Comments on: OS X Killing Intel Atom Support– No Hackintosh for You!

By: Kevin C. Tofel

Kevin C. Tofel — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:04:40 +0000

My bad — I misunderstood your question. No, I didn’t purchase a license to do my experiment. I had toyed with the idea of purchasing a copy of Leopard if I was going to keep OS X on my experimental hardware, but in the end, wiped the drives and went back to officially licensed software. :)

By: oliver

oliver — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 03:29:00 +0000

Really, a fully functional MacOS with support for all essential peripherals/devices such as WiFi, Ethernet, audio, and sleep? On the 2133?

By: oliver

oliver — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 03:24:49 +0000

Well, nice :). But what I wanted to know is whether you bought a new (cardboard) box with Leopard in it so Apple would actually get some revenue out of your use of their software.

By: Luscious

Luscious — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 23:28:29 +0000

So I guess my 2133 is more future-proof than expected! ;) Never tried installing OS X on it but I’ve seen it done. I’m happy with XP right now, does everything I need well.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:01:06 +0000

The windoze and linux crowd touted the netbook as their platform, yet many users have been using boot 132 to instead install a store bought Apple Snow Leopard. I think it shows, this tight, compact and speedy OS X to be in demand. With Apple market cap almost as big now as Microsoft, all the zunes, X boxes and microsoft keyboards and mice cannot keep it ahead for long.

They have upset too many users with their steep upgrade costs and requirement for full install of Windows 7. If you have to buy new hardware, why not switch to snow leopard and boot 132 for your PC instead, that or buy a used Macbook for $300 on ebay or just get a new Apple instead?

By: Kevin C. Tofel

Kevin C. Tofel — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:08:08 +0000

I performed my OS X experiments on hardware I already owned — my Samsung Q1UP and my MSI Wind.

By: Oliver

Oliver — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:57:06 +0000

Oh please… make an appointment with your doctor to get your nose checked out…

By: Oliver

Oliver — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:55:08 +0000

How many Hackintosh users do think spent money on a new license for OS X? (ignoring, of course, that you can’t actually acquire a license for a non-Apple computer in the first place).

Kevin, did you buy another Leopard box for your experiment?

By: Zack Lee Wright

Zack Lee Wright — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:38:06 +0000

Looks like they want to generate some demand for the upcoming 10.7″ iPad tablet PC. After the Atom Hackintosh crowd starts suffering withdrawal symptoms they will gladly open their wallet for the REAL THING with full touch support, color eReader content and subscription model (think instant magazine and newspapers at the touch of your finger) plus leveraging iTunes, appStore and more. By next year the majority of the Atom Hankintosh crowd will be firmly nestled upon Apple’s voluptuous bosoms once again. Stay tuned as Apple will be bearing much fruit in 2010.

By: TateJ

TateJ — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:36:37 +0000

I think Apple is getting ready to introduce something that they feel will compete with netbooks. (Please note I did not say Mac Tablet or Apple Netbook.)

By: SAM

SAM — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:48:05 +0000

If they sell an extra operating system for a netbook,
why should they care, it’s income.

It sounds lke CONTROL

“DO NOT tick off the GREAT ONE and do something we said you can not do…”

By: bobby

bobby — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:27:54 +0000

If Microsoft did something like that there would riots in the streets. I smell an Antitrust lawsuit.

By: JC

JC — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:19:57 +0000

Are they checking for Atom then refusing to boot or are they making use of some feature that Atom doesn’t support? These two are not the same thing but they tend to get conflated, especially when a behavior someone found desirable changes.

In any case, Apple never actually supported running OS X on Atom. (e.g., rigorously tested OS X on Atom based platforms to insure it behaved properly.) Since they don’t test to insure OS X works on Atom, that it would eventually stops working on Atom is expected.

It takes work to retain consistent behavior from version to version. Any behavior that never gets in-house testing will eventually fail from neglect as the software is continually revised. This is a general statement about development at any house, not about Apple.

By: turn.self.off

turn.self.off — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:06:17 +0000

sounds to me like the removal is more a issue of putting a bit of code in the kernel that basically detects atom series processors and then refuses to boot, as in theory a kernel compiled for X86 should boot on both core and atom, or for that matter anything from amd…