Is Apple morphing Mac into the ultimate PC capable of running Mac OS X, Windows, Linux?

“Now that the speculation about Apple switching from IBM PowerPC to Intel chips is over, industry buzz about more platform crossover for the Macintosh is just beginning,” Russell Redman writes for CRN. “Solution providers and analysts said Apple’s move to Intel opens up some intriguing possibilities: Would Intel-based Macs be able to run Microsoft Windows and Linux? And would the Intel version of Unix-based Mac OS X–code-named Leopard–be able to run on non-Apple computers powered by Intel processors?”

“The answer to both questions likely will be no, at least in the short term, VARs and analysts said. But they didn’t rule out either eventuality because of the huge market implications for Apple. Both scenarios would open the Windows PC space–especially the lucrative corporate market–to the Mac platform, potentially lifting Apple’s 2 percent to 3 percent computer market share into the double digits, they said. What’s more, if Leopard were permitted to run on PCs, Apple could reverse its historic decision to not license its operating system on other manufacturers’ computers,” Redman writes.

“Ross Rubin, an analyst at The NPD Group, said in a report that Apple could use a proprietary chipset to prevent Intel Macs from running other operating systems. Likewise, Apple could use Trusted Platform Module technology to ensure that the x86-based version of OS X will run only on its hardware, according to research firm Gartner,” Redman writes.

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: This has been covered numerous times and various Apple spokespeople, including Apple VP Phil Schiller, have stated that Mac OS X will only be able to be run on Mac hardware and that Apple will do nothing to support or prevent Windows from running on Intel-based Macs. Linux already runs on Macs hardware.

Related MacDailyNews articles:
The Washington Post: ‘In a year or two, the best Windows PC may come from Apple’ – June 19, 2005
Intel’s built-in virtualization tech could be one way to run Windows on Intel-based Apple Macs – June 16, 2005
If Intel-based Macs can run Mac OS X and Windows, buying a Mac will be a no-brainer – June 15, 2005
Apple could use Trusted Platform Module chip to keep Mac OS X off non-Macs – June 14, 2005
Intel-based Macs running both Mac OS X and Windows will be good for Apple – June 10, 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
Apple to use Intel microprocessors beginning in 2006, all Macs to be Intel-based by end of 2007 – June 06, 2005


  1. Who really cares? Honestly, this speculation by analysts is going nowhere.

    Who’s gonna dual boot? Or triple boot? It’ll be a minority for sure. If Apple allows OS X to run concurrently with Windows & Linux, they might have a product – but really, who wants to use different OSes at the same time? It can be cumbersome, confusing and I don’t honestly see office PC’s doing it, which is where the majority of users they’re talking about lies.

  2. MDN, I love you like a fat kid loves cake but PLEASE stop posting every single article you find on this topic, especially ones that make exactly the same point but contain no new information. When there’s new info on this issue, resurrect it. But until then, be a good fellow and give it a miss, would you? Thanks in advance.

  3. This type story is what we will be reading in MDN every day over and over and over and over and over for the next 2 years……gag, gag, barf.

  4. Only developers can get them for now, but they already ARE full-speed Mac-and-Windows-and-Linux-and-everything machines.

    Gotta get me one!

  5. what are the possibilities that leopard will allow me to jack my brain directly into mainframe so i can outwit the master controller and wear one of those fancy glow in the dark circuitry (sp) suits from tron?

    mw “again” as in once again we have an article on what if the next apple os can run on off the shelf pcs.

  6. One important point that is made in the article is the obvious: that when Longhorn finally makes its appearance, Apple will have Leopard ready to pounce. Forget Tiger vs. Longhorn. It will be Leopard vs. Longhorn and Apple will be perfectly positioned to totally take marketshare from Longhorn.

    So, I think it’s going to look like this:

    January 2006: Steve Jobs unveils the first Intel-based Mac at MacWorld and it’s a PowerBook based on the dual-core Yonah processor.

    June 2006: Several more Intel Macs have hit the scene since MacWorld, with sales up significantly year-over-year. Steve Jobs uses WWDC to unveil Leopard, with some killer, totally unexpected new features that make Longhorn look positively rickety. Pundits begin to wonder loudly why Microsoft seems to be taking so long providing answers to yesterday’s questions while Apple seems to be providing solutions for the future.

    January 2007: Longhorn is finally introduced, and there are major problems from the beginning. Things just don’t work becasue Microsoft is forced to rush Longhorn because of marketing pressure being applied by Leopard’s introduction. Leopard smokes everyone at MacWorld and the mass migration begins as WinXP/2000 systems begin to collapse from the incessant patching and viral loads.

    The Second Golden Age of Computing begins.

  7. You gotta wonder about how they chose the name “Leopard” for the change to Intel Macs. Because we all know what the most famous saying about a Leopard is, right?

    Maybe it is meant to emphasize that a Mac running on Intel chips will still be a Mac.

  8. You already may install Linux on a Mac and dual boot. Or you may run Linux applications on the Mac. Today. To be running Linux applications one does not even need to have Linux installed, anywhere. Most of the times one only needs to issue on the terminal prompt:

    $> make && make install

    There, done. Then you run the just-built application.

    The only new thing new would be the ability to do the same with Windows applications and – as with the Linux applications case of today – run them without the need to have Windows installed.

    This capability rests more on Microsoft plans than on Apple’s. Apple said it will not prevent it, Microsoft has to make so that Windows will be happy on a Mac with Intel inside. It will not and does not happens automagically.

    Please, someone tell me that people do know that OS X runs natively Unix and Linux applications NOW, no need for an Intel migration. Oh dear.

  9. Morphing…: “Only developers can get them for now, but they already ARE full-speed Mac-and-Windows-and-Linux-and-everything machines.”

    The situation today is:

    Everyone can get them and they already ARE full-speed Mac-and-Linux-and-everything machines.

    On the Mac-Intel machines Windows currently does not install. What you get? Put the Window CD on your Mac at home and try. There. You get the same.

  10. Personally, I’d like to be able to play PC games on my Mac, but I’d prefer some type of simultaneous booting to dual booting.

    The way I imagine it is the way Virtual PC works now, but without the need for emulation.

    MW: Maybe–How appropriate!

  11. One word: VMWare

    I’m sure they’ll be porting. I, for one, am looking forward to having 2 Macs instead of 1 Mac and 1 Windows machine.

    You can have Linux, Windows and OS X running on 1 machine without rebooting.

  12. >>You gotta wonder about how they chose the name “Leopard” for the change to Intel Macs. Because we all know what the most famous saying about a Leopard is, right?<<

    Yes, a Leopard can’t remove it’s spots, but it can move from spot to spot.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.