Will Mac sell an OS to compete with windows

[Mozze]

I have wondered this for years but I hope someone knows the answer why doesn't Mac release an OS to install on anyones home built PC? Mac OS X is nice looking and seems to me a better choice than Vista. I just don't see why they don't do this. Mac cries about only having a very small market but to me it seems to be their own fault, Seriously why have they not done this?

Will Mac sell an OS to compete with windows

 

[Teh Don Ditty]

Ummm OS X competes with Windows.

 

[mduser63]

Who's Mac?

 

[suneohair]

Hmm. I don't think Apple cries about its market share. If you have some data that says otherwise I would like to see it.

Simply put, OS X is better and more reliable because it is limited to Apple computers.

THey haven't done it, because they make money on the hardware. That is what they are in business for.

 

[Mozze]

Ummm OS X competes with Windows.

So your telling me I can go out and buy an ASUS MOBO and an Opteron X2 chip and some ram a HDD get a couple of SLi video cards buy OSX and it will install and run like a Mac PRO?

 

[Teh Don Ditty]

So your telling me I can go out and buy an ASUS MOBO and an Opteron X2 chip and some ram a HDD get a couple of SLi video cards buy OSX and it will install and run like a Mac PRO?

You answered your own (original) question.

EDIT: Psst. See this thread

 

[Mozze]

Hmm. I don't think Apple cries about its market share. If you have some data that says otherwise I would like to see it.

Simply put, OS X is better and more reliable because it is limited to Apple computers.

THey haven't done it, because they make money on the hardware. That is what they are in business for.

Thank you for that answer. I wondered if it was for that or if they had some other reasoning.

 

[GFLPraxis]

Thank you for that answer. I wondered if it was for that or if they had some other reasoning.

Two simple reasons;

1) The Mac OS has a lot less issues than Windows because, quite simply, it's running on a limited set of hardware. Apple knows exactly what machines it will be running on and has appropriate drivers preloaded for everything. It's much easier for them to manage. Opening it up to all the various peices of hardware, different processors, BIOSes, etc on the market would create all sorts of issues for Apple to support; right now, Macs don't even use a BIOS.

2) Apple is a hardware company. Releasing Mac OS X for every PC would cannibalize their hardware sales.

 

[gnasher729]

1) The Mac OS has a lot less issues than Windows because, quite simply, it's running on a limited set of hardware. Apple knows exactly what machines it will be running on and has appropriate drivers preloaded for everything. It's much easier for them to manage. Opening it up to all the various peices of hardware, different processors, BIOSes, etc on the market would create all sorts of issues for Apple to support; right now, Macs don't even use a BIOS.

2) Apple is a hardware company. Releasing Mac OS X for every PC would cannibalize their hardware sales.

I think Apple would have no problem whatsoever getting MacOS X running on about any modern PC. However, your point (2) is absolutely right: I don't think the number of sales of MacOS X would grow too much, and for every two sales of MacOS X or even less Apple would lose one sale of a Macintosh. Most stupid move possible for Apple.

 

[Erasmus]

I don't get this argument. So many people (ie. The Inquirer ) expect Apple to release OSX for running on generic Dell type PCs. The only thing I can think of is that they like the operating system, but want to custom build their own computers, and so claim that Apple would do well to open their OS to any computer, which is clearly equivalent to a large, dead bull.

Apple don't care how many computers run OSX. Apple really couldn't care if half the people who bought Macs installed boot camp and Windows on their computers, and ignored OSX. Apple is a hardware company. Microsoft is a Software company. This is clear when you look at the prices of the operating systems. I can get OSX for about AU$130 (or whatever it is Edu), while the upgrade from XP to Vista Ultimate, really the only way to get a system with most of the features of Tiger, costs like AU$500, or something absolutely rediculous. Similarly, we can see that Microsoft DO care about how many people use their operating system, with Vista's limits on use with Virtualisation, and the fact you can only buy an XP upgrade, or a pack of Vista licences, which effectively leaves Mac users in the cold, unless they buy XP first, or more realistically and more likely, get their hands on a pirated version of XP.

Apple WILL NOT open OSX to generic, non-Mac PCs. EVER.

 

[petvas]

I don't get this argument. So many people (ie. The Inquirer ) expect Apple to release OSX for running on generic Dell type PCs. The only thing I can think of is that they like the operating system, but want to custom build their own computers, and so claim that Apple would do well to open their OS to any computer, which is clearly equivalent to a large, dead bull.

Apple don't care how many computers run OSX. Apple really couldn't care if half the people who bought Macs installed boot camp and Windows on their computers, and ignored OSX. Apple is a hardware company. Microsoft is a Software company. This is clear when you look at the prices of the operating systems. I can get OSX for about AU$130 (or whatever it is Edu), while the upgrade from XP to Vista Ultimate, really the only way to get a system with most of the features of Tiger, costs like AU$500, or something absolutely rediculous. Similarly, we can see that Microsoft DO care about how many people use their operating system, with Vista's limits on use with Virtualisation, and the fact you can only buy an XP upgrade, or a pack of Vista licences, which effectively leaves Mac users in the cold, unless they buy XP first, or more realistically and more likely, get their hands on a pirated version of XP.

Apple WILL NOT open OSX to generic, non-Mac PCs. EVER.

Never say never!

 

[clevin]

I don't get this argument. So many people (ie. The Inquirer ) expect Apple to release OSX for running on generic Dell type PCs. The only thing I can think of is that they like the operating system, but want to custom build their own computers, and so claim that Apple would do well to open their OS to any computer, which is clearly equivalent to a large, dead bull.

Apple don't care how many computers run OSX. Apple really couldn't care if half the people who bought Macs installed boot camp and Windows on their computers, and ignored OSX. Apple is a hardware company. Microsoft is a Software company. This is clear when you look at the prices of the operating systems. I can get OSX for about AU$130 (or whatever it is Edu), while the upgrade from XP to Vista Ultimate, really the only way to get a system with most of the features of Tiger, costs like AU$500, or something absolutely rediculous. Similarly, we can see that Microsoft DO care about how many people use their operating system, with Vista's limits on use with Virtualisation, and the fact you can only buy an XP upgrade, or a pack of Vista licences, which effectively leaves Mac users in the cold, unless they buy XP first, or more realistically and more likely, get their hands on a pirated version of XP.

Apple WILL NOT open OSX to generic, non-Mac PCs. EVER.

too many ppl mistakenly think they know exactly what apple is, and to be frank, i dont think u know what apple will "never" do

 

[Spock]

Similarly, we can see that Microsoft DO care about how many people use their operating system, with Vista's limits on use with Virtualisation, and the fact you can only buy an XP upgrade, or a pack of Vista licences, which effectively leaves Mac users in the cold, unless they buy XP first, or more realistically and more likely, get their hands on a pirated version of XP.

What??

 

[synth3tik]

A problem with Windows and sadly Linux too, is that there is not control over both hardware and software. The reason OS X can kick so much more ass is the integration of both hardware and software. Vista is suffering from all these incompatibilities for that reason. MS does not have control over the hardware.

 

[Erasmus]

What??

Hmmm...

Re-reading that paragraph left even me confused.

Just ignore it. What I meant is Microsoft are doing their bit to make it difficult to run Vista on macs, so people go and buy PCs instead, and so don't ever use Mac OSX, and hence don't switch.

I am usually the sort of person who refuses to use the word "never", but in this case, I think it's pretty safe.

In terms of saying Apple is a hardware company, in the keynote, just before Steve told us the company was now to be known as just "Apple inc." mentioned four things to demonstrate that Apple wasn't just a computer company. Those things were the Mac, the TV, the iPod, and the iPhone. No mention of software. Apple makes money on hardware, not software, and so opening OSX to any old, crappy, computer would have to be one of the worst things Apple could do to themselves.

Of course, it may be beneficial for Apple to release old versions of OSX for generic PCs, but that's different.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

By not marketing their OS Apple has painted themself into a corner where new Macs must run windows. Its that simple. when you have 5% marketshare who wants to develope anything for your little tiny itsy bisty market, Look at Mac gaming,Video cards or Tv tuners for Mac and its pathetic. Apple is Silly for not selling their best product. Mac OSX is their best product in my view.

 

[SMM]

By not marketing their OS Apple has painted themself into a corner where new Macs must run windows. Its that simple. when you have 5% marketshare who wants to develope anything for your little tiny itsy bisty market, Look at Mac gaming,Video cards or Tv tuners for Mac and its pathetic. Apple is Silly for not selling their best product. Mac OSX is their best product in my view.

I really enjoy your political commentary and agree with almost all of it. I do not share your views on this, however, starting with "It's that simple". There is nothing simple about it.

Others have made more compelling points for Apple not doing this. I can summarize my opinion as "Now, is definitely not the time to do it". Let me explain.

Apple has a lot of momentum right now, and it is escalating. However, they have not yet reached a point where they have a safe base. They have been bloodied in their battles with the MS empire. But, unlike so many other competitors, they survived. They have also learned a great deal. This time they have rejoined the fight smarter and richer. Apple's diversification has given them revenue streams they did not have before. They do not have to solely depend on any one particular technology to prosper and grow. They have the capital to fund R & D, hire the best and most creative. The numbers do not lie. They are wining. But, it is a long road and much still needs to happen.

There is an old saying (and many spin-offs), "When you are wining, do not make mistakes". If Apple were to suddenly double their orders for the Mac line, they could not handle it. Deliveries would get pushed out to unacceptable timeframes. They would have to create shortcuts on the fly, these would almost assuredly cause more headaches. The PR aftermath would be a nightmare. The same situation holds true for offering OSX to the entire PC world. There are way to many variables (as others have mentioned), which could severely tarnish the reputation of the world's best desktop OS.

Growth has to be strategically planned and carefully managed. So far, Apple is doing a very good job with it. They know the situation a heck of a lot better than we do. I think we should cut them some slack and not presume we could be running the show better.

 

[smartalic34]

By not marketing their OS Apple has painted themself into a corner where new Macs must run windows. Its that simple. when you have 5% marketshare who wants to develope anything for your little tiny itsy bisty market, Look at Mac gaming,Video cards or Tv tuners for Mac and its pathetic. Apple is Silly for not selling their best product. Mac OSX is their best product in my view.

I think Apple will emphasize the superiority of Mac OS X when 10.5 Leopard is released this spring.

 

[Eric5h5]

Apple is Silly for not selling their best product.

Apple is silly for wanting to stay in business? Here's a secret: software never wears out. Hardware does. Microsoft may have a gazillion dollars now, but you can plainly see they're already having to resort to increasingly draconian measures to keep people on the upgrade treadmill. Because that's the only way to stay in business if all you do is software: find ways to keep people buying your product over and over again. Eventually you add all the features that anyone would need, and then what? Even though XP's not that great, it's apparently "good enough" for a lot of people and there's been more resistance to upgrading than MS was expecting. (The exception here is games. You always need more content in that case.)

On the other hand, you'll always need to buy a new computer sooner or later. Even if you don't care about advancing technology, eventually it will wear out or break. In the long run, what's a more sustainable business model? Apple isn't run by someone who just looks at what might work over the next year or two....

--Eric

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

I appreciate the responses though I still think Apple could make a fortune by selling say a two year old version of its OS for PC use in order to grab needed marketshare. Maybe even a cleaned up 10.1

 

[smartalic34]

I appreciate the responses though I still think Apple could make a fortune by selling say a two year old version of its OS for PC use in order to grab needed marketshare. Maybe even a cleaned up 10.1

I really wouldn't call it needed marketshare. Apple is doing just fine with their 5% or so. Successful companies don't necessarily need to be marketshare leaders (see BMW in cars, Verizon in cell phones, or Nikon in digital cameras).

 

[Sun Baked]

I really wouldn't call it needed marketshare. Apple is doing just fine with their 5% or so. Successful companies don't necessarily need to be marketshare leaders (see BMW in cars, Verizon in cell phones, or Nikon in digital cameras).

Yes, they are also likely the hottest PC hardware growth prospect in the world market.

So while they don't need marketshare, they will likely get it as they expand their product offerings -- and improve their PC product depth.

They don't need to compete on price and enter the $99 desktop PC or $299 laptop PC market to steal marketshare either.

All they have to do is make the iMac a desktop-based unit and release a consumer and gaming tower to get a bunch of people jumping over the fence.

While magazines are focused on the iPhone/iPod as "the future" -- the Apple PC business is rather healthy again.

No need to switch from selling $1000 PC to a $99 OS.

 

[GoCubsGo]

**** I hope so!

 

[Erasmus]

The only reason why people would want Apple to release OSX for generic PCs is to run OSX on hardware of their choosing (obviously).

Any idea that Apple would benefit from this is ill-advised.

The people would probably benefit in the short term from this, for example we could buy a massive PC case, stick in a 2.66 Kentsfield, two X2900XTXes in Crossfire, 4GB of 1.33Ghz RAM, and a couple of 10,000RPM HDD's in RAID, and then shove both Mac OS 10.5 and Vista Ultimate on it for the most awesome of awesome gaming computers ever.

I'm sure it would kill Apple though.

I think the only way Apple could do it is to as I said before, open up say 10.2 for anyone, and sell it for say US$49. This should create an "OSX Halo Effect" convincing people to buy Macs to get the latest of Apple's OSes. Or, it could cause people to just be content with 10.2, and would kill both Apple, and seriously damage Microsoft.

 

[Spock]

I think the only way Apple could do it is to as I said before, open up say 10.2 for anyone, and sell it for say US$49. This should create an "OSX Halo Effect" convincing people to buy Macs to get the latest of Apple's OSes. Or, it could cause people to just be content with 10.2, and would kill both Apple, and seriously damage Microsoft.

I think this would hurt Apple even more, if I buy a Dell and put a OS X on it and lets say my video card does not work right and it skips a little, if I have never used a Mac how am I supposed to know that Apple hardware will be any better?