Apple on the Brink

[Woodley]

. Personally, I think selling OS X for x86 would help Apple in the long run.

But it'll also dissapoint they're big time fans. And remember, people are scared of OS X. They think all Macs do is crash, and are insecure, don't work, etc. I think selling OS X for anything other than Apple hardware would only dissapoint Apple fans.

 

[jiggie2g]

Here we go again.

The Mac Zealots fearing change again.

OSX in the Wild will not kill Apple. At best it increases hardware sales and interest in the Mac , at worst it lingers in obscurity just like where it is now , just like Linux.

I have been modding PC's or 10ys and I have come to the conclusion that as long as you have quality components in a your system you should have a very stable machine.I for one can say having owned both a mac and PC that my Athlon 64 system is every bit as stable as my iMac(machine specs in my signature).

Cheap parts = crappy machine , this works in principle with just about evey machinical/electronic product you can think of Cars, TV's , Stereo systems.

I see this being no different for OSX on a Dell or DIY PC. All Dells , Gateways , HP's pretty much use the same components over and over. This is no different from Apple. so you lose me on the Intergration advantage apple has.
It's not like Apple will use a better quality DVD burner then Dell or not buy stuff made in china or taiwan. They will use the same Intel Mobo/CPU as Dell , HP and Gateway. same Samsung ram, DVD burners may vary.

At any given time a company like Dell will need only 3 Intel Mobo models to cover the wholedesktop line. for example....Chipsets. The intel 845G(AGP , P4 , Celeron D) , Intel 915P(PCIe , P4 , P4 EE , Celeron D) , Intel 945P ( Pentium D ,Pentium XE).

DIY PC's may get tricky , as for this I say Apple should encourage a Certification program with Mobo vendors like DFI , MSI , ASUS so they work without a fuss. while the other vendors just are unofficially supported , well buy cheap crap , get cheap crap.

Last point and Biggest one ...M$ may have just give Apple the Keys to the Kingdom with this Trusted Computer crap and HDCP in Windows Vista. this will render all current hardware usless and infuriate half the planet to storm redmond , seattle burn the M$ building and perform a vivi section on Billy Boy.

Dvorak made an excellent point about Apple having the bragging rights to say , Our OS will work on the machines Vista won't.

 

[Woodley]

Many people move away from Macs now. I don't know why. Many haven't tried them, and never will. I don't see how selling OS X for Dells, HPs, etc. is going to help it.

Though, it may be an option once the x86 transition takes off...

 

[Cooknn]

Truth is, OSX isn't THAT much better than XP...

You are so wrong OS X is in a different league. From the UNIX foundation to the GUI it is MUCH better than XP. If Steve would have played his cards right at NeXT in the early 90's, OS X (or whatever it would be called) could be running on 97% of the world's computers instead of Windows - and computer users would be a heck of a lot more productive because of it.

Offering OSX on generic PCs will kill Apple's soul. It's not going to happen, and that's a fact.

Just because you said that it probably will Seriously though, Apple could continue to produce quality products for the discerning buyer while keeping control of OS X and I'd be happy. I just feel for the rest of the world that doesn't get it.

 

[jayscheuerle]

I think more compelling than OS X is the other bundled software - all the iApps, particularly iLife that would be desired by consumers. I know that was a big factor in my decision to buy a Mac. To be honest, I could've cared less about the hardware, I wanted to play with and learn OS X and I wanted to use iLife and some other iApps. If i could have dual-booted by PC I would have.

Bingo. The whole REASON for the iLife suite is to get PC users to buy a Mac! If they sold it for the PC, then people wouldn't need to switch. The only reason there's an iTunes for the PC is to sell iPods. Their strategy is working (at least it did in your case). You could have walked out with $80 worth of software, but instead bought a $500 computer. Maybe you should do a Switch ad?

What Apple WILL be selling people is a dual booting Mac and that ability right there, to get two computers for the price of one, will make their hardware even more enticing.

Time will tell, but Dvorak never seems to know what he's talking about when it comes to Apple these days and just comes off as condescending and frustrated.

 

[jayscheuerle]

You are so wrong OS X is in a different league.

Hey, I've been an Apple user since '82 and have very little experience with PCs, so you don't need to convince ME! All I know is that there are plenty of people who use both and get plenty done with both. If Vista cleans up Window's security problems, it will take care of the majority of the complaints that people have with Windows.

 

[eRacer X30]

Sure it would. OS X running on a low-end Gateway would be terrible performance...

This won't happen. It will kill hardware sales, really.

WHat constitutes a 'low end Gateway'? Currently Gateway's lowend computer (base priced at $499) is a Celeron D (not a great proc mind you) running at 2.8GHz, with 256MB PC3200 DDRAM with integrated audio & sound. With the exception of the amount of RAM it matches up quite well (apples to oranges, no pun intended) with what most Mac users run at home with OS X loaded. There arent too many people with high end G5 sitting in their dens, for the most part they've still got their old G3's & G4's running OS X. These are 333MHz to maybe dual 1GHz machines, why would it yield poor performance running on a comparable PC? Not too mention if its OEM'd like its likely to be, you can bet there'd be a somewhat stringent hardware setup specified by Apple that Gateway and other manufacturers would have to adhere to.

That said would it kill Apples hardware sells? Initially its possible that it might hurt the HW sales, but what you would then have is a much wider base of users who are used to the OS and if they like the PC version would likely make their next upgrade to a Mac running the real deal. The main group who would be likely to continue upgrading their PC's running OS X would be the enthusiast community, the ones who pretty much pay top dollar for mid-to-upper tier hardware. As large as a community as that is, its a drop in the bucket comparatively. I'm sure there will be many to dispute this, but thats my 2 cents and thats all its worth.

 

[eRacer X30]

The Mac Zealots fearing change again.

OSX in the Wild will not kill Apple. At best it increases hardware sales and interest in the Mac , at worst it lingers in obscurity just like where it is now , just like Linux.

I have been modding PC's or 10ys and I have come to the conclusion that as long as you have quality components in a your system you should have a very stable machine.I for one can say having owned both a mac and PC that my Athlon 64 system is every bit as stable as my iMac(machine specs in my signature).

Cheap parts = crappy machine , this works in principle with just about evey machinical/electronic product you can think of Cars, TV's , Stereo systems.

I see this being no different for OSX on a Dell or DIY PC. All Dells , Gateways , HP's pretty much use the same components over and over. This is no different from Apple. so you lose me on the Intergration advantage apple has.
It's not like Apple will use a better quality DVD burner then Dell or not buy stuff made in china or taiwan. They will use the same Intel Mobo/CPU as Dell , HP and Gateway. same Samsung ram, DVD burners may vary.

At any given time a company like Dell will need only 3 Intel Mobo models to cover the wholedesktop line. for example....Chipsets. The intel 845G(AGP , P4 , Celeron D) , Intel 915P(PCIe , P4 , P4 EE , Celeron D) , Intel 945P ( Pentium D ,Pentium XE).

DIY PC's may get tricky , as for this I say Apple should encourage a Certification program with Mobo vendors like DFI , MSI , ASUS so they work without a fuss. while the other vendors just are unofficially supported , well buy cheap crap , get cheap crap.

Last point and Biggest one ...M$ may have just give Apple the Keys to the Kingdom with this Trusted Computer crap and HDCP in Windows Vista. this will render all current hardware usless and infuriate half the planet to storm redmond , seattle burn the M$ building and perform a vivi section on Billy Boy.

Dvorak made an excellent point about Apple having the bragging rights to say , Our OS will work on the machines Vista won't.

EXACTLY!

 

[feakbeak]

But it'll also dissapoint they're big time fans. And remember, people are scared of OS X. They think all Macs do is crash, and are insecure, don't work, etc. I think selling OS X for anything other than Apple hardware would only dissapoint Apple fans.

Aren't Apple fans used to be being disappointed now? PPC -> x86, FW -> USB, multibutton mouse, etc

Bingo. The whole REASON for the iLife suite is to get PC users to buy a Mac! If they sold it for the PC, then people wouldn't need to switch. The only reason there's an iTunes for the PC is to sell iPods. Their strategy is working (at least it did in your case). You could have walked out with $80 worth of software, but instead bought a $500 computer. Maybe you should do a Switch ad?

I've wanted a Mac for quite a while - to try out OS X and be able to use iLife and some other apps. Owning an iPod also added a little incentive to be able to easily sync my contacts and calendar items. I know it can be done on the PC with 3rd party apps (I was doing it) but the nice little extras gave me that added "cool" factor to buying a Mac.

I won't buy an all-in-one computer and I didn't want to spend the money for a PowerMac just to try out a new platform. The release of the Mac Mini is what really got me to buy a Mac. I would be a horrible choice to do a Switch ad. I like Windows. I enjoy building PCs. I have never had any problems with viruses or malware at home. I also like OS X and Apple's designs and software. I think both are suited to excel at various tasks and I like to use the best tool for the job. That's too level-headed for any type of marketing.

As for whether or not it would profitable for Apple to sell or OEM OS X for generic x86 hardware depends on how many licenses they could sell. Of course selling an OS for $129 isn't as much revenue as a $499 machine. However, the profit margins on software are generally much higher. Besides the extra investment for testing hardware compatibility and maybe some driver development wouldn't cost Apple much more money. All of the additonal licenses sold would be nearly pure profit. All Apple would need to do is make sure that lost profit on the hardware side would be compensated or surpassed by the gain of profit from independent OS/software sales. It's really up to Apple's internal market analysts to figure out whether that is feasible. We can guess at it and we all have our gut feelings but Apple will decide one way or another. The bottom line is that moving from PPC to x86 give Apple quite a few more options with how it wants to compete in both the hardware, OS and software markets.

 

[jayscheuerle]

Apple's problem would be with guys like me who've been with them for 25 years and have all the software investments, but who want more bang for their buck. If I knew I could get a PC that ran all my standard apps quickly via OSX, I would have done that last year instead of upgrading my ancient beige G3 minitower to an iBook, which was the only mac I could afford (eMac was too huge). Apples lack of an inexpensive tower would drive a lot of people away from their hardware to generic PCs when it came time to upgrade if the cost of upgrading software as well wasn't hanging over their heads.

People talk about Apple's low marketshare and all the profit they could make by opening up their OS to x86, but they're one of the most profitable computer companies around and they have tons of cash in the bank! They are remarkably strong and post higher marketshare than companies like Alienware, who make niche PCs as well. Apple has a formula that is working VERY well for them if their stock prices are any indication of smart business..

 

[Arnaud]

Integration, Integration, integration - it is what makes Apple and Macintosh great. By releasing the OS, you have to prepare for every scenario. That would most definately make the OS loose some of its plug 'n play luster...

It's funny, the same mantra was used for the last 20 years in the Great Debate "why Macintosh are better than PC's", and I think it was more of a truth then than it is now.

10 years ago, the strongest hardware was inside (because of data transmission needs) via the mac-limited Nubus cards (and/or PDS), and the weakest hardware was outside, mostly printers, scanners and keyboard/mice, with the mac-limited ADB and/or RS232 and/or SCSI (not so mac-limited, but no so PC-standard). Very little products from the PC world could be brought to the Mac, unless you were ready to pay a lot for plastic gizmos and unstable drivers (like printing on PC-world laser printers etc.)

Nowadays, almost every device is Mac/PC swappable, whether it is PCI cards or USB/Firewire devices, with a huge amount of drivers. Anyone ever heard of Nvidia on Mac System 8? I even use a Microsoft mouse for my iBook (because it was small and cheap, and, granted, it sucks as a mouse).

That is, OS X is as of today still Mac-only, but my "Pure Mac" already uses (with or without drivers) a Canon printer, a Contour Design Shuttle XPress, a Canon scanner, a couple of FW and USB hubs, a Wacom drawing pad, a Sony camera, etc...

I'm surprised I don't have that many conflicts, especially since not all of the devices were delivered with proper drivers.

Maybe it still works because of the limited number of devices so far, but this will only increase. If Apple hadn't wanted that, they'd have kept proprietary technology or the use of FW only. But they wanted cheaper parts too.