Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 18:08 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Mac OS X Anyone who hangs around on websites with information about installing Mac OS X on non-Apple labelled computers has probably already encountered this report, but it's newsworthy anyway. The upcoming release of Mac OS X 10.6.2 will remove support for the Intel Atom line of processors from Mac OS X.
Thread beginning with comment 392288
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by haus
by haus on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 18:49 UTC
haus
Member since:
2009-08-18

If the incompetent competition thinks that the way to level the innovation and IP playing fields is to try and pry Apple and it's the Mac OS apart and force it to license or otherwise, let them all take advantage of it, they are all in for a rude awakening.

Incompetence and lack of innovating technological prowess is their hallmark, and wanting access to Apple's platforms and access to it's IP is proof of this incompetence.

Apple never "supported" the Atom processor -- the Atom was a happy recipient of compatibility with Intel's other chips. Also, we all know Intel has been lobbying Apple to adopt the Atom on some of it's future product offerings. Perhaps this is simply confirmation that Apple has closed the door on the Atom in favor of other chip designs?

I can't believe some people have the temerity to bitch because a product won't work in a manner for which it was never intended. Remember, the only legal way to get a copy of Snow Leopard without buying a new machine is to purchase an upgrade copy for $29. How many of those Hackintoshes are running legal copies of Leopard (or Snow Leopard, even) to begin with. Methinks not many at all.

Edited 2009-11-02 18:52 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by haus
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 18:54 in reply to "Comment by haus"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I can't believe some people have the temerity to bitch because a product won't work in a manner for which it was never intended.


Where in the article is the bitching? Did you not read the last paragraph?

Not that I expect anything different from the MDN-reader that you are, but still.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by mckill on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 19:01 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
mckill Member since:
2007-06-12

people just don't like your 'reporting' Thom, you're incredibly biased with how you feel the world should revolve around your student lifestyle.

you even admitted buying the $29 snow leopard 'upgrade' for your dad's machine and then making an illegal copy of it for your machine that didn't even have a valid Leopard license.

This isn't even news to begin with anyways, Apple isn't dropping support for something it never support, it just so happened to work previously. OSX never showed CPUIDs for ATOM or the number of others (Core 2 Quad, etc, etc).

The spin here is Apple has investigated how Atom was working and then blocked when there is no proof of that. Further optimization and upgrades to the kernel likely caused it to stop booting or being supported, but nobody has looked into this yet because you are biased (as well as many other sites out there).

Edited 2009-11-02 19:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE: Comment by haus
by jokkel on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 19:04 in reply to "Comment by haus"
jokkel Member since:
2008-07-07

How many of those Hackintoshes are running legal copies of Leopard (or Snow Leopard, even) to begin with. Methinks not many at all.


I think so too. A lot of instructions on how to get Mac OS X on your PC start with:
First download the iPC or iDeneb Mac OS X distros from the torrent site of you choice.

Actually this is pretty sensible, because otherwise you have to jump through hoops to patch the Mac OS X install DVD.

I don't find it wrong to do so, if it's just curiosity driving you. Half your hardware won't work anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by gfolkert on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 19:34 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
gfolkert Member since:
2008-12-15

Actually this is pretty sensible, because otherwise you have to jump through hoops to patch the Mac OS X install DVD.


Hmmm, really. Not my experience. Jumping thruogh hoops, is not what I had to do.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by haus
by tupp on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 19:43 in reply to "Comment by haus"
tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

Incompetence and lack of innovating technological prowess is their hallmark, and wanting access to Apple's platforms and access to it's IP is proof of this incompetence.

Not sure to whom is referred who lacks "innovating technological prowess."

Please list the technology that Apple has innovated.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by apoclypse on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 20:49 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

You really want to go there, because the list will be at least 2 pages long. Innovation doesn't always mean first to get there sometimes its first to make it good. Steam Boat Willy wasn't the first to implement sound, just the first to make good use of the technique.

Reply Parent Score: 5