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 Says He'd Sell Apple's Mac OS
- Thread starter amac4me
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In other related news, the company that makes vienna sausages and potted meat has offered to start selling Angus beef steaks and prime rib, packaged in their ugly tin cans.
jadam said:
but not for apple and the mac in general....
Why would people spend 1300 on an imac when they can spend 600 on a dell pc with the same system..? apple wouldnt sell hardware at all... this topic is old... whats coming to BOSTON!?
Let's not forget that the new Apple hardware will run windows. So doesn't anyone realize that Apple's potential hardware market just went through the roof?
This thing is going to happen. Apple considers itself a hardware company? Well I argue that they're a software and ipod company. Their hardware has been slowly becoming standard intel machines, just without the chip. Drives,standard ATA. Monitor ports, standard. RAM, standard. Now chip, standard. Apple will truly be a hardware manufacturer, since they will be making boxes that will run either OS.
Now that's interesting! Apple machines can run the operating system of your choice and come preinstalled with OSX. The intel chips will lower the price of the machines probably to the Sony level.
Steve Jobs mentioned once that he really thought his only competition (in the home computer / home multimedia biz) was Sony. They were the only ones competing in the whole iLife scenario.
Maybe OSX isn't coming too soon for standard PCs. But I'd bet you see iLife sold for windows next. Then iWork. Then, the FCP studio suite. Then, when everyone really digs the software better than windows, and if people aren't buying the mac intel hardware, then OSX for Windows.
This thing is going to happen. Apple considers itself a hardware company? Well I argue that they're a software and ipod company. Their hardware has been slowly becoming standard intel machines, just without the chip. Drives,standard ATA. Monitor ports, standard. RAM, standard. Now chip, standard. Apple will truly be a hardware manufacturer, since they will be making boxes that will run either OS.
Now that's interesting! Apple machines can run the operating system of your choice and come preinstalled with OSX. The intel chips will lower the price of the machines probably to the Sony level.
Steve Jobs mentioned once that he really thought his only competition (in the home computer / home multimedia biz) was Sony. They were the only ones competing in the whole iLife scenario.
Maybe OSX isn't coming too soon for standard PCs. But I'd bet you see iLife sold for windows next. Then iWork. Then, the FCP studio suite. Then, when everyone really digs the software better than windows, and if people aren't buying the mac intel hardware, then OSX for Windows.
Because the iMac is much nicer looking and can have wi-fi and Bluetooth build-in. Apple's hardware may not always be superior in terms of specs, but their designs are head and shoulders above the competition. OEM'ing OS X would hurt their hardware sales, no doubt. Apple would need to have a good business strategy in place before they started allowing every x86 hardware manufacturer to pre-load OS X. Still, I do not believe this problem is insurmountable.VicMacs said:
Except for virus's, security patches, and a plethora of other crap that you probably had to worry about to make sure you didn't lose data.joshuawaire said:
Sorry for your bad experience. I'm sure your dell looked funny with such a nice looking Apple display anyways.joshuawaire said:
Dude, you should just switch back to dell if it is such a problem for you.joshuawaire said:
Yes. Confused.joshuawaire said:Then again, Dell is no innovator. Dell looks at what everyone else in the industry does and copies it. They have one of the lowest R&D budgets in the entire industry, and they are proud of it. Must be nice to sit back and let Apple and to some extent HP innovate in the computer industry, then rip off their designs for much less $$$.
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
Dream on.
This won't happen for many reasons, but one trumps all.
Jobs is concerned with his legacy and creating something world changing. That is NOT a beautiful box that runs Windows and it's NOT running a beautiful OS on an ugly PC. His desire to control EVERYTHING and his belief that he can deliver the best possible personal computer user experience is what drives Apple. This is EVIDENT in EVERYTHING Apple does.
Apple doesn't sell hardware. Apple doesn't sell software. Apple sells an experience, and that requires an integration of both hardware and software.
Apple does EVERYTHING in order to get you to buy into the whole experience. They don't want you using iTunes to manage your Dell Jukebox and they don't want you using Musicmatch to manage your iPod.
Of course DELL wants to be Jobs. Jobs will be remembered. Dell will not. Dell is impressive from a business perspective, but that mark does not have the repercussive staying power that a shaper of culture does.
Apple won't take over the world by offering OSX for PCs. They'd die. Macs are nothing without OSX and the OSX experience would be lessened by allowing it on classless boxes.
Macs are the left hand. OSX is the right. Apple needs both in order to hear the applause. - j
This won't happen for many reasons, but one trumps all.
Jobs is concerned with his legacy and creating something world changing. That is NOT a beautiful box that runs Windows and it's NOT running a beautiful OS on an ugly PC. His desire to control EVERYTHING and his belief that he can deliver the best possible personal computer user experience is what drives Apple. This is EVIDENT in EVERYTHING Apple does.
Apple doesn't sell hardware. Apple doesn't sell software. Apple sells an experience, and that requires an integration of both hardware and software.
Apple does EVERYTHING in order to get you to buy into the whole experience. They don't want you using iTunes to manage your Dell Jukebox and they don't want you using Musicmatch to manage your iPod.
Of course DELL wants to be Jobs. Jobs will be remembered. Dell will not. Dell is impressive from a business perspective, but that mark does not have the repercussive staying power that a shaper of culture does.
Apple won't take over the world by offering OSX for PCs. They'd die. Macs are nothing without OSX and the OSX experience would be lessened by allowing it on classless boxes.
Macs are the left hand. OSX is the right. Apple needs both in order to hear the applause. - j
In discussing this publicly, Michael Dell could be testing the waters, making an overture to Apple, trying to put pressure on Apple to open up, or simply be talking too much. Steve Jobs isn't likely to warm to a public dance; he prefers back-room negotiations. I don't expect Apple to respond to this.
Let's not forget this simple fact ... Apple's CURRENT strength is their operating system OS X. I know we can all sit and argue about how great Mac hardware is right now but without solving the G5 speed increase and heat issues, Apple would have found themselves behind all other manufacturers. It wouldn't be a compelling argument for Apple to say .. hey, we have a 2.7GHz G5 processor that is faster/better than a 3.8 GHz Pentium. The average consumer thinks processor speed is the most important spec in a system. Just go down to your local Best Buy or Comp USA and the sales associates alway tout processor speed. Not only that, the product descriptions ALWAYS list the processor speed first.
I think Apple finally got a sense of the average consumer and how best to market and sell to them with the iPod. The lessons learned are changing the culture within Apple and this knowledge will find it's way to Macs ... thus, one of the reasons for the Intel switch.
I think Apple finally got a sense of the average consumer and how best to market and sell to them with the iPod. The lessons learned are changing the culture within Apple and this knowledge will find it's way to Macs ... thus, one of the reasons for the Intel switch.
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
Never Happen
This will never happen while Jobs is running things.
Steve knows how Proud & Honorable the "Mac Few" are and how irate we would be if he just gave his OS to anyone with any type of computer. Why would he gamble like that? He would destroy all credibility with us. There is just no guarantee that enough PC owners would jump on board to offset the huge chasm he's created between Apple and the Apple Community.
This will never happen while Jobs is running things.
Steve knows how Proud & Honorable the "Mac Few" are and how irate we would be if he just gave his OS to anyone with any type of computer. Why would he gamble like that? He would destroy all credibility with us. There is just no guarantee that enough PC owners would jump on board to offset the huge chasm he's created between Apple and the Apple Community.
Apple is a hardware company? Really?
Apple is an innovation company. Period. Whether that innovation takes form in hardware, software or business practice is not really the point.
This (Apple licensing OSX on PC's) absolutely IS going to happen. Do the math. How much real profit does Apple make from selling something like a G5 iMac? I would guess around $400. Now, how many computer users of the potential user basedo they sell a $400 profit margin machine to? Lets say 5%. (It is actually much less than that, since the Mac Mini wrecks the average profit, but I will err on the side of inflating the profit to make the point)
If Apple were to simply STOP making hardware altogether (which they won't) and then begin to allow OSX to be sold to any PC platform (not just Dell) they could realize a profit of, perhaps somewhere between 50-75 dollars for each copy of OSX they sell. So, how many copies of OSX could Apple license at that profit level if it were allowed to run on any PC configuration?
Do the math any way you like, but you are likely to find that the actual profit year on year would eclipse Apples best financial results by several times. Even if Apple were to sell OSX to 10% of the PC market, they would make a killing.
THEN - what happens to sales of their Pro Apps? Final Cut, Shake, Logic, Soundtrack Pro, etc etc. Those also get a huge boost.
Those who say Jobs will never allow this are blinded by cultism. Fact is, Apple has been laying the groundwork for this for some time now. Seems like OSX on intel has been in the works all along, even way back when Apples IBM love affair began over the PPC, with no roadmap issues in sight. So why did they bother? What was the point?
Jobs is a businessman. Sure, sometimes he makes decisions based on his own vision, and he rules the place with that vision. But make no mistake, there is no way he would be able to resist the force of the billions of dollars that are to be made here, and the opportunity for Apple to become the next Microsoft. Jobs, as a CEO, is not indestructible.
Look at Jobs track record over the last few years. Everything from the iPod to the Mac Mini have been designed to be very inclusive of PC users. One day, not very far away, we will see Jobs laying out a keynote presentation that outlines Apples strategy for computer domination. "Bringing the Mac experience to the rest of the world".
The strategy would likely include a premiere vendor like HP or Dell marketing hardware that is "Apple designed" (but will not be required to run OSX, it will keep Apples hardware design profile out there), a version of OSX that can run on any PC, and of course Apples own in house hardware designs. This would be brilliant. Apple puts their stamp of approval on the Mac hardware Dell sells, and even if Dell only sells one of the "Apple designed" boxes for every ten regular Dell PC's, Apple continues to make a nice profit on hardware. You know, there is really nothing to stop Apple from insisting that Dell or HP actually sell Apple created boxes either. I mean...why not? The distribution channel is immense.
At the same time, Jobs will announce alliances with software creators that have never been thought possible or likely on the Mac. The software vendors will salivate at the thought of offering cross-upgrades for a fee to existing owners of certain products, and the potential for a whole new market of OSX users (since the user base would increase dramatically).
Huge amounts of cash for apple, more software for OSX, more users of OSX - this all spins off to greater educational/office/enterprise acceptance.
Is there a negative? Well, sort of. Depends on how stubborn you are.
The days of the elite cult of Mac are numbered. Those who embrace the platform and its niche status will either surrender and convince themselves this is all for the common good, or they will convince themselves that they must be different, and they will adopt another OS out of spite.
Either way, the way things will go, the current OSX user base will be a blip on the OSX radar amongt the vast armies of OSX users that are to come.
Apple is an innovation company. Period. Whether that innovation takes form in hardware, software or business practice is not really the point.
This (Apple licensing OSX on PC's) absolutely IS going to happen. Do the math. How much real profit does Apple make from selling something like a G5 iMac? I would guess around $400. Now, how many computer users of the potential user basedo they sell a $400 profit margin machine to? Lets say 5%. (It is actually much less than that, since the Mac Mini wrecks the average profit, but I will err on the side of inflating the profit to make the point)
If Apple were to simply STOP making hardware altogether (which they won't) and then begin to allow OSX to be sold to any PC platform (not just Dell) they could realize a profit of, perhaps somewhere between 50-75 dollars for each copy of OSX they sell. So, how many copies of OSX could Apple license at that profit level if it were allowed to run on any PC configuration?
Do the math any way you like, but you are likely to find that the actual profit year on year would eclipse Apples best financial results by several times. Even if Apple were to sell OSX to 10% of the PC market, they would make a killing.
THEN - what happens to sales of their Pro Apps? Final Cut, Shake, Logic, Soundtrack Pro, etc etc. Those also get a huge boost.
Those who say Jobs will never allow this are blinded by cultism. Fact is, Apple has been laying the groundwork for this for some time now. Seems like OSX on intel has been in the works all along, even way back when Apples IBM love affair began over the PPC, with no roadmap issues in sight. So why did they bother? What was the point?
Jobs is a businessman. Sure, sometimes he makes decisions based on his own vision, and he rules the place with that vision. But make no mistake, there is no way he would be able to resist the force of the billions of dollars that are to be made here, and the opportunity for Apple to become the next Microsoft. Jobs, as a CEO, is not indestructible.
Look at Jobs track record over the last few years. Everything from the iPod to the Mac Mini have been designed to be very inclusive of PC users. One day, not very far away, we will see Jobs laying out a keynote presentation that outlines Apples strategy for computer domination. "Bringing the Mac experience to the rest of the world".
The strategy would likely include a premiere vendor like HP or Dell marketing hardware that is "Apple designed" (but will not be required to run OSX, it will keep Apples hardware design profile out there), a version of OSX that can run on any PC, and of course Apples own in house hardware designs. This would be brilliant. Apple puts their stamp of approval on the Mac hardware Dell sells, and even if Dell only sells one of the "Apple designed" boxes for every ten regular Dell PC's, Apple continues to make a nice profit on hardware. You know, there is really nothing to stop Apple from insisting that Dell or HP actually sell Apple created boxes either. I mean...why not? The distribution channel is immense.
At the same time, Jobs will announce alliances with software creators that have never been thought possible or likely on the Mac. The software vendors will salivate at the thought of offering cross-upgrades for a fee to existing owners of certain products, and the potential for a whole new market of OSX users (since the user base would increase dramatically).
Huge amounts of cash for apple, more software for OSX, more users of OSX - this all spins off to greater educational/office/enterprise acceptance.
Is there a negative? Well, sort of. Depends on how stubborn you are.
The days of the elite cult of Mac are numbered. Those who embrace the platform and its niche status will either surrender and convince themselves this is all for the common good, or they will convince themselves that they must be different, and they will adopt another OS out of spite.
Either way, the way things will go, the current OSX user base will be a blip on the OSX radar amongt the vast armies of OSX users that are to come.
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
amac4me said:
Absolutely wrong. Apple could give a rat's arse about the average consumer. They want a fast, cool chip to further shrink the computing experience, whether it's mobile or desktop. They will continue to offer the smallest, most stunning products for a premium price. What chip is in these machines will be transparent to the consumer. Changing chips has just allowed Apple to continue doing what they've always done. Being forced to work with the hot G5 has stymied Apple's design efforts. Watch for more incredible designs for other PC makers to attempt to emulate in the near future!
Dell vs. Apple
Dell customer service is very good. I bought a Dell once, and they were able to turn around a motherboard replacement in four days, door-to-door. On the other hand, I've owned six Macs, and i've never needed a motherboard replacement with those.
mwpeters8182 said:
Dell customer service is very good. I bought a Dell once, and they were able to turn around a motherboard replacement in four days, door-to-door. On the other hand, I've owned six Macs, and i've never needed a motherboard replacement with those.
feakbeak said:
Are you telling me honestly that the OS and Hardware work independently of each other, and the integration of Hardware and Software don't make for a seamless experience? C'mon I know if you think about it you'll understand what I'm saying...
What drives Jobs ? The speech at Stanford gives us a clue. He eyeballed a life span of 3 - 6 months. Are you sure that he's looking for computing domination, or is he just trying to give the elect a wonderful computing experience ?
People are going to figure out ways to run OS X on standard x86 hardware. It's going to happen, and Apple will want to get in on it when it does. They know there will be money to be made there.
I can see a time, perhaps 4-6 years down the road, where Apple will make a deal with some PC maker (HP, Dell or someone else..Sony?) to sell Intel-based computers that can run OS X. Apple will naturally attempt to strike an arrangement that permits them to control the 3rd party spec's and pricing as much as possible to prevent their own hardware from being undercut too much, and perhaps most importantly, to control the quality of the end-user experience so that it feels like a Mac OS, not just another Windows box with a slightly different look to it. If Steve can't find a way to pass along that Mac feel, it flat out will not happen while he is in charge.
The old Mac clone experience has nothing to do with what is happening today. The clones only competed directly with Apple's existing customer base. All they did was undercut Apple pricing and steal sales from them. Bringing the right PC company on board would have to permit Apple to expand it's market base, otherwise Steve will never go for it.
Apple will still sell their own hardware. There are clearly enough of us who prefer Apple goods. There are, however, plenty of people who would love to run OS X (well, any viable Windows alternative, really) but can't see paying the premium for Apple-designed h/w. These are people who see Apple as a premium brand and can't get past the idea that they will spend more than they have to if they buy an Apple Mac.
There's your target audience. Apple isn't selling to them yet. Maybe the switch to Intel will drive prices down enough to tap that market, maybe not. I'm sure Steve has a plan to grab as much of that pie as possible. Plan A is going into effect over the next two years, with Intel processors. Plan B is waiting in the wings, just in case.
I can see a time, perhaps 4-6 years down the road, where Apple will make a deal with some PC maker (HP, Dell or someone else..Sony?) to sell Intel-based computers that can run OS X. Apple will naturally attempt to strike an arrangement that permits them to control the 3rd party spec's and pricing as much as possible to prevent their own hardware from being undercut too much, and perhaps most importantly, to control the quality of the end-user experience so that it feels like a Mac OS, not just another Windows box with a slightly different look to it. If Steve can't find a way to pass along that Mac feel, it flat out will not happen while he is in charge.
The old Mac clone experience has nothing to do with what is happening today. The clones only competed directly with Apple's existing customer base. All they did was undercut Apple pricing and steal sales from them. Bringing the right PC company on board would have to permit Apple to expand it's market base, otherwise Steve will never go for it.
Apple will still sell their own hardware. There are clearly enough of us who prefer Apple goods. There are, however, plenty of people who would love to run OS X (well, any viable Windows alternative, really) but can't see paying the premium for Apple-designed h/w. These are people who see Apple as a premium brand and can't get past the idea that they will spend more than they have to if they buy an Apple Mac.
There's your target audience. Apple isn't selling to them yet. Maybe the switch to Intel will drive prices down enough to tap that market, maybe not. I'm sure Steve has a plan to grab as much of that pie as possible. Plan A is going into effect over the next two years, with Intel processors. Plan B is waiting in the wings, just in case.
I do understand your point, but I don't think running OS X on other hardware would be a bad experience. I would expect that OS X would always have fewer bugs/issues on Apple's hardware, but what's wrong with offering OS X on other x86 hardware. You might have some driver issues or snags but for average consumers I would think the benefit of not having to worry about malware/viruses would be worth the trade-off if you weren't willing to spend the premium price for Apple hardware. I like Windows and PCs, but I have always felt that Apple's software is better for the home/consumer computing experience. I think hardware plays a smaller role in the overall computing experience than software does.paulypants said: