Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Panther osx on a Pc hmm

CaptainCaveMann

CaptainCaveMann

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Why not? Why doesnt Apple decide to stick it to Microsoft and make osx compatible with all home pc's i for one would buy it. 😉
 
Apple was planning on moving the Apple GUI and Cocoa (the updated version of the NeXT programming environment)...

But when they released Mac OS X Server 1.0 many old-hat developers announced plans to cease their Mac development. Since zero Mac Applications and drivers were supported.

They had to rewrite them from scratch -- a huge cost for companies looking to save money.

Apple had to scramble to update the OS add Classic & Carbon support to keep their developers, and Cocoa for Windows died.

Many developers are still keeping their updated Carbon-based code -- since it's cheaper than doing a ground up rewrite like Quark.

At one time, the NeXT OS/Cocoa allowed for rapid program development and NeXT was a terrific niche product to get things up and running quick -- now everyong seems to be more interested in supporting the fewest platforms and the tools they have now.

---

Reintroducing Cocoa for Windows, Linux and Unix would probably be a good idea to entice people over to Cocoa.

But Apple has to keep their niche hardware platform stable, and Cocoa for x86 might erode that -- ie, the years of CPU production problems.
 
Duff-Man says....please, not another OS X on Intel thread....this has been done to death a thousand times over on every Mac message board.....oh yeah!
 
Apple makes most of their money on hardware. If they were to port OS X to PCs they would loose a lot of money that they make on selling computers. Its just simple business. If Apple made most of their money on selling software (like MS), then they would probably port OS X to work for a many different systems (like MS). But having to support all kinds of hardware will naturally make your software less stable (like MS).
 
grapes911 said:
Apple makes most of their money on hardware. If they were to port OS X to PCs they would loose a lot of money that they make on selling computers. Its just simple business. If Apple made most of their money on selling software (like MS), then they would probably port OS X to work for a many different systems (like MS). But having to support all kinds of hardware will naturally make your software less stable (like MS).
Click to expand...
Yea that makes sense i agree
 
grapes911 said:
But having to support all kinds of hardware will naturally make your software less stable (like MS).
Click to expand...

Agreed. This is the Apple advantage. They can make exactly the kind of computer they want. Hardware and software, and not have to make it work with a zillion other systems. That's why OSX is so frickin cool.
 
actually, in the book "iMac" i read not too long ago, this is actually a good idea. I mean, if you look from the other way, it will defi. increase the user base, and make apple a bigger player in the PC industry.
 
busasa said:
actually, in the book "iMac" i read not too long ago, this is actually a good idea. I mean, if you look from the other way, it will defi. increase the user base, and make apple a bigger player in the PC industry.
Click to expand...

No, it won't. For a number of reasons.

Apple would then have to make SOFTWARE primarily. Not hardware. iPods? Nope. Because the cash goes into hardware.

All the different conflicting hardware would crash the operating system.
There is a small user base already, few others would try it.
It would be pirated.
It was tried before. Look up what the "Star Trek" project was, and what was said about it.

And what is this book, "iMac"? I cannot find it... link please?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back