Ferret-Simpson Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Considering the fact that my hardware is supposed to be supported in Macos X since 10.4.5 I'm slightly surprised that under the Jas-10.4.8/Semthex it has less hardware support than before. In neither version is my Atheros miniPCI-E wireless card supported, despite the fact that (AFAIK) it's used in all Macbooks. . . Also surprising is my gigabit ethernet controller, a Marvell Yukon 88E8055 PCI-E (Apparently, although I rather think it's integrated. . .) which I think is used in almost all GMA950 notebook motherboards. What else? My Carbus slot is not detected in either, nor is the internal serial port for my display, my SDHC or my modem (although that one suprises me the least.) What I do find odd is the USB controller. I believe this is what is causing the inability to use the wireless under 10.4.8. It was detected under 10.4.6, and my Toshiba Bluetooth chip was automatically configured and enabled. However under Jas 10.4.8 Beta 2, the USB subsystem isn't detected at all, and I've also noticed that the USB Prober as well as several other parts of MacOS X are PowerPC binaries. Go figure. I'm shrinking my Windows partition and I'm going to try installing both simultaneously, see if I can configure a working system using the two. I just want to know, has anyone else noticed this, is it a known bug? Is there a fix-update, will there be? Or should I just scrap 10.4.8 and my hardware support and just revert to having a partially-working 10.4.6 (Since at least it worked MORE completely than .8) Cheers, Ferret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bikedude880 Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 It called Apple is locking the OS down to specific hardware. Anything that isn't in their computers (basic hardware) will not be supported by them. The original developer system (10.4.1) had more hardware support because it was meant to run on generic boxes so that developers could write and test software for the Intel platform before it was officially released to the general public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soündless Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 yeah, as the realeases come out, it will get harder and harder to patch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferret-Simpson Posted January 27, 2007 Author Share Posted January 27, 2007 It's an Intel 950 USB controller. It IS Standard Mac hardware. Are you seriously telling me that between 10.4.6 and 10.4.8 Apple removed support for their own HARDWARE!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferret-Simpson Posted January 27, 2007 Author Share Posted January 27, 2007 The PowerPC binaries bother me a bit aswell. . . Do apple stil use PPC-only software as part of the Intel OS X? I gues they'd be run through Rosetta, but it's still odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EPDM Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 It's an Intel 950 USB controller. It IS Standard Mac hardware. Are you seriously telling me that between 10.4.6 and 10.4.8 Apple removed support for their own HARDWARE!? Intel GMA950 is part of a full chipset and NOT the USB controller. The 950 is the gfx part from 945G chipset. I reckon the low-cost macs uses this chipset (e.g. Mac Mini). Depending on your motherboard the 945G is coupled with other logic (ICH7) not necesarily from intel. So if your mainboard doesn't use the USB-controller from the ICH7 but another one (as is usually the case with LAN and audio controllers) then it might be not working from 10.4.8. As is said in here before. Apple is silently removing ADP code from the current codebases. Partly to annoy the hackers I guess. I also reverted back to 10.4.5 and used the Systemversion.plist-trick to get 10.4.8-only software installed (e.g. Photoshop CS3). This gives the least amount of problems and the highest degree of compatibility out-o-t-box. I did notice that Systemprofiler doesn't reckognise that I converted Universal-binaries to Intel-binaries. Hmmm...odd. Oh well. Who's gonna be stupid enough to send sytem-profiler-reports to apple when there's something gone wrong with their HackIntoshes, right? Regards, EPDM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts