“I will admit that the possibility does exist that Apple doesn’t want its OS in the wild, since it could potentially hurt hardware sales. At least that’s the way the company might see it. This assertion does assume that the Apple marketing department is brain-dead,’ John C. Dvorak writes for PC Magazine.
“I see the OS getting out in the wild as having the opposite effect. For one thing, it would increase interest amongst developers, which should boost overall sales. Besides, I’m completely convinced that Apple could still get the same premium for its machines that it does today,” Dvorak writes. “People simply like the design of Apple gear. Just look at the sales of the overpriced iPod in a market glutted with MP3 players. Why does anyone buy one? How is this ga-ga mentality different with computers?”
MacDailyNews Take: This article is sort of a re-do of Dvorak’s PC Magazine article, “Mac-Intel Aftermath” from June 13, 2005. In this new one, Dvorak looks at the possibility of Apple using Intel’s “trusted computing” hardware DRM to lock down Mac OS X OS to ensure it ran only on Apple-branded hardware. As you can see above, John thinks this would be a “brain-dead” move by Apple. Somehow, Dvorak gives Apple’s Mac OS X lots of credit for being so good that it would boost overall sales while giving Apple’s “ga-ga” hardware designs little or no value. Dvorak discounts the value of Apple’s control of the whole widget (hardware+operating system] to guarantee as seamless an experience as possible for Mac users.
Dvorak goes on to repeat the theme of his mid-June article; that Apple is just making it seem like they wish Mac OS X to remain only on Apple-branded hardware, but really secretly plans to eventually let Mac OS X run on the Dells of the world.
Dvorak outlines his latest scenario:
1. Keep Microsoft from getting weird early [keep “freaky Microsoft from get freaky on them” and killing Office for the Mac].
2. Assure current Mac mavens that not much is going to change.
3. Allow for Apple to pretend to fight the OS getting out into the wild, so it can then say, “There was nothing we could do. This is the OS that people apparently want and need.”
4. Give Steve Jobs the path to a formal announcement at one of the Apple confabs where there isn’t much to announce.
5. Give Jobs the ability to tell Gates that Apple didn’t really want its OS on all computers everywhere. “Bill, you’ve got to believe me!”
At or around the 4th step above, Dvorak explains, “In the wings is waiting a shrink-wrapped [Mac OS X] upgrade that works perfectly on older machines. A public announcement comes. ‘It works on machines that Microsoft Vista won’t run on!’ says Jobs. The crowd goes wild. And it’s priced below Microsoft Vista. It turned out that the hacked OS-X86 that Steve was so angered by was actually the beta test for the rollout of the commercial product.”
Read the full article (and Dvorak’s older article – see related article below) here.
MacDailyNews Take: Dvorak seems to have dropped his sixth step: “Spyware and viruses emerge on the Mac” from his earlier piece. Perhaps he’s taken a closer look at Mac OS X and realized that might not happen. Or, who knows, maybe he just forgot about that one? As we said in our take to his first article, “The insistence by some that if Mac OS X had the market share of Windows that viruses and malware would be just as bad is just illogical. There are millions and millions of Mac OS X computers on the ‘Net and zero viruses. Do the math. Use common sense. Mac OS X is simply more secure than Windows by design.”
The rest of Dvorak’s theory – a “twisted scheme” in his words – is interesting and, after the last few years, we have to admit that just about anything is possible. We do think that Jobs intends to attempt to offer the world at large a better option than Microsoft can offer. At this point, it’s anybody’s guess what Jobs is planning. What do you think?
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ ultimate goal: ‘to take back the computer business from Microsoft’ – June 16, 2005
Michael Dell say’s he’d be happy to sell Apple’s Mac OS X if Steve Jobs decides to license – June 16, 2005
Dvorak predicts Mac OS X for generic x86, Apple ‘Office’ suite, dawn of Mac viruses and spyware – June 13, 2005
It’s simple. Set hardware standards and support only those standards.
Apple could get $50 to $60 for each OS and $50 for iLife. A good Office clone would net them another $50. That’s all the manufactures would pay.
The Dells and HPs of this world would make these computers just to put Microsoft in it’s place.
Because of the hardware standards and the $80 to $90 software premium the Mac boxes would still be more expensive than the Windows boxes.
Would they sell? Only if the Dells and HPs pushed them.
Continued …
Thus releasing OSX into the wild is largely inconsequencial to what they anticipate as the road to success in the future. Keeping it locked on to Apple hardware may be a tip of the hat to MS, to placate them, or yeah even to lull them into not realizing the true strategy (“Don’t worry, we won’t play in your back yard … because soon we’ll simply own your house.”).
I’m sure this is what they are doing, but I’m not so sure it’s ultimately good for consumers. Yeah, we’ll have cool video products, but at what cost? Most tech and civil liberties people I’ve talked to or read about seem to think DRM is only going to make our lives miserable in other ways. I think they’re probably right. I just don’t know what we can do about it at this point – the wheels are already in motion.
If Apple were ever to release OSX for any PC other than its own. Hardware standards regulated by Apple with an Apple approved label on the outside of the PC box and on the PC itself would have to be implemented. Apple engineers would have to approve the design and build of these third party PC builders and run extensive compatability checks with Apple’s OSX. Also Apple would have to have onsight quality control people to check as each unit is built. That label would have to be pretty complicated to prevent forgeries some how. In all it would be pretty complicated and if these steps were not taken Apple would get a lot of support calls from PC users that bought equipment claiming to be OSX compatible but actually not.
Adam — EXACTLY! Thank you!
Dvorkak–Dork vac, as in vacuous.
MW–ill, ie, sick, that says it all.
I think Dvorak is wrong but I love the idea of Steve Jobs announcing a version of OSX that would run on machines Vista won’t run on. Can you imagine the look on Bill Gates’ face. That would be hilarious.
But realistically, I don’t know how Apple could make allowances for the endless variety of Windoze gear.
Winsocks is correct. Those making the loudest noise about OS X running on generic PC boxes are least desirable customers; the ones that want everything for nothing.
PS- Dvorak. I do not know of a single iPod owner that considers the iPod overpriced. It seems overpriced before you buy it, but after you begin to use it the true value of its design, quality and usability really shine. I consider the money I’ve spent on IPods one of the best uses for a dollar there is.
First of all, let’s stop comparing Steve Jobs’ bank account to Bill Gates’. There’s not a vacation on earth that Bill takes that Steve cannot afford. Money is not an issue with Jobs or Apple. Jobs is CEO to two companies. Apple itself is financially healthy. So, that dog don’t hunt.
Secondly, everthing that Apple does is an effort to sell hardware. All Apple software leads to Apple hardware. Period.
Third, Apple did not open 100+ boutiques around the world to sell boxes of software.
Lastly, comparing the abilities of Microsoft to the abilities of Apple is just plain stupid. They are very different businesses. Clearly, Apple doesn’t want to be Microsoft. Apple doesn’t want to be a software giant. Apple can’t be insanely creative as a world dominator.
Apple loves hardware. Steve Jobs loves hardware. Jonathon Ive loves hardware. Mac devotees love hardware.
I’m sure this whole “OS X on all PCs, winner takes all, slay the M$ beast” is a great wet dream for you folks. It’s very geeky ‘Star Wars – Lord of the Rings’ or whatever. But, it’s not very visionary, and kinda last century, really.
There are iPods that are not overpriced–they are called Dell DJs and nobody wants one.
I agree with Spark–if an iPod is the best player out there, its no more overpriced than a Lexus or Mercedes. If you think it is, enjoy your Dell DJ.
Dvorak points to a dirty little secret concerning Vista…it won’t run on existing hardware. That means a whole new hardware cycle for Windows users. But what if OSX ran on existing x86 hardware? Who would buy Vista, knowing they’d need to invest in a whole new system to run it? Now this *is* an intriguing idea.
The person in these postings who “gets it” is from APPLE HAS A SOUL! Expressed like a REAL MAC lover.
Nicely said.
–DJ
I think this guy Dvorak is worried crapless about what Apple is going to do and how its going to affect his microsoft world. So, his writings are actually warnings to all pro-microsoft guubers so that they can put the kabash on Apple.
Ive actually made a widget. http://www.dashboardwidgets.com/showcase/details.php?wid=1035 there
Well, after having read all of the comments I think people are just blowing a lot of wind and forgetting the main facts.
Firstly OS is about hardware and software and piracy damages only one of these sales, but you need both to have a great system no matter the software, so when it comes to hardware what you get in a mac will actually cost you more to build in a PC to match perfectly on spec, also a PC is not ready to use out of the box despite claims, you can’t have it online without a virus package installed first at least £30 so after I’ve spent almost a grand to have a decent sound and video card a fast motherboard and the right keyboard and mouse, wireless-card, dvd burner etc you then still have to go out and buy 3rd party software to go online it’s crazy (mac users won’t understand the last bit!), on the other hand just buy a powerbook for about the same money, plug in and go online no virus no nothing.
As a musician I can tell you, but an apple will just get on with it which is why I switched, it’s about workflow and productivity, the money you spend is the same, apple make it faster and easier to get up and running straight away, by the way has anyone seen logic pro 7 running on a pc? didn’t think so! The PC choice is there for those who want a choice or are starting their career and are skint, trust me my little bro has spent a fortune on equipment and PC’s added up he could have 3 x 2.7 G5 machines, apple is there for professionals as the professional choice.
Secondly people are harping on about price, you pay for what you get, show me a top ten film or music producer who works solely on PC’s. Yes there are some but most use apple hardware which means you use apple software. All the big hardware people out there such as AVid know you can run our stuff on PC’s but it works better on a Mac. So any PC user who wants mac OS needs to buy mac hardware, get your head out of the clouds and spend some money.
Corporates the attitude is changing, people and companies are becoming more technology driven, in my office we use PC’s because they are cheap, our network crashes daily but seeing as PC’s are all hybrid to a certain extent you can expect that, I take my laptop to work because we work with design people, now most of these guys use apple computers most of my clients are switching to apple a large number will still have PC’s but recognise the need for an apple if at least just 1 in the office certain things look better on apple I can view a clients work with confidence my boss says nothing but the old so mac user are you all vanished when the powerbook was running in the office, he’s happier because he didn’t have to pay for it but now knows his place, if you care about your work and your employees you will eventually use an apple system, why do microsoft want you to use word excel etc, because they realise what they are fighting and to survive they must embrace mac users and the same vice versa. Pc’s have a place in the world, their time for domination may be coming to and end but do not expect to see MS or Apple disappear from either the software or hardware markets, both have everything at stake, both have a definite plan for the next 20 yrs.
The reality is PC users need mac users to make their own systems better like night follows day, mac users gain from PC users because we want to avoid their pitfalls and see the mistakes of not using your software and hardware development cycles properly, but these faults will only make for more secure systems in the future. I will always love macs and probably will always use a PC at work, but if you ask me to do some work for you what computer do you think I would use.
Enoough said….PC users live long and watse your money every 2-3 years, Mac users enjoy the benefits of being sensible with your money.
Comments are welcomed…..
The only reason that MAC OS has never had a virus is very simple. MAC OS is not an OS. it’s kinda like how the ol win98 used to work. where DOS was the OS and windows was the pretty part on top. This is the same for MAC, only difference is that MAC is based on UNIX not DOS and this by itself should be enough explination of why there are no virus’ for MAC’s(yet) also consider that a virus is generally created for a malicious purpose, and to affect as many as possible. Affecting ten people on their mac, or 4 billion on windows isn’t really a fair comparison. Undoubtibly, if MAC OS becomes shrink wrapped, and they sell enough copies for it to have more market share than linux, then virus’ will emerge, just like they did for linux once enough people started using the software.