Why doesn’t Apple ship a 60-day evaluation copy of Mac OS X for Intel on every iPod?

“Apple’s iPods ship with virtually nothing on them,” Richard Edwards writes for The Butler Group. “What a waste of space!”

Here’s what Apple should do:

1. Follow Novell’s example and build a 60-day evaluation version of an OS X virtual machine that will execute and perform well on Intel’s latest chips.
2. Stick the virtual machine (along with the VMware Player) on every iPod with enough storage.
3. License HP to build MacPCs ready for the big rush.
4. Offer Windows XP users a discount voucher to purchase the full virtual Mac software.
5. Sell more iPods.
6. Sit back and count the money.

Full article here.

Advertisement: The New iPod with Video.  The ultimate music + video experience on the go.  Buy it now at the Apple Store. From $299. Free shipping.
iPod’s empty drives could be used more efficiently for promotion and software distribution, that’s a fact. But, why would Apple want to attempt to support all of the Wintel box assemblers’ and peripheral makers’ hardware variations in the world? It would be a mess. Like Windows.

That’s not the sort of first impression Apple would want to give the world about the Mac.

We still think Apple will eventually do something that allows Windows to run on Intel-based Macs – preferably in a protected “box” within Mac OS X. Think Virtual PC in reverse, but with both operating systems running natively on x86, instead of one running with dog-slow emulation. As an added bonus, before users realize they don’t need Windows, at least they’ll be able to run it more safely, as it’ll be better-protected by Apple’s Mac OS X. As we asked via headline in June, “Why buy a Dell when Apple ‘Macintel’ computers will run both Mac OS X and Windows?” For more detail, read our “Take” from “How Apple can win the OS war” from last Wednesday.

Related articles:
How Apple can win the OS war – October 19, 2005
Intel’s built-in virtualization tech could be one way to run Windows on Intel-based Apple Macs
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
Windows users who try Apple’s Mac OS X Tiger might not want to go back – June 07, 2005
Microsoft: The safest way to run Windows is on your Mac – October 08, 2004

39 Comments

  1. A 60-day evaluation of various porn would be more welcome.

    The Mactels are further off than one thinks.

    Yesterday, Intel pushed back the date of the next xeon chips…Mactels will probably also have a delay.
    Plus will need a new version of OSX…
    hmmmmmm.

  2. 3. License HP to build MacPCs ready for the big rush.

    IS THIS GUY ON FREAKIN’ CRACK?!

    Seriously – some people should keep their ideas to themselves – this is the worst idea of all i have heard today.

    i hope steve jobs reads this and rolflomaolololfloaflolmalol

  3. “All kinds of embarrassing and frustrating incompatibilities would be the only “for sure” thing.”…just like Windows! It is an embarassment to use such an arcane and old OS; one that has not seen an innovative improvement since DOS to 3.1.

    shiver

  4. I think people tend to forget that Apple will not be using the 32-bit x86 processors that people currently have, so distribution like that does not make sense.

    I wrote a comment about Apple’s 64-bit roadmap earlier this fall, and I was wrong about MacWorld Paris announcement, but I still think the overall content of the article holds true. (see also comments)

    http://www.andwest.com/blojsom/blog/tatle/comments/2005/08/26/Apples-64-bit-Intel-Roadmap.html

    What is extra odd is the _maybe I will get a_ speedbumped mini. I hold it fairly likely there will be a low-power announcement for a G5 mini soon as IBM has announced low-power versions of this chip.

    The reason why the development systems are still on 32-bit x86 has to do with availability of both processors and the Intel compiler for the new 64-bit chips (as noted in my article.)

  5. I think the reason that iPod don’t come full of software is the same reason your new iMac doesn’t come all covered with 4-color stickers like a PC– because it offends Jobs to crap up something beautiful.

    Yeah, what an iPod really needs is shitty trial versions of Quicken, Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing and Where In The World Is Carmen Sandiego?

  6. 1. Why doesn’t Apple make a Safari for windows and put it on the iPod?

    2. I Cannot figure out why after such success with itunes for windows, Apple doesn’t tease Windows users a little bit more by making iLife available for windows? It’s such a great package. Does Apple think since ilife is only for Macs that people will switch to macs to be able to use this program? If you show them this great package won’t they buy it in droves and not use the preinstalled Windows photo/movie making stuff? If people see enough great Apple software won’t they eventually switch?

  7. Mgmax hit it on the head. I don’t want my new pristine iPod coming with a bunch of crap I’ll never use, which I’ll have to trash before I can fit any music on it. That’s VERY Microsoft. Plus, since the iPod is both Windows and Mac compatible, should Jobs stick PC versions of software on there too? Twice the crap. People buy iPod to listen to music, not to test software. Know your market. Edwards is a dumbass.

Reader Feedback

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