If Mac OS X was available on any laptop

[Superdelphinus]

which one would you get?

still a mac?

[AdeFowler]

17" Mbp.

[Father Jack]

Yes, of course .. :)

[mrwizardno2]

which one would you get?

still a mac?

The macbook pro is probably the only one I would still consider

[Superdelphinus]

i reckon one of those sony vaios would be pretty cool running os x!

[Shaun.P]

ThinkPad

[PlaceofDis]

ThinkPad

i'd certainly consider a thinkpad or a viao, but probably still get a mac

[mrwizardno2]

ThinkPad

Ack! That'd be an abomination if there ever was one! I hate my thinkpad!

[Shaun.P]

Ugly as sin but built to last!

[Superdelphinus]

it interests me because i presume apple must think about this every so often? Maybe they don't have enough confidence in their own hardware line.

[mrwizardno2]

Ugly as sin but built to last!

This is true. You don't hear about them denting like MBP's....


But, yes, very UGLY.

[dejo]

it interests me because i presume apple must think about this every so often? Maybe they don't have enough confidence in their own hardware line.
Tell us more. Why do you make such a presumption and what gives you the impression that Apple lacks confidence in their hardware?

[AdeFowler]

it interests me because i presume apple must think about this every so often? Maybe they don't have enough confidence in their own hardware line.
Apple have plenty of confidence in their own hardware, but they do like to be in control. They also make a lot of money from selling hardware.

[PlaceofDis]

it interests me because i presume apple must think about this every so often? Maybe they don't have enough confidence in their own hardware line.

no, thats not it at all.
they know they're designs are good, but the thing that keeps OS X on them is that it drives sales. period. by licensing out OS X people won't buy macs. remember that this is a mac centric site, so of course a lot of people here would still buy macs, but for most people, they want the cheapest machine to run the software, and that means moving away from apple's offerings. apple is both a software and hardware company, its about a packaged system. and lets not forget the software issues that would arise from trying to support every possible configuration.

[redrdstr]

Lenovo X300

http://gizmodo.com/346797/ultralight-lenovo-x300-series-thinkpad-leaked

oh so sexy!

[Superdelphinus]

them thinking people won't buy macs if os x is available on other systems is sort of exactly what i mean.

Surely if they are confident that their machines are ultra desirable then they wouldn't stop selling because os x is widely available, per se. In fact they could get a shat load of money from everyone wanting it, especially those who want a cheap pc (£3-500 range)

[bamaworks]

Lenovo X300

http://gizmodo.com/346797/ultralight-lenovo-x300-series-thinkpad-leaked

oh so sexy!

That thing looks like a pile of animal excrement compared to Apple notebooks.

Apple = Beauty!

[mrwizardno2]

That thing looks like a pile of animal excrement compared to Apple notebooks.

Apple = Beauty!

it may not be as "pretty" but it's planned out MUCH better than the Air. Ports, removable battery, it's all there.

[Superdelphinus]

heh, fair point

is objectivity unlikely in this forum then?

[yellow]

A Think-pad.. so I could play with that little red nubbin all day long, and reminisce about how modern it looks!

[gauchogolfer]

them thinking people won't buy macs if os x is available on other systems is sort of exactly what i mean.

Surely if they are confident that their machines are ultra desirable then they wouldn't stop selling because os x is widely available, per se. In fact they could get a shat load of money from everyone wanting it, especially those who want a cheap pc (£3-500 range)

Apple is hugely profitable right now, moreso than any other computer manufacturer, AFAIK. Why would they want to emulate those who are struggling in the market?

[Superdelphinus]

pretty sure microsoft aren't currently struggling?

[PlaceofDis]

them thinking people won't buy macs if os x is available on other systems is sort of exactly what i mean.

Surely if they are confident that their machines are ultra desirable then they wouldn't stop selling because os x is widely available, per se. In fact they could get a shat load of money from everyone wanting it, especially those who want a cheap pc (£3-500 range)

apple makes the profit off of the hardware, not the software.
dell makes very little profit and makes up for it in volume.

the software helps sell apple's hardware, thats why they can make good profits off of it.

by releasing OS X for any computer, they'll have tons more to support, and people won't go for their hardware, since they won't be able to mark it up as much, and thus less profits.

you do realize that apple has tried to license their OS before right? and it nearly killed the company. its just not feasible. it has nothing to do with their 'confidence' in their hardware.

pretty sure microsoft aren't currently struggling?

vista isn't doing near as well as it should, and compared to XP and previous things, its not going well for them. box sales are struggling, yes. they're making the sales off of OEM, thats all.

[Superdelphinus]

placeofdis - no i didn't realise that actually, interesting. Was just a talking point really, i'm bored

[yellow]

pretty sure microsoft aren't currently struggling?

Not a 1:1 comparison. Microsoft doesn't design, make, and sell computer hardware.

I'm hoping this doesn't turn into an "Apple should sell Mac OS X for all hardware" threads. We don't need more of those. I'll just fold it into an existing one in that case. For the moment this thread stands because you asked what other type of hardware one would purchase to use OS X on, assuming it was possible.

[PlaceofDis]

placeofdis - no i didn't realise that actually, interesting. Was just a talking point really, i'm bored

http://lowendmac.com/musings/mm07/0830.html
for your reading pleasure :p

Not a 1:1 comparison. Microsoft doesn't design, make, and sell computer hardware.

also a fair enough point.

[Markleshark]

I'd still have a Mac... Yeah. :D

[Superdelphinus]

"Why would they want to emulate those who are struggling in the market?"

it's this i don't get then. Who would they be emulating?

[7on]

EEEpc

no, thats not it at all.
they know they're designs are good, but the thing that keeps OS X on them is that it drives sales. period. by licensing out OS X people won't buy macs. remember that this is a mac centric site, so of course a lot of people here would still buy macs, but for most people, they want the cheapest machine to run the software, and that means moving away from apple's offerings. apple is both a software and hardware company, its about a packaged system. and lets not forget the software issues that would arise from trying to support every possible configuration.

It's happened before. Look up the mid-ninties. Power Computing, Motorola, all made Macs running MacOS and this almost killed Apple.

I doubt they'd do this again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_clone

[yellow]

It's happened before. Look up the mid-ninties. Power Computing, Motorola, all made Macs running MacOS and this almost killed Apple.

I doubt they'd do this again.

Different times though. At that point, Apple was struggling all by itself. Licensing clones was a way to try and make some cash to keep it afloat. They had some really bad leadership at that point.

We bought a buncha PCCs. All pieces of **** that were dead/too problematic within 2 years. Still got all the stickers though. :)

[Superdelphinus]

they could start by selling os x to universities etc to gauge demand

[Sesshi]

Sony
TZ 3-series
UX 4-series

Lenovo
T61
X300

Dell
Precision T7400
Precision M4300

[ryannel2003]

A 15" MacBook Pro. Mac OS X doesn't look near as good on anything else.

[PlaceofDis]

Sony
TZ 3-series
UX 4-series

Lenovo
T61
X300

Dell
Precision T7400
Precision M4300

don't you buy those anyways? ;):p

[Phil A.]

Still a Mac, but I must admit I'd be tempted by one of these (http://www.oqo.com/intl/) running OS X :D

[Sesshi]

don't you buy those anyways? ;):p

Exactly. It would cut out the Apple hardware chaff.

[7on]

Different times though. At that point, Apple was struggling all by itself. Licensing clones was a way to try and make some cash to keep it afloat. They had some really bad leadership at that point.

We bought a buncha PCCs. All pieces of **** that were dead/too problematic within 2 years. Still got all the stickers though. :)

By 1995, Apple Macintosh computers accounted for about 7% of the worldwide desktop computer market. Apple executives decided to launch an official clone program in order to expand Macintosh market penetration.
...
Had it pursued a clone program in the 1980s, in this view, Apple might have ended up in the position currently occupied by Microsoft—an extremely powerful company with high profit margins and a wide base of consumers perpetually dependent on its system software products. Jobs claimed it was now too late for this to happen, that the Mac clone program was doomed to failure from the start, and since Apple made money primarily by selling computer hardware, it ought not engage in a licensing program that would reduce its hardware sales.

They weren't "struggling" to stay afloat. And similar market share as today.
They started struggling because of the clones and Windows 95.
Apple would need something like 50-75% marketshare before they could economically pursue a OS only market sans their hardware.

[yellow]

They weren't "struggling" to stay afloat.

Ah well.. From my perspective, the clones came at a time when I had low confidence in Apple and their products and the clones didn't help the situation. You're right though.

I should have limited my response to say that bad leadership nearly killed Apple and left the clone issue out of the equation.

Gil Amelio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gil_Amelio), CEO at the time:

During Amelio's tenure Apple's stock hit a 12-year low, and in the second quarter of 1997, after Steve Jobs sold all but one of his shares in the company, Apple lost another $708 million. Later in 1997, the directors of Apple lost confidence in and ousted then-CEO Gil Amelio in a boardroom coup. Steve Jobs then became Apple's interim CEO. In 2007, Apple CEO Steve Jobs summed up his predecessor's tenure with a quote that he attributed to Amelio:

"Apple is like a ship with a hole in the bottom, and my job is to point the ship in the right direction"

Incidently, thanks Gil. I owe my house in part to your leadership! :)

[nickster9224]

none because it would be unstable like windows. b/c every manufacturer would have to rewrite osx for their hardware.

[SodiumBenzoate]

none because it would be unstable like windows. b/c every manufacturer would have to rewrite osx for their hardware.

No.. OS X is already compatible with a wide variety of hardware (including, theoretically, every Core Duo/Core 2 Duo PC).

[hulugu]

them thinking people won't buy macs if os x is available on other systems is sort of exactly what i mean.

Surely if they are confident that their machines are ultra desirable then they wouldn't stop selling because os x is widely available, per se. In fact they could get a shat load of money from everyone wanting it, especially those who want a cheap pc (£3-500 range)

I don't think Apple is worried that people will stop buying Macs, rather that costs and benefits are unequal.

In exchange for a slightly more expensive development of OS X, Apple has to give up some amount of their hardware margins to someone else. Unless the Mac market suddenly exploded, and the cheap machines didn't simply replace machines that Apple was going to sell anyway, Apple loses money. Meanwhile, tech support and other costs will rise.

[Superdelphinus]

Why doesn't apple have a presence in the middle range. Even their 'budget' macbooks are pretty much top spec for the size etc.

Ps if itunes for windows is anything to go by os x would be horrible on pcs

[c073186]

Ps if itunes for windows is anything to go by os x would be horrible on pcs

I don't think that applies because it is a completely different operating system.

I would still buy a Mac, no doubt.

[JSchwage]

I'd still get a Mac. Nobody makes hardware designs as well as Apple! :D

[stubeeef]

I am on the road in and out of multiple customer's accounts. I speak to doctors and nurse managers that don't have much time. I want a small tablet form factor that can also be a small laptop for quick presentations as well as big ones.
I would keep my macs at home, wouldn't leave those, my iMacs, PowerBooks, eMacs, etc...but I need more for going on the road, bigger than iTouch and smaller than MacBook.

some other specs
9.13” x 6.57” x 1.36” Approximately 2.2 lbs. with a 3-cell battery
9.13” x 7.32” x 1.36” Approximately 2.5 lbs. with a 6-cell battery
LINK (http://store.shopfujitsu.com/fpc/Ecommerce/buildseriesbean.do?series=P1620)

[hulugu]

Why doesn't apple have a presence in the middle range. Even their 'budget' macbooks are pretty much top spec for the size etc.

Ps if itunes for windows is anything to go by os x would be horrible on pcs

Well, Apple's not interested in that part of the market, probably because the margins aren't worth it in their mind.

iTunes for Windows (or for that matter Safari) aren't indicative on how OS X will run on the average PC because they're entirely different problems. iTunes has to run on Windows APIs. OSX running on a PC has to work with the actual hardware.

[PowerFullMac]

The Asus EEE PC. Not a powerhouse, but very cool, better than the Air!

[Shadow]

I'd be very tempted with a Dell M1330/M1530...

Still get a Mac though :p

[Everythingisnt]

A Voodoo Envy. http://www.voodoopc.com/sellpage/sellpage.aspx?spid=74

[Cassie]

Probably I'd get the cheapest laptop I could, say around $400-$500.

However, I'd much rather have a desktop then a laptop.

[Mammoth]

Here's my list.

EEE PC
Vaio TZ
OQO
Kohjinsha series
Self-built desktop w/ Core 2 Quad and Nvidia 9xxx series in SLI. :D