I personally have a lot more faith in the quality and utility of OS X more than I do of Apple hardware. Why won't Apple just release Marklar, OSX on x86 and spread its OS to the mass market?
Yes, I would anticipate that Apple's computer hardware sales might take a hit. Actually, that would be a good thing. If would give them plenty of incentive to make Apple more competitive in that area.
There are plenty of religiously loyal Apple fanatics that would be wary of jumping to cheaper generic x86 products, thus ensuring that Apple would keep at least half of its core hardware market intact. If Apple's hardware is as good as many here suggest, Apple should remain the "preferred" hardware for OS X and Apple's designer skills would still be a significant selling point.
The big plus for Apple could be a huge flood of new revenue from x86 OS X and software sales from those who thought about buying a Mac but were put off by inflated costs and underpowered performance.
For those Mac fanatics who blindly insist that "GHz" doesn't matter, OS X could prove whether that is true or not by competing on the same CPU platform. Furthermore, if the forthcoming PPC970/80 CPUs are supposed to so great for OS X then that CPU platform should still be the preferred high-end platform.
By putting OS X out there for the x86, Apple could demonstrate its move to greater openness and away from elitist, overpriced pretentiousness, which is how most non-Apple folks currently view the Mac.
Now that Apple has moved to a highly-respected Unix core with OS X, Apple is given much greater credibility among influential tech-oriented Linux fans. Clearly OS X is a much better user experience for the average person than Linux. If the hardware price came down I have no doubt that many Linux fans would flock to OS X. Linux would likely become a server-only OS.
The move to OS X on x86 would undoubtedly garners tons of free publicity for Apple and a snowballing public awareness from influential favorable technical reviews. Its a big story when Apple's David seriously takes on Goliath Microsoft. If Apple was viewed as a more egalitarian entity, there would be plenty of writers that couldn't wait to take Microsoft down a peg or two.
Considering the increasing wariness of Microsoft's monopolistic practices, I would predict that OS X could grab a 25% share of desktop operating systems within three years of introduction of OS X on x86. That's a lot of cash.
A risk? You bet. But that is what Apple used to be about.
Yes, I would anticipate that Apple's computer hardware sales might take a hit. Actually, that would be a good thing. If would give them plenty of incentive to make Apple more competitive in that area.
There are plenty of religiously loyal Apple fanatics that would be wary of jumping to cheaper generic x86 products, thus ensuring that Apple would keep at least half of its core hardware market intact. If Apple's hardware is as good as many here suggest, Apple should remain the "preferred" hardware for OS X and Apple's designer skills would still be a significant selling point.
The big plus for Apple could be a huge flood of new revenue from x86 OS X and software sales from those who thought about buying a Mac but were put off by inflated costs and underpowered performance.
For those Mac fanatics who blindly insist that "GHz" doesn't matter, OS X could prove whether that is true or not by competing on the same CPU platform. Furthermore, if the forthcoming PPC970/80 CPUs are supposed to so great for OS X then that CPU platform should still be the preferred high-end platform.
By putting OS X out there for the x86, Apple could demonstrate its move to greater openness and away from elitist, overpriced pretentiousness, which is how most non-Apple folks currently view the Mac.
Now that Apple has moved to a highly-respected Unix core with OS X, Apple is given much greater credibility among influential tech-oriented Linux fans. Clearly OS X is a much better user experience for the average person than Linux. If the hardware price came down I have no doubt that many Linux fans would flock to OS X. Linux would likely become a server-only OS.
The move to OS X on x86 would undoubtedly garners tons of free publicity for Apple and a snowballing public awareness from influential favorable technical reviews. Its a big story when Apple's David seriously takes on Goliath Microsoft. If Apple was viewed as a more egalitarian entity, there would be plenty of writers that couldn't wait to take Microsoft down a peg or two.
Considering the increasing wariness of Microsoft's monopolistic practices, I would predict that OS X could grab a 25% share of desktop operating systems within three years of introduction of OS X on x86. That's a lot of cash.
A risk? You bet. But that is what Apple used to be about.
