Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 9th Nov 2009 23:55 UTC
Mac OS X Apple has finally released Mac OS X 10.6.2, the latest version of its Snow Leopard operating system, and be prepared for a massive update for your Mac: 473MB. There's a lot of stuff in here, and among other things, it includes a fix for the guest account data loss bug.
Thread beginning with comment 393691
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by haus
by haus on Tue 10th Nov 2009 00:09 UTC
haus
Member since:
2009-08-18

"This means that if you exercised your rights by installing Mac OS X Snow Leopard on an Atom-based machine (netbooks, mostly), you'll have to avoid the 10.6.2 update for now"

It's comments like these that make this site so unbearable.

Edited 2009-11-10 00:09 UTC

Reply Score: 11

RE: Comment by haus
by theTSF on Tue 10th Nov 2009 00:30 in reply to "Comment by haus"
theTSF Member since:
2005-09-27

Exactly. Not to sound like a fan boy but Apple has the rights to determine what their software will support or not. Apple has never sanctioned hacking OS X to run on non-Apple computers. So if they want to disable support for a platform it is there choice and rights. You have the rights to either use the software if you agree with the terms or not. The same holds true for other systems. If you are not willing to abide by the GNU then you have the rights to not use Linux.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by mrsteveman1 on Tue 10th Nov 2009 00:41 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
mrsteveman1 Member since:
2009-11-10

If you are not willing to abide by the GNU then you have the rights to not use Linux.


You should probably go read the GPL (which i assume is what you were referring to when you said GNU), specifically the part about not being required to accept the license at all just to use the software.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by Delgarde on Tue 10th Nov 2009 01:31 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

If you are not willing to abide by the GNU then you have the rights to not use Linux.


Quite untrue. The GPL is nothing more than a statement that the end user of a piece of software has certain rights with regard to the source code. It very explicitly has nothing to say about what the end user does with that software.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by aliquis on Tue 10th Nov 2009 07:01 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Wrong.

I won't comment on the EULAs but in the case of GPL software you get additional rights, not less rights.

If you don't agree to the GPL (rather just ignore the rights given) then the software would still be protected by copyright laws and you'd lose the right to get your copy at all.

The GPL gives you more benefits, access to the source code and so on, but if you don't accept it then well, they would be protected and you can't use them so ... Your choice.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by 4nntt on Tue 10th Nov 2009 16:07 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
4nntt Member since:
2009-02-12

While it is definitely true that Apple has no obligation to support the atom platform, there also is no real reason for them to actively disable it, other than spite. Since the OS is based largely on open source software, it seems odd for them to slap hobbiests like this.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by haus
by cb88 on Tue 10th Nov 2009 00:32 in reply to "Comment by haus"
cb88 Member since:
2009-04-23

For who Apple? I don't use apple products and could care less about such comments ... and to some extent I agree they [Apple] should be able to say what the OS supports on but not restrict you from installing on unsupported hardware that is in fact capable of running it

Edited 2009-11-10 00:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by apoclypse on Tue 10th Nov 2009 00:58 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

For who Apple? I don't use apple products and could care less about such comments ... and to some extent I agree they [Apple] should be able to say what the OS supports on but not restrict you from installing on unsupported hardware that is in fact capable of running it



And pray tell why not? They don't actually sell any netbooks, what incentive do they have to let people install it on a netbook? Good will? Its all fairy dust, and magic with you guy. Apple is a BUSINESS, not a charity. I just don't get why people don't understand that

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by Delgarde on Tue 10th Nov 2009 01:21 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

they [Apple] should be able to say what the OS supports on but not restrict you from installing on unsupported hardware that is in fact capable of running it


Well, there's a question - *is* Atom capable of running this version of MacOS? More specifically, is it broken because Apple have deliberately blacklisted Atom?

Or is it for legitimate technical reasons, such as being compiled with CPU optimisations which don't work on Atom? In which case Apple are being entirely reasonable, making sure it works as well as possible on their supported platforms, even if it upsets people trying to do things that Apple have no obligation to help them with?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by aliquis on Tue 10th Nov 2009 07:05 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Obviously it's not any longer.

Regardless of whatever EULAs would be legal or not I still think the developer/creator should have the right to decide over how their work is allowed to be used.

If you don't like "the artists" (depending on the product) wish then don't use the product.

People know how Apple want OS X to run. Also even if people bought the OS which I doubt many people installing it on regular PCs do I see the price more like an upgrade price set by Apple rather than a retail first install price since all macs ships with OS X and there are no "upgrade"-branded boxes. That part is Apples own fault though.

Reply Parent Score: 2

v RE: Comment by haus
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 10th Nov 2009 00:33 in reply to "Comment by haus"
RE[2]: Comment by haus
by apoclypse on Tue 10th Nov 2009 00:46 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

You are free to alienate your readership too, but apparently you don;t give a shit about that.

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by mlankton on Tue 10th Nov 2009 11:15 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
mlankton Member since:
2009-06-11

Jesus Holwerda. You already come across as a frothing at the mouth anti-Apple zealot, then you take the low road with a reader in the comments.

You just proved yourself to be a troll. Your Apple articles are trolling in nature, and have no intrinsic value.

I would suggest leaving Apple alone before you completely destroy whatever credibility you may have left.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by WillG on Wed 11th Nov 2009 16:08 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
WillG Member since:
2009-11-11

Thom, this is my first, and will be my last, post on the OSNews forum.

Your behaviour has become increasingly petulant and boorish over the last few months, quite unbecoming of an editor of a serious IT site.

You do not seem to realise that as editor, it is up to you to take the high-ground, and not to reduce yourself to rude behaviour, however disgruntled you may feel due to the comments of others. I believe that the position you are in here is one you are very much unsuited to.

You may tell me to go and frequent other technical sites - that is your right, although your way of going about it is very unpleasant. I do indeed visit several such sites daily. OSNews will now not be one of them.

Yours, a long-time, but sadly now no longer, OSNews reader.

Edited 2009-11-11 16:11 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by haus
by thavith_osn on Tue 10th Nov 2009 00:45 in reply to "Comment by haus"
thavith_osn Member since:
2005-07-11

Agreed... (just editing this as "Agreed" doesn't really say who I agree with - lol)...

I agree with the original poster, not Thom...

I just hope OpenGL is back on track again...

OK, the update is there, time to reboot...

Edited 2009-11-10 00:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by haus
by Riba on Tue 10th Nov 2009 10:54 in reply to "Comment by haus"
Riba Member since:
2006-02-12

Agreed. I don't think the fact that "10.6.2 does not support Atom" is the most important feature of this update. For the most users it is completely irrelevant, and here it is, right there in the article title. It is getting really old...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by haus
by Tony Swash on Tue 10th Nov 2009 11:52 in reply to "Comment by haus"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

I have 10.6.2 running on my Atom Mini 10V Netbook. The fix to get it working is trivial. Just use Google and find the various solutions out there.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Comment by haus
by Morgan on Wed 11th Nov 2009 00:32 in reply to "Comment by haus"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

It is getting a bit tired, isn't it? Though I do generally agree with Thom on OSX86 issues, the Atom situation is a bit different. As so many others have said, Apple never "supported" that processor, we were simply lucky that it worked with vanilla retail installs. I don't look down on Apple for narrowing the line of hardware that OS X can be run on, especially if it was for the purpose of making their own hardware work better. Given the huge list of improvements and tweaks in this update, that's probably what happened.

When you consider that the hackintosh community has already come up with a few workarounds for the Atom issue, I'd say it's no longer a newsworthy item. I'd love to never see another news article about it again, as it has been relegated to the archives of the various hackintosh support forums. I mean, honestly, when was the last time this or any other news site discussed and debated other hackintosh harware issues like certain video cards and AMD processors?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by haus
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 11th Nov 2009 12:49 in reply to "RE: Comment by haus"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Uhm, what are you all on about? did you guys ALREADY forget the previous article in which I CLEARLY stated that Apple has zero blame here?

Let me copy it for you all:

Of course, Apple has no obligation whatsoever to look out for Atom users, as the company does not ship this type of processor in any of its machines. If you run Mac OS X on a non-Apple labelled computer, then you know what the risks are. Just as much as you have the right to use the software in any way you deem fit, Apple has the right to alter its software in any way it deems fit.


On top of that - where in this article am I putting blame on Apple? This is getting ridiculous - you're all seeing stuff that isn't there.

Reply Parent Score: 1