Dell Says He'd Sell Apple's Mac OS

[sacear]

Licensing by Spindler, not Amelio

It's amazing how quickly everyone has forgotten Gil Amelio's licensing program that practically killed Apple.

Correction, Gil Amelio did not have a licensing program for anyone to forget. Michael Spindler was the Apple CEO who started the licensing program, years prior to Gil Amelio's very short tenure.

 

[5300cs]

Personally, I can't see why this story would be negative.

Because it's DELL, that's why. Talk about perverting a platform...

Interestingly, Mr. DU- DELL, is listed on the Apple Death Knell Counter

 

[Panther]

A necessary move

While I understand the emotional side of this debate, I see several reasons why Apple needs to consider this:

1. Until they get their x86 systems out there, their hardware market will certainly be slower - the so-called "Osborne Effect"

2. Companies like Corel have pulled out of the Mac market because the market is small ... ~90% potential vs 3% potential isn't hard math. Companies like Adobe figured out how to make 70%+ of their codebase shared so the cost of being on the Mac isn't as high

So what you're looking at is a slow lingering death, as Microsoft's marketing machine keeps trying to get Windows 2000 users to move to XP and the latest versions of Office, and MacOS is just off on the sidelines somewhere.

2) above is the main reason that Apple ended up getting into the Pro apps (FCP, Logic, Motion etc.), and I think this changes the equation for Apple (I know a couple of folks that want to run Logic but are in denial about having to buy a Mac to do it, so they make do with PC offerings instead)

Some folks have talked about system costs vs OS/iLife costs, or have compared margins directly. I think that is missing the point, and the point goes to that 3% market share. That 3% can also be looked at as PPC market share, meaning most of the remaining 97% is x86. So what is the potential upside for MacOS in the x86 market? Is it twice the current market base? 5x? 10x?

At the point you get to 10x then $129 for Tiger suddenly doesn't look too bad against your hardware margins. I'm not saying 30% market share overall -- I'm talking 10x current hardware sales. Get MacOS to 10% overall market share and you'll see a lot of software vendors porting their apps to MacOS, and suddenly you have an OS that is a contender. The earlier post about how MacOS dev tools are now free is a major part of this too. If a bunch of existing PC devs (even hobbyist developers) can invest $129 in Tiger, get the dev tools free and see how fun/cool Cocoa/Obj-C is, you'll see a lot more apps.

And Steve must know he can't sit on MacOS forever. That was the mistake they made early on. If they had licensed MacOS back in the mid 80s back when they were at the peak then Windows probably wouldn't exist.

But there are two other concerns... Right now it seems like Longhorn is in trouble. MS may figure it out in the initial release, or in SP1 or SP2, but they will figure it out. Linux isn't going to be big in the "non-hax0rs" consumer market until its gets a shell/GUI that folks gravitate to. Kind of like when MacOS came out and folks wanted to buy a Mac just cos it looked so frikkin cool.

By letting Tiger roam free before Longhorn gains momentum, before Linux gets the compelling uber-GUI it needs to break out of the geek community ... then we might be seeing 5-10% OS share sooner than you'd think.

Oh, and to the folks that suggested Michael Dell is making overtures or trying to pressure Apple into doing something ... what I see is a reporter that asked a specific question in the light of the Apple announcement. He could have said how Dell was looking forward to squeezing Apple the way they had HP and IBM (now Lenovo), but he chose the olive branch instead.

Finally, I just wanted to say: I own 3 Macs, 3 Dells and 2 other PCs too, as well as a Dell 24" LCD (awesome!) ... and I've never had any trouble with any of them. I did have a drive failure in my G4 PowerMac after a lightning storm knocked the power out, but I don't blame Apple for that ...

 

[Stella]

Because it's DELL, that's why. Talk about perverting a platform...

Interestingly, Mr. DU- DELL, is listed on the Apple Death Knell Counter

No.... it shows that PC manufacturers are willing to license OSX if Apple chose to. Which is, a good thing.

Forget its Dell. Dell computers works very well for many people, you may not like them, but others do. They are ugly, but they work and are cheap, which suits an awful lot of people!

 

[dejo]

And Steve must know he can't sit on MacOS forever. That was the mistake they made early on. If they had licensed MacOS back in the mid 80s back when they were at the peak then Windows probably wouldn't exist.

How certain are you of that claim? Because if they had licensed the OS (which wasn't called Mac OS yet), there still wasn't any hardware to run it on, other than Apple's own hardware.

For a more detailed analysis of what might have happened in the mid-80s, Daring Fireball wrote a very informative article about it:

The Art of the Parlay, Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying About Platform Licensing and Market Share

 

[Panther]

For a more detailed analysis of what might have happened in the mid-80s, Daring Fireball wrote a very informative article about it:

The Art of the Parlay, Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying About Platform Licensing and Market Share

While I agree with the comparison between Microsoft's pragmatic approach vs Apple's idealistic approach, I think this article doesn't take into account the historical context of the rate of growth and adoption in the PC market.

While Apple did make it hard for folks to switch from the II to the Mac, they also lowered the bar so that Joe Homeuser could finally get/use a computer. And while early IBM PC users wouldn't necessarily have thrown their hardware/software out to buy Macs, there was a constant stream of new users coming on board. Just look at the size of the PC market today vs the size it was back then ...

 

[MontyZ]

So what you're looking at is a slow lingering death, as Microsoft's marketing machine keeps trying to get Windows 2000 users to move to XP and the latest versions of Office, and MacOS is just off on the sidelines somewhere.

It's funny how Apple has been in a "slow lingering death" for nearly it's entire existence. But you know what, Apple isn't dead and is doing very well. In fact, Microsoft is having a very hard time getting people to switch from Win2000 to XP. Gee, I wonder why?

As far as Dell goes, if you've ever had to deal with their horrid outsourced customer service, you'd realize it's not a company concerned with customer service anymore. It's truly awful and frustrating. I'll never buy anything from Dell ever again.

 

[Panther]

It's funny how Apple has been in a "slow lingering death" for nearly it's entire existence. But you know what, Apple isn't dead and is doing very well.

I wasn't talking about Apple, I was talking about MacOS X ... Without a spike in adoption, you might expect more companies to drop Mac development.

In fact, Microsoft is having a very hard time getting people to switch from Win2000 to XP. Gee, I wonder why?

Exactly. And with Longhorn being on the ropes, what better time than now for Steve to go and grab market share ...

 

[-hh]

While I understand the emotional side of this debate, I see several reasons why Apple needs to consider this:

1. Until they get their x86 systems out there, their hardware market will certainly be slower - the so-called "Osborne Effect"

However, it is interesting in that Apple's intentions to start "bottom up" with Intel roll-out and ongoing rumors about a dual-core G5 would suggest that Apple's approach to the top end of the market is going to be "best in breed" in that they're effectively suggesting that the Powermac won't transition to Intel until there's a Intel chip that actually outperforms the existing top end. As such, there may be less of an Osborne Effect than otherwise suggested...with fat binaries, the bottom end of the market can focus on price and the top end on performance.

And Steve must know he can't sit on MacOS forever...Right now it seems like Longhorn is in trouble. MS may figure it out in the initial release, or in SP1 or SP2, but they will figure it out....By letting Tiger roam free before Longhorn gains momentum, before Linux gets the compelling uber-GUI it needs to break out of the geek community ... then we might be seeing 5-10% OS share sooner than you'd think.

Agreed. Overall, I think that Longhorn has been causing a lot of FUD within the Windows community (especially due to its delays), and Apple's Intel announcement only throws more gasoline onto this fire. The net effect is that Apple's annoucment is invariably going to cause an Osborne Effect amongst Windows buyers too.

Overall, I think that we do have to admit that if Apple had to make the switch to Intel, the timing at present is nearly perfect in that it is the situation most likely to do the least harm (to Apple!).

Oh, and to the folks that suggested Michael Dell is making overtures or trying to pressure Apple into doing something ... what I see is a reporter that asked a specific question in the light of the Apple announcement. He could have said how Dell was looking forward to squeezing Apple the way they had HP and IBM (now Lenovo), but he chose the olive branch instead.

If this perhaps means that Michael is learning something, this unfortunately takes a lot of fun out of the Spectator Sport of watching these CEO's


-hh

 

[ebunton]

Now, why would people vote negative on this? I mean, this is obviously a public endorsement of the operating system.

 

[myapplseedshurt]

hope this is the future

here's my two cents:

apple does not license OSX, instead just makes its own boxes

apple becomes huge, makes jobs even richer

OSX becomes the target of virus writers, and gets slewed all over the place, boggs down and becomes virtually unusable

Steve, being the jerk he is, says, "oh crap... (hampster is spinning on wheel in his head).... I think I'll license it now!! What a brilliant idea I just had!! me want ice cream now...."

OSX goes on line at DELL, Becomes self aware

jobs becomes even richer.

now that tens of millions more are using a virus infested POS operating system, they consider changing to an obscure OS from a company called microsoft, which in the wake of the OSX bonanza, switched to making the best damned Wiki tools in the world.

 

[jayscheuerle]

here's my two cents:

apple does not license OSX, instead just makes its own boxes

apple becomes huge, makes jobs even richer

OSX becomes the target of virus writers, and gets slewed all over the place, boggs down and becomes virtually unusable

Steve, being the jerk he is, says, "oh crap... (hampster is spinning on wheel in his head).... I think I'll license it now!! What a brilliant idea I just had!! me want ice cream now...."

OSX goes on line at DELL, Becomes self aware

jobs becomes even richer.

now that tens of millions more are using a virus infested POS operating system, they consider changing to an obscure OS from a company called microsoft, which in the wake of the OSX bonanza, switched to making the best damned Wiki tools in the world.

Windows has virus problems because it's vulnerable, not because of its market share. If OSX had 1000 times as many viruses as it has now, it would still have 0 viruses...

 

[myapplseedshurt]

bubble boys and girls

Windows has virus problems because it's vulnerable, not because of its market share. If OSX had 1000 times as many viruses as it has now, it would still have 0 viruses...

yeah, just wait. you've been living in a bubble too long. I suppose the whole mac community thought it's benefactor would preserve that bubble forever, however you've been let down. You need to stop staring at the shadows on the wall and turn around to see the figures making deals which go against the premise which drew you into the bubble in the first place.

good things don't last long, everything has to change or it gets boring.

 

[jayscheuerle]

yeah, just wait. you've been living in a bubble too long. I suppose the whole mac community thought it's benefactor would preserve that bubble forever, however you've been let down. You need to stop staring at the shadows on the wall and turn around to see the figures making deals which go against the premise which drew you into the bubble in the first place.

good things don't last long, everything has to change or it gets boring.

We're ALL waiting, right?
Nobody's been let down yet, have they?

Cryptic dialogue you speak! Point you make?

OSX is less vulnerable by design. XP is more vulnerable by design. That's the light at the end of the tunnel, not the shadows on the wall...

 

[kingtj]

MontyZ: You're right, but it doesn't matter.

No matter how poor the customer service gets (and with Dell, it's pretty awful - but some are even worse than them - scarily enough!), the majority of people will buy them anyway because of the price.

The problem I see Apple struggling with, ultimately, is the commoditization of computers. Back when Apple was a young company, the biggest challenge faced was getting someone to understand why the heck they'd ever want to own a computer in their house. We've come a long way since then. Nowdays, many people own 3 or 4 of the things - and even grandma and grandpa are learning to use email as one of their "retirement" projects.

You can go to practically any electronics/appliance store (Circuit City, Best Buy, etc.) and grab a complete computer system, ready to take home and plug in, for no more than $400-700 or so.

Apple has tried to hold the "high ground", promising a "better computing experience" and "superior customer service" - but only that 3% or 4% of buyers have really listened.

None of this means Apple is "doomed" or "dying". It just means they sell to a niche market, just as Rolls Royce sells to a niche market of car buyers. (I'm sure you can find Rolls Royce owners who would declare "I'd never buy anything but a Rolls again, after seeing how great this car really is!" ... but that wouldn't mean a thing to most car buyers.)

It also means as we move forward, Apple will have to find new ways to keep convincing the general public that they really do offer something superior. Updates to OS X have been the "cornerstone" of this, in my opinion. But so has embracing the lower end of the price scale with the Mac Mini. If the move to Intel helps further bring prices down - that too would put Apple in a better position, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Ultimately, Dell has nade it VERY clear that their focus is on moving as much quantity as possible and becoming the "Wal Mart" of computers and peripherals. Perfectly good business strategy - but makes them the exact opposite of a business like Apple.

It's funny how Apple has been in a "slow lingering death" for nearly it's entire existence. But you know what, Apple isn't dead and is doing very well. In fact, Microsoft is having a very hard time getting people to switch from Win2000 to XP. Gee, I wonder why?

As far as Dell goes, if you've ever had to deal with their horrid outsourced customer service, you'd realize it's not a company concerned with customer service anymore. It's truly awful and frustrating. I'll never buy anything from Dell ever again.