“For the first time, a PC player publicly welcomes the notion of selling machines loaded with Apple’s software,” David Kirkpatrick reports for Fortune. “I’ve mentioned several times in the past few months that executives from several PC companies have told me of their interest in Apple’s Mac OS X operating system. Sadly my sources would not let me attribute these assertions; PC executives are pretty leery of offending Microsoft, which holds enormous power over their businesses. So, many readers have challenged me on this point.”
Kirkpatrick reports, “But Dell (the company) has for several years fearlessly—and lucratively—sold servers loaded with Linux, the operating system Microsoft reviles and dreads. And as the industry’s top dog it wields more bargaining power with Microsoft than other PC-makers. So I emailed Michael Dell, now the company’s chairman, and asked if he’d be interested in the Mac OS, assuming that Apple CEO Steve Jobs ever decides to license it to PC companies. (For now, Jobs says he won’t.)”
“‘If Apple decides to open the Mac OS to others, we would be happy to offer it to our customers,’ Dell wrote in an email. It’s the first time any PC industry executive has openly shown enthusiasm for selling machines with Apple’s software. Though that’s all Dell would say for the record, I suspect his interest is not unknown to Jobs. So, as I said in this column last week (and in an article in the new issue of FORTUNE), the ball is in Jobs’ court,” Kirkpatrick reports.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Dell saying, “If Apple decides to open the Mac OS to others, we would be happy to offer it to our customers” certainly sounds better than “sell the company and give the money back to the shareholders.”
It also shows fear.
This would go a long way to answering the question we asked via headline last week, “Why buy a Dell when Apple ‘Macintel’ computers will run both Mac OS X and Windows?“
Let’s face it, everybody knows that Windows can’t match Mac OS X and the stripped-down “Longhorn” Windows XP SP3 holds no promise, either. Microsoft’s Windows illusion has been shattered among those in-the-know and that reality is currently in the process of filtering down to the masses. There is a better way. Mac OS X offers the world a stable, secure, well-designed, fun, and simply better operating system than it’s slumming along with right now. If Jobs licensed Mac OS X to Dell, would you buy a Dell? Perhaps not, but would your company?
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple’s ‘Mac OS X for Intel’ developer build reportedly running on Tablet PC – June 16, 2005
Apple could use Trusted Platform Module chip to keep Mac OS X off non-Macs – 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
Video of Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel running on Dell laptop posted online – June 13, 2005
Why buy a Dell when Apple ‘Macintel’ computers will run both Mac OS X and Windows? – June 08, 2005
Microsoft and Dell must have a lot of bricks lying around today – June 07, 2005
Dell CEO: Apple can’t just have one product and then say they’re the innovative leader of the world – February 22, 2005
Buy one, get one free: Ford offers Dell PC with purchase of Ford Focus – February 03, 2005
Dismissive Dell CEO not impressed with Apple Mac mini, calls iPod a ‘one-product wonder’ and a ‘fad’ – January 17, 2005
Michael Dell owes Apple an apology; Apple up 176 percent vs. Dell’s 13 percent in past 12 months – January 15, 2005
iPod success opens door to Mac OS X on Intel – March 04, 2004
Windows users who try Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger might not want to go back – June 07, 2005
PC World names Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger ‘Best Operating System’ – June 01, 2005
Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger ‘is the most advanced operating system on the planet’ – May 31, 2005
TrustedReviews: After using Mac OS X Tiger ‘going back to Windows XP is something of a joke at best’ – May 18, 2005
The Butler Group: ‘Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger the best desktop operating system in the world to date’ – May 13, 2005
BBC News: Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger ‘the most stable and reliable OS, well ahead of Windows XP’ – May 10, 2005
Windows users show strong curiosity about Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger – May 09, 2005
Windows tech writer Thurrott: ‘In many ways, Mac OS X Tiger is simply better than Windows’ – May 07, 2005
EarthWeb: Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger is a ‘serious enterprise operating system, a pivotal release’ – May 06, 2005
BusinessWeek: ‘Tiger bolsters Mac OS X’s edge as the best personal-computer operating system’ – May 06, 2005
The Guardian: Mac OS X Tiger a powerful solution while Microsoft’s Longhorn remains on drawing board – May 06, 2005
Chicago Sun-Times: Mac OS X Tiger shows ‘there’s never been a more compelling time to switch to Mac’ – May 05, 2005
Dan Gillmor: ‘With Mac OS X Tiger, Apple is plainly in the lead today’ – May 05, 2005
Jupiter Research VP: Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger ‘runs rings around Microsoft Windows’ – May 04, 2005
The Independent: Apple’s ‘faster, smarter, simpler’ Mac OS X Tiger ‘a must-have’ – May 04, 2005
Mac OS X Tiger review for a Windows PC audience finds Tiger’s ‘far, far better than Windows XP’ – May 03, 2005
Boston Herald: Mac OS X Tiger should compel Windows PC users to think about switching to Apple Mac – May 02, 2005
Mac OS X Tiger will likely improve performance of your Macintosh – April 30, 2005
PC World review gives Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger 4.5 stars out of 5 – April 30, 2005
Ars Technica: Mac OS X Tiger ‘at least twice as significant as any single past update’ – April 28, 2005
BusinessWeek: ‘Tiger bolsters Mac OS X’s edge as the best personal-computer operating system around’ – April 28, 2005
Associated Press: Mac OS X Tiger ‘provides another excellent incentive to switch from Windows’ – April 28, 2005
Mossberg: Apple’s Tiger ‘the best, most advanced personal computer operating system on the market’ – April 28, 2005
InformationWeek columnist: Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger ‘a compelling upgrade’ – April 28, 2005
NY Times: Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger is the most secure, stable and satisfying OS on earth – April 28, 2005
Wired News: Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger ‘full of welcome surprises’ – April 27, 2005
Apple posts QuickTime movies of Mac OS X Tiger features in action – April 13, 2005
Microsoft won’t pull Office from the Mac. Remember, before there was Windows, there was Office (or at least what would become Office).
Bill Gates is probably well aware that the dominant position Microsoft has enjoyed over the past 10 years can’t last forever. Apple will never “destroy” Microsoft, if that’s what people are hoping, but they may begin to erode that dominance. In the end, Microsoft will need its other ventures (Office, Xbox) as its core Windows market begins to decline.
And whether you love them or hate them, love Apple or hate Apple, the reality is that Windows has nowhere to go but down. Microsoft will never capture that last 8%, and it would probably be even worse for them if they did.
Meh. I seriously doubt Apple would let Dell build Mac clones. More like HP or Sony. Don’t fire up the space heaters yet, mcloki.
“Personally I think Apple will now have a bargaining chip answer to MS. “What was that? You are threatening to drop Office, again? Ok, do that, and we will release the next version of OS X for any PC as a public beta…. free. We’ll survive off the iPod sales until we gain a significant marketshare.”
Then why don’t Apple do that, regardless of the Office thing? If it would be that easy to get a fat chunk of the market, one would expect them to, well, simply go ahead and do exactly that?
I’m all for it, mind you
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Steve and Mikey sitting on a tree….
There’s is a fundamental difference between 1996/97 and 2006: the hardware Apple sells nowadays is cost-competitive and extremely well-designed while the Performas of 1996 sucked and the PowerMacs were drab. Licensing a MacOS-X version, or rather allowing people to install MacOS X on Intel-based computers, will bring MacOS to the corporate world. They readily switch to Linux already because it is hardware-compatible. A huge after market will develop where people will develop compatibility packages to run MacOS on various hardware configurations. This be done by the open source community at no costs for Apple. MacOS X is open source, and they will love to port the system to any given hardware setup.
Once people get hooked on MacOS at work, the cool factor of the Macintosh will kick in. Apple has the fastest growing brand right now and is in a unique position to first penetrate the installed base with the MacOS and then reap the rewards of hardware sales based on their superior design and functionality.
Producing the operating system will not cost a dime more than it does already, but hardware sales could be in the double digit range right where HP and other premium PC brands are. Besides, the corporate world would purchase MacOS licences to protect themselves against litigation.
The iPod has shown that Apple can thrive in a market where it is not protected simply by offering superior hardware-software combinations. S.J. is probably convinced that Apple can sell computers even if the MacOS runs on other hardware, too.
This is why the developer kits have been seeded: to get people to adapt OS-X to the installed Intel base without paying for it.
The whole thing will kill Linux, though, because a great number of open source developers will flock towards the MacOS once hardware compatibility is given.
Does Dell even compete in the same market as Apple? I mean, are there actually people that are torn between buying a Dell or a Mac? The way I see it, Dell’s target market is always going to be different than Apple’s target market. If Dell suddenly started selling OS X, the people that have always bought Macs are still going to buy Macs because they want the entire package, so Apple’s hardware sales are not going to go down. Most of the people that buy Dell probably don’t even consider buying a Mac and probably never will. So this would just to Apple’s overall market.
If anything, Macs will still sell, OS X will increase marketshare, Apple will gain more revenue, and OS X on Dell could even lead to more Mac sales.
In fact, even though I’d rather see OS X on a Sony or HP, OS X on Dell may be better for Apple since Sony or HP could actually compete with Mac sales, whereas Dell consumers are a completely different market.
“dude, you’re getting a macintel.”
i had to post but lame.
“Then why don’t Apple do that, regardless of the Office thing? If it would be that easy to get a fat chunk of the market, one would expect them to, well, simply go ahead and do exactly that?”
I just think it works more as a threat then what they’d prefer to do. Like the move to Intel. It was something they threatened IBM with for a while I am sure and eventually had to pull the trigger. Apple and Steve Jobs in particular, loves hardware, especially in regard to hardware design. To Jobs the design element isn’t just the shape of the box, or the GUI, but both in tandem. I think Steve Jobs is unwilling to give up the hardware.
Except, he may be learning that Apple is about the software, even if they make beautiful hardware, and most of their money from it. Pixar probably taught him that. NextSTEP too. He recently admitted that the soul of the Mac is the OS.
I think this is a multi-stage process, and who knows what the endgame really is. Moving to Intel brings Apple a huge step closer to licensing out it’s OS. Remember that he mentioned in an article late last year I think that 3 PC companies have been courting him asking him to license the Mac OS. One step at a time though.
The “Hot News” section of Apple’s website features a Mossberg article about the Intel switch, including a Q&A about the new processor. In answer to a question about running OSX on non-Apple machines, Walt says OSX will be:
“…designed so that they cannot run on non-Apple hardware, and Apple has no plans to license OS X to other PC makers.”
Posting this article so prominently may tantamount answering the licensing question…
should read “may be tantamount to answering the…”
^%&*^$ Windows work machine
I haven’t had time to read all the posts, but a Dell branded Mac would be a wonderful thing – as long as Apple made it. A contract along the lines of the HP iPod deal would be perfect. The Apple logo is replaced by a Dell logo and it’s good to go. I might even buy one. What I will not buy is a Dell box running OSX. Dell has not proven itself to me as a maker of high quality machines.
Microsoft is having to compete fairly these days. If Mac sales dropped to only 500k units a year, they would probably cancel Office:Mac, but the chances of that happening ended with the bondi blue iMac. MS are still in a strong bargaining position, but if Dell wanted to sell OSX and Apple wanted them to, they couldn’t really stop it happening.
Every Windows->Mac switch is a potential Windows->Linux switch averted. The last think MS need is for Linux to get serious traction. Imagine if people stopped using Office because the formats weren’t fully OpenOffice compatible. Where would the money to fund the XBox come from then?
OH HELL NO, F@#K YOU bitch ass mike. So now you welcome Apple in to your court. F@#K YOU. We don’t need you and the world of PC too. The reason Apple is switching to intel cause IBM can’t keep up with the supply of chips. Apple is growing and who need to license to the sorry PC world.F@#K them. Remember they laugh at us when apple was was nothing to them before the Ipod. They (PC World ) dam near cry for Apple to open the Ipod to them and Steve did. They still crying for Apple to open Ipod software too. (napster). And I’m gald Steve did’t. If the people will wake up and see what Apple all of about they will said F@#K YOU Dell and suck my D@#K you punk ass BITCH. And stop copying other people stuff and make your own junk. OH sorry you don’t know how. I forgot Dell is not a real computer company. You just rip off other people ideas sell it with your name on it. Real sad for a ass.
How to licence the clones:
One way for Apple to license to PCs is to force-link the running of a non-Macintel to a .Mac account. If the user keeps subscribing and linked to the internet, you can keep running the one non-Macintel, otherwise it stops running after a period of grace.
It forces the non-Macintels to register to be able to run the Mac OS, keeps the revenue coming in, advertises Apple produces via email, stops pirating (can’t link more than one non-Macintel to a single ,Mac account at one time), and gives them a real service for registering (more than MS registration does!).
Would it work?
no, hell will have frozen over once steve says ok to michael…
this news of dell wanting OSX is old-maybe i didnt read it here but there was an article somewhere stating that dell was wanting to offer their customers an alt. to XP.
Holy Mackerel:
Now that’s an interesting idea. Be interesting to see if that could work; it would allow people to try it (or maybe a limited version) on a beige box without giving the story away. Stop subscribing, and the OS stops.
It’s basically the mp3 subscription service DRM. Hmm. Just realized that this sounds a lot like what Bill Gates wanted a couple of years ago when they started the .Net thing; get everyone to use web-based apps and then subscribe to .Net to keep everything current—no OS actually on the local computer.
M$ upset all the PeeCee makers, plus Intel, when it announced the new XBox360, which is just a personal computer in the disguise of a game console.
M$ has now entered into direct competition with the PC makers it provides its OS to.
Dell and others would be smart to try and convince Steve to license OSX. I don´t know how it work or if it would seriously damage Apple in the long run…but it is all a giant chessgame being played out where everyone knows that M$ is the enemy.
But then…what is the difference between M$ or Apple selling both the OS and hardware in competition with the PC makers they would provide their OS´s to????
“PS Oh and we also have this version of Apple Office running…check it out….this will be part of the free public beta. Like it?”
Anyone remember the release of iWork? I predict that soon it will have more than just a word processor and a presentation package. Maybe it will be the next serious competitor to Office. Maybe Jobs knew all of this when he announced it.
MW forward, as in MS has nothing to look forward to while Apple has owning the computing world to look forward to.
There, I used it twice in one sentence.
how much could apple make by licensing mac osx? this year 200 million pcs will be sold. lets say apple can achive a marketshare of 50% by licencing mac osx to dell/hp/acer etc. and gets 100 dollar (probably less) per licence. that makes 10 billion in revenue. their hardware will be tiny at this moment. (why buy apple hardware when you can get an mac osx pc far cheaper?). that is almost the same they make now with their hardware business. why change that business-model? it doesnt make much sense to risk it.
“Personally I think Apple will now have a bargaining chip answer to MS. “What was that? You are threatening to drop Office, again? Ok, do that,”
Apple has had this bargaining chip all along
MS kills office. Apple dies, but before their dying breath releases OSX for x86 as open source.
It’s like Wrath of Khan all over again, except this time the Enterprise doesn’t get away.
Putting OSX on a Dell would be like putting a custom metalflake paint job with 15 coats of clear on a BUFFALO TURD!!!!! You heard me, A FREAKING BUFFALO TURD!!!! Ok, I feel better now. <vbg>
A buffalo turd:
It’s been said before but should be repeated here.
Putting OS X on a Dell is like putting lipstick on a filthy pig.
This is the very same person who insulted Steve Jobs when Jobs returned to Apple. He made a sarcastic remark that Apple should close its door and return all the shares to the share owners. What gives? He should make a public apology to Steve before he ever try to contemplate doing business with Apple. I don’t trust Michael Dull and either shall Steve.