“Steve Jobs knows that Apple will never wrest away a significant chunk of Microsoft’s Windows market share as long as OS X remains tied exclusively to Apple hardware,” Jason Brooks writes for eWEEK. “I predict that, shortly after the completion of Apple’s big move, the company will deliver OS X Unbound—a version of its excellent and innovative operating system that’ll join Windows, Linux, Solaris and OS X’s own BSD cousins in offering users the option of running the OS they’ve acquired on the hardware they choose.”
“In fact, I believe (and maybe there’ll be a magic Steve Jobs keynote moment in our future to confirm it) that this has been the Apple co-founder’s aim ever since he returned to the company’s helm,” Brooks writes. “What about the much-vaunted, unified hardware and software experience on which Apple hangs its hat? Apple will bill its own systems as the truest path to the full Macintosh experience, and Apple-built machines will remain among the prettiest and best-put-together computers you can find… While OS X will run most seamlessly on Apple-built machines, Apple can ensure good hardware compatibility in the same way that every other OS vendor does—through a hardware compatibility list.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: MacDailyNews’ own SteveJack wrote on March 04, 2004:
I believe analysts and others are missing the big picture: iPod success paves the way for Mac OS X on X86. People have argued for years for and against the release of Mac OS X on Intel (and AMD) commodity hardware, but Apple derives such a large portion of its revenue from hardware that doing so could potentially damage the company beyond repair. But, what if Apple replaces that lost Mac hardware revenue with iPod revenue?
Steve Jobs would then be free to drop what amounts to a hydrogen bomb on Microsoft. Mac OS X that runs on “regular” off-the-shelf x86 hardware. Or partner with a Sony, for example – to insure quality. Years before “Longhorn” even comes close to shipping. Moo.
Sell enough iPods and the OS war is on again in a big way – and for real this time. Steve Jobs knows this and that’s why, right now, iPod is much more important than Mac hardware to Apple Computer, Inc.
SteveJack’s article, “iPod success opens door to Mac OS X on Intel” was published over 15 months ago. It’s quite interesting to read that article and the Reader Feedback knowing what we know today.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple Computer attacks Microsoft Windows with two-page Mac OS X Tiger print ad in Time (with images) – June 14, 2005
Dvorak predicts Mac OS X for generic x86, Apple ‘Office’ suite, dawn of Mac viruses and spyware – June 13, 2005
Report: Apple Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hits piracy sites – June 11, 2005
Intel-based Macs running both Mac OS X and Windows will be good for Apple – June 10, 2005
Is Apple setting up the ultimate “Switcher” campaign by preparing to let Mac OS X speak for itself? – June 10, 2005
iPod success opens door to Mac OS X on Intel – March 04, 2004
Dude, Steve Jack is not the only guy to predict this way before when.
Please stop acting like the ORACLE when it comes to stuff like this.
I like MDN, but please stop acting like smucks patting yourselves on the back. That’s for the PC weenie crowd.
We’ve learned to never say never, but I find this highly unlikely. The basic fact is, Steve Jobs loves case design. He has, arguably, the best industrial designer in the world working for him (Jonathan Ive) and letting just any old box run OS X would kill the hardware division. Hardware sales wouldn’t drop completely, as there are always those (like me) who would want Apple’s hardware, but I think sales would drop significantly enough for them to lose a substantial amount of R&D money. The iPod can’t go like gangbusters forever. There will come a day (it may already be here) where it reaches a saturation point and sales level off.
I can see possibly doing a joint effort with Sony or HP, but what’s the point?
Welcome to the big bad hacking world… Once OSX for Intel ships, it will be available through P2P in no time at all. This time, there is sort of a truth to the ‘security through obscurity’-thing: so far, it was not interesting to hack OSX, because it runs only on Apples own hardware anyway. Once OSX runs on any old hardware, a veritable army of hackers out there is waiting to open up OSX and spread it.
If you think Apple can stop that by building a fancy thingy into their own boxes, think again. Codes, dongles, cables, what have people not tried in the last 30 years to protect their software? How many have been succesful? N o n e. (Apple, by creating their own reality within computing, have come the furthest in that field, but there is plenty of pirated software for Mac out there) Hackers, by nature, are always a step ahead.
Apple will not be able to keep OSX off cheap boxes, it is that simple. As Apple are no fools, I’m quite certain that we’ll see an ‘Open OSX’ out there within a few years.