“Are humans just naturally driven to want what they cannot have?” David Berlind asks in his ZDNet blog.
“Apple may be resisting the OS licensing model that has traditionally worked so well for Microsoft and perhaps that resistance is finally paying off as Macs nibble away (albeit very very slowly and from a distant blip in Microsoft’s rear view mirror) at the market share of Windows-based PCs. Apple goes to great lengths… to tightly control the relationship between its software [and] its hardware,” Berlind writes.
“But none of this seems to be phasing the tenacious mice (the hackers) who are managing to keep the Apple cat on its toes. Most recently, under the headline $399 Ultraportable Apple Laptop, Gizmodo has coverage of how OS X has been hacked to run on the Asus EEE PC. Based on the buzz around the Net, Hackintosh How-To author Adam Pash is already a folk hero in certain circles. But if a Hackintosh isn’t your speed, then maybe the Torrenttosh is. There’s apparently a pre-hacked version of OS X floating around on Bittorrent that takes most of the hacking out of Hackintosh,” Berlind writes.
“Perhaps its time for Apple to reconsider its Apple-hardware-only policy and once again look into licensing OS X. Clearly… there are no technical barriers. And, compared to selling hardware, selling bits is like printing money. There’s no question the demand is there… Apple could, if it wants, roll the program out on a limited basis. For example, it could pick one or two other hardware partners… and work exclusively through them in a way that those vendors shoulder the lion’s share of supporting users.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Note: “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.” – SteveJack, MacDailyNews, March 04, 2004 (yes, 2004)
God.. this again?
I still say no. Too many variables with the crappy hardware many of these people would run it on. Keep it a quality experience by leaving it on Mac hardware only.
Second!
{d’oh}
Sorry, Chrissy, beat you!
Generic containers built to run licensed OSs are the realm of desktops, and that is the past. The future will belong to purpose-built devices with purpose-built OS variants to run them. No one seems to get this yet.
No! No! No! Apple should never ever allow their OS to be mounted on crappy hardware no matter what company.
The reason that they are in such a sorry state is because they have taken thier customers for cash cows Sony et al.
That has to stop! & not because Apple provides the means, but because those sorry SOB’s have finally realised & learned the lesson.
Crabapple.
Hello!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thou shalt not use my name in vain! He! he! heeee!!!!!!!
HERE we go again.
Dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea, dumb idea….
Enough said?
HP doesn’t even care if the webcams work in Vista, so how would buggy drivers make Mac OS X look?
Tight hardware and OS integration is why I switched to Macs. Less hassle.
Keep it solely on Apple machines. Anyone who appreciates quality will want it in both the hardware and the software. Apple can supply all those people with what they want. Can you imagine all the debating about how some sh__ box is just as good as an Apple; it even runs the same programs? I do not want to suffer through it. The Apple model works. Stick too it.
YOu definitely wouldn’t partner with sony to ensure quality. The reason why the closed hardware is the way to go is because as your computer spreads out into satellites, ie media server, phone etc. in order to elegantly distribute the right data to the right places, ie music to speakers, contacts to and from phone, video to tv, it needs to be thought through from the top down. Apple is creating a family of hardware that will make up the digital home. Other company’s will follow suit, there will be a Dell home, and a sony home, etc. Apple just happens to be positioned to be first, even ahead to MS.
I don’t think people want to buy a Dell with OS X, but what they want is to install OS X onto their existing hardware. I don’t think Apple is going to want to support that mess.
Wait. If controlling the h/w and s/w makes Apple better than the commodity box makers, then we make Apple better still by allowing anyone to control the h/w? Say what? This is asinine and will destroy Apple’s quality.
As long as a Zune will work on my Mac……..wait…..did I just say that?
A Macintosh is the combination of software AND hardware. Apple may not be able to stop the hacks, but this is small group that won’t effect the broad universe of consumers. Keep the Mac pure. No licensing!
What if Apple were able to make up the lost hardware sales with OS sales? The margins on selling software are like 100%.
Umm, don’t mess with success? It’s the quality stemmng from Apple’s marrying its OS to its hardware that has made the company a success. If you start licensing the OS to other manufacturers, thus begins the QC issues and the threat of a downhill slide. Ain’t worth it.
Licensing would be a desperate move for a fledgling company, not that of a rising star that is enjoying obscene profits. Silliness.
The old modicum “If it isn’t broke, don’t fix it” comes to mind, cliched as it is. Of course there are things Apple can do better and improve upon. But this is not one of those sort of things. It is a complete 180 degree change. Of course, since Apple is often full of surprises, a change like this wouldn’t be the first of its kind. It would, however, be rather different a 180 degree change from some of its past ones.
How ’bout Ferrari start putting engines in Fords? They’ll have greater distribution and finally be able to catch up with GM and Toyota.
The OSX in anything discussion is moot. Didn’t Steve Jobs say not too long ago that Apple won’t ship junk? Allowing someone else to ship junk doesn’t get around issue of believing in quality. By opening the platform to to all comers Apple tarnishes it’s hard won image as a superior product. I doubt it will happen.
I believe that Apple has is planning on selling OS X for other computers someday but that this day depends on a certain target value of mac computer market share.
Mark
It makes no business sense to license OS X. There’s a higher margin on hardware than software, so there is no reason for Apple to license the software and run the risk of losing hardware sales. It would be like dropping a ten-dollar bill while bending over to pick up pennies.
Of course, the problems that would arise from supporting OS X to run on Dells, and HPs, and Hamilton-Beach toasters would ruin Apple’s stock-in-trade: the perception of high quality and exemplary service.
It is possible, however, that Apple may have to license OS X to protect its turf–just as it had to pre-release Leopard’s Bootcamp to protect its hardware business.
No. Period. End of story.
Moving to Intel chips is one thing, to open Pandora’s Box of mix and match kit hardware crap, it’s Windows all over again.
May be Apple should partner with BFG Technologies to make sure people can buy a guaranteed video card that works under Mac OS X.
The only way I can see this happening is via a limited ‘partnering’ arangement which gets Apple somwhere it wants to go.
For example it could link up with (say) IBM/Lenovo and/or Sun, both of whom have the clout to get into the corporate sector which Apple on its own probably couldn’t.
Yes there would be some ‘leakage’ but probably no more than at present with the hackers. For all the column inches given to them, nobody outside the enthusiast community is going to bother going to the lengths these guys do simply to get OSX up and running on a generic box. And that’s only ’til the next update…
> The margins on selling software are like 100%.
No, it’s not 100%, but even if it’s significantly higher than on hardware, Mac OS X sells for $129. The average price of a Mac is more than ten times that amount. Also, if Apple sells it directly at an Apple Store (physical or online), it gets the full $129. But if it sells Mac OS X through a retailer like Amazon, it gets much less. Since Amazon was selling it for $109, Apple probably gets $99 or less. And if Apple licenses Mac OS X to PC makers, the revenue per license will be much much less.
And… if that’s not enough to discourage Apple from licensing Mac OS X, consider the additional cost of technical and development support. Right now, Apple just needs to support a few dozen different Mac configurations for any given release. If Mac OS X ran on generic Intel hardware, it would need to support tens of thousands of wildly different configs. And if Apple starts to rely on revenue from Mac OS X licensing, it would be motivated to make Mac OS X backwards compatible with as many older (passed their prime) PCs as possible. It would start to implement horrendous piracy protections schemes to protect that revenue. In other words, Apple would turn into Microsoft.
I, for one, would bet Apple does not go that route…
Well the argument has always been…
…can there be enough sales of Mac OS X to make more profit that the current hardware tie in?
What will Microsoft do in retaliation?
What will the PC hardware vendors do if Microsoft threatens to pull Windows licenses from them if they pre-install Mac OS X instead of Windows?
People tend to use what they are familiar with and what’s pre-installed on the PC when they buy it.
I agree Apple should sell Mac OS X for generic PC’s even though each sale of that version could mean one or more less hardware sales for Apple. Because people will get it for free otherwise.
Then again a person has already made up their mind not to buy Apple hardware, for example a older person who can’t use glossy screens, but still want to run Mac OS X because they have a investment in software already.
Apple should try to do everything to attract and keep more users to it’s OS and therefore it’s exosphere because it’s hardware choices are not the best right now.
So the appearance of a hacked Mac OSX on a torrent is supposed to give Apple reason to sell the OS separately from the hardware?
BWAHaaHaaHaaHaa.
I think this might be worth pursuing on a limited basis. Commodity hardware will never be part of Apple’s future, but one or two strategic partners could really help broaden OS X’s reach. Sony would be a good fit. Already known for designing beautiful hardware, a slick OS X based Vaio could do a lot to boost the Mac’s credibility on the PC side – just so long as Apple keeps a close eye on Sony engineer’s to ensure tight integration with the OS for maximum stability and functionality.
One of the greatest impediments to Mac sales is the unfamiliarity with OS X that pervades the general population. All other considerations aside, it would be a far better world if everyone at least knew someone else who was familiar with the operating system. At present, that’s not the case. Me? I’d like to see Apple take the chance and put OS X out there for a broader segment of the computing community.
How about a version that expires? A demo. Run it on your Dell for six months. After that .. get a Mac or do without. heh.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
I think for as long as Steve is head honcho, Apple will stick to making an OS that works (and compliments) their hardware. And, anyway, isn’t OS X’s foundation ‘Free BSD’ available for anyone who wants it through the Darwin thing?
Sure, it wouldn’t have OS X’s spit and polish, but it’s the closest thing to OS X as an alternative to Windows, hmm?
It’s never gonna happen. Not a chance. Not even worth discussing.
The first thing Jobs did upon returning to his CEO duties in 1997 was take back control of the Mac OS from the OEM vendors and he vowed to never license it again..
Apple’s business philosophy is a completely vertical approach. Hardware and software.. Mac/OSX, iPod/iTunes, iPhone/Exlcusive At&T;partnership. This vertical approach allows Apple complete control over the user experience.
You may criticize them for this, but this is what has made Apple what it is today. Licensing the Mac OS will never be an option as long is Jobs is involved with the company.
Those tech pundits couldn’t convince S.J. to visit the john, even if he had the stomach flu. They’re just trying. I can’t see it making much sense for Apple, either. After all, they tried it in the late 90s, and S.J. axed it, because it hurt the Mac sales (although I really liked my PowerCenter Pro 210).
Get OS X working in VMWare and Parallels and the driver compatibility problems are solved. Make a ton of money for all involved and the combo would still be cheaper than Vista
So the appearance of a hacked Mac OSX on a torrent is supposed to give Apple reason to sell the OS separately from the hardware?
Well music is on the torrents because the music industry didn’t respond properly to the change the customers needed.
iTunes is a success because it’s finally a answer, but a little to late as millions of people are used to torrents now.
Apple needs to respond to the fact that their hardware choices absolutely suck compared to what’s available on the PC side.
I can’t use a lot of Apple hardware choices lately. Glossy screens and too small of a keyboard/screen on iPhones.
So I am going to investigate OS X on PC for sure, I hope it’s as easy as it sounds.
Within ten years hardware will be generic enough for X’s use generically. Form and function will again rule the day. The hardware market will be tiered from utility to high-end. Users will become increasingly focused on just the utility, the computers usefulness.
The days of the in-the-wild nerd are numbered; they mostly are waist deep in the river and pontificating over which boat will save them first, and soon all they will see are the ripples of the wakes. The hardware battles are over. Apple has won the software war already– its over. The M$ mammoth is still chewing the green and trying to ignore the snow drifts.
Bad idea. Apple is special because they’re not only about money like all the other brain dead companies that haven’t read the Cluetrain Manifesto. Sure, the money is there, but it comes from making the best products, not chasing the numbers. No commoditization please!
Bah, sell it for 3x the cost of Windows, no warranty, and let anyone who wants to install it on a Dell do so at their own risk.
-jcr
Saying Apple needs to respond to its customers by being ‘everything to everyone’ is exactly the strategy the company has no interest in.
Essentially you’re saying Ferrari ought to get off their high horse (har) and start making $15,000 compacts/station wagons, eh?
Like Ferrari, Apple has a market (afterall, they’re rolling in money) and they are comfortable in the high value market they’re in.
Nothing more, nothing less.
Steve Jobs said not to long ago that “OSX is the soul of the Mac.”
With the Mac at it’s strongest point in it’s 30 year history, I just don’t see Jobs selling his soul anytime soon.
No. The Mac is neither its hardware nor its software individually, but the combination of the two.
Got that, switcheurs? THE MAC IS A PLATFORM. As body cannot exist without soul, and vice versa, neither is a Mac a Mac without its fundamental components.
Seems to me the hardware dweebs think the Mac is about its hardware, while software nerds think it’s about the software alone; real Mac users understand the one-ness of the Mac and see the question as meaningless. Only a PC user would insist the two are separable.
There was a lot of screaming and wailing when Apple switched to Intel and then again released BootCamp
But you know what? Apple is still here and better than before.
Now it’s time they released Mac OS X for generic PC’s. It’s not like major hardware vendors Dell and HP are going to dump Microsoft, it would be suicide for them.
But for those who need to run Mac OS X on a PC, at least they get a authorized version, safe and secure.
After all Apple hardware is premium, most people can’t afford premium, having to settle for MicroCrap Windows and once they get used to that, it’s harder to switch them to Mac OS X later on.
So why not sell Mac OS X for PC’s, to get people used to it and then later when they need a premium PC they buy a Mac instead?
Ever think of that?
Well music is on the torrents because the music industry didn’t respond properly to the change the customers needed.
Not really. It’s on there because Americans are greedy bastards who will steal whatever they think they can get away with. I saw this even in Europe, where “ugly American” tourists would cheat the transit systems that operated on the honor system.
In my building there are some assholes who are using P2P software to download and upload music, totally whacking the speed for hours at a time. Not only are they stealing music, they’re also denying the rest of us usage of the wireless network. It’s the Me Generation.
I’ll 34th the measure to keep OS X on Mac hardware, the less time they waste getting it to work in all hardware environments the more time they spend making it awesome.
The only other solution…
…too the Mac OS X on PC problem is for Apple to begin offering MORE HARDWARE OPTIONS.
This way they still retain the vertical control and cater to more people’s needs for different hardware requirements.
@lee:
“All other considerations aside, it would be a far better world if everyone at least knew someone else who was familiar with the operating system. At present, that’s not the case. Me?”
Um, don’t look now, but I think that’s changing. Two years ago I knew two other people with Macs. Now it’s more like two dozen. By next year it’ll be two hundred.
“Are humans just naturally driven to want what they cannot have?”
LoL, just ask Adam and Eve!
Apple is obviously very successful and profitable company with its current business model. I don’t see any reason to stir the pot.
Exactly what are we trying to fix by licensing OS X to commodity box builders?
Even with a less than 5% worldwide market share, Apple is making tons of money, with a fraction of headache that Microsoft, HP, Dell, and others have to deal with.
Why would Apple want to commoditize their hardware sales just to sale gain market share?
Their current model of getting the cream off the top is apparently working very well…..
No, no, a thousand times no:
No, Apple Should Not License Mac OS X For PCs.
Not really. It’s on there because Americans are greedy bastards who will steal whatever they think they can get away with. I saw this even in Europe, where “ugly American” tourists would cheat the transit systems that operated on the honor system.
Well your experience with Americans is slim obviously and since Americans are tourists in Europe they might not be familiar with the “system”. Just like a lot of Europeans fail to tip in America, at least we know they don’t know any better and don’t judge them all by it.
In my building there are some assholes who are using P2P software to download and upload music, totally whacking the speed for hours at a time. Not only are they stealing music, they’re also denying the rest of us usage of the wireless network. It’s the Me Generation.
So your sharing a internet connection with a whole apartment building?
Naturally this is going to slow things down and it doesn’t say a whole lot of good about your economic status which may contribute to your bad attitude. Work harder, get better creature comforts and your life will be happier.
All I want to know is when will Ford start selling engines separately?
Exactly what are we trying to fix by licensing OS X to commodity box builders?
Well first off commodity box builders won’t sacrafice their relationship with the majority Microsoft Windows for minority OS X on PC.
However they will use Mac OS X as a bargining tool against Microsoft.
Apple most likely won’t approach these commodity box builders anyway, rather selling OS X/PC on their own shelves with a list of tried and proven hardware vendors.
Apple is obviously very successful and profitable company with its current business model. I don’t see any reason to stir the pot.
Apple has a problem, they got so much exposure now that their hardware choices are too limited to provide what the real world needs.
Either they need to expand hardware choices or release OSX/PC.
I much rather prefer they release more hardware choices.
the botom line is that who wants to HAVE to support every little and last crappy this and that. Apple enjoys the success of making sure the insides of the computer are GOING to work with some managable margin of error.
Simply put, if they let OSX out of the bag then Apple would be in support hardware hell…..and really…who would want that?
How about license Tiger for ordinary x86 hardware and keep the feature rich Leopard for Macs. Tiger is a great OS that kicks the socks out of Vista and XP! double wammy!!! keep robust hardaware sales and software sales as well. Once a peecee user gets familiarized with tiger, the jump to a real Mac with leopard will be easy!!!
ok, let’s get a grip. admit that the current apple leadership could implement a much better version of licensing than the apple/pepsi/nec version, but why?
1) recent article in cnet reported that intel’s otellini informed the industry at oracle world [http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9816311-37.html] that semiconductor demand shifted to consumers in 2004. that means from here on out, consumers will dominate the shaping of IT. who kicks ass in the consumer IT world today? why would you ever want to go capture market share in the shrinking future market of enterprise computing? that’s what licensing osx really means.
2) sj called it right back in 2001. the strategic shift to intel had less to do with enterprise computing marketshare than dependable performance. if you have a couple of hours, read “blue ocean strategy”. you’ll be able to understand the deeply embedded strategy of sj to create new markets rather than compete in old ones. it did not hurt his pride whatsoever to proclaim the desktop os war was over and lost to ms. he knew when he said that it did not matter as long as you defined and shaped the future. that’s exactly what apple has done and the equity price reflects that.
apple under sj has always been about shaping the future rather than padding the bottomline. that’s what ms is engrossed with now and you can imagine what will happen to their equity price when their performance starts south. buying profits is not the same as making them. that’s the difference between apple and ms.
unlike what most people are thinking, apple is not on a hot streak, their strategy is just playing out. when you place your confidence in strong core values like identifying with the customer (mba-talk for make products you would like yourself) your strategies will win the day.
@Anonymous
“After all Apple hardware is premium, most people can’t afford premium, having to settle for MicroCrap Windows and once they get used to that, it’s harder to switch them to Mac OS X later on.”
Apple is NOT for everyone. Just like Sony hardware is not for everyone. Get it!
NOOOOOO
Don’t do it… let the hackers keep on hacking, and keep OSX proprietary.
The margins on ANY software is NOT 100%. There are these little inconvenient things called development costs, packaging, shipping, support, servers, electricity, computers, employees, etc., etc.
“Margin” refers to profit margin, not gross sales. BIG difference.
No. The primary difference between Apple and everybody is is the operating system.
By a huge margin.
You don’t give away your advantage just to be “popular.”
It would make no sense whatsoever for Apple to betray its own corporate philosophy by licensing out OS X to Dell et al.
It’s oh so simple, really. Want OS X? Buy a Macintosh!
OS X on any other machine just wouldn’t be the “Apple experience” imo. I just don’t think they should do it… even under tight control with 3rd party computer makers as suggested in the article. Seems like it would be a mistake, I mean, look at microsoft. yeah, it’s good financially, but not for the customer… and, at least i like to think, Apple appears to care more about their customer base.
just my 2¢
No, but effing hell no! It would destroy Apple. Apple would suffer the fate of Microsoft, taking forever testing the OS against a vast array of combinations of hardware, a lot of which have defective designs. It would kill Apple’s business model, margins and corporate culture.
Get this you schmuck David Berlind. You idiot pundits are not going to drag Apple into corporate suicide by supporting your half witted strategies.
In any case, many of those who get OS X running on pee cee hardware will eventually get fed up with always being behind and having half working systems by buying Macs and making life easier. And a large group of users running OS X on non Apple hardware denies competing operating systems of market share.
“partner with Sony – to insure quality”
???
Anyone remember the exploding notebook battery fiasco? All Sony batteries.
In the list of companies without moral or ethical compasses, Sony is on par with Microsoft. I would hate to see Apple getting too friendly with them.
I think the Microsoft megalomaniacal obsession of having total domination of the desktop has rubbed off on the few Windows fanboys out there. And they seem to want to use it as a blunt instrument to wave in the face of us Mac users.
The thing is Apple are the most profitable computer manufacturer on the planet so lets not take the bate. Apple are great where they are right now. Let them chip away at MS market share slowly so they can control it. And by no means should they license their OS again.
Microsoft’s profit on Windows is in excess of 90%, so it’s not that far off 100%. Their net profit would be higher if they didn’t piss money up the wall on Zune, XBox, WebTV and such like.
Look at it this way, they give a disc to OEMs, and a piece of paper. The piece of paper may be a license for 1,000 or 10,000, the extra cost? – a minute fraction of a cent on ink. (Don’t tell me about support issues, if the product didn’t suck then they would have significant support issues). Marginal profit? – 99.9999999999%
Apple is a solutions company, you could say a design company. Like Apple doesn’t build any hardware, it’s all contracted out. Apple works with partners very well when the partners can deliver, if they can’t Apple does it themselves and with the prime directive of put the customer first.
Any move that creates a sudden upsurge in sales of any component will stress the system and cause failures, bugs, hardware breakdowns etc. Organic growth is the best, add a little here and there (like Final Cut Pro for example) but 30% growth per annum is about all that it is possible to deal with and keep quality standards.
At 15% marketshare Apple would have enough depth to consider licensing but at the stage the question is why bother. New models to fill the gaps, easy, pick the moment and do it. But if filling the gaps now means a sales uptick of more than 30% that in itself promotes problems.
Apple should authorize the use of PC’s as land fill for their new campus.
Sure. . . Apple’s headed into licensing mode. . . or theMDN/Apple sounding board wouldn’t be discussing it. That old yellow brick road so well-trodden by Micro-wart is much too intoxicating a prospect for the Steve NOT to follow in unca Billy’s footsteps. Besides, Apple has already begun violating its own (unspoken) sacred pledge to clients that it will never engage in snooping and low-level seediness, with the advent of v10.4. Tiger. A little spybot lives in an onboard software component of Tiger, which is comparable to Microsoft’s PROMIS-ware, such as found in the CommonName parasite. The latter, do recall, was shipped in every version of Windows OEM/bundled media over a period of a quarter century. What is the similarity to CommonName that now lives in Apple’s retinue of recalcitrance? ––– try SyndicationAgent on for size. It monitors a users’ every move, frequently sending letters home to muthah Stevo-o. Try blocking SyndicationAgent in, say, NetBarrier, ticking the box for popup alerts (Antivandal/Anti-Spyware/Options)–––and see what happens. You won’t be pleased. How much further in this same direction. . . i.e., that of monitoring users’ browsing habits (and no telling what else), has Leopard been engineered to go?
Responde sez vous plait. Respond IF YOU DARE!
When the best Windows platform is an Intel Mac, why would Apple license a crown jewel to substandard hardware?
OS X licensing will never happen. If you want it you get Apple hardware. Very simple.
I think if Apple was making enough profit from their non Mac items, they could easily license the OS to PC makers with the stipulation that Apple had a say in the hardware and prices. They could control the quality to a certain extent. If they didn’t sell a retail version to just anyone they could limit the hassles that MicroSoft has. I could see Steve Jobs doing this some time in the future. What a kick in the arse to MS that would be. And I would bet that Gates and Ballmer have that little scenario in the back of their minds. Sweet dreams.
“Respond IF YOU DARE!”
Ok, I’ve responded. Now what?
I’m just not sure what it is that I responded to.
Will put on my tin foil hat for protection…..sez vous plait
Well your experience with Americans is slim obviously and since Americans are tourists in Europe they might not be familiar with the “system”. Just like a lot of Europeans fail to tip in America, at least we know they don’t know any better and don’t judge them all by it.
Oh boy, moral equivalency, huh? You must be a republican, and not a well-traveled one at that.
So your sharing a internet connection with a whole apartment building?
Naturally this is going to slow things down and it doesn’t say a whole lot of good about your economic status which may contribute to your bad attitude. Work harder, get better creature comforts and your life will be happier.
Definitely a republican. No intelligent response, so a fallback to ad hominum attacks. Does posting here take away much time from Bittorrent-Kazaa downloads?
No, no, no y no!!!
OMG, I’ve taken to writing Spanish! Not that there is anything wrong with that, it’s just that I don’t understand the language.
Very simple. This will never happen.
Let’s face it: Steve Jobs is not John Sculley. He knows how suicidal it would be to license the keys to the kingdom (OS X) at this point or ANY point. The differentiation between Windoze and the Mac is too great; it’s at a point where a Mac newbie/novice can see it, and that divergence is widening.
They say, “Never say never.” I’m saying “Never.”
To paraphrase what others have already said, “If you want a superior computing experience, do what me and my ladyfriend did…GET A MAC!” Period.
Peace.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Olmecmystic
Yugo!
“OMG, I’ve taken to writing Spanish!”
I si what tu mean.
If it’s not broken, don’t fix it. So what if people hack it? Hackers are such a small percentage of the population, it doesn’t matter.
Sounds like a great idea … NOT !!!!
Why would Apple want to waste all their hard work, especially, that of the last decade, to throw it all away, simply for the excesses of market share and filthy lucre.
That would be a monumental mistake.
Hey! MDN, how come you didn’t tear David Berlind a new one for this lie
… “(God forbid you should attempt to acquire new audio online for your iPhone — music, ringtones, etc — through anything but the iTunes Music Store).”
Having read through a few of Berlinds’ other articles, he seems to aim for hits (as they all do at zdnet) and this one was particularly pointless.
@ Olmecmystic et al,
Why do you people speak in such absolutes like it will “NEVER” happen? Then make stupid statements in support of that by saying Steve Jobs is no Sculley.
What about when Steve no longer works for or at Apple? How do you know the next guy won’t be a Sculley? Or the guy after him?
Don’t think this will ever happen (at least as long as Steve is around). Why? Well first Steve believes that marketshare is at best a trailing edge indicator and as such we won’t see all the positives of iPhone iPod etc. for several more years. Remember those are all osX but won’t be counted as Mac sales however they will bolster ever incresing Mac sales. In 3 to 5 years Apple will not need anybody else to increase their marketshare as they will have at least 20 or 25 %. Consider that those sales will only be laptops & desktops not the real market driver which will be mobile portable devices. Apple’s marketshare vs. Microsuck Winblows will be roughly 50-50.
I just hope there are no Linux or open-source trolls running around MDN. Since THEY are those people who pushes the idea of cracking OSX then contribute it to Bittorent sites so a lot of people will gain pirated copies of OSX and run it into a stupid junky PC!!
F****** U evil hackers!
Wow!!! Out of 80 or so posts, almost half are from one guy. Maybe he should run Apple?
Cool? Who says there is no privacy
One of the nuttiest ideas I have ever heard. Why doesn’t Apple just start giving away their computers instead? That would satisfy even more people!
Hardware choices is key. I can’t believe it, but I too am seriously looking at a hack solution after 20 years of mac only (well the Power Center 180 lasted me 7 years). But I really need a bigger mini or a smaller MacPro. I need dedicated video to support two monitors, and more memory, bigger HD, but I don’t need or want a Hummer under my desk. And this has nothing to do with gaming–I need to get work done, but don’t need nor want the MacPro box. It’s sad that there continues to be all the talk about the solid-state notebook/tablet whatever, but nothing to fill the major gap so many of us want. The market’s grown considerably since the mini was added to the line, it’s time again for a new hardware segment, one that fills this gap.
> I need dedicated video to support two monitors, and more memory, bigger HD…
In your case, the solution exists. It’s called an iMac. It has dedicated video. You can do monitoring spanning with an external display, so the 20″ or 24″ built-in display plus one equals two. Do you need more the 4GB of RAM? Do you need a hard drive inside larger than 750GB? And you’ll have the ultimate space-saving setup (plus you won’t have ANYTHING under your desk).
There is certainly a gap between the Mac Pro and Mac mini for a model without a built-in display, but unless you already have two good external displays, the obvious solution for your stated needs is staring you in the face.
Apple could deffinitely sell a licensed MacOSX to the PC boxes… But with few changes. At least, Apple coudn’t garantee a proper support for exotic hardware builds!
A sort of “entry level OSX” would still be much better than a XP or Vista…
STFU
Don’t you ever get tired of yourself?
I need dedicated video to support two monitors, and more memory, bigger HD, but I don’t need or want a Hummer under my desk. And this has nothing to do with gaming–I need to get work done, but don’t need nor want the MacPro box.
Actually what you do need is the MacPro. Standby and let me explain.
First off the iMac is a consumer device, I got a powerful iMac G5 for a friend a few years back. But because nothing in it is expandable, except the memory, it’s now slow as hell now and certainly won’t run two monitors well. So it’s not cost effective in the long run.
I got a PowerMac Dual 2, sure it doesn’t fit under my desk because desks were designed for people and small PC towers, not the new state of the art machines that need more drive space and expandability options. Heat is a major issue and placing a PC or Mac tower under the desk isn’t such a good idea for the long term heath of your computer. Instead I build a cart where the machine sits in and it has rollers and I keep it on the other side of my desk with a external DVD drive that sits on my desk. No under the desk or on the desk clutter or heat/noise etc. Problem solved.
If cost is a concern, get the most powerful set of processors you can get in a MacPro and a above average video card that will drive the two monitors you want. Later as time goes by you can add memory, faster RPM hard drives and faster video cards. Learn to RAID 0 the boot drive and clone the boot drive for backups.
This is the smart choice for saving HUGE amounts of money because you upgrade your main hardware (which is the big cost) less often. Instead you upgrade a few items here and there, learn how to tweak your machine for ultimate speed.
My Dual 2 is almost 4 years old, but it will blow away any new Mac in general performance except a MacPro with a decent video card. Plus I paid for good software when I bought the machine and still running it today without paying for upgrades, got video games and other good stuff. I haven’t paid for computer software or hardware in over 4 years and can easily use this machine unchanged for another 5 to 6 years and it will suit me just fine. I’ve seen 12 year old Mac SE’s still doing graphic design work in silk screen shops. This is why Mac’s have good resale values.
So if you divide all those years by a total investment, you’ll actually come up with a substantial savings.
SKY LARK, I don’t usually speak in absolutes, but in this case I feel perfectly comfortable doing so.
Would you bust your ass for ten years to improve your and your family’s financial situation to the point where you’re now living in your dream home in the hills overlooking the ocean, only to then go down to the barrio and give a crack dealer the keys to the house?
I don’t think you would; in fact, I feel comfortable saying you NEVER would, and I don’t even know you. My point with Steve Jobs and Apple is that they’ve been working hard for ten years to gain the position they now enjoy, which is a long way from where they were a decade ago: BELEAGUERED. Why would they even consider throwing away all those man-hours and creativity and focus by giving away the keys to the house, which is what I consider OS X to be?
As far as Sculley goes, if you study the history like I have, you’ll realize that John Sculley wanted Steve Jobs gone and within a month of it happening, he made a deal with the devil that Bill Gates KNEW he could have NEVER slid past Steve Jobs. That single decision not only set Apple back, it regressed the entire computing world to a “Dark Ages of Computing” that I say we’re only just now emerging from. The “Renaissance” is about to begin.
In fashion terms, the computing world has been running around for the last 20 years wearing a cheap Chanel knockoff. I don’t know about you, but I want the ORIGINAL of any high fashion I buy. The work, the care, the details, the LOVE are in the original, NOT the knockoff. The only advantage of wearing the knockoff is that it’s CHEAP. I don’t mind paying a little more for the original when I understand WHY it’s more. That way I always know what I’m getting.
Consider this: is KFC ever going to license their secret recipe? And how long has the Colonel been gone? Is Coca-Cola ever going to license the secret formula? In business, you just don’t do that. Why? Because that’s your advantage in the marketplace; therefore, it would be SUICIDE.
I hope this helps you better understand why I said what I said.
Peace.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Olmecmystic
Sorry SKY LARK, it wasn’t you.
Whoever Anonymous was, that’s for you.
Peace.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Olmecmystic
@ Olmecmystic
You woke me up at 3am in the morning for that. !
Peace.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
SKY LARK
This is an incredibly stupid idea. Microsoft itself is going the opposite way with the xbox for example. As soon as Apple has to make OS X or OS XI work with many types of hardware we will get Apples version of what one writer described as the “broken windows environment’.
Hmmm. Maybe Apple could write an operating system specifically for inferior boxes – a derivative of OS X. OS X LIte. Update it three years behind the OS on the Mac, so it never has an up-to-date feature set. (not a new idea)
Or Maybe Apple could roll out a completely different OS for generic boxes. Possibly a “Compatibility Kit” that lets people run their home Mac software on their work Dells. (nani)
Perhaps Apple can wait a couple of years, buy up Microsoft and do a FreeBSD-based version of Windows. (nani)
I have a better idea, though. Apple should just continue the way they’re going now. It’s a pretty good show watching the rest of the technology companies in the world running in circles and screaming like their hair is on fire; trying to figure out how to compete with Apple.
Now the entertainment companies are trying to figure out how to stop the juggernaut.
Apple doesn’t need to change a thing. Hackintoshes will pop up briefly. A few hackers and homebrewers will boast about using it. The broader market will ignore an illegal and unsupported configuration.
Much ado about nothing. Slow news day?
Why would Apple want to bomb Microsoft? Microsoft is perfect for Apples needs. Microsoft is a bumbling giant that can’t find its way.
Microsoft provides enough competition to slow new entrants into the operating system business while at the same time not defending its own turf against Apple (how many times have you heard of people switching from OSX to Vista?). Let Apple absorb market share in ever increasing amounts.
Like treestman, I say No,NO, a million times no:
Apple should not license Mac OS X for PCs.
Boxed version of OSX for PC with a list of supported hardware. Optional paid three years support.
or
More Mac hardware choices to make the whole matter mute to begin with.
Boxed version of OSX for PC with a list of supported hardware.
Problem is PC users would buy it regardless of their hardware, then bitch when it doesn’t work.
Then of course we’ll get all comments like “How come Apple only supports ABC video card? That sucks! XYZ is so much better, yadda yadda…”.
IMO it’s a can of worms not worth opening.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”raspberry” style=”border:0;” />
If Apple wants to spike their growth, would it make sense to get iMacs into the channels currently selling iPods and iPhones?
A true “halo effect”?
What scares me most is Apple possible way to try and prevent OS X from being easily modified to run on PC’s. I would hate to see Apple put part of the OS into ROM’s like they did on early Mac’s. That would be the one way to defeat using non-Apple hardware. Trouble was when they did it before when fixes or new feature came out they had to make patch files that had to be loaded at boot up. Sounds innocent but they caused all sorts of problems with load order, missing patches, and compatibly issues.
So I hope Apple doesn’t license OS X because it would be a QA nightmare with no good solution, but hope also they find reasonable way to keep non-Apple hardware loading OS X.
I would hate to see Apple put part of the OS into ROM’s like they did on early Mac’s.
Why not a simple, little 11-character ROM with “©Apple,Inc.” burned into it.
Have OS X randomly check for the ROM. Change the locations of the calls (and the call system itself) with every update, to break the hacks that are bound to appear.
If the ROM can’t be found, force-front a web browser that’s locked onto the Apple Store’s “Shop Mac” page.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
“Apple may be resisting the OS licensing model that has traditionally worked so well for Microsoft…”
It has worked well for Microsoft, but not because they make a great OS that everybody wants, but because IBM handed them the ill-thought out contract of supplying the OS back in the 80’s.
There was nothing in that contract stopping them from selling it to clone makers, in fact, it was a pre-requisite of that contract that PC’s could ONLY be sold with MS-DOS.
Apple’s in a completely different position, different marketplace, different time.
It wouldn’t work, as there is no way that Apple could make as much potential money from software, despite what the author says.\
It would destroy Apple completely, and this is why certain members of the press keep pushing it.
It’s just another missile fired in the war against Apple succeeding – the PC zealots are running scared – and along with FUD about security, it’s designed to stop Apple dominating the marketplace and showing up all these ‘experts’ as the narrow minded, self-serving, blinkered, Microsoft supporting drones they are.
Make no mistake, as Apple begins its resurgence, you’ll see more and more ‘articles’ about Apple, carefully worded to show them in a negative light, with only one goal in mind – that Apple must be stopped.
I must admit it’s going to be very amusing to see those PC-bigots squirm.
These Hacked Macs amount to zilch, nichts, nada, zero. No average Joe or more importantly, no corporate Joe is going to do this. It will forever remain the domain of pimply-faced nerds, geeks and dorks, and never, ever come close to “dragging” Apple into licensing the Mac OS. These articles are so frickin’ dumb it’s unbelievable.
Now, maybe, maybe, maybe, Apple might considers a tightly controlled partnership with IBM or HP to get a strategic foothold in big IT but as far as increasing their overall market-share, they are better off building more Apple stores throughout the world and signing up more BTO factories in Taiwan and China to increase production capacity.
They don’t need Dell or Acer to do that.
Well
These are interesting logs, but I have concluded that there needs to be a low cost entry into the market, and it’s not the Mini. Contrary to above posts, the Mini’s performance is pretty good, and spectacular compared to the budget PC’s.
When I look at the iPhone, this may morph into the low cost entry level “machine” in future versions, hence, no need to licensce OSX today. Don’t really know the map or possibilities, but to really expand market share, there needs to be lower priced hardware to run OSX on.
I really believe companies would pay a premium for the software, proof is M$ pricing of different versions of Vista. Hence, Apple could better leverage it’s investment in OSX and improve ROI. Budget conscious customers want and need alternatives. Companies AND individuals make really poor decisions by talking themselves into paying less. Heck, M$ is pandering to these folks with it’s pricing model. Say what you want, Apple knows it’s technology, but M$ knows it’s customers.
Licensing almost killed Apple last time. Granted, Apple management did not include Steve Jobs when the stock went down to $12 a share.Why should Apple listen to the nay-sayer baloney again. They are doing great without it and will continue to grow exponentially.
Reason?
Superior products that people want.
Software and hardware that out-performs the competition.
One of the basics of business: find a need and fill it.
I think Apple will release OSX/PC when it can create a trojan horse for more Apple hardware sales. For instance iTunes for Windows to sell iPods.
Now what does Safari for Windows do? Nothing yet right? But maybe we are going to see something come January. Perhaps Apple is going to release iLife for Windows next?
How about a real Universal Binary? Compile for Windows, OSX Intel/PPC in one shot?