Apple: The New Microsoft

[Kid Red]

We are moving to Intel and PC makers are creaming themselves at the chance to get OS X on their beige boxes. We all know Apple makes it money from hardware sales, but imagine licensing OS X to hundreds of millions of PCs? That would greatly make up for a few hundred thousand macs. If MS can it's mega fortune simply selling a license why wouldn't Apple therefore dominate the world doing the same? We'd all love OS X to dominate the planet, well, maybe not all of us. But even on some level, an expensive license or limited one somehow could be huge.

Look what happened with the iPod. Give it to the windows world and dominate. Give them OS X and it's over. The Icy on the cake, is with Intel chips, if Apple can compete price wise with Dell? It's over. And those that won't switch, can't switch, sell them OS X. $130 x hundreds of millions? Equals M$'s downfall

 

[yellow]

Don't forget the hidden costs associated with changing from Windows to OS X (assuming it ever was offered for straight x86 boxes from Ma&Pa computer store). All new software to be purchased. Ouch. Plus, will current Windows users fall for the same stuff we Apple aficionados fall for? Paying $ for a new OS ever 1.5 years, even when some of the "upgrades/new features" are questionable?

I think it'll be QUITE a while before Apple tries this route. They need to see if Longoverdue is a piece of **** or not. If it's a decent OS and is significantly more secure then it's predecessors, then it would be MUCH harder for Apple to break into that market.

In order to take on the stale King, they would have to have jillions of $$ in the bank and be willing to loose cash for a while when then were no longer selling hardware until the market evened out.

I'm not sure how I'd feel buying a piece of **** eMachine from OfficeMax and installing OS X on it. it'd keep my ass in business, for sure, but there's the psychological aspect to it. What happened to our tough little underdog?

 

[Josh]

I agree.

Everyone argues that Apple makes all their money on hardware. But if you really think about it - everyone wants OS X, and to get that, you HAVE to get the hardware. Naturally, the hardware is more expensive, so it is no wonder it pulls in the most money.

If OS X was available all over just like Windows, it would sell like crazy, and would - in my opinion - completely take over as Apple's money maker.

The iPod is a huge seller. Doesn't anyone stop to consider why? It is because ANYONE can use it, regardless of their PC hardware.

The more you limit what can run OS X, the more you limit WHO can run OS X.


And especially now that OS X is going intel/x86, what happens? How will Apple control what it runs on? If there is some kind of new device layer ontop of everything else that normal computers run used to control this, it will not be a good move.

Think about it. If consumers were faced with the decision to buy either a)An Apple Intel or b)and identical Intel (minus the new device) made by someone else, that is half as cheap, they are going to buy the Intel.

No consumer is going to feel that Apple's "device" that limits OS X to their machines is worth an additional $1000 for the computer.

 

[dejo]

We are moving to Intel and PC makers are creaming themselves at the chance to get OS X on their beige boxes.

They may be creaming themselves at the chance but it won't happen:

After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.

Emphasis added by me.

 

[yellow]

The iPod is a huge seller. Doesn't anyone stop to consider why? It is because ANYONE can use it, regardless of their PC hardware.

Because it's a fad. End of story. Once the fad dies down, sales will slide, and it'll be up to the next great offering from Apple to fill the void.

The more you limit what can run OS X, the more you limit WHO can run OS X.

This is no different then it's been with OS X on a PPC based box.

And especially now that OS X is going intel/x86, what happens? How will Apple control what it runs on? If there is some kind of new device layer ontop of everything else that normal computers run used to control this, it will not be a good move.
Think about it. If consumers were faced with the decision to buy either a)An Apple Intel or b)and identical Intel (minus the new device) made by someone else, that is half as cheap, they are going to buy the Intel.

The only way you're going to get OS X on a straight x86 box is when someone hacks it. And you can be sure that Apple will have (attempted) to figure out a way to keep this from happening.

I really don't see OS X on any-old x86 anytime soon. And you shouldn't either.

 

[chibianh]

the iPod works because everyone buys it, computer literate or not. OS X won't work because no one is going to go buy it for their sons or daughters for their birthday or christmas.

 

[Josh]

the iPod works because everyone buys it, computer literate or not. OS X won't work because no one is going to go buy it for their sons or daughters for their birthday or christmas.

If it is easier to use, friendlier, less prone to virus/spyware, sure they will.

Besides, large corporations spend TONS of money on Windows machines chock full of anti-virus software (remember: all software is paid for).

If Macs as computers cost the same as normal PC's, the greatly reduced security risks alone would already save companies millions upon millions of dollars. They wouldnt need all the anti-virus software. And if they were cheaper and more effecient electricity-wise, you can surely bet large corporations would be interested.

As has been said before: Apple is a business, and the purpose of a business it to make money. The best way to do that is to deliver good products to the largest number of consumers as possible. Overly-expensive proprietary machines greatly limit the # of potential customers.

Proprietary hardware/software does have benefits, and it does have its place. But consumer computers that people use to connect with everyone in a global community to power the future is NOT the place for proprietary products.

The only reason Macs aren't in every office, every class room, and every home is simply because Apple has priced themselves out of the market for most people. It is not a matter of what is better and what works, but what people and businesses can aford.

(I can hear the overzealous fanboys screaming about marketshare already...but put your thinking cap on, and its not hard to see that large market share = large consumer base = large amount of interest = increased competition = progess)

 

[drison]

If it is easier to use, friendlier, less prone to virus/spyware, sure they will.

Besides, large corporations spend TONS of money on Windows machines chock full of anti-virus software (remember: all software is paid for).

If Macs as computers cost the same as normal PC's, the greatly reduced security risks alone would already save companies millions upon millions of dollars. They wouldnt need all the anti-virus software. And if they were cheaper and more effecient electricity-wise, you can surely bet large corporations would be interested.

As has been said before: Apple is a business, and the purpose of a business it to make money. The best way to do that is to deliver good products to the largest number of consumers as possible. Overly-expensive proprietary machines greatly limit the # of potential customers.

Proprietary hardware/software does have benefits, and it does have its place. But consumer computers that people use to connect with everyone in a global community to power the future is NOT the place for proprietary products.

The only reason Macs aren't in every office, every class room, and every home is simply because Apple has priced themselves out of the market for most people. It is not a matter of what is better and what works, but what people and businesses can aford.

(I can hear the overzealous fanboys screaming about marketshare already...but put your thinking cap on, and its not hard to see that large market share = large consumer base = large amount of interest = increased competition = progess)

I dunno, I just don't see that happening. Do you think that the cost savings of having a more "secure" computing environment for your workforce is going to be greater than the software, training and retooling of your entire workforce? What about the comfort level of working with a business partner that you know, like Microsoft and third-party windows vendors?

Lastly, let's say that large corporations take the plunge and retool their entire workforces to save millions in reduced security risk and the market share shifts in Apple's favor and the previously non-existent security risks begin to surface as MacOS becomes the target.

Just playing devil's advocate. I love my macs.

I also have worked for a large fortune 50 company and this would never happen.

Of course, I never thought Apple would go intel.
-Dave

 

[Kid Red]

From a CNN article-

Jobs’ options are many. For one thing, Intel badly wants to sell its chips to Apple. For another, PC makers realize that the Mac OS X operating system is superior to Microsoft's Windows, and they want a piece of that market. FORTUNE has learned that Apple, Intel, and several PC companies already have the Mac OS X operating system working on Intel chips in their labs. And then there's the fact that more PC users are considering switching away from Windows.

Sure, Apple may resist, but once we have Intel inside, I see it as only a matter of time, a next step in the direction of Apple.

the iPod works because everyone buys it, computer literate or not. OS X won't work because no one is going to go buy it for their sons or daughters for their birthday or christmas.

Yea, I'm sure IBM thought the same when M$ wanted to license thier windows

 

[Josh]

I dunno, I just don't see that happening. Do you think that the cost savings of having a more "secure" computing environment for your workforce is going to be greater than the software, training and retooling of your entire workforce? What about the comfort level of working with a business partner that you know, like Microsoft and third-party windows vendors?

snipped to save space

Very true. There would be a lot of training, and new software purchases involved.

But in the end, in the long run, it would be cheaper.

I don't expect any company is suddenly going to replace all their PCs and have the employees walk in the next morning and wonder how do I use this thing????!!!

But get one Mac in the office. Show the office/people how well their MS Office documents open, how quick the PC is, how much less often they need to reboot (again: energy cost saved), how virus free it is, and how easily they can edit PDFs and their co-workers files just like before.

Then slowly start filtering them in.

Its like what Apple does at school, giving them iBooks for the kids to use. Sure, in one aspect it is a good-natured gesture to help children. But its also good marketting. Its introducing tomorrows generation to Apple and the Mac. Its getting them a head start and familiarizing them with what they will be using later in life. Apple knows what they are doing.

Right now it wouldnt be too plausable to replace every PC in the office with a Mac. But when they are slowly filtered in, and are ready when today's 5th graders who are accustomed to Macs graduate college and land a job, it's very likely they'll be sitting down in front of an Apple system - no training required

 

[drison]

Very true. There would be a lot of training, and new software purchases involved.

But in the end, in the long run, it would be cheaper.

I don't expect any company is suddenly going to replace all their PCs and have the employees walk in the next morning and wonder how do I use this thing????!!!

But get one Mac in the office. Show the office/people how well their MS Office documents open, how quick the PC is, how much less often they need to reboot (again: energy cost saved), how virus free it is, and how easily they can edit PDFs and their co-workers files just like before.

Then slowly start filtering them in.

Its like what Apple does at school, giving them iBooks for the kids to use. Sure, in one aspect it is a good-natured gesture to help children. But its also good marketting. Its introducing tomorrows generation to Apple and the Mac. Its getting them a head start and familiarizing them with what they will be using later in life. Apple knows what they are doing.

Right now it wouldnt be too plausable to replace every PC in the office with a Mac. But when they are slowly filtered in, and are ready when today's 5th graders who are accustomed to Macs graduate college and land a job, it's very likely they'll be sitting down in front of an Apple system - no training required

Hehe. I do like your idea. Slowly infiltrate the ranks of the hord.
-Dave

 

[neildmitchell]

I doubt Apple will be hitting Windows hard with the initial release.

As far as getting OSX into the little beige boxes for exisiting MS loyals. DOUBT IT! But I would love to see it. Great idea, but I see the problem as Apple would have to support a palethera of hardware, drivers..., adding to the bulk and bloat of OS X. Driver issues.... Then deal with the Den of Malice (Black Hat Hackers)....

I really hope that Apple has one hell of a strong integrated security plan (Stronger than Symantec and the rest) for the next release of OS X!

 

[aloofman]

Equals M$'s downfall

Fantasy can be fun.

 

[Kid Red]

Fantasy can be fun.

Can't they tho?

 

[OnceUGoMac]

They already did this in the 90s and it was a disaster. When Jobs returned, he immediately bought back all the rights to it.

 

[eva01]

it would take a decade for that to even begin to take over MS. Why you ask? well companies are not going to say "here is a laptop with OS X find out how to use it yourself!" also part of the reason OS X is so great is because it only runs with certain hardware. do you know how many Drivers would be needed for all the third party hardware in the entire world? that alone would take forever.

Plus A LOT of people still don't know Apple makes computers, i have heard people tell me "oh they make computers too?"

 

[jayscheuerle]

Because it's a fad. End of story. Once the fad dies down, sales will slide, and it'll be up to the next great offering from Apple to fill the void.

From what I see on the street, 1 in every 10 people I pass is sporting SOME kind of iPod. I'm guessing that 90% of the people who want one have already bought it....

 

[admanimal]

From what I see on the street, 1 in every 10 people I pass is sporting SOME kind of iPod. I'm guessing that 90% of the people who want one have already bought it....

If Apple is able to keep adding features or otherwise make new iPods something different than the old ones, then I think even people who already own one will keep buying new ones.

For example, I know many people who have a regular iPod who also bought Shuffles, partly because they also work well as a thumb drive. And I would buy a 4G photo to replace my 3G in a second if I had the extra cash (not so much because of the photo part...just cause the new model looks a little nicer I think and has the color screen).

 

[jayscheuerle]

If Apple is able to keep adding features or otherwise make new iPods something different than the old ones, then I think even people who already own one will keep buying new ones.

For example, I know many people who have a regular iPod who also bought Shuffles, partly because they also work well as a thumb drive. And I would buy a 4G photo to replace my 3G in a second if I had the extra cash (not so much because of the photo part...just cause the new model looks a little nicer I think and has the color screen).

That's probably true to some degree with Apple fans, but a LOT of people have bought them because of the "coolness" factor and will just use the one they have until it no longer functions, as they would an old-school walkman. Music travels well as a background, time-dependent media and color does nothing to help it. Photos and movies won't work the same. They're niche for the masses.