Why doesn’t Apple’s Mac OS X 10.6.2 work on Atom processors?

Apple Store“The small community of hobbyists who have been installing Apple’s operating system on their netbooks [with cheap Intel Atom processors] suddenly found Monday’s update to OS X, version 10.6.2, is no longer cooperating,” Brian Caulfield reports for Forbes. “The real question: why now?”

“It could be nothing, of course. Or Apple could be about to strike out in a radically different direction than the one that has guided the rest of the computer industry towards cheaper, less capable versions of the notebook computers,” Caulfield writes.

“Making it more difficult to get an Atom-powered machine running OS X might be a sign Apple is preparing to introduce its own mobile processors, built around the technology it acquired from P.A. Semi in 2008,” Caulfield writes. “A powerful, power-sipping processor could be ideal for the long-rumored Apple tablet computer.”

Full article here.

34 Comments

  1. Err.. for the same reason that Apple is vigorously pursuing Pystar, maybe? You know, Apple being a HARDWARE company, making most of their profits from HARDWARE, and maybe not wanting people buying HARDWARE from other companies, only to run Apple’s OS on it. Like, duh.

  2. The tech blogging community has reached a point where the validity of content is not even a top 5 consideration when publishing. It’s a 5 – 10 word title designed to pull in the maximum number of eyeballs followed up by 200 words of absolute nonsense.

  3. Makes sense. If Pystar rises the question of Apple allowing the netbooks to work with hardware that Apple does use. Well, could hurt there case. Seems reasonable.

    That must have been an eye opening event for some. Noooooooo, my HACKINTOSH will not boot! Hope they backed up there data before.

  4. Well if they aren’t planning to use them why support them. If they plan to introduce their own device (oh really there’s a shock)using their own processor then that would double the reason to cut out competition. You can certainly argue an alternative translation but this would be the most likely. If there are going to be services available that others will find difficult to compete with then it would be sensible to make those unique services difficult to exploit in the way that for example Palm have been doing with itunes.

  5. Let’s give enough doubts around to discourage all these fancy hackers!
    ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” /> Fear’s has often been a pretty good psychological tool anyway…

  6. G4Dualie, I think you misunderstood the point being made. If Apple allows OSX to run on hardware it does not build, how can it argue – <u>in court</u> – that this is not a valid use of the software? Apple is trying to tell the court that the end-user agreement prohibits the use of the software on equipment not made by Apple – even if it is essentially identical. Their appearance of veracity could be hurt if Pystar can show that the OS runs on hardware that is quite different from that made by Apple.
    There’s no specific Hobby/For-Profit differentiation here.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.