3 ms·
I think that's very far-fetched. The Atom "problem" showed up in a developer build which would not give Apple any kind of accurate measure of a potential netbo
by tvon 17y ago
I think that's very far-fetched.
The Atom "problem" showed up in a developer build which would not give Apple any kind of accurate measure of a potential netbook market (ADC members are not representative of the general public, I think it's safe to say). Measuring public reaction would be useless as well as Apple is aware of how easy it is to generate an absurd amount of misguided outrage. Even ignoring those two points, the problem wasn't even blogged about until the day before the following update which apparently doesn't have the same problem (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/04/rumors-of-disabled-intel-atom-support-in-mac-os-x-10-6-2-unfounded/ http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/04/rumors-of-disabled-intel...).
So, if that was their plan it was a horrible idea with bad execution.
- protomyth 17y agoTo add to your point; the Apple rumor sites spend so much time taking small bits of information (e.g. a developer release is reported to not work on Atom processors) and creating a whole story out of it. This is kinda insane. Look, Apple likes the profit margin. They are very fiscal minded (witness that Apple rumor sites report on GAAP changes). Netbooks do not make the money laptops make and Apple is still selling a lot of laptops. I actually don't think they care that much about individual power users creating netbook hackintoshes. Remember how everyone freaked about the TPM chips in the original Intel Macs? That "threat" never materialized.