http://blogs.forbes.com/velocity/2009/11/10/apple-drops-atom-bomb-on-netbooks/
Apple Drops Atom Bomb On Netbooks
November 10th, 2009
Let's be clear. Apple never encouraged the installation of its operating system on netbooks. Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook, among other Apple managers, has always belittled the $300 machines built around cheap Intel Atom processors, cramped keyboards, small screens, and -- usually -- Windows XP.
So it should come as no great surprise that the small community of hobbyists who have been installing Apple's operating system on their netbooks suddenly found Monday's update to OS X, version 10.6.2, is no longer cooperating. 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.
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. A powerful, power-sipping processor could be ideal for the long-rumored Apple tablet computer. Such a device could explore new possibilities for fusing music and video, applications such as those built for the iPhone, and the web in novel ways.
At this point, however, that's must speculation. What is clear, however, is Apple doesn't seem too keen on exploring those possibilities with Intel. Or the hackers, hobbyists, and small-time entrepreneurs who are -- no doubt -- already close to finding a way to make Apple's latest software work on all those netbooks, again. -- Brian Caulfield
--
"You were sick, but now you're well again, and there's work to do."
--Kilgore Trout
Garry
Apple bought their own chip maker: PA. That's the one they plan to use. Not the Atom.
Why support a chip they don't use in the computer or any of their other products?
Would you? Would you support someone else's horse, or only those in your own stable??
Do you pay the bills for your neighbors car repairs?
Apple isn't beholden to hardware they don't use or support. Duh!
Bill
On Nov 10, 2009, at 1:24 PM, Garry Howard wrote:
> So much for "do anything you want" with your computer. LOL I don't know why
> Apple insists on fighting the hobbyists. After all, the company started as a
> hobby in a garage by a couple of hackers.
>
> Garry
Radix lecti.
Couch potato.
>
> So much for "do anything you want" with your computer. LOL I don't know why
> Apple insists on fighting the hobbyists. After all, the company started as a
> hobby in a garage by a couple of hackers.
When you think about all the vulnerabilities and problems Windows PCs have, many of them generated by hackers, it's easy to understand Apple's tight control over their environment. It may be closed to hobbyists, but it's also far less vulnerable to worms, viruses, et al. There was a story the other day about how a worm has appeared in the wild that targets jailbroken iPhones. Something about how the jailbroken phones have to break certain required security measures and use default permissions that make it easy to hack. The first worm known for the iPhone did nothing but "rickroll" the owner (if you're a fuddy-duddy who doesn't know what that means, Google it). But it showed that far worse can be done.
THAT'S why Apple exerts the control it does. It wants the most trouble-free operating experience its customers can have, and in order to gain that, it has to prevent a lot of fooling around inside it.
Scot "I like not having to worry about viruses" Murphy
> But if Microsoft tries to control things it is called a monopoly and the courts make them open up there code so others can play.
Microsoft has engaged in other anti-competitive practices: breaking business deals after obtaining a company's trade secrets, introducing "vaporware" to depress the stocks of innovative companies and drive them out of business, buying up companies and then killing off their products, sometimes just out-and-out stealing their technologies, stuff like that. Engaging strict control over 90% of the world's computers is just one of the many things they've done. When they engage in such practices, they set themselves up to be sanctioned by governments here and abroad.
Scot "if they produced their own hardware, it'd be a different story" Murphy
>
> If I buy a copy of Windows 7 I can install it on any computer I want. I
> don't need them to protect me from myself.
>
> Apple exerts the control they do so they can sell you their overpriced,
> proprietary hardware. That's their business model. It really has nothing to
> do with your well being.
Complete misconception. Win 7 is already vulnerable to viruses. OS X: None. It's all about the OS.
Speaking of prices, though...have you checked out the cost of a 27" monitor--JUST the monitor--which has the specs of Apple's new iMac? About $1600. Buy an iMac, though, and you get that same quality, plus a high-end computer stuck to the back. PCs spec'd out to match Macs are about the same in cost. Then there's the total cost of ownership: sure, you might save a few hundred dollars by buying a cheaper PC, but what about that antivirus subscription you have to pay? Or, for non-technically savvy people, all the money they have to pay to the tech to clear out their registries, get rid of malware, and so on? And what about the loss of productivity whenever a whole company has to scrub every one of their computers because a virus goes wild? The eventual cost of your PC is going to match or exceed the cost of a Mac and it'll give you a LOT more headaches.
Scot "if you want Lexus quality, you don't trick out a Ford Focus" Murphy
>
> The complete misconception is that OS X is invulnerable to attack.
It's not invulnerable to attack, but it does seem to be invulnerable to viruses. Trojans and browser exploits can still exist, and of course, running Javascript opens you up to potential problems.
> I could
> post numerous links to support that statement but I won't. Of course, if you
> install the latest release you stand to risk losing all your data.
> http://www.pcr-online.biz/news/32516/Grave-Snow-Leopard-flaw-killing-Mac-dat
> a
>
> "Security Update 2009-006 describes fixes for Mac OS X 10.6.2 and for
> earlier Apple operating system versions. It includes 58 Common
> Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) entries, 18 of which don't affect Snow
> Leopard." The latest patch fixed 58 vulnerabilities that don't exist.
I don't know where they come up with that. But the data loss issue--which only affected you IF you happened to reboot after installing SL into a guest account rather than your own--has been resolved in 10.6.2. The total number of people affected by this flaw were in the hundreds, a miniscule percentage of SL users.
>
> The other misconception is that similarly configured PCs are as expensive as
> Macs. I've done that analysis numerous times and it just isn't true. You can
> get a similarly configured PC for hundres less than a Mac. I don't know what
> the specs are for an Apple $1600 monitor, but I am using an HP desktop with
> 4GB of memory, a duo-core processor and a 22" wide screen monitor that is
> more than adequate for my needs and it cost $650.
Just because it's a comparable size doesn't mean it's comparable quality. Is it backlit LED? Is it mercury-free? What are its pixel stats? The new iMac has a pixel range that is higher than 1080p. A similar monitor from Dell costs $1600 or thereabouts. This one just happens to have a computer attached to it running the world's best OS.
Scot "perfect for large pictures of BBQ ribs" Murphy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: smoker...@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:smoker...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Scot Murphy
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 1:37 PM
> To: smoker...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [BBQ] Re: OT: If you have a netbook running hacked
> OS X, don't update the OS!
>
>
> Just because it's a comparable size doesn't mean it's
> comparable quality. Is it backlit LED? Is it mercury-free?
> What are its pixel stats? The new iMac has a pixel range that
> is higher than 1080p. A similar monitor from Dell costs $1600
> or thereabouts. This one just happens to have a computer
> attached to it running the world's best OS.
>
>
All of that is irrelevant. The 22" monitor that came with my computer
displays everything beautifully and more than meets my needs at a cost of
hundreds of dollars less. There are plenty of more expensive PCs that cost
much more than I paid for this one, but again, this one more than meets my
needs so why would I want to pay more?
Garry
>
> All of that is irrelevant. The 22" monitor that came with my computer
> displays everything beautifully and more than meets my needs at a cost of
> hundreds of dollars less. There are plenty of more expensive PCs that cost
> much more than I paid for this one, but again, this one more than meets my
> needs so why would I want to pay more?
Well, that was really my point. If you find something cheaper, good on you. But if you look for something with similar specs to the iMac, you're going to spend just as much for just the monitor. Me, I'd love one, but then I don't know what I'd balance on mah belleh. :)
Scot "maybe a cup of coffee" Murphy
Bill
On Nov 10, 2009, at 1:40 PM, jwhi...@comcast.net wrote:
> But if Microsoft tries to control things it is called a monopoly and the courts make them open up there code so others can play.
Never let a computer know you’re in a hurry. -- Unknown
From: smoker...@googlegroups.com [mailto:smoker...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Douglas
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 2:11 PM
To: smoker...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [BBQ] Re: OT: If you have a netbook running hacked OS X, don't update the OS!
> but I am using an HP desktop with
> 4GB of memory, a duo-core processor and a 22" wide screen monitor that is
> more than adequate for my needs and it cost $650.
Hmmm How long do you spose that's gunna last before Windows 8 comes out and makes it obsolete??
Bill
Is it 5 yet??
Aha!!! Got it. Yes... I had both at one time. Bought a 20MB! external Serial, (later converted to SCSI), hard drive and figured that would be the most I'd ever need. HA!!
From: smoker...@googlegroups.com [mailto:smoker...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Gerry Curry
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 3:24 PM
To: smoker...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [BBQ] Re: OT: If you have a netbook running hacked OS X, don't update the OS!
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 3:15 PM
>
> I don't know, but Apple is the only computer manufacturer I'm aware of that
> made a whole product line obsolete.
Since when? You can still run Leopard on PPC Macs. I've heard of Leopard being run on Cubes, even. Besides which, you have to clear out the deadwood eventually. One of Windows's biggest problems is trying to maintain every single app ever written, going back as far as Win 95. Just try to imagine if Apple was trying to make Macs that supported OS X and the original ClarisWorks. Having to support every single driver in existence is what makes Windows spaghetti code. Apple limits its hardware suppliers so it doesn't have to provide support for Bob's Lo-Cost Video Cards of Yuba City.
Scot "Leopard even runs on original DV iMacs and makes them faster" Murphy
Install OS X on it!
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 4:01 PM
To: smoker...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [BBQ] Re: OT: If you have a netbook running hacked OS X, don't update the OS!
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 4:01 PM
To: smoker...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [BBQ] Re: OT: If you have a netbook running hacked OS X, don't update the OS!
----- Original Message -----From: Garry HowardSent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 6:14 PMSubject: [BBQ] Re: OT: If you have a netbook running hacked OS X, don't update the OS!
A TRS-80 isn't a PC. That was pre-Microsoft.
I did own a TRS-80 Color Computer, though. That was my first computer.
>
> I don't know, but Apple is the only computer manufacturer I'm aware of that
> made a whole product line obsolete. It isn't necessary to upgrade. Our 10
> year old PCs in Puerto Rico are still running XP just fine and will continue
> to do so until they are retired. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for
> Windows 8 to come out.
Yeah, it does seem to take a long time, doesn't it.
Which product line was that that Apple obsoleted? Oh, you mean the Clones.
Never should've happened. Oh, you mean the old OS 7, 8 and 9 machines. They're still around. Lots of people are using those computers as servers and phone distro units.
Bill
> -~--~---