Forums | MacLife

Avari wrote:

TiMeLoRd wrote:

Ha_hA_HA! wrote:

I think that allowing OSX to be run on any PC would be Apple's greatest move.  There isn't anywhere near as much money in selling the hardware and the os as there is in the OS alone.  By allowing OSX to run on any AMD/Intel box they would already have a market of hundereds of millions of consumers available to buy their product. Selling an OS alone (+ software for your OS) made microsoft into the monsterously succesful giant it is today.  Apple should follow suit, as most of us already know OSX is the superior OS.

Yes...but...then there would be NO hardware to sell at all...

How so sony sells Windows boxes that are even more expensive then most windows/mac boxes. Do people still buy them? Yes, people will buy a mac and companies like sony because they know its a quality box and most of the time they just look cool.

They buy them partly because they run Windows. People currently buy Macs partly because they run OS X, for some it's their only reason. If every tom dick and harry could run OS X on their Sony or some other box, *for cheaper no doubt* where is the need to buy a Mac??? Buh bye hardware/software integration. There'd be much less demand for the Mac, period, it'd be suicide for Apple hardware.

I'm pretty sure that Sony wouldn't make it cheaper then Apple...

Assuming they can boot Windows (Intel's CEO hinted that they will), it could be a wet dream that comes true for a hardcore gamer that also has to do work on their computer.

And a nightmare for game-porting companies.  ARr!

True, if apple opened up OSX to all Intel/AMD computers they would sell less apple computers, but they would sell soooooo many more copies of OSX that it would more than make up in terms of profits. I have no doubts about that.  Unfortunately, they would probably need to implement some sort of activation feature similar to Winblows XP to prevent massive piracy, but it would be worth it to run OSX on a pc in my opinion.

Not really. I think apple would be smart enough to do what MS won't. Set a standard and anyone who wants there hardware working with OSX will have to meet that standard. That and them writing the bios for mobos and drivers for most things like they do now. End of story.

I'm still thinking they would sell more computers. Apple would be able to drastically lower the price (G5 is an expensive ship) of there own hardware and not miss a beat in revenue. Hell we might even see dell shipping OSX intel boxes, apple is still happy because the OS is still selling. At that point its quality hardware over crap just like it is now in the PC world.

pcguy wrote:

Wrong, If apple open up osX to all Intel/Amd machine, they will face the exact problem MS have! 10000 config with driver from 10000 company who think they know better then you about your os!

Right now the only differences in hardware between a Mac and a pc is motherboard, cpu, and video card (most video cards can be flashed from pc to mac anyway).  Once Mac goes Intel, the hardware will be virtually equal.   Everything else is basically identical and interchangable.  I have both Macs and a PC's, and don't have any issues with drivers at all. 

The way it is, we are letting Apple choose our hardware for us (and paying a premium over identical hardware for the pc).  If they did open it up, we would be free to choose what hardware we want.  And trust me, there is very good, very high quality hardware out there that surpasses what Apple has to offer. (Example: Video cards...most new pc video cards are pci express, something Apple doesn't even offer.  Find me a Radeon X850XTPE video card for a mac...more choices is always better in my opinion)

Anyway, I think people will still buy Macs, such as the iMac and Mac mini, as there really aren't pc equivelents. Apple provides innovative, attractive packaging to most of it's products that will keep people buying their products.

oatmeal wrote:

Thunderstruck wrote:

akb825 wrote:

Assuming they can boot Windows (Intel's CEO hinted that they will), it could be a wet dream that comes true for a hardcore gamer that also has to do work on their computer.

Phil Schiller said Apple won't stop nor prevent people from installing Windows on Mactels

"Won't stop" doesn't mean "compatible out of the box."

Which is exactly why I questioned your statement that VPC was turning out to be a bad investment.

None of us really know anything yet.  It's really just speculation at this point.

It seems to me that Apple is taking advantage of a window of opportunity that may not happen again. Microsoft is having a hard time with Longhorn. If Apple is to get a larger share of the pc market, it's now or never. They've obviously planned this for some time (hence the we've been playing with Mac OS X for five years comment) and with the insults Jobs laid on Microsoft (even as they were going to introduce a Microsoft representative), he is definitely out for some payback (at least as he sees it).

I've always wondered how Jobs felt when Bill Gates showed up at that Apple conference lo those many years ago...especially since Jobs' ego is at least as big as Bills. I can see Jobs back stage before the presenation, whispering "At last we will reveal OS X on Intel. At last we will have our revenge."

Ha_hA_HA! wrote:

The way it is, we are letting Apple choose our hardware for us (and paying a premium over identical hardware for the pc).  If they did open it up, we would be free to choose what hardware we want.

But Apple would be threatening Microsoft's market. And Microsoft would destroy them before they had a chance to do so.

,xtG
.tsooJ

TiMeLoRd wrote:

So.. Apple would sell more hardware if they let other people choose, other, hardware?

For one thing, I chose my iBook because it didn't have a whole lot of crap sticking out of it like on other brands. It's not like Apple pointed a gun to my head and said "baw haw haw, this is the only laptop that can run OS X, baw haw haw!".

Jobs' NeXT company released NeXT OS to the generic hardware market. Where is NeXT as a full-fledged company now? Nowhere, because they dumped their hardware and became a software-only company... Then they were snapped up by Apple.
I don't think steve would repeat his mistake. I'm not saying it wouldn't be a cool, wicked-sick thing if OS X ran on anything like a whore OS such as linux, but it's just not going to happen if Apple want to keep selling Macs.

I concur.  It would also damage one of the things Apple has going for them - stability.  If you have to support more hardware, you'll have more conflicts.  That's all there is to it.

The move to Intel is going to do some hurtful things to OS stability anyway - supporting a hundred thousand video cards, sound cards, controllers, and hardware management tools will make the scope much larger when trying to weed out all the bugs.  Steve Jobs did mention that OS X is processor indepedent though - which means the OS itself won't be so crappy when it comes to dealing with the CPU.

Alien wrote:

nstehle wrote:

The move to Intel is going to do some hurtful things to OS stability anyway - supporting a hundred thousand video cards, sound cards, controllers, and hardware management tools will make the scope much larger when trying to weed out all the bugs.

Who says they're going to support every last bity of crappy PC hardware out there? Might just as well still be nVidia and ATI that are selected by Apple to produce OEM and aftermarket cards and write the included Mac OS X drivers.

Every other card manufacturer can choose to produce a card and write their own driver... Like they could do now, but mostly don't.

,xtG
.tsooJ

Intel's integrated Mobility video chips might be supported.