Of course they must do that. I agree.

 

another attempt to secure their market share and their "right" to sell hardwares. but then again perhaps the question is "can they (ever) keep up with the (overwhelming) community that is there to debut their resistance?". well, Apple has her business and IP rights, but do they care, really? or should they?!

 

Why would people use Mac on netbooks? If you want Mac you buy a mini mac or something like that... isn't it supossed to be best for media editing and stuff like that (Netbooks are a lot cheaper, but Mac doesn't really make up for the hardware they have).

I mean you want an UPMC in order to be able to connect anywhere anytime, so you want something universal, then microsoft is the way... right?

Acording to Marketshare.hitslink.com that would be Microsoft Windows with a huge window of 92.2% versus Macs with 5.27%, then comes Linux distros with a 0.96% and the rest of Operative Systems to come are Mobile like Symbian, iPhone, etc.

If we are talking about Atom powered Desktops, I insist, why Mac?

 

I don't think it will be a great idea.Apple should spread it's OS t low end PCs.

 

Sounds like a bad marketing move to me. It just makes Apple look more like the bad guy, and I can't imagine that there are very many "Hackintosh" users. I feel like, if Apple wants to gain a bigger foothold on the computer market, they need their software to get around as much as possible.

It's all fine by me though, I'm really not a big Apple fan.

 

@Treeski: But if they do allow it, they would loose a lot, the Mac bussiness is not on software, it's on pricy hardware.

If anyone could run Mac OS X on a realy low price PC then Mac gets nothing back.

 

@kibaruk... People might want to have a second or third PC they use for basic stuff, like word processing and the like, and would rather not have a hodge-podge of different operating systems to contend with. This is especially true for the techno-challenged. If they get used to the Mac OS and then want to get another PC, but don't want to pay out the nose for a system that only needs bare minimum specs, I can see why they would definitely want to run the Mac OS on a netbook. Paying a premium for hardware that you will only use 15% of is a pure waste.

This is where Apple needs to get in gear. They are missing out on the huge netbook market, and throwing this fancy touch tablet at the market will get some wow factor, but still be far more costly than a netbook-ish system NEEDS to be. The fact that many are running their OS on a netbook and are satisfied enough with the functionality to keep running it, speaks volumes regarding what consumers want. They need a Macbook Lite, not a flashy gimmicky tablet.

 

Once again , Apple is being an ***. Why can't they just let it slide for once ? Maybe they could actually try to gain something here ? Mac only , mac only over and over again ? People want to try Mac on their PC's , why not just let em' ? Sigh...

 

Apple already makes a ton of money with everything, why restrict people on what they can do with their OS. I mean I understand changing the make up of it or anything like that but I thought mac was supposed to be open and more "fun" than an old boring pc. At least that's what I got from the commercials .

 

@Vrmithrax: Mac isn't the lower computer for everyone, and they intend to keep it that way, if there is someone techno-challenged I doubt big time he/she would pay a Mac to "learn" (Unless they are loaded, in which case they won't matter paying extra for a powerfull notebook instead of a netbook). They don't have netbooks, they have iPhones for the daily (As you described) browser, mail and youtube, music, etc for techno-challenged users.

 

They are "being an ***" and restricting this because Apple is a hardware company. Seems like people keep forgetting that little fact. The only reason there IS a Mac operating system is that it helps sell their hardware, and for their customers they practically give it away (when compared to Microsoft prices for their OS). If they open it up, slack off on their policies, "let it slide" as it was put, then what's to stop people from taking their hard work on the OS and putting it on other cheaper computers that will ultimately gain zero benefit to Apple? They'd have to jump their OS prices dramatically to make any money. And, of course, since their software would now be running on any of an infinite number of hardware combinations, they'd have to massively upscale their support department to handle the technical issues... They aren't Microsoft, software is only a sideline to a goal, written specifically for their particular hardware platform configurations, so why do they have to justify not allowing it to run on systems outside of what it was designed for???

Yet another case of people feeling like they are entitled to whatever they want, without a care or consideration for what it might cost the company.

 

Haha... Just shows that Apple is afraid of what might happen to its view of being "secure" or "stable" if it is being put on a system that hasn't been hand put together by them. It is apple being controlling in their hardware and not allowing customization. Apple is a jerk of a company that can't handle what it puts out.

 

Of coarse they are going to prevent the use of there os on Atom , thats how they make all there money .. not through the sale of the os but the sale of the hardware as well. Imagine if Microsoft did this , here ya go win7 but you have to buy all the hardware from us and we are going to inflate the costs to you our customer.. it just wouldn't fly. The only reason that Apple can do it is nobody really cares they have crap for market share on the PC world no matter how good there Iphone and Ipod do.

 

Wow, talk about missing the mark by a mile... This has absolutely nothing to do with their stuff being secure or stable, because their OS is designed, refined, and tested for Apple hardware ONLY. Of COURSE they are controlling in their hardware, IT IS THEIR HARDWARE, and it is their sole reason for being in business! I find it laughable that you say they can't handle what they put out, when their software is run on their hardware (as intended) there's no handling problems. It's when yahoos get a cheap version of the Mac OS and try to run it on foreign hardware that the problems occur - which, by the way, is exactly what this move is trying to curb. You may not like it because you can't just do whatever you want and you hate restrictions, but it's a smart move on Apple's part.

 

netbooks could all go android anyway... Why not just go ubuntu rather then paying for apple brand unix.

 

Just another reason to stick with PCs. I know macs are supposedly more user friendly (or so I've heard), but I couldn't stand having to use what apple decide I must. If people are pissed at Microsoft for monopolising the OS market, just imagine if apple manage to take a hold with their uber locked systems, only apples OSs, only apple hardware...no thank you!

One company can't possibly be make the best everything.

 

You said it brother.

 

I'm not sure that they needed to do this, netbooks are still a pretty small market share, and netbooks running OS X are a tiny fraction of that. It probably isn't hurting OS X sales.

But having said that, Apple doesn't design their OS to run on things they don't control, and it is their OS, so I'm not sure why there is so much outrage at this decision.

Perhaps the thing that we should be getting out of this is not that Apple is a bad company, but rather that this likely means if Apple does release their long rumored tablet - it won't be Atom powered.

 

Apple just wants to make money off it becuase there profit comes from selling there pc/mp3s not there OS-s. By stopping others from using there OS you'll have to settle for there grand old monopoly, and im betting overrpriced versions.

 

I have no problem with Apple doing this. It's not part of their business model to sell their software separately from their hardware. When you buy an Apple product, you're buying a closed system. The close hardware/software integration is part of what makes Macs so appealing and reliable to end users. If Apple had to support the breadth of legacy hardware that Microsoft has to and include a ton of 3rd party drivers, I'm sure Mac OS X would look a lot more rickety.

 

I believe that Apple has totally missed the boat when Vista was around. They had the perfect opportunity to release OSX into the open market to run on any PC when PC users were disheartened by the dog that was Vista. It seems now that Apple is fighting fires rather than going out there and saying "Yes, we have a better OS than Windows. Install it on your PC and find out why!". They may lose a few sales in the hardware stakes but they could then dominate the OS market instead - knocking off Microsoft - now wouldn't that be funny!

 

I am with him... but still I never really liked Atom... it's just too small..

Also my first Atom experience was so damn bad that I have ever bought any netbook containing atom since. Atom is in my opinion a word processing and/or mobile device processor, never intended to run a full blown OS like MAC OSX or even Windows 7, though small flavors of LINUX work well on it..

 

Apple OS now = *nix based OS + Apple GUI = massively over priced on "selected hardware" only..

and they wonder why hacks appear to eliminate the stupid restrictions they have placed on the OS.

Ubuntu FTW

 

forget apple, forget the hackintosh, forget microsoft and windows. GO LINUX!!!