PDA

View Full Version : iTunes for windows...great move...so can we expect os x for PCs?


jefhatfield
Oct 23, 2003, 11:56 PM
i believe os x for PCs would be great...basically, mac users buy macs and new mac usets like to switch mostly do to the great looks and funtionality of the hardware

i think macs would still sell at the same rate and apple can make a few extra bucks if they made os x work on PCs so curious users can experience the ease of use us mac users have known for years...expecially compared to PCs running windows

i am going to get panther for my mac, but if os x were to work on PCs, i would gladly buy a copy for my compaq laptop and leave windows behind forever:D

Counterfit
Oct 24, 2003, 12:03 AM
Well, you can get OS X for x86 hardware right now. That is, if you don't mind not having a GUI...

jonapete2001
Oct 24, 2003, 12:04 AM
osx will never come to x86 unless apple ever switched it line up away from power pc.

jefhatfield
Oct 24, 2003, 12:10 AM
Originally posted by jonapete2001
osx will never come to x86 unless apple ever switched it line up away from power pc.

having followed apple since the 1970s,

who thought steve wozniak would leave apple?

that steve jobs would get fired?

that the ibm PC and clones would overtake apple machines?

that steve jobs would come back?

that apple would have an alliance with ibm or microsoft?

that the imac would get an lcd and g4 at the same time?

that the ibook would get a g4 before macworld sf 2004?

etc...

Horrortaxi
Oct 24, 2003, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by jefhatfield
having followed apple since the 1970s,

who thought steve wozniak would leave apple?

that steve jobs would get fired?

that the ibm PC and clones would overtake apple machines?

that steve jobs would come back?

that apple would have an alliance with ibm or microsoft?

that the imac would get an lcd and g4 at the same time?

that the ibook would get a g4 before macworld sf 2004?

etc...

But all of that does nothing to change the fact that Apple is a hardware manufacturer and the magnificent OS, cool apps, etc are just there to sell the hardware. My own belief is that Mac OS for the PC would be the last ditch effort to keep the compay alive.

Thanatoast
Oct 24, 2003, 12:32 AM
i think this would pose two major problem for apple.

1) their hardware sales would tank. i mean, i like apple as much as the next guy, but if i can get faster pc hardware for a fraction of the price, i'd be nuts not to.

and 2) their tech support division would incease by a factor of 10 overnight. even by restricting the "recommended hardware" requirements to a ridiculously thin slice of the market, they would still have large compatibility problems. look at it4w.

i think apple should stay separate and focus on increasing it's own market share, but that's just my opinion. :)

jonapete2001
Oct 24, 2003, 12:39 AM
appel would have microsofts security problems over night. The problem with microsoft is they have to be generic in their programing to ensure maximum compatibility. this caused many problems and hold windows back in many ways. apple has the benifit of only programing to its own hardwar. apple can be very specific, that, in part, is what makes apple's os more secure. Moving to x86 would be a terrible move unless they controlled what x86 proc.,motherboard, gpu, would be allowed to run it.

jefhatfield
Oct 24, 2003, 06:32 AM
Originally posted by Horrortaxi
But all of that does nothing to change the fact that Apple is a hardware manufacturer and the magnificent OS, cool apps, etc are just there to sell the hardware. My own belief is that Mac OS for the PC would be the last ditch effort to keep the compay alive.

steve jobs on his first tenure at apple inc and loss of increasing amounts of market share to the PC world:

"My biggest mistake was not realizing that Apple was a software company, not a hardware company"

need i say more?

and who here would buy an inferior PC (instead of a mac) to save a few bucks if it ran os x?..not me

GregA
Oct 24, 2003, 07:17 AM
Originally posted by Thanatoast
2) their tech support division would incease by a factor of 10 overnight. even by restricting the "recommended hardware" requirements to a ridiculously thin slice of the market, they would still have large compatibility problems. look at it4w.

i think apple should stay separate and focus on increasing it's own market share, but that's just my opinion. :) yeah... I'd rather see them run their GUI on Redhat or the United-Linux base.... let Redhat worry about the underlying hardware.

On a different but related note - would Apple lose anything by open-sourcing the Cocoa API? Throw developers behind it too and get it running on Linux and Windows. I think it would encourage development on Cocoa which would be (in the short and long term) good for the Mac.

mmmdreg
Oct 24, 2003, 07:19 AM
Maybe if Apple made their PC's themselves, in which case, having Macs also by them would be pointless. Therefore, it's a bad idea still.

jefhatfield
Oct 24, 2003, 07:28 AM
many people who use macs like the fact that the company is small and the market share is small...it makes them feel like the marines...the few and the proud

and i think people fear that porting os x everywhere would make apple bigger, richer, and ultimately just another big, uncaring high tech company indistinguishable from a giant like ibm or hp-compaq

and if apple inc ever became that big, many who like the eliteness of mac would find something else to be proud and exclusive about

it's like linux...in the early days, it was rare and linux heads were an exclusive and tight knit community and if one person met another who did linux, it was " hey, long lost brother, come share my house and share my wife and join us in our santa cruz commune"

one of my first high tech job offers was at a linux company near the santa cruz nude beaches and boy were those people strange...tight knit but very bhagwan or koresh-like:p

tomf87
Oct 24, 2003, 07:46 AM
I, for one, am sorry to see we're bickering over this yet again. This has been discussed so many times.

sparks9
Oct 25, 2003, 02:26 PM
There is no point in what you are saying... Why would anyone run os x on a compaq computer? If you don't want to use windows at all just get a mac instead.

Macco
Oct 25, 2003, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield
having followed apple since the 1970s,

who thought steve wozniak would leave apple?

that steve jobs would get fired?

that the ibm PC and clones would overtake apple machines?

that steve jobs would come back?

that apple would have an alliance with ibm or microsoft?

that the imac would get an lcd and g4 at the same time?

that the ibook would get a g4 before macworld sf 2004?

etc...

But over this whole time, their basic business philosophy has not changed. Apple always has, and always will, provide the "whole widget," including the hardware, software, and the OS.

Dippo
Oct 25, 2003, 03:05 PM
Originally posted by Macco
But over this whole time, their basic business philosophy has not changed. Apple always has, and always will, provide the "whole widget," including the hardware, software, and the OS.

Which is the way it should be :)

iJon
Oct 25, 2003, 03:15 PM
all i know is that if apple made mac os x for pc's i wouldnt install it. there is a reason i have a pc, for windows. it just doesnt make sense for apple to do this in my opinion. apple is in its best position to make switchers more than ever right now.

iJon

paj
Oct 25, 2003, 03:18 PM
People said Sun Microsystems would never release Solaris for Intel.

But they did. Then they started selling Intel boxes alongside their SPARC machines.

Schiffi
Oct 25, 2003, 03:37 PM
We'll see Windows on a mac (not VPC, bootable Windows) before a macos on a pc. The reason OSX works is because of the hardware. Put it on a PC and most of the OSX benefits are lost. If you have a PC, just use Linux.

themadchemist
Oct 25, 2003, 03:40 PM
Never...

It would be financially disastrous. Apple's software sales cannot support its operations. It probably can't even support software development entirely.

Apple depends on its hardware division in order to thrive. To create an x86 version of OS X would prevent many people from becoming switchers and would shift many Mac users over the PC hardware.

The experience would also be very different. One of the things I love about Apple is that it designs everything and that it oversees very carefully the 3rd-party components that go into its hardware. Moreover, with a limited subset of hardware supported, Apple can optimize its operating system to a degree that Microsoft will never be able to.

Increased compatability also means decreased reliability. The Mac OS would no longer be the absolute superior, because hardware and software are inextricably tied to performance. The Mac is a well-engineered machine because it is a cohesive one, not a mismatch of parts that do not work together optimally. Slapping the Mac OS on such a mish-mash system would greatly reduce the operating system's performance.

iJon
Oct 25, 2003, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by themadchemist
Never...

It would be financially disastrous. Apple's software sales cannot support its operations. It probably can't even support software development entirely.

Apple depends on its hardware division in order to thrive. To create an x86 version of OS X would prevent many people from becoming switchers and would shift many Mac users over the PC hardware.

The experience would also be very different. One of the things I love about Apple is that it designs everything and that it oversees very carefully the 3rd-party components that go into its hardware. Moreover, with a limited subset of hardware supported, Apple can optimize its operating system to a degree that Microsoft will never be able to.

Increased compatability also means decreased reliability. The Mac OS would no longer be the absolute superior, because hardware and software are inextricably tied to performance. The Mac is a well-engineered machine because it is a cohesive one, not a mismatch of parts that do not work together optimally. Slapping the Mac OS on such a mish-mash system would greatly reduce the operating system's performance.
thats exactly what i was going to say earlier, im just at work and to lazy to write all my thoughts. well said.

iJon

themadchemist
Oct 25, 2003, 03:45 PM
oh, and iTMS for Win can't really be used as suggestive that Mac OS will be ported to x86. That's like saying that Quicktime constitutes such evidence.

However, Quicktime was released for Windows to make it a media standard that would then draw creative professionals to Macs in order to use the best-designed quicktime creation tools.

And iTMS was introduced for Windows in order to best the competition, keept he buzz up, and sell more iPods to PC users.

I feel that every PC release is tied to advertising the Mac, creating a standard, and using both to increase hardware market penetration.

That's possible with a Mac OS for PCs, but the negating factors are too strong: The draw of Mac users to PC hardware and the satisfaction of PC users with their hardware + Mac OS (even if the combo doesn't work as well as Mac hardware + Mac OS).

Ramsos
Oct 25, 2003, 04:20 PM
Marklar is dead and will be ressurected when pigs fly:D

GregA
Oct 25, 2003, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by Ramsos
Marklar is dead and will be ressurected when pigs fly:D Though I agree with you, be careful, your line could one day be a headline on the Apple site - instead of "Hell Froze Over" it could be "And Pigs Flew".

There are various things I'd like to see Apple do - like Cocoa everywhere, all their software they have available everywhere (Windows, LINUX, and more?), and so on. Apple also has a unique ability because it can make specific products combining hardware and software and that is a great thing that MUST be kept (IMO) - though a lot can be done within that constraint.

But I realise cross platform isn't their philosophy. They want to control everything as much as possible (with the occassional toe in the water, but always very safely). I'd love to see them go all out with cross platform ideas (like IBM did 5 years ago) .... everything working anywhere.

Selling stuff for Windows will affect Mac hardware and people's attitude towards Apple. But in what way? Some people who would have bought Mac won't. Some who would not have bought Mac will. Does it end up increasing sales or not?

Like I said I think this is all unlikely, it's just not Apple's philosophy. But I'd love to see it.

krossfyter
Oct 25, 2003, 07:08 PM
i think the big reason why apple made available itunes for windows was specifically to get more people to buy from their music store. apple doesn't mind selling apps that work with their os to have them work on other operating systems. but what would be the benefit for apple to sell their entire os to pcs? the big goal of apple right now is to convert others to come over to their hardware, system etc. how would selling their os aid in this? it wont really. i think it would be a contradiction of their goals. apple wants to sell more macs right? why would they want to aid people in buying more pcs? to have a mac without the mac (osx on a pc) would contradict apples primary purpose. osx for pcs would sell more pcs and less macs, i tunes for windows doesn't sell more pcs it sells for the apple music store.... its saying ... okay if you must have a pc heres a little something from apple for ya that we would in-turn benefit from without a big risk. if they sold their os to other systems it would be too great of a risk. i tunes for windows is not a risk at all but if it is one its a small one.


mind you i do see the benefits of apple selling their os over to other systems. its just when weighted (is that a word?) together... you know comparatively speaking... the cons far out way the pros... in my opinion. that in addition to the primary purpose of apple right now which is to sell more macs not to sell more pcs.


spiral out

Marble
Oct 26, 2003, 12:31 AM
NOT AGAIN! NOOOoooooo!

Ramsos
Oct 26, 2003, 01:26 AM
Oh did I say when pigs fly, what I meant to say was when Pigs fly over a heard of pink elephants walking on water in the mojave desert. My mistake. LOL.

krossfyter
Oct 26, 2003, 03:19 AM
same discussion different people. important and provactive issue. why minimize the discussion? different strokes for different folks i guess.

krossfyter
Oct 26, 2003, 03:21 AM
Originally posted by Marble
NOT AGAIN! NOOOoooooo!

ill make sure and bring it up again next time just for you!;)

jefhatfield
Oct 26, 2003, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by krossfyter
same discussion different people. important and provactive issue. why minimize the discussion? different strokes for different folks i guess.

i still hold up some "hope" for osx or some apple inc operating system on intel/amd

but as most of us know, it should have been apple inc on all the desktops in the world, but bill gates squirmed his way into the world's computers when apple inc actually had the real momemtum

if the two steves saw the potential of "software", which was all once considered freeware and not important, then apple inc would be the 800 pound gorilla, not some company in redmond with inferior software

and anybody who thinks that being big is also akin to being the worst in quality, then tell that to ibm and sony

apple inc is the "boston red sox" of the computer world...like the red sox and early world series history, apple inc kicked butt in the industry in its early days...boston sold babe ruth many decades ago and that cursed the red sox...apple inc practically handed the ball to gates and that cursed apple

i know at this point it is close to impossible for apple to be the big kahuna in the computing world, but i would still like to see PC users have an option besides windows and linux...but i am glad pc people have itunes

themadchemist
Oct 26, 2003, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by Marble
NOT AGAIN! NOOOoooooo!

precisely. quite eloquent, really.

phillymjs
Oct 26, 2003, 12:46 PM
First, Apple will probably never base their machines on x86. Secondly, even if they did switch to x86, OS X will never, never, never run on any hardware that Apple has not produced-- so surrender the fantasy of running OS X on some homebuilt sh*tbox. The major selling point of the Mac is the "it just works" factor-- the tight integration between Apple software and Apple hardware. They won't be able to deliver that if they suddenly have to support hundreds of varieties of commodity hardware flying out of factories in East Bumblef*ck, Asia. Microsoft has blown through umpteen billion dollars over damn near twenty years in their attempt to do it, and they still haven't got it right. Now, I know that over the years Apple's engineers have managed to pull off quite a few things that eluded Microsoft's engineers, but this is one time where that absolutely will not happen. No matter how good Apple's people are, if Mac-quality plug and play with commodity hardware were possible, Microsoft would have already achieved it.

The only way Apple could do it would be to support only a tiny subset of the available PC hardware-- like NeXTStep did when it ran on Intel. And such a move wouldn't shut up most of the legions of x86heads who acknowledge the superiority of OS X but refuse to purchase entirely new hardware to run it, because they would still have to buy officially supported hardware.

~Philly

the_mole1314
Oct 26, 2003, 01:23 PM
When Apple builds a x86 OSX, it's the day they exit the market. No longer must people buy Apple hardware. Apple makes it's living by hardware, not software, not even iPods.

themadchemist
Oct 26, 2003, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by iJon
thats exactly what i was going to say earlier, im just at work and to lazy to write all my thoughts. well said.

iJon

thanks, iJon, I do what I can. That said, I'm not at work and posting to MacRumors has been constantly drawing me away from the studying I SHOULD be doing...Like right now.

Sun Baked
Oct 26, 2003, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by Schiffi
We'll see Windows on a mac (not VPC, bootable Windows) before a macos on a pc. The reason OSX works is because of the hardware. Put it on a PC and most of the OSX benefits are lost. If you have a PC, just use Linux. They've been there, done that -- but it got canceled.

MS sold Windows NT PPC for awhile, which ran on the PowerPC Platform machine.

MS canceled it, followed by Apple killing clones a couple months later.

Amiga should have brought some excitement back to the PPC Platform -- but it looks like they may declare bankruptcy yet again, they got a big court appointment Dec. 2003 (which may have been called by creditors).

krossfyter
Oct 26, 2003, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield
i still hold up some "hope" for osx or some apple inc operating system on intel/amd

but as most of us know, it should have been apple inc on all the desktops in the world, but bill gates squirmed his way into the world's computers when apple inc actually had the real momemtum

if the two steves saw the potential of "software", which was all once considered freeware and not important, then apple inc would be the 800 pound gorilla, not some company in redmond with inferior software

and anybody who thinks that being big is also akin to being the worst in quality, then tell that to ibm and sony

apple inc is the "boston red sox" of the computer world...like the red sox and early world series history, apple inc kicked butt in the industry in its early days...boston sold babe ruth many decades ago and that cursed the red sox...apple inc practically handed the ball to gates and that cursed apple

i know at this point it is close to impossible for apple to be the big kahuna in the computing world, but i would still like to see PC users have an option besides windows and linux...but i am glad pc people have itunes

i hear ya. nice baseball to computer company analogy there. i dont understand much about baseball or the red sox but i got your point.
i think today more so then ever apple is being respected more and more by people in the pc world. pre osx pc people were more adament on thier position on apple selling horrible computers. now that osx has come along i see more and more pc people open up to it and give it a try. i think pc people have an option... not the way you see if though.... the option is to ditch thier puter and get a mac. ive converted about 5 people to macs right now and 4 of them were predisposed thinkers that macs suck. after seeing osx they were easier to deal with. apples job is easy really. its just that predisposed ideology that rears its ugly head that is the hard thing to fight.