Should Apple Sell Mac OS X for Beige Boxes?

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Jan 15, 2007.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1

    [​IMG]

    Category: Apple Software
    Link: Should Apple Sell Mac OS X for Beige Boxes?
    Description:: Now that there's a comparable operating system with comparable popularity to Windows out there that's also running on Intel, the media and analysts have come up the arguments that Apple should release the OS for "normal" PCs and they'd make a killing off it. The assumption is that people would buy it up and Apple would make more money on the software sales from people that wouldn't buy a Mac anyway. That's the assumption, but is it true? History speaks to us on this topic.

    Posted on MacBytes.com
    Approved by Mudbug
     
  2. Guest

    calculus

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    #2
    In a word, no.
     
  3. macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #3
    Yes, you make a great product sell it.
     
  4. macrumors 603

    gauchogolfer

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Location:
    American Riviera
    #4
    I think the bit about 'comparable popularity to Windows' is a bit of a stretch, eh?

    But still, the answer for me is no.
     
  5. macrumors G3

    bigandy

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Location:
    Murka
    #5
    never, never, never!
     
  6. macrumors 6502a

    janitorC7

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Location:
    North Hollywood, CA
    #6
    no

    it would not be the Mac os X that we are used to. What makes the MAC and Mac os X so much better is that they are fine tuned to each other, nothing that mac os X does not use is in the Mac (and wow, we get nice small computers). There is nothing that the mac uses that mac os x has (no need for a million pre installed drivers, we get a fast clean OS). I'm sorry but OSX on windows would suck almost as much (not as much, not even close to as much) as windows on a PC.

    the cleanness and elegence is why we love macs, why turn X into XP. Its like, if M$ decided to buy DELL and only make Windows for DELL, would windows be a lot better (mb not OS X, but better than it is now?).

    becides, do you actually think that apple makes the MAC to sell OS X, NO! They make OS X to sell Mac's, if it was the other way arround then they would not have enables you to run XP on the MAC


    $0.02, agree?

    cooper
     
  7. macrumors 601

    ITASOR

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Location:
    Oneida, NY
    #7
    I can agree with that, somewhat. I would personally still buy a Mac for the design, so in turn, I would get the tightly integrated hardware and such. Others that choose to install it on their generic hardware (and maybe install a separate "not Mac" driver kit) get the benefit of running OS X, but will have to hope that their hardware cooperates.
     
  8. macrumors 68000

    Danksi

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Location:
    Nelson, BC. Canada
    #8
    It's great because it's designed to work with specific hardware, MS Windows fails because it has to 'work' with a huge number of devices out there, well that and it's hardware prompts annoy the hell out of the user.
     
  9. Administrator emeritus

    xUKHCx

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Location:
    The Kop
    #9
    I read quite a little while ago before the second to last keynote someone's suggestion, i am sorry i cant remember who you are.

    They suggested that after announcing Leopard the one more thing should be Panther for PC's. Which i thoght was a cool idea as Steve said that they had developed every version of OS X for PCs so they wouldn't have to do much to get it out. Plus it would should people how good OS X is and get them to buy a mac to be able to get Tiger/Leopard.

    I would consider Panther the first fully usable version of OS X, so can not go further back than that, so maybe at this point in time it is too close to Tiger to be worthwhile. Maybe when Leopards successor is announced this plan would be best placed.

    I think this will never happen but is a novel way of releasing OS X to PCs.
     
  10. Moderator

    dejo

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Location:
    The Centennial State
    #10
    He did not say for ALL PCs. In fact, he said they had developed every version of Mac OS X for Intel CPUs. A big difference.
     
  11. macrumors 601

    DMann

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    10023
    #11
    iPod interface on Zune

    Would that make an improvement? I think not.
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    dllavaneras

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Location:
    Caracas, Venezuela
    #12
    There's no way you'd get it well integrated with the hardware. I vote no
     
  13. macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #13
    If your happy with Microstink running the computer industry then no but if Apple wants to be telling the industry how to do things it needs to break out of its 5% market and it wont ever do that by selling crippled computers or forcing new displays on people. Its hardware line is gimmicky and OSX is what makes a Mac a Mac, not its same as PC guts. That means there is no reason not to market its OS unless it enjoys following Bill Gates. Thats how I see it.:p
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    mrsebastian

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2002
    Location:
    sunny san diego
    #14
    yes and no. yes, because sales would surely be fantastic and my stock will start to really resemble the winning lotto ticket. no, because we'll surely have some the same issues our windows friends have when you don't control the software and the hardware... then again, i'll take the lotto ticket as the stock has already made impressive gains for me :)
     
  15. macrumors 68030

    BenRoethig

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Dubuque, Iowa
    #15
    Yes, but with qualifiers. Mac OS X compatible machines should be based on specific intel reference designs with EFI. Old BIOS machines should not be supported. Driver requirements would be equal to or even less than the PPC days. Why? Despite the opinion to the contrary around here, Apple is not some time of ultimate answer to all computer needs. A large chunk of computer users are left out and Apple has shown no desire to expand its horizons. Yes, there are definitely situations where something from Dell or HP is a better fit for the customer's needs than something Apple has and vice versa. Mac OS X is being wasted on a very narrow interpretation of the computer industry.

    The hardware is the same. That Apple logo on the front isn't some magic device that makes everything work. It's all drivers.

    No, it wouldn't. Windows' problems from everything being layered on top going back to windows 1.0 which in itself was basically a GUI program on top of DOS. Apple avoided these problems by creating a totally new operating system. You guys talk as if Mac OS X doesn't require drivers or something. It does. The PowerPC version has to support a lot of chipsets. Almost every new Mac release was a custom part that required new drivers.
     
  16. macrumors 65816

    eric_n_dfw

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2002
    Location:
    DFW, TX, USA
    #16
    OS X for generic PC's would not sell that well because of the 2nd point you just made. In fact, it would probably cannibalize Apple hardware sales the way the Apple cloners were doing in the 90's. This would drive stock prices down as the market would not like to see a ton of R&D $$$ going to trying to make it compatible with a million different hardware config's when they could have stayed with their "walled garden" approach that is currently making money hand over fist.

    The only way this would work would be if PC makers sold "Apple Certified" PC's that used a specific set of hardware that Apple supports. They could also publish a list of such hardware for people to build their own PC's around as well.

    Again, though, why would they want to do this when the public is willing to pay them a premium for Apple systems?

    When/if Apple's profits start to wane do to this I think we'll start to see more hardware options being offered to start chipping away at niches that Dell or HP fit right now. On the budget end that could mean mid-towers and on the high end they could start doing more server class machines.
     
  17. macrumors 68030

    BenRoethig

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Dubuque, Iowa
    #17
    By then it will be too late. Apple has a company is doing very well. The Mac as a platform is still very much in the danger area. The professional creative areas are very viable for the Mac. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about the consumer ranks.
     
  18. macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #18
    No it would make OS X start to have problems with hardware compatibility. The only way it may be good is if people pirating OS X to install it on PCs ever becoms a problem.
     
  19. Moderator

    dejo

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Location:
    The Centennial State
    #19
    Macs are selling as well as ever and over half of them are being bought by people new to Macs. Sounds pretty dangerous to me. ;)
     
  20. macrumors 68030

    BenRoethig

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Dubuque, Iowa
    #20
    Macs are 6% of the Market after all the advances. Still way too low.
     
  21. macrumors 603

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #21
    Whoever says yes should burn in hell.:) (Or at least ban them)
     
  22. macrumors G4

    Teh Don Ditty

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland
    #22
    Absolutely Not! (Right on Cassie!)

    The entire reason you buy anything Apple is because the hardware and software were made/designed to work together. From the finanical side of it though, they would make a killing.

    Just say no to OS X on Beige! We'll call it Proposition 666. (Sorry poor attempt at humor)

    - The Don Ditty (aka Mike)
     
  23. macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #23
    isn't the consumer area where they are growing the most?
     
  24. macrumors 68030

    BenRoethig

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Dubuque, Iowa
    #24
    Most of Apple's gains are in the upper end thin and light notebook category. Macbook and Macbook Pro are selling well. Mac laptops on a stand...err desktops are holding steady.

    I buy them because they do the same job better. Or at least they used to.
     
  25. macrumors 65832

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    #25
    As I have pointed out numerous times on this site, the move would be absolutely foolish on Apple's part. And one who would willingly undercut a profitable business strategy for a strategy that earns less profits and gains nothing shouldn't be in any decision making position.

    And considering that this would be akin to throwing away 70% to 80% of one of Apple's most profitable businesses, I would be happy to accept 70% to 80% of the incomes of anyone who would say this is a good idea for Apple. If it is a good idea for Apple, then it should be a good idea for them as well... right?


    Here is an odd quote from the article...
    "Now that there's a comparable operating system with comparable popularity to Windows out there that's also running on Intel, the media and analysts have come up the arguments that Apple should release the OS for "normal" PCs and they'd make a killing off it."
    So unless most computer media and analysts are stupid (and I'm not necessarily saying that they aren't), this statement of their motivations must be false. Which brings up the question of what their real motivations for wanting to see this would be.

    Actually, that is an easy one to answer... they want to see blood.

    They aren't suggesting Apple do this because it is a good idea for Apple, they want to see Apple and Microsoft pitted against each other. And they don't care who wins either, as long as someone loses, and loses badly. They want two companies to beat up on each other so they can report about it... so that their is news for them to give to their readers.

    Actually, this is the same reason so much of the computer media and analysts are so focused on the Mac platform and malicious software attacks. The subject is old news on the PC platform, so if they can help to make it a subject for the Mac community, then they can dust off and rehash all the things they have said about malicious software in the PC community... and who doesn't want to make easy money that way?

    The worst enemy that we in the Mac community face are the computer media and analysts. They need us to have problems so that we can go looking to them for coverage and advice on the subject.

    I would point out that not a single writer of malicious software has made any money from the Mac community so far... but with every report of even the possibility of such attacks in our community, the computer media, computer analysts and security companies have made money.

    Frankly, the people we should fear are the people who are promoting these types of things in our community. They are actively stirring the waters (be it about pitting Apple against Microsoft, or malicious software on Macs) to give themselves talking points.

    It is a scary day when these types of people set their agenda towards making bad news so that they can write about it... and profit from it. :eek:
     

Share This Page