OSX on Non-Apple Computers: How Much Would You Pay?

[IJ Reilly]

This poll is an offshoot of the discussions about running OSX on non-Apple computers. In two of these threads, I asked the question "how much would you be willing to pay for a copy of OSX which is licensed to be installed on a non-Apple computer?"

This hypothetical version of OSX would function precisely as it does on an Apple-branded Mac (including updates), but would include activation and authentication, similar to Microsoft's activation and authentication for copies of Windows. We should assume that this version of OSX would not come bundled with the iLife applications, as these applications are included with Apple's hardware, not the OS. Also, similar to OEM Windows, Apple would support only the OS, not the hardware. Hardware support would be the responsibility of the box-maker.

Select the choice which comes closest to the price you'd pay for such a version of OSX.

Please, answer this poll only if you'd actually be interested in building or buying a non-Apple Mac.

 

[NC MacGuy]

This poll is an offshoot of the discussions about running OSX on non-Apple computers. In two of these threads, I asked the question "how much would you be willing to pay for a copy of OSX which is licensed to be installed on a non-Apple computer?"

This hypothetical version of OSX would function precisely as it does on an Apple-branded Mac (including updates), but would include activation and authentication, similar to Microsoft's activation and authentication for copies of Windows. We should assume that this version of OSX would not come bundled with the iLife applications, as these applications are included with Apple's hardware, not the OS. Also, similar to OEM Windows, Apple would support only the OS, not the hardware. Hardware support would be the responsibility of the box-maker.

Select the choice which comes closest to the price you'd pay for such a version of OSX.

Please, answer this poll only if you'd actually be interested in building or buying a non-Apple Mac.

Well written!

$500. They make money, I get OSX on something that is what I want, not what Apple tells me I need. Assuming updates but not upgrades are included and I can transfer license if I change machines.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

$250, is the sweet spot for me. Its not insulting to and it fair priced for multiple copies discount.

 

[Eric Lewis]

bring back

the

$499 and $699 mini

 

[IJ Reilly]

I will tabulate and post the mean price periodically, assuming we get a reasonable response to the poll.

 

[weckart]

The market is already there: XP/Vista sets the price. That is what Apple has to compete against. If Apple limits the hardware that OSX can boot from or operate on in a stable way, then start discounting.

Also bear in mind that 3rd party hardware manufacturers (ATI/NVIDIA/Soundcards) may not necessarily be inclined to write drivers for every piece of hardware that is launched onto the market, further increasing pressure on Apple to do so or make OSX look less inviting for the uncommitted.

 

[MacUser2525]

This poll is an offshoot of the discussions about running OSX on non-Apple computers. In two of these threads, I asked the question "how much would you be willing to pay for a copy of OSX which is licensed to be installed on a non-Apple computer?"

This hypothetical version of OSX would function precisely as it does on an Apple-branded Mac (including updates), but would include activation and authentication, similar to Microsoft's activation and authentication for copies of Windows. We should assume that this version of OSX would not come bundled with the iLife applications, as these applications are included with Apple's hardware, not the OS. Also, similar to OEM Windows, Apple would support only the OS, not the hardware. Hardware support would be the responsibility of the box-maker.

Select the choice which comes closest to the price you'd pay for such a version of OSX.

Please, answer this poll only if you'd actually be interested in building or buying a non-Apple Mac.

Screw the activation BS you have in there, I would pay the same price that I already have to run OSX on a PC namely the full retail price of the copy of Leopard I bought to do it with.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Screw the activation BS you have in there, I would pay the same price that I already have to run OSX on a PC namely the full retail price of the copy of Leopard I bought to do it with.

You have to know that Apple would never do this without activation/authentication, for the same reasons Microsoft would not. The question should be realistic or there's no point in asking it.

The mean is $257.00 so far.

 

[NC MacGuy]

You have to know that Apple would never do this without activation/authentication, for the same reasons Microsoft would not. The question should be realistic or there's no point in asking it.

The mean is $257.00 so far.

I think he's saying he's already running it on a PC and wouldn't pay anything more than he already has. So much for a realistic gauge of poll numbers.

 

[MacUser2525]

I think he's saying he's already running it on a PC and wouldn't pay anything more than he already has. So much for a realistic gauge of poll numbers.

Exactly and just why would you bother with a different Apple version that requires you to do the same as you already have to do in supporting your own hardware anyways, it doesn't make any sense.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I think he's saying he's already running it on a PC and wouldn't pay anything more than he already has. So much for a realistic gauge of poll numbers.

IOW, stealing is cheaper than buying -- or am I missing something?

Mean is $273.00 now, with 22 votes, BTW.

 

[Quillz]

I think $129.99 is a fair price, and that's how much I'd pay to be able to use Mac OS X on any computer of my choice.

 

[NC MacGuy]

I think $129.99 is a fair price, and that's how much I'd pay to be able to use Mac OS X on any computer of my choice.

You'd really pay that? You don't think being able to run OSX on any box isn't at least worth as much as XP or Vista?

I can understand Apples reasoning now

 

[hakuryuu]

I think $129.99 is a fair price, and that's how much I'd pay to be able to use Mac OS X on any computer of my choice.

I can promise you if Apple were to ever allow this there would be activation (more of a response to above posts than quoted). And they would end up patching the current version so that it cannot boot without an updated EFI present.

Why anyone expects them to essentially give the OS away for cheap ($129 is OEM windows xp price) is beyond me as their whole business model and subsequently the reason the OS is as stable as it is is because they limit the OS to their hardware. With the way they code the OS and the limited support they even now get from hardware vendors for drivers their stability would go down the drain because of the random configurations and we'd be looking at an OS with the stability of Vista.

 

[IJ Reilly]

You'd really pay that? You don't think being able to run OSX on any box isn't at least worth as much as XP or Vista?

I can understand Apples reasoning now

I was going to say that, but at this point, five voters think that OSX on the computer of your choice is worth less than OSX on a Mac, and less than running Windows on a PC!

 

[NC MacGuy]

I was going to say that, but at this point, five voters think that OSX on the computer of your choice is worth less than OSX on a Mac, and less than running Windows on a PC!

Well, so much for realistic and mature thought processes. I look at that nice little TZ and would love to have an Apple blessed copy of OSX on it.

For this unrequited faith in MR members in this and other posts, I change my Avatar to reflect my feelings....

 

[bashveank]

$50-150
For the record, I would pay the same for Windows. I don't think an OS, one that I have to buy upgrades for every few years especially, is worth any more than that. It's not as if Apple wouldn't turn a profit no matter what they charged for it.

 

[MisterMe]

... It's not as if Apple wouldn't turn a profit no matter what they charged for it.

Yes, it is.

 

[GFLPraxis]

Honestly, I think the current $129 is a fair price. I feel Microsoft inflates their prices because they can- $500 for Vista Ultimate is simply insane, and $200 for Basic is still quite pricey considering how stripped down the end product is. Microsoft has steadily been increasing the price of Windows over the years, and now you can build whole computers for less than the price of your operating system.


Regardless, I have to look at this from a realistic standpoint. I'd say $200. It's the same price as Windows Vista Basic, but from a marketing perspective Apple can point out that it's fully featured (like Vista Ultimate). Price it too high and you won't get the market share.

But I think $200 is too much for Windows as well, personally. I never pay retail price on OS's. Thank goodness for education discounts and special deals because otherwise I'd wait years to upgrade my OS or consider piracy (which I generally despise, but maybe not quite as much as giving a monopolistic Microsoft that much money).

 

[KingYaba]

With Linux becoming a more and more attractive alternative, I don't think I would pay more than $150.00.

 

[dsnort]

Screw the activation BS you have in there, I would pay the same price that I already have to run OSX on a PC namely the full retail price of the copy of Leopard I bought to do it with.

I think you're overlooking that the reason you can run OS X on that PC is in part due to the fact that Apple has, to date, not shown any interest in making it difficult to do. That could change at any moment.

I was going to say that, but at this point, five voters think that OSX on the computer of your choice is worth less than OSX on a Mac, and less than running Windows on a PC!

To be statistically accurate, your poll must take into consideration the "idjit" factor!

 

[portent]

How about $1000?

Back in the late 1990s, when Apple tried licensing clones, it charged the manufacturers like Umax, DayStar and Power Computing up to $1000 per computer for a license to build a high-end machine.

And at that price, Apple was losing billions! They nearly went under!

Granted, that was a much less efficient Apple than today. But it's really hard to make back the kind of money it costs to develop an entire operating system unless you control the market. That's how Microsoft does it.

 

[ltldrummerboy]

For the next poll try setting the lowest amount at $200. It's safe to assume that people are willing to pay more to run OS X on non-Apple HW than the official computers.

 

[TH-Gunner]

$50-150
For the record, I would pay the same for Windows. I don't think an OS, one that I have to buy upgrades for every few years especially, is worth any more than that.

I agree.

I think $100 through the current $130 is a fine price. Any more than that and I would resort to hacking

Obviously they would never do this, though, because if they released OSX for any PC, they would lose virtually all of their hardware sales. They would NEED to raise the price.

For the next poll try setting the lowest amount at $200. It's safe to assume that people are willing to pay more to run OS X on non-Apple HW than the official computers.

That defeats the purpose of a poll. If you do that, then you're just going to be hearing what you want to hear.

Look: Out of 37 thus far, there are 18 people who would only pay $50-199. There are 19 people who would pay over.

Your results would not be accurate if you set the lowest price at $200; you would have excluded almost 50% of the voters.

 

[IJ Reilly]

To be statistically accurate, your poll must take into consideration the "idjit" factor!

I can certainly try that. What's the coefficient?

That defeats the purpose of a poll. If you do that, then you're just going to be hearing what you want to hear.

Look: Out of 37 thus far, there are 18 people who would only pay $50-199. There are 19 people who would pay over.

Your results would not be accurate if you set the lowest price at $200; you would have excluded almost 50% of the voters.

Exactly. So far, 30% of respondents would pay less for running OSX on the PC of their choice than they'd have to pay to install any version of Vista on that same PC, and 50% less or no more. This is certainly an interesting result. You're sure showing Apple da love, people!

Current mean with 40 votes: $211.00.