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.
Dell Mac OS Drivers?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hell freezes over "encore un fois"!!!
Microsoft now release a Mac specific Keyboard and Mouse!!!
http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/mouseandkeyboard/productdetails.aspx?pid=078
Microsoft now release a Mac specific Keyboard and Mouse!!!
http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/mouseandkeyboard/productdetails.aspx?pid=078
. Can't wait for the MacPro, to be superior to all other dekstops....
That would be simply AWESOME!!!!!!!Squire said:
Imagine for just one second....a machine that could be at least 2 to 3 times faster than the fastest Intel Powermac...then, visualize it with OS X...it would be a hell of a machine!!!!! Pure power!!!! Pure speed!!!!!
EricNau said:
Umm, that's exactly what they'd do. Let's say Apple gets out of the hardware business to focus on OSX and iPod. What are you going to run OSX on? The dozens of PPC machines you can buy at Best Buy?
I'm sure that's an equivalent item to PC KB/Mouse. Just a minor tweak in manufacturing for a run (make provision for Command Key mainly)... I'm sure they end up right next to Mac MS Office in the few places that carry Office on the shelf. Might sell a good number through mail order houses, too.Shagrat said:
Dunepilot said:
Say it with me folks, "Apple Certified PC". They might even get a key to load into the Trusted Computing module that they're under contract not to load into uncertified hardware.
Dell can source whatever parts it wants to at good prices. They can use their usual junk or something decent. I've been bitten by el-crapo chips in Dell servers, the $4000 kind, so their instinct is deep. But with their acquisition of Alienware, they have at least a few people at the company who aren't so miserly. Who knows, but "everybody buys Dell".
grockk said:
The point the OP was trying to make is that when you go buy a disc with Leopard, there are certain legal rights you get with that purchase. Installing it on the hardware of your choice may be one of them.
Today, the only way to get OSX/Intel is to copy one from somebody that bought an Intel Mac which would be very different in the eyes of the court.
KEL9000 said:
No, but you calculate the cost of software based on the revenues for that version. So, Apple is doing Leopard now. Leopard is costing $X to develop. Leopard will ship and they'll collect $Y in revenue from selling Leopard. Ongoing maintenance of Leopard will cost $Z. So, the profit on Leopard is $Y -$X - $Z. You don't subtract $X from the profit made on Tiger, except on quarterly financial statements if you're looking to quantify the profitability of a software product. In Apple's world, $Z goes away eventually (see any Jaguar security updates lately?)
KEL9000 said:
After R&D for both, the cost to produce a widget of hardware is much much much higher than software. Printing software is like printing money. See also Microsoft.
From the recently linked PDF, Apple's revenues on hardware look like about $6B a year. Their margins are around 25%, so figuring in support and repairs call it 20% profit, for round numbers. That's $1.2B profit per year. Their software revenues were about $1.3B. I seem to recall hearing they spent $300M on software R&D that year (some of which is reflected in the hardware margins not counted here). Even ignoring that, and counting in a generous number for support (no repairs), we're talking profit around $900M. Now go grow the hardware and software business 5x each, and the hardware business makes $6B and the software business makes $6.2B. The more it grows, the more software makes more money than hardware.
How about this:
Instead of all the typical rumor site babble, one of you should just shutup and go to the dell website, buy a computer with the 'Apple Mac OS X' on it and then see what it actually is.
Instead of all the typical rumor site babble, one of you should just shutup and go to the dell website, buy a computer with the 'Apple Mac OS X' on it and then see what it actually is.
dagger01 said:
Umm, well, ok, here goes:
- Connectix and Virtual PC were bought by microsoft for virtualisation technology they had for the Windows version that was about to arrive. Microsoft purchased that so that you can run multiple instances of Windows Server on one machine, all at once - but you have to get a license for each one..
- The Mac BU won't die, no matter what. Apple customers are a crowd who seem to all want to buy MSOffice, and unless that changes they won't do it. Office makes far more money than Windows, remember.
- I'm not even going to go into detail about the 'prediction', because apple signing deals for API development in Windows would be less ikely to happen than big brother UK actually stopping after this year.
BenRoethig said:
the iMac, and Mac Mini both have custom logic boards. the MB and MBP 15+17 all have custom logic boards, to fit their enclosures.
they also have EFI, which no other computers on the market have.
how are they the same? how are they not using custom logic boards?
or do you mean they share common components with a few other maufacturers (intel GMA, processor), ATi graphics.. ?
bigandy said:
There's a difference between a custom form factor and a custom motherboard. The U3 series was custom since it was designed for Apple by Apple. The intel Macs use stock 945GM chipsets, the same one Dell, Gateway, and everybody else use, but with EFI instead of BIOS.
The problem is where you define the platform's limits, and the reality is that anything that isn't "out of the box" compatible is off-limits. Unless you can insert the install disc and go with no other modifications, it's not an interchangeable platform. The old Intrepid logic chipsets weren't vastly different in capacity or features than a commodity chipset anyway. As long is there any difference, no matter how slight, Apple can continue to maintain a Macintosh "platform" as being a separate entity from a typical PC.BenRoethig said:
ClimbingTheLog said:
More importantly, it's very difficult. I, personally, don't know anyone with an Intel Mac. While Apple's marketshare remains in single digits, I suspect that'll remain the norm. So if I wanted it (and, FWIW, no, I'm not going to install an OS on my Thinkpad I haven't paid the asking price for, and I don't believe anyone should, it cost Apple money to develop OS X), I'd have to download the DVD from the 'net.
Whether it's going to be legal or not, or should be, the practical upshot of the release of Leopard will be that it'll be easy to get hold of everything you need to do a Mac OS X on White Box install. You buy the installer disks from one of the many outlets that will sell it, you download a small installer program from the 'net, and you've got everything you need (assuming your hardware's compatible.)
So Mac OS X on non-Macs is going to happen. The question right now is does Apple wants to cash in on it, or just engage in a fruitless attempt to make it hard.
So how would this happen, the OS can't boot from BIOS.
Eh, it's apple programming, I bet they'll figure a way around it. I still think it's an incredibly stupid move.
Eh, it's apple programming, I bet they'll figure a way around it. I still think it's an incredibly stupid move.
TallShaffer said:
What makes you think that? OpenDarwin and Tiger/Intel developer preview both booted on IBMPC BIOS machines.
But I don't think Apple would certify any machine that didn't EFI boot. Nothing prevents Dell from implementing EFI, except the extra half dollar it would add to the cost of a machine.
TallShaffer said:
But, Windows can boot on EFI using the same implementation Apple uses. No support for BIOS PCs.