Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

610 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No biggie (1, Insightful)

Puchku (615680) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059384)

Since they don't sell any computers with Atom.. I don't think that you can blame them for dropping support. Tightens the code and all that.

Re:No biggie (2, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059438)

I don't think that you can blame them for dropping support.

Any other company and yes, they would be blamed.

Re:No biggie (5, Insightful)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059618)

Any other company and yes, they would be blamed.

Maybe if "any other company" had sold the product explicitly with Atom support and then reneged on that promise.

AFAICT the argument from the whiners is "Even though OS X is explicitly sold with strings attached which make it hard for me to legally build a hackintosh, it shouldn't be because I don't like it and any attempt to enforce such strings, no matter how feeble such an attempt may be, is nasty!"

Re:No biggie (4, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059678)

I'm not judging the legitimacy or morality of their actions; I just know slashdot, and if any other company had done something like this they'd be excoriated here.

Re:No biggie (1)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060222)

You think that Apple is excluded from that? It's a large company, just like MS, Sun, Google. It has major brand recognition. There will always be haters for all of these companies.

No one with that sort of brand recognition is exempt.

As to the whole Atom bit, Apple doesn't sell any products that use it, and I would guess that most of the hackintosh community downloads OS X from a Torrent. You can't expect a free ride for ever. For those that actually went out and purchased it for a netbook, you got what you paid for. A piece of software with no valid hardware to run it on.

Re:No biggie (3, Insightful)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059762)

The problem is the Atom supports a similar instruction set to the standard processors.

Dropping support in this case means they are adding explicit code designed solely to prevent use on a processor the OS would otherwise work with.

If Microsoft modified Windows 7 64-bit edition to BAN support for AMD 64-bit processors, and therefore encourage users to utilize only Microsoft Approved or Microsoft Manufactured hardware that utilizes Intel microprocessors.

Microsoft would be in court, at the wrong side of a lawsuit, pretty fast...

Again: it's not about hardware vendors not supporting a chip.

It's about hardware vendors adding code specifically designed to prevent use of a chip that otherwise works just fine.

Re:No biggie (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059832)

Again: it's not about software vendors not supporting a chip.

It's about software vendors adding code specifically designed to prevent use of a chip that otherwise works just fine.

There, fixed that for you.

Re:No biggie (5, Insightful)

realityimpaired (1668397) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059944)

You seem to be operating under the premise that Apple is a Software company like Microsoft. They're not. They're a hardware company like HP or Dell. That the operating system they provide with their hardware is their own creation is irrelevant, and they're under no obligation, moral or otherwise, to provide support for any platform that they didn't sell.

That they're disabling support for the Atom platform is irrelevant. They're disabling support for a platform that they don't sell. The EULA that comes with their software specifically prohibits your using that platform in the first place, so if you were using their software legitimately, it shouldn't affect you. If it does affect you, too bad.

Re:No biggie (1, Insightful)

tak amalak (55584) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059956)

And you know all this how? Yeah, I thought so.

You have no idea how booting off an Atom machine was broken.

Re:No biggie (0, Flamebait)

psergiu (67614) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060140)

OMG - Porsche changed the gearing of their new Engines and i can no longer install stolen Porsche engines on cheap Tata Nano car bodies.

Porsche should be in court, at the wrong side of a lawsuit !

Again: it's not about car vendor not supporting a certain type of gear sizes.

It's about car vendors specifically using non-standard sizes to prevent the installation in a 3rd party car body that otherwise works just fine.

Re:No biggie (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059948)

...unjustly.

OS X is only licensed to run on Apple-branded hardware, in an even more direct way than Dell-distributed Windows installation discs are licensed (by both Dell and Microsoft) to be installed on Dell-branded PCs. You can't even pretend that Dell and Microsoft don't try to introduce technical "obstacles" to prevent non-supported use of those OEM discs, since they do at some level.

Without delving into the licensing specifics of the above examples, there is seemingly NO requirement for either Apple or Dell/Microsoft to provide support for any non-supported hardware/software combination. Apple is merely in the unique position of being the primary provider of both their own OS and their own computer hardware, therefore trivially enabling them to employ this more finely-directed method of preventing such a scenario.

Re:No biggie (4, Insightful)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059458)

It's more about "user experience" than anything else. They don't want to allow OSX to run on anything other than their hardware, because some cheap chipset might make the whole thing malfunction and users would be fast to blame apple for a bad product... Even though it would be the user at fault for not respecting the hardware specifications...

That's a policy that have been enforcing for a long time now.

Re:No biggie (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059582)

Well thats a load of crock, now isnt it?

Apple makes money on Hardware and software as a bundle.

Hackintoshes threaten this money making opportunity.

I'm not concerned with it, because I don't plan on running OS X on anything other than an expensive computer sold by apple. And since I have no desire to spend on such a frivolous thing, the plans happily sort themselves out.

The user experience Apple truly cares about is the one where the user pays apple a large sum of money. Everything else merely facilitates this.

Re:No biggie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059938)

Well thats a load of crock, now isnt it?
It is not a load of 'crock'.

Apple makes money on Hardware and software as a bundle.
Apple unbundled before. It nearly destroyed them financially. The mac market is relatively small. The computers the competitors were making were *WAY* better than what Apple sold and at about half the cost. Steve jobs decided he didnt want a percentage of a percentage of the computer market...

Apple long ago stopped being about selling good hardware. And more about selling 'cool'. Their cases mean more to people than what the computer does. That their hardware is sometimes decent is secondary to what they sell. They sell an experience.

It doesn't compete with Apple in my situation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059972)

I am on my third OS X Apple (17" Powerbook, 20" iMac, now a 24" iMac), currently have four iPods (home, car, shuffle for workouts, Touch for multimedia) and have had another three in the past, and AAPL is my largest single stock holding. So clearly, I'm an Apple fanboy.

Until Apple releases something with the footprint of a netbook, Apple is not losing any sales to me by virtue of me hacking a MSI Wind to run OS X.

I looked at the Macbook Air before I purchased the Wind. The footprint was just way too large. It was marvelously thin, but the overall size was a dealkiller for me. So I decided to go with the wind and the small headaches it takes to update OS X periodically. It work for me and works well.

Now if hackintoshes never existed because OS X wouldn't run on them, I still wouldn't have purchased a Macbook air (or any other iBook or Macbook) due to the size. So no foregone profit for Apple in my situation.

Now if Apple made a netbook (or possibly the rumored tablet) I'd probably be one of the first to buy one, as the stuff they put out is second to none. Until then, my Macbook will serve my portable needs rather well.

Re:No biggie (2, Insightful)

PCWizardsinc (678228) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059658)

Hardly, anyone that has built a hackintosh, or for that matter, modded a netbook to run OSX, would never blame Apple for it not working... the whole point is just to see if you can do it, ...

Re:No biggie (2, Insightful)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059726)

Well, in this exact case they make the software malfunction on a certain chipset and the only one to blame is Apple.

It's about money (1)

Adrian Lopez (2615) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059752)

... because some cheap chipset might make the whole thing malfunction and users would be fast to blame apple for a bad product...

I'm sure that has nothing at all to do with it. What's actually happening is that Apple is the sole supplier of computers that can run OSX out of the box and it wants to make sure things remain that way. It's simply a matter of Apple maintaining a profitable hardware monopoly.

Re:No biggie (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059808)

What, the same style of user experience policy that makes all iPhone apps require Apple approval, and gets AMIGA emulators banned, because hobbyists might be able to access a BASIC interpreter and have too much fun?

Mod parent down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059842)

Anyone who's capable of installing OS X on a non-Apple machine understands how computers work. Further, it violates the OS X license, meaning even if they do blame Apple, they wouldn't give a hoot.

Parent Posts Case In Point (2, Insightful)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059892)

http://www.itwire.com/content/view/29250/1023/

Nowhere does the article say "Jailbroken", even though the worm only targets jailbroken, non-officially sanctioned stuff that lives outside Apple's cage. This is an open and shut case of Apple's hardware getting blamed for something the hobbyist hack community does. An IT manager who's considering brining iPhone's into the business might read the article, not go the extra mile to find out the exploit's for jailbroken phones only, decide that iPhones are not secure enough yet, and go with a blackberry or something else.

Re:No biggie (1)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060018)

>hey don't want to allow OSX to run on anything other than their hardware,

They dont. They sue people who sell OSX based machines. This update targets hobbyists and techies who know what they are doing and who dont need Apple's hand holding for "user experience" as you put it. Open your eyes already. Its embarrassing to see a place like slashdot that supposedly is all about the DIY ethic defending bullshit actions by one of technology's most controlling and DRM friendly companies.

Re:No biggie (1)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060104)

Although I understand that argument, I really believe that this type of behaviour is holding back Apple. I think that OSX CAN be a huge threat to Windows, if they allowed it to be installed on any PC. I would imagine that many people would LOVE to ditch Windows and install OSX on their Dell laptops. The MacBooks are too expensive compared with other laptops, which is why a lot of people just suck it up and buy a Dell with Windows.

Re:No biggie (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060282)

And then OSX behaves just as badly as Windows since it is now in the same driver hell as MS.

If you're going to have a crappy experience either way, why not stick with the one that everyone else is suffering through?

Re:No biggie (2, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059558)

Tightens the code and all that.

I must be unfamiliar with the x86 architecture. Can you explain to me how blacklisting x86 devices as opposed to other x86 devices "tightens the code and all that"?

Maybe they should just build a white list that checks the firmware of the motherboard to make sure that the device is an approved "user experience" device before booting? I mean, they're suing Psystar when they could just let the problem take care of itself, right?

In my opinion what Apple is doing is bad for the market and bad for end consumers who want choices. They should explicitly state their product's system requirements and let the consumer decide (like everyone else). Sure, they think they're protecting us from bad situations but where will that mothering stop and at what cost?

Re:No biggie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059734)

Uh, they DO explicitly state their product's system requirements - one of the machines they sell, none of which contains an Atom.

"Sure, they think they're protecting us from bad situations but where will that mothering stop and at what cost?"

Pure idiocy. They think they're making money.

Re:No biggie (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059754)

They're already doing that... Problem is, there are EFI simulators out there that simulate the correct firmware.

Re:No biggie (5, Informative)

Smurf (7981) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059814)

They should explicitly state their product's system requirements and let the consumer decide (like everyone else).

From the Snow Leopard Tech Specs:

General requirements
Mac computer with an Intel processor

Only Apple makes Macs and Apple does not make any product with the Atom processor. Therefore, no computer with the Atom is supported. Neither is any computer with an AMD procesor. Or any computer not made by Apple, since all Mac clones are over ten years old and used PowerPCs.

None of those computers are supported. The fact that it works on some of them is a happy coincidence. There it is, written clearly in the very first requirement.

Re:No biggie (2, Insightful)

winthrop (314632) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060068)

I think the complaint is that the requirement for a Mac computer is a business requirement for Apple to make money, not a technical requirement in order to run the software, except in so much as Apple cripples their software (from the end-user's perspective) in order to achieve their business goals.

Re:No biggie (3, Interesting)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059564)

Actually, they would have had to add more code to disable the specific processor in question.

You see, the Atom is an X86 (or, on some, X86-64) based processor, so they didn't have to change their code at all for it to work on it in the first place. Now, they must look at the Processor ID and specifically disable support.

Bill

Re:No biggie (0, Offtopic)

Huge_UID (1089143) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059804)

Mod parent up.

Re:No biggie (4, Interesting)

Chaos Incarnate (772793) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059816)

Unless it's based on the presence of some other capabilities like SSE4.

Re:No biggie (1, Flamebait)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060072)

Unless it's based on the presence of some other capabilities like SSE4.

This is a stupid argument and you are a stupid person for making it because OSX is supported on computers without SSE4.

Re:No biggie (1)

Adrian Lopez (2615) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059572)

Tightens the code and all that.

How exactly does adding instructions to special-case-disable the OS when it's running under particular hardware tighten the code?

Dell Zino (3, Insightful)

tompeach (1118811) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059394)

I wonder if the recently launched Dell Zino could have been a motivator? http://www1.euro.dell.com/uk/en/home/Desktops/inspiron-zino/pd.aspx?refid=inspiron-zino&s=dhs&cs=ukdhs1 [dell.com]

Re:Dell Zino (2, Insightful)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059560)

I'd say no more than the countless netbooks that it (previously) could be installed on.

Re:Dell Zino (2, Interesting)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059620)

Who needs OS X with that ... they sell a version with Ubuntu installed. I just wish they'd sell a larger range of laptops with Linux already loaded.

Re:Dell Zino (4, Interesting)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059936)

Absolutely not, Apple has sold machines and sells machines to that demographic already. It's netbooks that challenge Apple, because they don't actually offer anything in that market.

Re:Dell Zino (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060236)

I'm not familiar with the Zino, so I read the specs then clicked the gallery link to get a look at the machine. Then I read the captions. Seems they need to get some things in order on their site. According to the gallery captions, there's an HDMI port, optional Blu-ray drive, integrated HD3200 graphics, and an AMD Athlon dual-core processor. Of course, none of those are available on the Zino. But if all of those actually were options, it would be a nice little machine worth considering...

That's funny (2, Funny)

paimin (656338) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059418)

I saw this on Google News yesterday, and I figured, "Huh, must have missed that on /."

Ah well, let the shitstorm begin.

Re:That's funny (1)

wjsteele (255130) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059464)

It happens every day here on /. I like to call it "Slashdot: Yesterday's news, Today!"

Bill

Re:That's funny (1)

zerosomething (1353609) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059622)

And it seems to be getting worse. Important things don't seem to get through. Articles like this one get moded down by Mac Mac fan boys connecting to http://slashdot.org/recent [slashdot.org] and don't show up till a day or so after submission. Then the anti Mac Windows fan boys do the same when positive Apple things show up and etc etc...

"Officially"....? (5, Insightful)

benwiggy (1262536) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059442)

I RTFA, and there's no acknowledgement by Apple of what they have done or why they have done it. So the update does not "officially" break Atom support, it just breaks Atom support.

If Only /. Admins Were More Vindictive (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059660)

I RTFA, and there's no acknowledgement by Apple of what they have done or why they have done it. So the update does not "officially" break Atom support, it just breaks Atom support.

It's official because CmdrTaco said so!

My news stories have leveled whole cities! I'm not afraid of you!

Sincerely,

CmdrTaco

Re:"Officially"....? (3, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059866)

I don't think that OS/X ever had official atom support to start with. The interesting question is this caused by intent or because Apple didn't test the update on an Atom. Of course they have no reason to test the update on an Atom because they do not sell a single computer that uses the Atom.

Re:"Officially"....? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059952)

I think it "officially" breaks it because 10.6.2 is now an official build.
Official admission = Apple acknowledges it
Official break = Official release version breaks

Posting AC because I modded in this thread.

Start complaining, "free" software people (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059444)

Wah... oh well, sooner or later people will look at the price of their preferred genuine Apple portable, divide it by the number of hours they spend hacking to keep things working every time there is a point update, subtract a bit for general annoyance, come up with a single-digit hourly figure, and if they have half a brain they'll just buy one.

Or if they're not capable of working that out they'll just post whiny little messages on Slashdot about how their freedoms are being repressed by the big bad company that chose not to support hardware they don't even ship.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1, Insightful)

Nursie (632944) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059472)

"Free" software people won't touch Apple with a long pointed stick. It's even more closed and unfriendly than MS.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059544)

"Or if they're not capable of working that out they'll just post whiny little messages on Slashdot about how their freedoms are being repressed by the big bad company that chose not to support hardware they don't even ship."

I see you've proved me right :-)

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060322)

As the sort of user you are trying to misrepresent, I am far more concerned about
what Apple will or won't do with my data than whether or not it will run on some
random machine. Although "locked" installation disks are a bit of a pain.

The more important issue with Apple is their tendency to ignore data formats and
otherwise act in a manner that assumes that you've never created or imported data
from another non-Apple system.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (4, Insightful)

3vi1 (544505) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059652)

>> "Free" software people won't touch Apple with a long pointed stick. It's even more closed and unfriendly than MS.

You do realize that OS X comes bundled with 100's of 'free' open source utilities/apps, right?

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (2, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060008)

You do realize that OS X comes bundled with 100's of 'free' open source utilities/apps, right?

You do realize that I can get all the same shit for free for Windows with Services for Unix, right? It's not bundled so that you're not forced to receive it if you don't want it, but it's a free download.

Further, you do realize that Apple is abysmal at keeping up with updates on that Open Source stuff, so that it's almost always outdated and thus often useless anyway, right? And in fact creates security holes that they do not see fit to address?

yay slashdot (-1, Flamebait)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060154)

Where "flamebait" means "anything with which I disagree". I guess some Mac fanboys who can't stand it when Microsoft does as well as Apple have modpoints.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060184)

MS still has that whole "Services for Unix" thing? I remember poking at that a bit when I wanted to get NFS (as a client) working under XP but I could never really get it working properly (read: at all), never had any problem with FreeBSD, Linux or OS X machines talking to the same NFS server though...

/Mikael

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060330)

Microsoft still has that whole "Services for Unix" thing, they refreshed it when Vista came out and that version works on Windows 7 because they're the same OS with minor changes, mostly in the area of kernel tuning. I've been using it off and on since Windows 2000 or so, and have never had any problems with it whatsoever, using it primarily for NFS.

With that said, using NFS today for any purpose is generally a bad idea. Samba will run practically everywhere and you can even get binary packages for most legacy systems. In practice, CIFS outperforms NFS in nearly every situation. I use it even for mounting a remote filesystem from my little Debian server to my big Ubuntu desktop because NFS is so annoying. Samba works very reliably and provides superior performance. I've also used other NFS solutions for Windows (like that from Chameleon) and Samba is the clear winner over all. Except in the very rare cases where Samba cannot be used at all, avoid NFS.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (2, Insightful)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060204)

You do realize that OS X comes bundled with 100's of 'free' open source utilities/apps, right?

Do you realize that getting the apps themselves isn't the point?

I can get things like GCC and bash on Linux, Windows, Solaris, OS X and so on.

The difference is in that when something goes wrong, on Linux and OpenSolaris I can debug all the way up to the kernel, while on Windows and OS X I'm stuck if the problem happens to be somewhere in the closed components of the system, and the core system is very unfriendly towards any kind of interesting customization.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1)

Gopal.V (532678) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059680)

They do actually. It has more to do with the devil that works than the devil that doesn't ...

At least, here's what one of my f/oss gurus who uses Apple had to say [lerdorf.com] .

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (3, Funny)

magnus.ahlberg (1211924) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059812)

Ah, there's nothing to support an argument like a blog post from 2006.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059828)

>>At least, here's what one of my f/oss gurus who uses Apple had to say [lerdorf.com].

Well done! That article is only 3 years old.

How is it even relevant?

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1)

Techman83 (949264) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059716)

Indeed, I like their products and their software seems impressive (discounting itunes on windows). But the cost both in monetary terms and my philosophy on how I feel the world should work, mean that I'll never own an apple product in at least the near future. If they change their philosophy, maybe I'll consider it then.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1)

Kleppy (1671116) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059802)

Have a website and want to use iWeb to edit it? Tough noogies, you have to start from scratch again because you can't import a website(or so that I have seen so far).

Mods on crack today? (4, Insightful)

StuartHankins (1020819) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059838)

One of the more uninformed posts I've read today.

Apple owns or participates in a HUGE number of open-source projects.

Re:Mods on crack today? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059920)

Ah, yes. It's the little things that matter.

Re:Mods on crack today? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30060040)

"Free" software people won't touch Apple with a long pointed stick. It's even more closed and unfriendly than MS.

One of the more uninformed posts I've read today.

Apple owns or participates in a HUGE number of open-source projects.

There are people who make a distinction between Free and Open Source. The GP specified Free software people. You've made one of the more uninformed posts I've read today.

Re:Mods on crack today? (2, Insightful)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060186)

Reminds me of a conversation with a Linux Zeloat the other day:

LZ: "Look at my Ubuntu, it automatically finds my printer!"
Me: "Thank Apple"
*LZ GIVES ME A CONFUSED LOOK*
LZ: "What do you mean?"
Me: "Point your browser to localhost:631"
*screen: CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by Apple Inc. for Mac OS® X and other UNIX®-like operating systems.*

Having to deal with linux printing a decade ago, be glad that Apple bought CUPS and continued to develop it.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (0, Troll)

JackDW (904211) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059984)

Exactly. One thing I love about my Debian laptop is: it just works.

It's really user friendly, at least according to my definition of "user friendly". You can see that thousands of man-years have gone into the development of the software that it runs. Decades of evolution have brought the shell, the GUI and the productivity apps close to the point of perfection.

It's based on a Unix-compatible kernel, so I get all the power of Unix in a portable machine.

It came loaded with hundreds of free, open source utilities. The great thing about Debian is, whatever you need to do, there's an app for that. There's this network of software repositories, like an "app store", all ready to download and seamlessly install. Tens of thousands of apps! All free!

The laptop is a Thinkpad; quite an expensive brand, but the costs are kept down by two things. Firstly, there are hundreds of competing manufacturers, thanks to the open market for PC compatible hardware. Secondly, all of the software is free as in beer as well as speech, so there is no "tax" to pay to Microsoft or any other monopolistic manufacturer of proprietary operating systems.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1, Flamebait)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059772)

Wah... oh well, sooner or later people will look at the price of their preferred genuine Apple portable, divide it by the number of hours they spend hacking to keep things working every time there is a point update, subtract a bit for general annoyance, come up with a single-digit hourly figure, and if they have half a brain they'll just use Linux.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30060022)

Masterful karma whoring there! So the trick is just to recommend Linux no matter what?

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (1, Interesting)

samkass (174571) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060114)

Apple's kernel is OPEN SOURCE, isn't it? Isn't the whole theory of open source that if something doesn't work for you, go write some code to make it work? If folks are so pissed that the Xnu kernel that underlies MacOS X is now missing Atom support, then why not go add atom support, recompile your kernel, and use your own kernel?

I haven't installed a custom-compiled Xnu kernel on my own MacOS X box in a couple years, but as I recall the process isn't even very onerous...

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30060156)

I have a feeling that those folks would have their Hackintoshes even if it costs them more than buying a Mac because they just enjoy the hacking experience.

Re:Start complaining, "free" software people (3, Funny)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060238)

Or if they're not capable of working that out they'll just post whiny little messages on Slashdot about how their freedoms are being repressed by the big bad company that chose not to support hardware they don't even ship.

ARTHUR: Please, please good people. I am in haste. Who lives in that castle?
WOMAN: No one live there.
ARTHUR: Then who is your lord?
WOMAN: We don't have a lord.
ARTHUR: What?
DENNIS: I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.
ARTHUR: Yes.
DENNIS: But all the decision of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting.
ARTHUR: Yes, I see.
DENNIS: By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs,--
ARTHUR: Be quiet!
DENNIS: --but by a two-thirds majority in the case of more--
ARTHUR: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!
WOMAN: Order, eh -- who does he think he is?
ARTHUR: I am your king!
WOMAN: Well, I didn't vote for you.
ARTHUR: You don't vote for kings.
WOMAN: Well, how did you become king then?
ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king!
DENNIS: Listen -- strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
ARTHUR: Be quiet!
DENNIS: Well you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: I mean, if I went around saying I was an empereror just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me they'd put me away!
ARTHUR: Shut up! Will you shut up!
DENNIS: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system.
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! HELP! HELP! I'm being repressed!
ARTHUR: Bloody peasant!
DENNIS: Oh, what a give away. Did you here that, did you here that, eh? That's what I'm on about -- did you see him repressing me, you saw it didn't you?

Haha (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059462)

Someone mod the article -1 Troll. We all know that PCs are the ones that are shit, Macs Just Work.

makes me rethink things (2, Insightful)

Skraut (545247) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059568)

It's funny as someone with an aging MacBook Pro, I was contemplating passing it down to my wife, claiming her netbook, installing osx86 on it, and then picking up a new Mac desktop, either an iMac or a Mac Pro, and just standardizing on OSX throughout the house.

Now I wonder if I'm better off just installing Ubuntu on the MBP and the Netbook and spend a lot less money on the desktop and build myself one with Ubuntu as well.

I'm not totally stating that this has caused Apple a hardware sale, (at least not yet) but it has made me re-think my strategy.

Re:makes me rethink things (1)

Skraut (545247) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059598)

should have said "caused Apple to lose a hardware sale" That'll teach me not to hit preview.

Re:makes me rethink things (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059714)

Reading is an odd thing. I read it as "I'm not totally stating that this has cost Apple a hardware sale" and it made perfect sense.

Re:makes me rethink things (1)

benwiggy (1262536) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059666)

Why would you put osx86 on an Apple MBP....? You can run OS X 10.6.2 on it.

I can't see how the "decision" not to support hardware for which the OS is not designed affects your setup one jot.

Re:makes me rethink things (1)

benwiggy (1262536) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059736)

Oh, hang on. Sorry, had trouble reading. I see now.
Still, either the osx86 crowd will hack the kernel, or something else will happen.

Re:makes me rethink things (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059818)

Learn to read. He said he was going to get his wife's netbook and put OSx86 on THAT.

Re:makes me rethink things (1)

vvaduva (859950) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059856)

I almost bought a netbook for the very same reasons - keep my macbook pro at work, take the netbook with me wherever I need to go and have a small computer with me.

This is not causing Apple to sell more stuff...it's just pissing off people like you and I, making us wait until a fix is out.

Re:makes me rethink things (4, Insightful)

StuartHankins (1020819) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059964)

OS X vs Ubuntu have not only entirely different target audiences but are entirely different experiences. I use XP, OSX Tiger, RHEL 5 and Fedora 8 daily but switching my laptop from OSX Tiger to Fedora or RHEL would be a huge difference in capabilities and would greatly reduce my performance -- until I found replacements for all the things I do, assuming that's possible.

And please before you tag me as not friendly to open source, I've been using Fedora since it was called Red Hat 5.2. Just make absolutely sure you are willing to put up with the change in scenery... Ubuntu tends to be a rather cutting-edge distro. Hope it works for you.

Re:makes me rethink things (1)

Skraut (545247) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060208)

Yeah my main desktop at work is an Ubuntu machine, which runs VirtualBox whenever I need to do something which requires windows (not often). I also have an old iMac at work, but it doesn't do much but serve as an iTunes player, and doing the occasional SVN merge. I've always appreciated the OSX ui, and a few years ago bought Final Cut Pro to do some video editing as a hobby. I'd like to keep using it, but I'm caught in the Mac Hole. iMac isn't the ideal platform for it. Mac Pro is to expensive for something I'll be doing as a "hobby" I want to get my wife off of Windows, and the transition from Windows -> OSX would be just as easy/hard as the transition from Windows -> Ubuntu. Yes they aren't equal yet, but for what she'll use it for there will be close enough.

vvbx (0, Offtopic)

czychk (1671102) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059570)

Thanks for ugg boots [uggbootshare.co.uk] this post. I have finally found the time to comment, because you raise a very good point for the open and transparent community you and may of us, your readers, aspire to adopt and be a part of. It is hard to feel hopeful at times.

Oh, great. (2, Insightful)

saintlupus (227599) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059628)

Time for another thousand posts on how Evil Apple should leave in support for hardware that they don't sell. Fantastic.

--saint

Re:Oh, great. (1)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059690)

"Disabling support" in this case is an euphemism for intentionally breaking stuff.

Re:Oh, great. (2, Insightful)

Quantumstate (1295210) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059766)

There is a difference between leaving in support and explicitly disabling "support". I put support in quotes because there was never anything extra done to support atom, it just acts like a normal processor. This si like websites which look at your browsers user agent and deny you access because you are running the wrong browser, when the page would run in the blocked browser anyway.

Re:Oh, great. (5, Insightful)

ircmaxell (1117387) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059900)

You haven't read through the previous comments, have you? I see far more people (at least at this point) complaining about the anti-apple comments than anti-apple comments...

Now, with that said, I think it's genius what they are doing from a business perspective... Making the software an beacon to their hardware profit center. From a moral perspective, I don't care what they do, cause I'm not spending $3k on a MacBook Pro... OSX may be amazing, but I am quite happy with Ubuntu, so this news has no consequence for me. If you want the freedom to do what you choose, use a free OS (Linux flavors, BSD flavors, etc). If you want the polished yet non-free OSs (OSX, Windows), then you have to live with the restrictions... It's as simple as that. They own the copyright on the OS, so they can tell you how they want you to use it. You can argue about the moral implications of what they do all day long, all it does is keep their name in the news...

Re:Oh, great. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30060182)

They own the copyright on the OS,...
Yes, they do
so they can tell you how they want you to use it.

They can tell you anything they like; it doesn't necessarily have any legal force.

In some jurisdictions EULAs (I assume that's want you're referring to) are completely unenforceable and you can do anything that basic copyright law allows (e.g. run it on any machine you like but not make copies for others); in other jurisdictions specific EULA clauses may be partly or wholly invalidated by consumer law. As far as I am aware there is *no* jurisdiction in which a EULA is automatically fully enforceable even if it conflicts with other laws or is impossible or unreasonable to follow.

There seems to be a significant strand of opinion on slashdot that believes that *every* clause in Apple's EULAs automatically have the full force of law beind them in every respect and that *any* EULA 'breach' automatically means you are illegally running the Apple software in breach of copyright law, which is a pretty bizarre position not supported by case law.
 

Apple Netbook on the Way (1)

wkurzius (1014229) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059778)

Another sign of the rumored Apple Netbook?

Re:Apple Netbook on the Way (1)

fluch (126140) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060150)

I doubt it. More likely a sign that they care a damn about Atom processors which is at most a sign that they do not plan to have Atom powered toys around.

Hackintosh is for the hobbyist, not the end-user (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059780)

If you know what any of the techno mumbo is in this article, you should know better then to care. The OSx86 project is facilitated by hobbyists who lived for this kind of nonsense. Oh sure, we all fret and cry out "Oh noes"...but we all know someone's gonna fix it sooner or later.

If putting OS X on anything you wanted was easy, it'd take all the fun and geek cred out of it.

Not that big of a deal (3, Insightful)

Fred IV (587429) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059784)

Hackintosh users can live without the 10.6.2 update. This doesn't really break anything, it just prevents netbook users from having the latest set of OS patches between now and whenever the community finds a workaround.

FIRSt (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30059844)

200 running NT Market. Therefo8e or chAir, return parties, but here

I do not see the fuss about it... (-1, Troll)

fluch (126140) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059906)

If people want to run Mac OS X they should get a Mac and not one of those silly Netbooks!

Nobody is blaming M$ for their windows not running on PowerPC chips (as they never intended it to be useable on this processor) and neither should anybody blame Apple for not taking care that Mac OS X boots nicely on a Atom (under-)powered Netbook.

Re:I do not see the fuss about it... (1)

FrostDust (1009075) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060116)

There's a difference between not developing support for a certain architecture, and breaking functionality for a specific processor model that previously worked.
The point of the matter is whether Apple broke support on purpose to impede Hackintoshers, or if it just happened as a side-effect of some unrelated change.

Atom (under-)powered Netbook.

They're supposed to be underpowered, it's a Netbook. The point of the Atom line was to make power-efficient processors, which would thrive in a market of devices that prioritizes battery life over performance.

Re:I do not see the fuss about it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30060200)

Nobody is blaming M$ for their windows not running on PowerPC chips (as they never intended it to be useable on this processor)

Because x86 and PPC are totally different architectures. Microsoft hasn't explicitly prevented the code from running on PPC; there is simply NO WAY to get the code to run on PPC.

Atom, on the other hand, is an x86 chip. Mac OS X is targeted for x86 and would run except for the fact that Apple has put in an actual check into the code to forbid it. Understand the difference?

and neither should anybody blame Apple for not taking care that Mac OS X boots nicely on a Atom (under-)powered Netbook.

Straw man. Nobody asked Apple to optimize the user experience. Tinkers and hackers simple want to use it and deal with the associated issues of an unsupported platform.

Re:I do not see the fuss about it... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060252)

If people want to run Mac OS X they should get a Mac and not one of those silly Netbooks!

People who want one of those silly netbooks and want to run OSX are being ignored by Apple. You're blaming the consumer for getting what they want, which is stupid. Thanks for making slashdot grate, Apple fanboy. Blame Apple for not offering potential customers what they want; it's short-sighted and in fact a bit pathetic.

Nobody is blaming M$ for their windows not running on PowerPC chips (as they never intended it to be useable on this processor)

Windows used to run on PowerPC, but nobody wanted it, so they discontinued it... just like Apple.

and neither should anybody blame Apple for not taking care that Mac OS X boots nicely on a Atom (under-)powered Netbook.

People are blaming Apple for taking deliberate and unnecessary steps to make it not boot on Atom. Not all intel-based macs have instructions lacked by Atom, so the only way this would happen is if Apple made a deliberate and yet unnecessary change which stops Atom from working. Since my brain works, I bet I get more done on my "silly" Atom-based netbook than you can accomplish on any computer. Now go away, and stop telling consumers what they want.

That's fine (0, Troll)

psergiu (67614) | more than 4 years ago | (#30059982)

Less support for CPUs not sold by Apple means less bloat in the Darwin XNU kernel, means more speed for us legitimate mac users.

Thumbs up, Apple. Our money were well spent.

Re:That's fine (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30060090)

Ummm. No it doesn't. It actually means *more* bloat, albeit insignificant, because they have to explicitly check to see which CPU you are using.

Not in Darwin? (4, Interesting)

wandazulu (265281) | more than 4 years ago | (#30060102)

I'm guessing that, since the actual kernel is open source [apple.com] that they are doing some additional check further up the chain in a non-open source module. Otherwise wouldn't it be trivial to do a diff, search for the code that checks for the stepping, and if it's an Atom, call exit(0)?

yuo f4il it (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30060256)

smells worse than a We strongly urge It has to be fun it transfor8s into is dying. Fact: Trying to dissect Users With Large won't be standing world-spanning BitTorrent) Second,
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>