Apple rumored to disable Atom support with Mac OS X 10.6.2
Mac OS X 10.6.2, the forthcoming update for Apple's Snow Leopard operating system, is reported to disable support for the Intel Atom processor, preventing unauthorized PC netbooks from running the operating system.
Users at OS X Daily claim that Mac OS X 10.6.2 prevents Snow Leopard from running on systems with Atom processors. No official Apple products use the low-cost, low-power chip from Intel. For now, users on unauthorized Atom machines are recommended to stay with Mac OS X 10.6.1.
"You can't help but suspect this move is Apple's attempt at shutting down the growing and popular Hackintosh Netbook community, since Apple has no product line that runs the Atom itself," the report said. "Mac OS X runs absolutely flawlessly on much of the PC Netbook hardware, once it's configured you wouldn"t know you?re not on a Mac. Maybe it?s in effort to kill the Atom Hackintoh Netbooks in anticipation of the rumored Tablet? Or maybe it?s something totally unrelated?"
The news is another example of Apple fending off systems with unauthorized installs of Mac OS X. Florida-based clone Mac maker Psystar has been engaged in a lawsuit with Apple for some time, as the Cupertino, Calif., company has alleged that Psystar's selling of systems with Mac OS X is in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Starting in October, Psystar began selling a $50 software hack to allow users to install Snow Leopard on some Intel-powered unauthorized PCs. The Rebel EFI software provided support for Intel Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, i7 or Xeon Nehalem processors.
In the non-commercial world of "Hackintosh" systems, some users were able to install Snow Leopard on inexpensive netbook computers, like the Dell Mini 10v. Launched in 2008, the Intel Atom processor is intended for sub-notebooks and ultra-mobile PCs.
Last year, one high-ranking Intel executive publicly vouched for the Atom processor to be used on Apple's long-rumored tablet device. The 10-inch touchscreen device, expected to arrive in the first quarter of 2010, is believed to originally be intended to run on the Atom processor upon conception. But after the $278 million buyout of fabless chip designer P.A. Semi, it is believed that Apple began to design its own ARM-based processors and abandoned the Atom.
Mac OS X 10.6.2, the forthcoming update for Snow Leopard, will update nearly 150 components of the operating system. The latest beta, released last week, addressed issues with the Dock, ColorSync, QuartzCore and graphic driver components.
Users at OS X Daily claim that Mac OS X 10.6.2 prevents Snow Leopard from running on systems with Atom processors. No official Apple products use the low-cost, low-power chip from Intel. For now, users on unauthorized Atom machines are recommended to stay with Mac OS X 10.6.1.
"You can't help but suspect this move is Apple's attempt at shutting down the growing and popular Hackintosh Netbook community, since Apple has no product line that runs the Atom itself," the report said. "Mac OS X runs absolutely flawlessly on much of the PC Netbook hardware, once it's configured you wouldn"t know you?re not on a Mac. Maybe it?s in effort to kill the Atom Hackintoh Netbooks in anticipation of the rumored Tablet? Or maybe it?s something totally unrelated?"
The news is another example of Apple fending off systems with unauthorized installs of Mac OS X. Florida-based clone Mac maker Psystar has been engaged in a lawsuit with Apple for some time, as the Cupertino, Calif., company has alleged that Psystar's selling of systems with Mac OS X is in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Starting in October, Psystar began selling a $50 software hack to allow users to install Snow Leopard on some Intel-powered unauthorized PCs. The Rebel EFI software provided support for Intel Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, i7 or Xeon Nehalem processors.
In the non-commercial world of "Hackintosh" systems, some users were able to install Snow Leopard on inexpensive netbook computers, like the Dell Mini 10v. Launched in 2008, the Intel Atom processor is intended for sub-notebooks and ultra-mobile PCs.
Last year, one high-ranking Intel executive publicly vouched for the Atom processor to be used on Apple's long-rumored tablet device. The 10-inch touchscreen device, expected to arrive in the first quarter of 2010, is believed to originally be intended to run on the Atom processor upon conception. But after the $278 million buyout of fabless chip designer P.A. Semi, it is believed that Apple began to design its own ARM-based processors and abandoned the Atom.
Mac OS X 10.6.2, the forthcoming update for Snow Leopard, will update nearly 150 components of the operating system. The latest beta, released last week, addressed issues with the Dock, ColorSync, QuartzCore and graphic driver components.
Comments
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
For now, users on unauthorized Atom machines are recommended to stay with Mac OS X 10.6.1.
I dont think Appleinsider should be encouraging thieves.
I dont think Appleinsider should be encouraging thieves.
Thieves?
I see Netbooks everywhere. Apple are missing a trick by not selling an official OSX Atom based netbook.
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?
Not supporting non-Mac OS X installs is one thing and I support going after third parties trying to make money off selling OS X like Psystar, but actively targeting the hackintosh community doesn't seem a good choice. Tinkerers can often be the best supporter of a platform, especially through word of mouth, and the fact that OS X can run so flawlessly on netbooks can only be positive publicity. Whereas, actively thwarting the hackintosh community, who aren't really making money doing it, really only makes negative press. Given that Apple's target market is those looking for ease of use (ie. not tinkerers) and OS X market share is continuing to grow, it's doubtful that the hackintosh community is making a huge dent on Apple's bottom line.
So basically what you're saying is that it won't make a big dent in Apple's profits if they tick off people who are not buying Apple hardware and just want to run Mac OS X on the cheapest hardware they can find.
Again, if it won't reflect in the numbers, it won't really matter. All of this assumes the update actually breaks compatibility or otherwise disable's support. So far it's unsubstantiated.
Hackintosh hobbyists have always operated outside of Apple's rules and have been unsupported and unendorsed by Apple, save for acting as guinea pigs by testing new and different hardware, perhaps. They're aware of the risks. Now they might actually materialize. Apple is within their rights.
Whatever happens, the bulk of Apple's market will baerly notice. Hackintoshes are an enthusiast phenomenon confined to small corners of the internet. It's unauthorized tinkering. Unfortunately, there aren't enough hackintosh users to make a market impact one way or another, but there certainly are enough to make Apple seem hypocritical when it comes to enforcing its own policies.
This is just a rumour for now, anyway, But it's no big deal. Hackintosh users will find a way around this, should it materialize. They've been doing exactly that up until now.
Some of them, however, might actually have to get a Mac like the rest of us.
As for the netbook market, Apple missed nothing. They completely crushed the notion of missing anything about it. Apple bypassed the entire netbook market and no one even cared. What did consumers do? Hand them more record quarters. In a recession.
So much for netbooks.
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 don't know if anyone is expecting Apple to sell one for $300. It seems they can make one for $500 and wipe out that market. I do get the demand, it's not an ideal machine, but really, nothing is. There is a gulf between the 3.5" and 13" screens, I can picture a lot of uses that can be comfortably served somewhere roughly halfway between.
and just want to run Mac OS X on the cheapest hardware they can find.
Cheapest hardware or better suited hardware to do the job.
This means tablet OS is ready. It's rather Mac OS, not iPhone OS. And Tablet is not Atom-based device.
This is a big logic jump
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?
While I don't disagree that netbooks do not make manufacturers a lot of money, they do have the advantage of getting a wider range of consumers than Apple already has. Even if Apple came out with a dirt cheap netbook that didn't make them that much money, they would still be attracting a host of new users that have never made the switch because they thought Macs were too expensive. It's a great strategy to get people hooked into the world of OS X, [fanboy]because once you go Mac, you don't go back[/fanboy], so they can lock in future customers.
So basically what you're saying is that it won't make a big dent in Apple's profits if they tick off people who are not buying Apple hardware and just want to run Mac OS X on the cheapest hardware they can find.
I don't follow your logic. These people weren't going to buy a Mac anyway because they are priced too high. So if anything, Apple is still making out OK if these people are using a retail copy of Leopard or Snow Leopard that they purchased to do a Hackintosh mod.
So would Apple rather:
1) Not get ANY money whatsoever from those looking for OS X on a budget?
2) Get a bit of extra money from those that buy OS X and install it themselves on a netbook?
3) Do it the Apple way, piss off a small subset of the tinkerer base, and not get any money whatsoever from it?
Thieves?
Yes. The cost of developing and maintaining OS X is covered by the sale of hardware. Apple was overly generous to sell Snow Leopard at such a bargain price.
Yes. The cost of developing and maintaining OS X is covered by the sale of hardware. Apple was overly generous to sell Snow Leopard at such a bargain price.
So, why Apple sell it in stores?
So, why Apple sell it in stores?
For existing Mac users. The end-user license agreement states this clearly at the very top.
SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR MAC OS X
Single Use, Family Pack and Leopard Upgrade Licenses for use on Apple-branded Systems
In case you didn't get that.... "Apple-branded systems".
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx106.pdf
I know there are lots of downloadable custom build's of OS X out there but if you actually look at a good hackintosh tutorial, a lot of them use a retail disc to install from. I say as long you paid for that disc and only intend to use it privately, why not?