Thank you thats what I was trying to get across I don't even need an LCD a high quality CRT would do just fine and being able to use a cheaper cpu like an amd x2 and a pair of high quality SLi gpu's or even one high quality Gpu with being forced into the 2100+ dollar range with a mac pro at it's lowest configuration don't get me wrong I like apple and I think they are a great company I would just like to see things at a more even playing field with windows and the only way I see that happening is if apple releases a vr of OSX for "whitebox" builders. I know apple likes to control the hardware and such but I don't see a problem with apple getting royalties from hardware manufactures for building components to apples specs... if they just did that it would make their place in the computer world so much bigger, and they would still have control on the hardware.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will Mac sell an OS to compete with windows
- Thread starter Mozze
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thank you thats what I was trying to get across I don't even need an LCD a high quality CRT would do just fine and being able to use a cheaper cpu like an amd x2 and a pair of high quality SLi gpu's or even one high quality Gpu with being forced into the 2100+ dollar range with a mac pro at it's lowest configuration don't get me wrong I like apple and I think they are a great company I would just like to see things at a more even playing field with windows and the only way I see that happening is if apple releases a vr of OSX for "whitebox" builders. I know apple likes to control the hardware and such but I don't see a problem with apple getting royalties from hardware manufactures for building components to apples specs... if they just did that it would make their place in the computer world so much bigger, and they would still have control on the hardware.
Apple wouldn't do this as this would actually decrease their profits. If you can buy the mac OS X on a cheaper system such as a dell then that means you don't have to buy an Apple computer. The whole catch to Apple's products (except for a few such as the iPod) is that you HAVE to have an Apple computer to use them. Apple's popularity and profits have increased significantly in the past several years, they have no need to make a move like such.
But honestly I think that gain in popularity has been due to the Ipod and it's other NON computer related products, I don't know if they have increased in sales of macs and laptops I would assume they have but I would say that it is due to their non computer products. I honestly believe that if they did introduce the OSX with some controlled hardware that the average/experienced user could buy off the shelf assemble and decide what OS they wanted (ie not being forced to buy xp/vista or some of the dozens of random versions of Linux) I really feel that apple as a company would see huge profit gains and gain a ton of users witch in turn would increase their profit margin overall. if it wasn't for me being in tech support at symantec I wouldn't have even known apple was still around. Apple didn't put a blip in the electronics world until the trendy ipod came along and with all this forward momentum I think it is time that apple sticks it to M$ and release an OS that gives more end users a real alternative option.
This is more or less the reason I'm planning on switching. I have used Windows for more than 20 years. I'm sick of each Windows version of BSOD, I can no longer believe the claims with EACH new OS or service pack how this time they got the security problems fixed, tired of programs locking up my system, completely sick to death of hours upon hours of time on a phone only to be told it's because I have some "non-standard" component (usually factory installed) that is causing a problem, something the manufacturer-Dell/Gateway/HP denies.
I don't think everything will suddenly turn sunshine and roses if I switch. I think I will still have OS problems, I will probably wish company A would produce their software for the Mac, while realizing that they won't, and that if I was a hard core gamer I should probably stay with a PC (but not with Vista), or at least have a Windows game machine on the side. BUT, from talking with friends who own Macs, looking around on a lot of forums, and investigating the hardware/software tie in, I don't think those problems will come anywhere near what they are on a Windows machine.
Apple makes it possible for me to boot in Windows XP if I wish. Yes its an extra cost for the OS but it works and works well from when I have tried it on my friends machines. Their machines don't lock up if you leave it connected with a browser left connected to the Internet, they way my last 2 Windows machines (a Dell and an HP, respectively). To solve my lockups and slow-downs, I have been told a couple of times to save all my files, wipe the disk, and do a complete re-install of XP and all the programs I use -never by MS, but once by HP and more times by programmers I know. This does correct the problem-for about 3 months. I use spam blockers, virus checkers, registry cleaners and firewalls and keep them all up to date. But my registry still grows -even when I have not installed any new programs myself, and if I roll by the registry to an earlier date I usually lose a MS update that was recently installed, leaving my system open until their next auto update unless I manually re-download them.
My interest in Apple is because it looks like I can learn to use the software without needing to spend a lot of time and effort just keeping the *&^%!! operating system running. And at this stage, thats worth a lot to me..
I will be waiting for Leopard before buying, however.....
Ed
Relax. I'm not trampling upon the FW800 "holy ground" without good reason -- I was speaking of what (useful things) one physically might be able to squeeze into a little cd-sized plastic what-not box obviously not large enough for a full-sized pci slot, 2nd HD, etc.
That concept (Apple selling what basically amounts to a "bare bones" system) would seem to be a possible solution, but even this could be a real challenge to manage if it offered what everyone seems to desire -- a slot for a mega-ultra super-wicked graphics card. Imagine what all the "computer geniuses" of the world would try to stick in there... or "tweek" in such a system.
Maybe Apple should sell a "developer's kit" for an additional fee above the $499 ADC Select fee. That (price) might cut down on some of the potential problems... dunno.
My interest in Apple is because it looks like I can learn to use the software without needing to spend a lot of time and effort just keeping the *&^%!! operating system running. And at this stage, thats worth a lot to me..
I will be waiting for Leopard before buying, however.....
Ed
Yep, this is also the reason I switched. I wanted to be productive and not fiddling with things all the time just to get them working. The whole fiasco with all pre-SP2 XP keys being permanently blacklisted forcing me to waste my time calling India when I needed to reinstall was adding insult to injury.
Let me tell you it's amazing when things work like they should... everything for software install and uninstall to plugging in and rotating a monitor were dirt simple. No driver headaches, no buggy installs, no virus problems, no spyware, no hassles, no calling India to get an ungodly long number to activate windows.
I'm happy with my switch to Tiger and I'm sure you will be happy with Leopard as well.
Apple tried to convert to a software company once, it destroyed revenue, crippled their ability to sell hardware, and made them bleed ... and nearly wiped them off the face of the planet.
Sounds like maybe Apple should try for a repeat.
Especially since their PC business is doing better than ever, and is likely to add megabucks to the revenue numbers in the years ahead.
Heck these are real revenue dollars, unlike the iTunes store where Apple is selling stuff for someone else. Big difference between the two revenue numbers.
You, like many others, are under the impression that Apple should be competing with Microsoft on the OS front, or dell/HP on the hardware side. Apple are doing their own thing by being one of the few remaining system sellers. They are providing the whole enviroment. Jobs wants Apple to offer the best computing experience they can, they don't need to do anything other than carry on doing what they are doing at the moment. The switch to Intel is still in it's infancy as to showing where Apple can go and what market share they can capture.
I find this debatable, Apple's stock and profile rose a couple of years after both the iPod and OSX had been introduced (IIRC). Even without the iPod I think Apple would still be strong in the computing market.
Ok here is my perspective on that I honestly forgot about Apple all together until I was being trained on Linux/Unix/Macintosh virus removal. If I did not work at Symantec I wouldn't have even known Apple was still around. (I am an avid PC hardware enthusiast) And outside of work I didn't even know anyone who owned a Mac ( i take that back I knew someone who had a mac laptop the ones that looked like they had changeable color skins and it was horrid slow so I never gave mac another look until now) I am finally at the point where I understand the Mac hype but I still don't understand how they can justify their prices. I know I will get a ton of flaming for that but seriously $1000 for R&D and an "experience" please if you know anything about computers you can make windows just as stable. I don't see why now with the OSX they don't release it to selective hardware they have approved to just gain more users they will still have the .Mac to make money and since they release new OS like MS makes update packs they can make a killing I just don't get it. and please can you people quit comparing apple to dell/gateway apple is more like alienware only they charge more for hardware
I'm not sure Apple makes, on average, $200+ on each system they sell. The Intel components are pretty expensive (C2D's aren't cheap, anyways). I'd love to see them offer a limit licensing deal with a select manufacturer, letting them maintain control over hardware that goes into "Macs" and charge $300 for the OS alone, plus another $50 for iLife. I'd pay a $350 premium to get OSX on a configure to order Dell, and I think $350 would be close if not more than they'd make on my potential hardware purchase (I'm looking at a mini or maybe a low end iMac).
Relax. I'm not trampling upon the FW800 "holy ground" without good reason -- I was speaking of what (useful things) one physically might be able to squeeze into a little cd-sized plastic what-not box obviously not large enough for a full-sized pci slot, 2nd HD, etc.
I think an eSATA port would be more useful and more likely. FW400 is fine for DV work, and eSATA would be better than FW800 for external HDDs, plus leave the full FW400 bandwidth open for peripherals, like DV cams.
I'm not sure about Apple's actual margins, but on the retail side of things they are lower but not THAT much lower. For an equal laptop to a Macbook you'll see about $150 in margin, for a Macbook it would be around $120. This of course was 2 years ago when I worked at a computer shop. Nonetheless, I couldn't ever see Apple doing something like this. They like to be in complete control of their products and offer that all around experience, perhaps this is arrogant of them, but I really do feel it's what is so unique about Apple. To me, it's why Apple just works. It works because pretty much everything is made by Apple or for Apple to work with Apple products. To take OS X and sell it to non Apple hardware configurations is like taking a Porsche engine and sticking it in a Toyota Corrola. Sure it may work, but the results could be disastrous.
I'm pretty sure it's Steve Job's control freak nature. While it's not LIKELY To happen under his reign, it could, or it could happen later after he leaves. Also, technically Apple doesn't make anything except software. They design systems, and now-a-days they do it around a pre-designed reference board, then contract out the construction of the hardware to various Asain manufacturers.
Really, what is happening is they build software around a certain set of known hardware, not build hardware and software together. If they licensed out OSX with the right conditions, this same level of "known hardware" would be maintained.
If "technically" Apple doesn't make anything but software, then "technically" Dell, HP and any other PC maker you care to mention doesn't make anything.
The reason Apple doesn't license OSX to other PC manufacturers is so much simpler than most people make it out to be. It's because companies don't deliberately create competitors for their own products, and they don't do that because it's just plain bad business.
Well, if that's what you meant, then that's different. I was just drawn to the statement about you supposedly having this super ability to spec out and assemble a complete comparable machine in ten minutes and for $1000 cheaper, since that is quite obviously unnecessary hyperbole that only serves to discredit your opinion.
Wait, what? You're once again saying that you could build a comparable machine for $1000 less? I seriously have to question where you're getting these ideas from, because the numbers you toss around are nothing like current prices. If you can spec out a $1000+ Apple machine (using default configurations, except in cases where the parts can only be upgraded by Apple when the system is initially purchased) for $1000 less, then why not prove it with a list here, including sources. Don't forget to add in retail costs for the OS and included software.
THEY DO release OSX with selective hardware. They come preassembled because the demographic that wants to cut down costs by assembling the products themselves is too small, and would put too much burden on Apple support because every call would require further steps to make sure the correct components were used and connected properly.
Besides, "if" they did what you're suggesting, then you would be on macrumor forums complaining that you want to be able to take you own precise pick of components and assemble them, rather than be stuck choosing from their selection of hardware.
This comparison may be a bit exaggerated, but comparing Macs to regular PC's is like comparing Loewe and Bang & Olfusen TV sets with the ones made by Sony, Phillips, etc...
Of course, you can buy Panasonic receiver, Sony TV, Phillips DVD player and have a nice home theater. That would suit my tv watching needs for example. There are people, however, that want more from their home theater, and are willing to spend $20,000 on a TV set that includes everything else you would have to put together by hand, and that may not necessarily play well together.
Since Macs integrate everything in one box, they can make it work pretty damn good. It would be like asking of Loewe something like: "why don't they sell their technology to other TV manufacturers so that they can benefit from all the nice things their very exclusive TV's are known for. It's just not happening. And as I said, the comparison is VERY exaggerated because the price difference between Macs and PC's is not as steep. But still...
Of course, you can buy Panasonic receiver, Sony TV, Phillips DVD player and have a nice home theater. That would suit my tv watching needs for example. There are people, however, that want more from their home theater, and are willing to spend $20,000 on a TV set that includes everything else you would have to put together by hand, and that may not necessarily play well together.
Since Macs integrate everything in one box, they can make it work pretty damn good. It would be like asking of Loewe something like: "why don't they sell their technology to other TV manufacturers so that they can benefit from all the nice things their very exclusive TV's are known for. It's just not happening. And as I said, the comparison is VERY exaggerated because the price difference between Macs and PC's is not as steep. But still...
I think the real core of this question isn't even about wanted OSX on a generic PC. It's the general state of dissatisfaction with Apple's current desktop lineup. They sell an All-In-One that is a decent machine and provides a good value, if and only if you buy the whole package. If you want to get your own display, or configure your machine a little differently, you have just two choices, a $2000+ Pro machine (which requires the use of extremely expensive RAM) or a pretty low end, non upgradeable, somewhat expensive for what it is mini.
Apple has been pretty unwilling to cater to the mid-range headless Mac crowd; they made a brief attempt with the single CPU G5 PowerMac a few years ago, but even that was fairly costly ($1500 if I recall) and not a great value compared to other machines. People want that sort of machine, and would gladly pay Apple for the software to run on it, or pay a premium price to a select vendor if Apple would let them sell it.
The old clone debacle was a shame, but the main problem with that era was a relatively low demand for Macs and an excess in vendors. With demand for Apple computers rising, I don't think a partnership with a select OEM or even two would hurt Apple at all. Then again, I could be wrong.
I'm not sure if it's really that Apple is "unwilliing" to create this sort of machine, but rather that there really isn't that large of a demographic that is interested in such a machine. Most people using Mac's are either consumers that are perfectly happy with a machine the just works and doesn't need to be upgraded and changed around and all that OR are professional developers in media or what not and will buy the high end Pro versions offered to them which are highly upgradeable.
It's because Apple knows it would be a massively dumb move to create competitors for their own products. Nobody does this -- for a good and obvious reason. It's got nothing to do with demographics or upgrades or integration or quality, or anything else really. You don't compete with yourself. Simple as that.