AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple rumored to disable Atom support with Mac OS X 10.6.2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple rumored to disable Atom support with Mac OS X 10.6.2 - Page 2

post #41 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post

Does anyone even understand this question, let alone the grammar used to ask it?

AI members should show where they live or what their native language is. That would forestall statements like the above. Please let us know where you're coming from. When registering, there is a way to show this. AppleInsider, why not make this a requirement.
ADS
Reply
ADS
Reply
post #42 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion View Post

Thieves?

You know...the same people who download movies and music. They're all evil doers.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhowarth View Post

Exactly. If you want to know what the full retail cost of an operating system is (neither an upgrade nor bundled with a hardware sale) you only need to look at Windows.

Just because there's very little stopping you installing a Snow Leopard upgrade on non-Apple hardware that doesn't mean you aren't still infringing copyright.

Copyright isn't at issue here unless the codebase of OS X has been modified and redistributed without permission of its authors. Copyright is based on authorship and in the case of software, the creation of code.

Even at that, with most of OS X based on Open Source BSD, including the kernel, Apple is not the copyright owner of the code, the BSD community is. Apple is the copyright owner of the GUI and other proprietary, closed source parts of OS X.

At most, what is in violation here is civil contract dispute between Apple and the person who has broken the terms of the Apple OS X EULA. Apple would need to show material harm from such a contractual violation and if the user has paid for the license, that will be difficult to claim on the part of Apple because they have profited from the sale of the license. Such a case would most likely be settled with the user giving up their right of use of OS X in return for a refund of the cost of the license.

These issues are exactly why Microsoft keeps Windows proprietary and why OS X is both Apple's greatest success and greatest liability.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx View Post

Apple should make a small and pocketable full Mac, like the OQO or the Vaio P. 350 g would be awesome. No more than 600 g. Video-out and USB 2 ports for Keynote and PowerPoint presentations from NATIVE files. Thus, an Intel Atom is required instead of the ARM processor.

Isn't OQO dead?
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sequitur View Post

AI members should show where they live or what their native language is. That would forestall statements like the above. Please let us know where you're coming from. When registering, there is a way to show this. AppleInsider, why not make this a requirement.

Gwydion did.
PremiÃ* de Mar, Spain

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #46 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:30am
Rather than making OSX crash with Atom is used, why not focus on making OSX not crash when I use my normal MBP?
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by fulldecent View Post

Rather than making OSX crash with Atom is used, why not focus on making OSX not crash when I use my normal MBP?

Or how about fixing the SATA II issue with third-party HDDs and SSDs on the June '09 13" and 15" MacBook Pros.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:35am
This is a slippery slope. If this is just the start, their Paranoia could end up disabling their own computers by accidents. Not that they'd care, you'd just be expected to buy a new one.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:36am
... .. ..


Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesy mogul View Post

i don't think you can call someone a thief, who takes the effort to figure it out how to run his favorite os on a computer model category apple is obviously too lazy to offer!

deliberate "laziness." as in, it isn't part of apple's business model. For a reason.

no matter how thin the mba is, a 13" screen notebook is not a netbook.

ok.

apple thinks they know what people want, but the exploding number of netbook hackintoshs proof them wrong!

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq409/

http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/ar...fit/1255985794

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...ence_call.html

http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/21/tra...ing-apple.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...56005c7997.dtl

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/10/19/...-quarter-ever/


not quite the "expoloding" number of hackintoshes. They don't even make an infinitesimal dent in the market. Apple treated netbooks (which *are* on the market in abundance) as if they didn't exist, and didn't even flinch. What did consumers do in response? They bought *more* macs.

and then we move on to the following:



http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10019711-37.html

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...g-industry.ars

http://digg.com/apple/apple_leads_20...faction_survey

http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/08/....no..1.on.csi/

http://theappleblog.com/2009/05/06/a...he-experience/

http://blackfriarsinc.com/blog/2007/...s-customerbase

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...stomer_sa.html

http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-posts...ion-index/2553

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/22467/

http://bindapple.com/apple-satisfaction-2009-report/

http://www.macnn.com/news/25971

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/14/...action-survey/

http://www.ipodobserver.com/ipo/arti...ff_the_charts/

http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/08...-satisfaction/

http://www.mactivist.com/2009/06/iph...kings-in-japan

http://www.9to5mac.com/jobs-satisfation-rate-high

http://www.jdpower.com/business/rati...tphone-ratings

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3/news/2248040/...ps-top-billing

http://www.eweek.com/prestitial.php?...453807%2f&ref=

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2352796,00.asp

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2006/08/5002.ars

http://www.osnews.com/story/15553

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1689554/posts

http://forums.macrumors.com/archive/.../t-224872.html

what exactly were you saying about apple not knowing what people want? Looks like apple knows better than the consumers themselves know!


there is only one effective hackintosh prevention: Bring that damn small footprint netbook/tablet people are waiting for, or shut up! If you don't deliver, people will fix that problem for themselves.

ok. And apple can go right ahead and not bring that "damn small footprint netbook" and lose nothing whatsoever. The tablet is a different story. It's on the way. But it aint no netbook.

you have no idea how many times i've been tempted to buy a netbook and put osx on the damn thing.

you're in the minority, it would seem. But good luck in the future. Sorry, i'm not sure what else to say to this.

with win 7 looking not too bad at all, my patience and apple loyalty stands on its last leg.

if you choose to switch, i wish you the best of luck.

and this is coming from someone who has never owned a windows machine before, and even dares to say her 8-core mac pro is worth every penny.

there was a time when i owned a windows machine for the first time, too. Guess what happened?
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
post #50 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

That depends, would you rather sell 3 million highly profitable $1000+ computers per quarter and make a lot of money. OR would you prefer to sell 9 million dirt cheap $300 netbooks and make nothing?

I would rather have a deeper penetration of OSX used by larger numbers of the public which would increase market share and spur on sales of the more expensive machines as well once the OS is ingrained in the public's consciousness- especially young students. Alas it's like 2 years too late.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

I would rather have a deeper penetration of OSX used by larger numbers of the public which would increase market share and spur on sales of the more expensive machines as well once the OS is ingrained in the public's consciousness- especially young students. Alas it's like 2 years too late.

They aren't having a problem selling machines as it stands.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post

Does anyone even understand this question, let alone the grammar used to ask it?

Sorry, I'm not an English speaker, I've never learned English in a formal way, only through reading a lot of books, surfing Internet and watching movies and series. So my grammar skills are weak.

I thank you your polite observation.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:50am
Its reasons like this that I will never buy an Apple product again (and sold all my Apple computers) until Apple realizes they are just being immature.

If the whole netbook market was something they never went after, and Apple sales have been increasing even with Hackintoshes around, then why pull a silly move like this? Its like going up to the weakest kid in school and beating them [why is there no gender neutral word in English for this case?] up just to show you can.

Anyhow, as one who has three Atom based computers at home (two netbooks, one desktop) news like this makes me sad. I don't have OS X installed on any of them, but I guess if I wanted to install SL, then I'm pretty much out of luck.

Also, I encourage all Hackintosh builders to buy their Mac OS X disks. Don't pirate, don't download. Just go to the Apple store and forfeit 30 bucks to their empire and be done with them.


Lastly: I think this signals that we won't be seeing the Atom in the tablet, and therefore, I doubt we'll see full running OS X. To me this screams FAIL. (Think, THREE platforms for devs to work on? I'm sure they'll be happy about that!)
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #54 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

I see Netbooks everywhere. Apple are missing a trick by not selling an official OSX Atom based netbook.

Could it be that one reason Apple is steering clear of this low margin business is that the excellent customer service and support that is an important component of the Apple brand reputation costs money and without higher margins there's no way Apple can offer the same service and support to netbook customers thus ruining a brand reputation that took years and billions to establish?
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

This means tablet OS is ready. It's rather Mac OS, not iPhone OS. And Tablet is not Atom-based device.

My bet is it is iPhone OS (on steroids) rather than Mac OS ... perhaps to be a category of its own. We already know it isn't Atom.
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #56 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

Could it be that one reason Apple is steering clear of this low margin business is that the excellent customer service and support that is an important component of the Apple brand reputation costs money and without higher margins there's no way Apple can offer the same service and support to netbook customers thus ruining a brand reputation that took years and billions to establish?

So, sell an Atom based netbook for 600 bucks. Margins kept in hand
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #57 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

Could it be that one reason Apple is steering clear of this low margin business is that the excellent customer service and support that is an important component of the Apple brand reputation costs money and without higher margins there's no way Apple can offer the same service and support to netbook customers thus ruining a brand reputation that took years and billions to establish?

Yes, Apple doesn't need to sell low margin netbooks or, even, it can be worse as you have said.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 230
11/2/09 at 6:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

My bet it is iPhone OS on steroids rather than Mac OS ... perhaps to be a category of its own.

They then did their surgery on what both have in common

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #59 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

Also, I encourage all Hackintosh builders to buy their Mac OS X disks. Don't pirate, don't download. Just go to the Apple store and forfeit 30 bucks to their empire and be done with them.

They'll have to do more than buy the $30 upgrade and then they'd still be breaking the EULA.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Yohe View Post

They aren't having a problem selling machines as it stands.

True- but they could have made a lot more and more importantly penetrated the OS deeper. It will be a lot harder now that Windows 7 has a lot of support behind it - more than Vista. I may just be buying my first Windows 7 PC for $500 after seeing all those Best Buy models in yesterdays flier. There are some pretty good deals out there now.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Arguably, Apple has a much weaker case against consumers who buy a legal copy of OSX, and then put it on a Hackintosh. The consumer, however, must be doing it for non-commercial purposes. Psystar's problem is it is actually trying to make a buck off of infringing Apple's copyright.

However, for most users to buy a legal copy of OSX they must buy the $169 copy if they don't already own a Mac. Most Hackintosh people will tell you what they are doing is OK because they paid Apple $29 for the OS. Problem is that Apple specifically states that that is an update version for people switching from Leopard. The $169 version is the full install version. So, if you paid Apple $169 for the OS, you have a much stronger case for what you are doing is reasonable.

There seems to be some confusion here about the term "legal copy". In one sense, any copy of Mac OS X you buy is a legal copy, yet, the license you receive for payment for that copy does not allow you to legally install it on anything but Apple hardware. The $169 version is an upgrade for users on Mac OS versions prior to Leopard. It's not a copy that can legally be used without restriction.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesy mogul View Post

I don't think you can call someone a thief, who takes the effort to figure it out how to run his favorite OS on a computer model category Apple is obviously too lazy to offer!

My are we feeling entitled today. Let me guess Gen-X? Gen-Y maybe?

A hacker took the effort to figure out TJ Maxx's computer system and retrieved credit card information that he was not authorized to take. Also not a thief? After all, per your criterion, he 'took the effort' to figure it out and that gives him all sorts of privileges.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:08am
My bet is X.7-X.8 will work smoothly on below-1.0GHz processors

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #64 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

I would rather have a deeper penetration...SNIP

Nice

Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

My are we feeling entitled today. Let me guess Gen-X? Gen-Y maybe?

A hacker took the effort to figure out TJ Maxx's computer system and retrieved credit card information that he was not authorized to take. Also not a thief? After all, per your criterion, he 'took the effort' to figure it out and that gives him all sorts of privileges.

Dude, that's sooooo lame. Let me guess; Old fogie?
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post

Could it be that one reason Apple is steering clear of this low margin business is that the excellent customer service and support that is an important component of the Apple brand reputation costs money and without higher margins there's no way Apple can offer the same service and support to netbook customers thus ruining a brand reputation that took years and billions to establish?

Even if Apple relelased a Netbook for $700 as opposed to Windows $400 I think it would be classy and the public would have supported it. But Apple apparently thinks that margin is not enough or those machines aren't powerful enough to back them . The public however has proven Apple wrong. Netbooks are everywhere.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

True- but they could have made a lot more and more importantly penetrated the OS deeper. It will be a lot harder now that Windows 7 has a lot of support behind it - more than Vista. I may just be buying my first Windows 7 PC for $500 after seeing all those Best Buy models in yesterdays flier. There are some pretty good deals out there now.

7 is definitely an improvement over Vista, but quite honestly I don't see a huge difference. The only reason I bought it is because I got it for cheap from Amazon (pre-order).
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

So, sell an Atom based netbook for 600 bucks. Margins kept in hand

I bet if you write Mr. Jobs and promise that you and your three best buddies will buy one each, they'll build it.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Even if Apple relelased a Netbook for $700 as opposed to Windows $400 I think it would be classy and the public would have supported it. But Apple apparently thinks that margin is not enough or those machines aren't powerful enough to back them . The public however has proven Apple wrong. Netbooks are everywhere.

Except they have had no impact on Apple. Apple has ignored netbooks without even flinching, and consumers responded by buying *more* Macs. In a recession.

Yes, netbooks are everywhere. So are cheap, generic PCs.

But you can rest easy, Apple's Tablet is on the way.
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
post #69 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trboyden View Post

Copyright isn't at issue here unless the codebase of OS X has been modified and redistributed without permission of its authors. Copyright is based on authorship and in the case of software, the creation of code.

Even at that, with most of OS X based on Open Source BSD, including the kernel, Apple is not the copyright owner of the code, the BSD community is. Apple is the copyright owner of the GUI and other proprietary, closed source parts of OS X.

At most, what is in violation here is civil contract dispute between Apple and the person who has broken the terms of the Apple OS X EULA. Apple would need to show material harm from such a contractual violation and if the user has paid for the license, that will be difficult to claim on the part of Apple because they have profited from the sale of the license. Such a case would most likely be settled with the user giving up their right of use of OS X in return for a refund of the cost of the license.

This is entirely a copyright issue. You don't buy Mac OS X, you buy a license to use a copy of Mac OS X under certain restrictions. Also, Apple is entirely in compliance with the BSD licensing, so that's irrelevant to your argument. The material harm is that the use r is enjoying the benefits of Mac OS X while Apple has lost the revenue from the required hardware purchase. It's a clear violation of copyright law, there is no ambiguity.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Even if Apple relelased a Netbook for $700 as opposed to Windows $400 I think it would be classy and the public would have supported it. But Apple apparently thinks that margin is not enough or those machines aren't powerful enough to back them . The public however has proven Apple wrong. Netbooks are everywhere.

Of course they are. People are buying them because they're cheap. For a lot of people, it'll do what they need of a computer which is email and web. Not saying you can't do more with them, but that is all many need (and maybe a music and photo app).
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

True- but they could have made a lot more and more importantly penetrated the OS deeper. It will be a lot harder now that Windows 7 has a lot of support behind it - more than Vista. I may just be buying my first Windows 7 PC for $500 after seeing all those Best Buy models in yesterdays flier. There are some pretty good deals out there now.

This is basically the cloning argument restated, and it's an argument entirely without merit in the current market.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:15am
That could probably be construed as being anti-competitive?
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #73 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

Nice

Dude, that's sooooo lame. Let me guess; Old fogie?

Guilty as charged. I suppose my morals and ethics were a dead giveaway? Morals, ethics, ever heard of those quaint concepts?

Then again it's my generation that raised yours so I suppose it's really our fault.
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

This is entirely a copyright issue.

Here, in Spain, is not a copyright issue. You're not infringing Apple copyright installing OS X in a non Apple computer, you're only allegedly breaking an article of the EULA. An article that can be illegal according to Spanish consumer law.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trboyden View Post

... most of OS X based on Open Source BSD, including the kernel, Apple is not the copyright owner of the code, the BSD community is.

Well, the Mac OS X kernel is based upon Mach and not the general BSDs per se, and there's quite a bit of GNU in the user-land tools. But that trivial technical detail aside, you nail it with:

Quote:
Apple is the copyright owner of the GUI and other proprietary, closed source parts of OS X.

Indeed they are. Anyone can take the Darwin kernel, and run much of what constitutes the Unix portions of OS X. But they can't legitimately run Windowserver onwards and have the OS X graphical experience on non-Apple hardware.

Quote:
At most, what is in violation here is civil contract dispute between Apple and the person who has broken the terms of the Apple OS X EULA.

Well, the EULA is an extension of the rights you have to Apple's copyright materials (very little, by default.) They permit you to use their copyright materials on hardware that they have designed, manufactured, and sold to you, and, err, that's it.

Quote:
Apple would need to show material harm from such a contractual violation and if the user has paid for the license, that will be difficult to claim on the part of Apple because they have profited from the sale of the license.

Such as the loss of sales from hardware, perhaps?

Basically, if you have the smarts to get OS X running on your own hardware, on your own. Great! Wonderful for you. You're probably not going to materially affect Apple's profits. (But don't come whinging that Apple owe you something if it later stops working.)

Start trying to do it for profit, as Psystar are attempting to do, and you should expect to be hit hard.
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

Just shows you that people want cheap OS X machines

If I'm not mistaken, the Dell Mini 9/10 works PERFECTLY as an OS X machine and can be had for under $300. Can't argue with that

An empty CD also costs much less than an officially released music CD, and if you copy music onto it, it plays said music perfectly. Just shows how much people want cheap music.
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

I would strongly disagree. Tinkerers, as you call them, are generally regarded as weirdos by their families and neighbors. They usually have ultra-inflated egos, tend to turn off people rather than influence them, and are true bores. The more they tell you how tech savvy they are the more you know they aren't. So whatever they recommend is considered to be too complicated to use by the average Joe. The old Saturday Night Live "Your Company's Computer Guy" skit about sums them up.

So, no, they are not good for any platform let alone Apple.

Didn't Steve Wozniak "tinker" by buying some parts from the local electronics store to build a blue box to bypass paying the phone company for their products and services?

http://www.markusehrenfried.de/mac/applehistory.html

Maybe Psystar and the Hackintosh community can file a class action lawsuit against Apple under the "What's Good for the Goose, Is Good for the Gander" claus! \

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #78 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

You don't buy Mac OS X, you buy a license to use a copy of Mac OS X under certain restrictions.

I believe that it's not as clear cut as that.

There have been murmors in the past. I'm sorry to be vague, but there was a story going around on these boards about a year ago that at least one US judge had ruled that the EULA was illegal, and that it was indeed a 'sale'.

This is fundamental, because if you buy something, you can do with it as you see fit.

I guess we'll need to see how things pan out...
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #79 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post

A couple of points worth mentioning:

1) We don't know what proportion of hackintosh users actually bought OS X for their computers. Let's not automatically assume Apple is giving up a big chunk of OS sales on this one.

2) I've yet to hear a strong argument for how it hurts Apple to thwart hackintosh installations. If it doesn't, in fact, hurt Apple to do this then why wouldn't they try to shut it down or at least curtain the activity?

I guess because Jobs and Woz used to do the same type of thing when they were younger? It's just a matter of principle. The shoe is on the other foot, and they don't like it.
Reply
Reply
post #80 of 230
11/2/09 at 7:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

I see Netbooks everywhere. Apple are missing a trick by not selling an official OSX Atom based netbook.

Apple's recent sales figures would suggest otherwise.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Apple rumored to disable Atom support with Mac OS X 10.6.2