Apple disables ATOM Processor in 10.6.2

fyrefly · Nov 2nd, 2009, 02:08 PM

There's been a bunch of Back and forth talk about Hackintoshing and such on this forum, and I'm not here to promote one side or the other, but rather discuss Apple's most recent move - to disable ATOM processors in 10.6.2, seemingly to stop netbook hackintoshers.

Apple Disabling Support for Intel Atom Processor in Latest 10.6.2 Build? - Mac Rumors

I wonder what exactly is the *point* behind this. People buying $250 netbooks aren't in the market for the $1000+ MacBooks. And having played with Snow Leopard on an HP Mini 1000, it runs *really* well.

Oddly, with the iMacs now sporting i5 processors with (assumingly) the p55 intel chipset - hackintoshers with more $$ to spend, can now build i5 workstations and probably use 10.6.2 natively (needed hacked kernels before).

Thoughts?

UPDATE: This whole 10.6.2 not working on ATOM processors may have just been a bug, and has since been corrected...?

Apple disables ATOM Processor in 10.6.2

Adrian. · Nov 2nd, 2009, 02:13 PM

It's just proprietary market engineering.

Apple says that the absolute cheapest you can run OSX is $1000 on a portable computer, then people who want to run a mac will pay $1000. If you have people doing it on $250 computers with ease, then people will not be willing to pay $1000 to run OSX anymore.

Heck, I'm considering a hacked netbook!

fyrefly · Nov 2nd, 2009, 02:40 PM

	Quote:			Originally Posted by Adrian.
	Heck, I'm considering a hacked netbook!

Even if it won't support 10.6.2?

SoyMac · Nov 2nd, 2009, 02:53 PM

	Quote:			Originally Posted by fyrefly
	...I wonder what exactly is the point behind this. People buying $250 netbooks aren't in the market for the $1000+ MacBooks. And having played with Snow Leopard on an HP Mini 1000, it runs really well. ... Thoughts?

1. It's still a rumour.

2. Why should Apple be content with HP (and any other hardware makers) profiting from hardware sales based on Apple's IP? (When people buy a NetBook just to run OS X)

3. I think your point that Snow Leopard runs really well on an HP Mini 1000, is a strong argument in favour of Apple protecting their hardware sales from this cannibalisation.
How would Apple ever make up for lost hardware sales when Jane and Joe Public can run Apple's subsidised software "really well" on competitors' hardware?
What incentive would there be to ever buy Apple hardware to run Apple software, if the Apple hardware is, or appears at first blush to be, more expensive?

4. If there is a performance loss on sub-Apple hardware, will consumers unfairly and negatively judge Apple's software, including the iLife suite?

That's what I've come up with so far.

ldphoto · Nov 2nd, 2009, 02:59 PM

If they want to do that, they should release something to compete. I have both a MBP and a cheap MSI netbook with 10.5.7. Sometimes I just need the really small form factor.

Luc

Lars · Nov 2nd, 2009, 03:29 PM

	Quote:			Originally Posted by fyrefly
	People buying $250 netbooks aren't in the market for the $1000+ MacBooks.

That isn't the point. The point is that Apple doesn't want people running Mac OS X on non-Apple produced units. Period.

hayesk · Nov 2nd, 2009, 04:02 PM

Yep - and it's because it costs a lot of money to develop MacOS X - more than the $129 you pay at retail.

Hodge · Nov 2nd, 2009, 04:04 PM

	Quote:			Originally Posted by Lars
	That isn't the point. The point is that Apple doesn't want people running Mac OS X on non-Apple produced units. Period.

I'm honestly surprised they didn't do this sooner. Good for them.

Paddy · Nov 2nd, 2009, 05:30 PM

I'm not surprised - nor bothered by this. Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. They lose when OS X is installed on non-Apple hardware.

A little more here - not sure where macrumors got their info:

Snow Leopard Update Blocks Intel Atom, Kills Hackintoshes | Gadget Lab | Wired.com

Amazing how badly the Mac-haters at Wired get their knickers in a knot over this in the comment section.

Gerbill · Nov 2nd, 2009, 05:30 PM

I'm rooting for Apple on this one. To those who are rooting for the hackers: Do you really want to see Apple's business model attacked? Do you want to see the kind of "phone home" crap in OS X that you see in Windoze? If you're such a do-it-yourself guy, install Linux on your netbook.

Nov 2nd, 2009, 02:08 PM	#1
fyrefly Honourable Citizen Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Toronto, Ontario Posts: 3,493	Apple disables ATOM Processor in 10.6.2 EDIT: Maybe not? There's been a bunch of Back and forth talk about Hackintoshing and such on this forum, and I'm not here to promote one side or the other, but rather discuss Apple's most recent move - to disable ATOM processors in 10.6.2, seemingly to stop netbook hackintoshers. Apple Disabling Support for Intel Atom Processor in Latest 10.6.2 Build? - Mac Rumors I wonder what exactly is the point behind this. People buying $250 netbooks aren't in the market for the $1000+ MacBooks. And having played with Snow Leopard on an HP Mini 1000, it runs really well. Oddly, with the iMacs now sporting i5 processors with (assumingly) the p55 intel chipset - hackintoshers with more $$ to spend, can now build i5 workstations and probably use 10.6.2 natively (needed hacked kernels before). Thoughts? UPDATE: This whole 10.6.2 not working on ATOM processors may have just been a bug, and has since been corrected...? Apple disables ATOM Processor in 10.6.2 __________________ Steve Jobs re: iTunes on Windows: "It's like giving a glass of ice water to somebody in hell" Last edited by fyrefly; Nov 4th, 2009 at 03:35 PM.

Nov 2nd, 2009, 02:59 PM	#5
ldphoto Full Citizen Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Ottawa Posts: 539	If they want to do that, they should release something to compete. I have both a MBP and a cheap MSI netbook with 10.5.7. Sometimes I just need the really small form factor. Luc __________________ www.artisticphoto.ca 2.8 GHz 8-core Mac Pro 10GB 2.66 GHz i7 15" MBP w/matte display 1.6 GHz Atom 330 mini-PC OSX 64GB iPad Wi-Fi + 3G 32GB iPhone 3G S

Nov 2nd, 2009, 05:30 PM	#9
Paddy Full Citizen Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Toronto, Ontario Posts: 667	I'm not surprised - nor bothered by this. Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. They lose when OS X is installed on non-Apple hardware. A little more here - not sure where macrumors got their info: Snow Leopard Update Blocks Intel Atom, Kills Hackintoshes \| Gadget Lab \| Wired.com Amazing how badly the Mac-haters at Wired get their knickers in a knot over this in the comment section. __________________ 15" 2.33GHz C2D MacBook Pro, 2.5GHz DP G5, 1.8GHz SP G5, 1.5GHz 15" G4 Powerbook, 933 MHz Quicksilver, 800MHz G4 Powerbook

Nov 2nd, 2009, 05:30 PM	#10
Gerbill Honourable Citizen Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: White Rock, BC Posts: 2,368	I'm rooting for Apple on this one. To those who are rooting for the hackers: Do you really want to see Apple's business model attacked? Do you want to see the kind of "phone home" crap in OS X that you see in Windoze? If you're such a do-it-yourself guy, install Linux on your netbook. __________________ "I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." - Bill Cosby

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Nov 2nd, 2009, 02:13 PM	#2
Adrian. Honourable Citizen Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 4,030	It's just proprietary market engineering. Apple says that the absolute cheapest you can run OSX is $1000 on a portable computer, then people who want to run a mac will pay $1000. If you have people doing it on $250 computers with ease, then people will not be willing to pay $1000 to run OSX anymore. Heck, I'm considering a hacked netbook!

Nov 2nd, 2009, 04:02 PM	#7
hayesk Honourable Citizen Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: Nepean, ON, Canada Posts: 1,881	Yep - and it's because it costs a lot of money to develop MacOS X - more than the $129 you pay at retail.