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.
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).
UPDATE: This whole 10.6.2 not working on ATOM processors may have just been a bug, and has since been corrected...?
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.
Location: Ottawa (where Torontonians go to watch NHL-calibre hockey, but where Montrealers go to get sleep)
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.
"Teaching a child not to step on a caterpillar is as valuable to the child as it is to the caterpillar." ~Bradley Millar
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