocked by the number of folks I meet whom only see the the internet through IE. That is all they have ever known. Safari came along during this new period of web browser competition and faces a great deal of competition even among Mac users where Firefox is extremely popular.

To this day many corporate desktops are locked to IE only. Every computer in the banking corporation (a top 6 bank here in the USA) I work for can only us IE. Extrapolate that forward and you can see how possibly millions of users are forced to us IE at least when surfing at work. Not to mention we use browser interfaces on many of our system applications here. Despite renewed browser competition there is a huge portion of the computer world still locked into IE due to policy, bundling, and at times ignorance. This is important for the many see the browser as the new OS.


RE: EU
By Alexstarfire on 11/7/09, Rating: 0
OSX Memory footprint
By fsardis on 11/6/2009 12:29:22 PM , Rating: 3
Seriously, how do you people conclude that OSX is lightweight?
My new MBP is using 2.18GB RAM out of 4GB and that is simply running safari with 3 tabs, MSN, activity monitor and skype.




RE: OSX Memory footprint
By axias41 on 11/7/2009 3:21:25 AM , Rating: 2
Sshh, not too loud...


Steve Jobs: CEO of the Decade
By crystal clear on 11/6/2009 9:48:26 AM , Rating: 2
You don't say man! With all the chicko potato whaaa trolls gone and replaced with meek and polite Alex it's not an ol' good fun it used to be. *sighs*



Hey Pirks this is for you ! bring the ol' good fun back.

The decade of Steve
How Apple's imperious, brilliant CEO transformed American business.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/04/technology/steve_j...

Steve Jobs: CEO of the Decade

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/steve_jobs/...

Hit the keyboard & shoot !




RE: Steve Jobs: CEO of the Decade
By Pirks on 11/6/2009 11:31:32 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks for a piece of common knowledge, try harder next time.


MainFrame Magic
By hiscross on 11/6/2009 8:59:58 PM , Rating: 2
If we would get rid of all PCs and start using a mainframe everything would turn out just fine. Just ask IBM.




RE: MainFrame Magic
By Donkey2008 on 11/8/2009 4:58:10 PM , Rating: 2
+1 for this bold comment


I imagine
By BigToque on 11/6/2009 11:33:26 AM , Rating: 2
I imagine what happened was that the developers were instructed to disable support for the atom, then the legal department caught wind of the request and realized it was illegal to do.

I don't remember but I was under the impression that Microsoft (or Intel), once got in trouble because they were intentionally crippling software that worked on AMD processors.




Just trying to get attention?
By Marlonsm on 11/6/2009 2:48:27 PM , Rating: 2
No... of course not! Just because Apple's iTablet rumors were slowing down, Apple wouldn't make everybody remember OSX has Atom support... They never do this kind of things...

/irony




meh
By Randomblame on 11/6/2009 3:01:22 PM , Rating: 2
rebel efi is crapware,
the latest version of ideneb is stuck with leopard and even if it wasn't it is junk and doesn't install on any of the higher end systems I've been putting together lately. Fresh installs of leopard and snow leopard are a pain in the ass but possible. It was a great feeling to finally, after hours of work, get snow leopard running on my pc. That feeling lasted about 5 minutes when I realized there really is nothing to do in this operating system anyways. Back to windows for me with ubuntu in reserve




"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki