Is The Time for Clones Now?

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Apr 23, 2008.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1
  2. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Britain
    #2
    One of the posters who made a comment got it dead right, licencing OS X will loose Apple money. They wont be able to sell there high profit hardware. If they could pull it off and OS X became very popular then in the long run it would, but they would have to spend years perfecting it to work on all hardware.
     
  3. macrumors 68020

    mainstreetmark

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Location:
    Saint Augustine, FL
    #3
    Why are there even articles running around about how apple could become bigger and make more money. Honestly, do these back-room reporters really know what they're talking about?

    Apple, as stated numerous times, is a hardware company, and the money comes from hardware. OSX is software, sure, but it's the hardware people are buying, and in growing numbers.

    Plus, they have craploads of cash sitting in the bank. They make money every quarter. Their retail stores generate over $4000 per square foot per year, higher than almost any other retailer.

    But, doom and gloomers say Apple needs to re-start that clone program. The one that was tried before, and nearly starved Apple for cash.
     
  4. macrumors 68000

    SPUY767

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Location:
    GA
    #4
    There are plenty people who would want to zero-configuration paradigm that purchasing Mac Hardware offers, and there are also plenty of people who want Mac OS X, but can't afford/don't want to pay for Mc hardware. This idea that allowing the use of OSX on non-mac hardware and manufacturing macintoshes are mutually exclusive is bollocks. Apple would probably lose a few percent in hardware sales, but they would probably pick up quite a few users of their software. That said, I still think it would be a poor fanancial choice.
     
  5. macrumors member

    Accylad

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Location:
    Accrington
    #5
    Sorry, but its the software I buy apple stuff for. The hardware apart from being aesthetically pleasing has usually been surpassed in the P.C market. The components are basically the same these days, but apple charge through the nose for it. Graphics card anyone? Anyway who would want Apple to corner the market. Not me. Any monopoly is bad.
    I'm sure the Air will now get a mention.
     
  6. macrumors 603

    NC MacGuy

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Location:
    The good side of the grass.
    #6
    It's a rough call. With the Intel transition, they have an easier path then Apples previous clones & the totally different processor architecture. The OSX software is already there for 90% of most Intel pc's.

    On the other hand, they may open up a whole other can of worms regarding drivers, ports, support - "is it hardware or Apple OSX that's giving you a problem?" issues. I think support would be the killer. How many Dell, Lenovo, or other PC makers support groups could answer questions about deciphering OSX issues? My guess is not many.

    An easier path would be for Apple to resell Apple certified compliant PC's specially optimized for OSX along with ability to run other operating systems. Just like Apples current products running Windows now. Include Apple OSX preinstalled and if you want to run Windows, Linux whatever - buy a copy and load it up yourself. Sell them the same way they do their own computers now. At least Apple would know the hardware works w. OSX and has an upgrade path. They could collect MS's licensing fees and make a buck.

    The time has never been more right for the clone concept but there are some significant hurdles. I for one would love a few PC's I've seen to work easily w. OSX.

    Apple Computer is now Apple, Inc. which shows they are not necessarily putting all their eggs in the computer basket anyway. iPods, servers, iTunes, iPhones, i-u-name-it, Apple is creating diversified revenue streams that would allow them some leeway into a clone venture.
     
  7. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #7
    First of all, Apple is hardly a monopoly. Second, monopolies in and of themselves are not inherently bad, let alone illegal. It's what a monopoly does with itself that can be illegal, and them not wanting some fly by night to hack their software on a machine that could have been put together with chewing gum for all anyone knows is hardly what I'd call abusing your monopoly. I'd love for Apple's prices to go down a bit, I would, but this is not the way. I'm one of those who's been clamoring for a low end tower. You couldn't pay me to buy one of these though. And I don't see why Apple would want to condone it.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    #8
    More of less: what solvs said.

    Apple is not a horizontal monopoly by any measure.

    Apple is a vertical monopoly, which is completely legal in the US, and is probably the most beneficial form of company Apple can be for both Apple and the end user.

    I wrote a long tirade about this in the OpenMac thread a while ago...
     
  9. macrumors 603

    NC MacGuy

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Location:
    The good side of the grass.
    #9
    I think the article in the OP was referring to Apple allowing and licensing clones - not the Psystar fiasco.

    That is absolutely the wrong way to go about it.
     
  10. macrumors 68030

    Capt Underpants

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2003
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    #10
    Hasn't Jobs been quoted saying that Apple is a software company? I can't find the link, but I'm pretty sure you've got it backwards.

    Apple sells hardware that complements their software. Why is the iPhone successful? Software. Why are apple computers successful? Mac OSX. Software.

    edit: found one quote that supports my point: "If you look at the iPod, it's a software product -- in beautiful hardware." - Steve Jobs
     
  11. macrumors G3

    bigandy

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Location:
    Murka
    #11
    Is The Time for Clones Now?

    No.
     
  12. macrumors 68020

    mainstreetmark

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Location:
    Saint Augustine, FL
    #12
    But what *IS* the iPhone. Hardware. What IS the apple computer? Hardware.

    Stuff like Final Cut Pro is pure software, of course. (although, it only runs on Apple hardware, so ... um... Hey! Look a ball!)
     
  13. macrumors 603

    NC MacGuy

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Location:
    The good side of the grass.
    #13
    Apple officially changing name from Apple Computer to Apple, Inc. confirms that Apples software & hardware is not limited to computers or anything else for that matter.

    I sure would like more choices in OS's on PC's. Some of those Sonys are sweet and would be super sweet running OSX.
     
  14. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    #14
    Apple is a company that makes its money on high-cost hardware by selling it with amazing low-cost software. If you want the software, you have to buy the hardware, which is why Apple's software is often lower-priced compared to its competitors (think Leopard vs. Vista or iWork vs. Office), and its hardware often perceived as higher-priced.
     
  15. macrumors 603

    NC MacGuy

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Location:
    The good side of the grass.
    #15
    Understood, but why not increase software prices or licenses to be run on non-Mac boxes w. Apples blessing?

    OSX on non Apple Inc. pc included @ $0, OSX on Apple compatible products at $260?

    Just a thought
     
  16. macrumors 68030

    Capt Underpants

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2003
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    #16
    I think if Steve Jobs were here, he would argue that the iPhone is all about the software.

    Apple develops hardware platforms to sell their core component... the software.

    What is an apple computer? The exact same thing as any other PC... except for the software.
     
  17. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #17
    Piracy, and still doesn't make them the money their niche hardware does.
     
  18. macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #18
    Good points all. The machines, or rather the superficial aspects of them are what really differentiates OS X from the rest.

    It'll only help to highlight how inadequate the security and reliability of OS X is once it starts turning up on anything but a very rigidly controlled and very limited selection of gear - because even in this situation they can't quite get it right.

    There's relatively little point in commercialised clone Apples, especially for Apple, because for 90+% of people out there the reason to pick one would be cost - and if that is the case, the machines would be in the same class as the bottom-dollar PC's and you'd end up running into the same stability issues that plague cheap PC's.
     
  19. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    #19
    The profit Apple would make on a more expensive version of OS X would be a pittance compared to the profit they turn by selling a true MacBook. That kind of business model only works for Windows because of their market share. They can afford to sell their operating system for so much, and can make a profit on selling only software, because they they know almost 95% of computer users must buy from them. The same is not true of Apple. Even given the argument that offering OS X on non-Apple hardware could persuade a lot of people to move from Windows of OS X, it would be a big, big gamble that probably wouldn't pay off. Business would still be Windows-based, and that's a big portion of the market that won't budge for a long time coming. It's still in Apple's (and IMO the consumer's) best interest to keep OS X on Apple hardware.

    Software is an important part of Apple, yes. In fact, you're probably right that it's the most important part. But regardless--it's still not what makes Apple money. In reality, it works the other way around, from a business perspective. Apple develops excellent software to run their fairly run-of-the-mill (besides the above-average aesthetics) hardware.

    Of course, from the consumer perspective, you could argue that Apple uses the money it makes from hardware to fund its development of revolutionary software. And technically, that's true, but its still for the ultimate purpose of using that revolutionary software to sell hardware and make money as a business.
     
  20. Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #20
    When the clones are as sexy as Caprica or Deanna, we'll talk....
     
  21. macrumors 68020

    winmacguy

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2003
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #21
    Apple only spends around 5% of their total revenue on R&D although they have upped it recently. They are currently sitting on just over $18 Billion US in cash reserves.
     
  22. macrumors 603

    NC MacGuy

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Location:
    The good side of the grass.
    #22
    $19.5B as of yesterday.
     
  23. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    #23
    You would think they would have a profitability problem.
     
  24. macrumors 603

    NC MacGuy

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Location:
    The good side of the grass.
    #24
    And that leads right back to tho clone issue... Technologically, it's easier than ever for Apple to clone or license others so the time is right in that regard.

    Business-wise, they have been gaining market share since the switch to Intel and Mac's can run Windows so do they really need to?

    If the Psystar debacle ever actually makes it to court or there is a serious challenge from others attempting the same scheme on more than a shoestring, it may force Apples hand.
     
  25. macrumors 603

    Cromulent

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Location:
    The Land of Hope and Glory
    #25
    How anyone can call Apple a monopoly escapes me. Do you even know what a monopoly is?
     

Share This Page