Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Panther for them, Leopard for us!

C

Cybernanga

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 27, 2004
201
0
Essex, United Kingdom
I just had this crazy thought.

What if... when Apple release Leopard, they also re-release Panther?

Leopard would only run on true Apple Mac's (either PPC or Intel based), and Panther would run on all the DELL, SONY, HP and other intel based machines.

I reckon that if they could manage to work it so that it was impossible to install the Latest version on Non-Apple equipment, they could easily gouge Microsoft's market share, especially if they had WINE emulation going on.

Maybe we could get the OS market share levels to something nearer 50/50?

Anyone else think this is a good idea, or am I just nuts?
 
It'd certainly be a big old 'up yours' to Bill.

But; the image of OS X as a rock solid operating system wouldn't ring true -- Apple would have to face the multitude of problems faced by Microsoft in the search for compatibility and stability.

Not good publicity, and could backfire horribly. In a perfect world, though, sure. That'd be cool. Make it Jag, though - Panther was (still is) great! ;)
 
brap said:
It'd certainly be a big old 'up yours' to Bill.

But; the image of OS X as a rock solid operating system wouldn't ring true -- Apple would have to face the multitude of problems faced by Microsoft in the search for compatibility and stability.

Not good publicity, and could backfire horribly. In a perfect world, though, sure. That'd be cool. Make it Jag, though - Panther was (still is) great! ;)
Click to expand...
Just put it in your system reqs.............no old crap...Athlon64s and P4s 3.0 or greater :) Apple could make Millions.
 
PlaceofDis said:
could work, but probably wouldnt. be cool to steal away MS's marketshare though
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Yes because it's nice to see MS suffer. No because more people would switch and would eventually lead to hackers/virus writers sending out viruses and a bunch of all that crap. Adware would also eventually occur.
 
mad jew said:
brap's right, it'd give all the Windows users a bad impression of OSX. :(
Click to expand...

Well, we only got Tiger a few weeks ago, and Jaguar and Panther were wiping the floor with XP the last time I checked. I feel it would show them the "light side" of the "force"

JzzTrump22 said:
Yes and no. Yes because it's nice to see MS suffer. No because more people would switch and would eventually lead to hackers/virus writers sending out viruses and a bunch of all that crap. Adware would also eventually occur.
Click to expand...

Firstly I think (know) the virus/spyware/adware problem on Windows is more because Windows is badly written which makes it easier to write malware for. Secondly if hackers were going to easily "attack" OS X, they would have managed at least one sucessfull attempt in the last five years. Can you imagine the 1337|\|55 (eliteness) of being the first hacker to infext OS X? It's what these people live for.

The good thing about more people switching, is that more developers will be encouraged to write for OS X, so that would mean we get more Apps, and better games.
 
Cybernanga said:
Well, we only got Tiger a few weeks ago, and Jaguar and Panther were wiping the floor with XP the last time I checked. I feel it would show them the "light side" of the "force"
Click to expand...


It's not the difference between Windows and Panther that's the problem. By the time this happens we'll all be looking back on Panther and laughing at how pathetic it is compared to the current OSX. Assuming it was undertaken correctly, this initiative would be showing users how Panther is better than XP but not how much better a new OSX machine is compared to either of the older OSs.

In addition to this, most of the new programs made for Intel will no doubt have the latest OS as a system requirement so Panther on x86 wouldn't be capable of running all that much anyway.
 
mad jew said:
It's not the difference between Windows and Panther that's the problem. By the time this happens we'll all be looking back on Panther and laughing at how pathetic it is compared to the current OSX. Assuming it was undertaken correctly, this initiative would be showing users how Panther is better than XP but not how much better a new OSX machine is compared to either of the older OSs.

In addition to this, most of the new programs made for Intel will no doubt have the latest OS as a system requirement so Panther on x86 wouldn't be capable of running all that much anyway.
Click to expand...

I see your point, however when this does happen Windows will still be waiting for Longhorn, and those users will be getting desparate for something better. It wouldn't necessarily have to be Panther, they could do Leopard for Mac, Tiger for everyone else, which I think is a pretty fair deal.

With regard to the applications, Rosetta should hopefully take care of that. while true they wouldn't be getting the latest apps and OS, they would still be getting a serious improvement over XP.

Just my thoughts which are probably worthless anyway. If I was like SJ and had a few million in the bank my thoughts might be worth a bit more ;)
 
Don't get me wrong Cypernanga, it's a good idea and I'm very impressed with your lateral thinking but there are some flaws IMO.


Cybernanga said:
With regard to the applications, Rosetta should hopefully take care of that. while true they wouldn't be getting the latest apps and OS, they would still be getting a serious improvement over XP.
Click to expand...


I might be wrong, but won't Rosetta only run the uber-old G3 apps (no Altivec support) or something? There'll still be a massive gap in programs between the old G3 ones and the 2006/7 apps. :(
 
Give the Windows (l)users (sorry, you know I had to) Tiger. Why be selfish?

We'll give them Tiger just as we move to Leopard. Tiger gives them a good impression of Mac OS X, but we Macheads get to use Leopard which is better.
 
Thats really, REALLY stupid.

I know of about twenty windows users who want OS X but not a Mac.

Ever hear of PearPC?
 
Bah, might as well license the latest and greatest if you're gonna do that. Give them Leopard (or Tiger NOW), then Apple would really be rolling in the dough. But with Apple, there is more to it then just making gobs of dough, so they won't do that. That's M$ lot in life. Shallow, but shallow with stacks of cash.
 
mcarnes said:
Bah, might as well license the latest and greatest if you're gonna do that. Give them Leopard (or Tiger NOW), then Apple would really be rolling in the dough. But with Apple, there is more to it then just making gobs of dough, so they won't do that. That's M$ lot in life. Shallow, but shallow with stacks of cash.
Click to expand...

The reason I thought of staggering the releases was so that there would still be a compelling reason to by an Apple built machine. If you want to run the latest OS, you have to buy a machine from Apple. Otherwise if they just licence the Mac OS, why would anyone (me included and I've been a MacAddict since 1989) buy an Apple machine if one could get a cheaper one from DELL or others.


oh, and dotdotdot, have you ever actually run PearPC? It sucks, it's slow and not worth the hassle.
 
mad jew said:
I might be wrong, but won't Rosetta only run the uber-old G3 apps (no Altivec support) or something? There'll still be a massive gap in programs between the old G3 ones and the 2006/7 apps. :(
Click to expand...
Very little software actually needs Altivec to run. Remember that Apple only moved the iBook off the G3 around the end of 2003, and now developers are on notice that it would be a bad idea to yank out that code path.
 
iMeowbot said:
Very little software actually needs Altivec to run. Remember that Apple only moved the iBook off the G3 around the end of 2003, and now developers are on notice that it would be a bad idea to yank out that code path.
Click to expand...


Okay, thanks for that. I feel reassured. :)
 
OS X dies when MSOffice for the Mac is pulled.

You can guarantee that MS will pull Office the moment OS X is available on generic PCs.

Your idea is a good one, but it will never happen. Well, not until the MSOffice monopoly is broken.
 
BWhaler said:
OS X dies when MSOffice for the Mac is pulled.
Click to expand...

Nah, then Apple would just make a kick pro version of iWork, something that could read all MS docs, plus. Apple wouldn't give up that easy.
 
Why would you support all those companies that instead of producing some software innovation, "recommend using Windows XP"?

Let them eat it now.
 
if anything they should bring back jaguar... i liked jaguar.. i think it was because it was the first version of os x to actually be usable and what not.
 
No, this is not a good idea.

What Apple should do though is offer a Panther to every registered Mac user with a capable system for a nominal fee of, say, $25. It'd be a great PR move, and would put those still on Jaguar and earlier back in the market for new Apple software that needs Panther or higher.
 
I think this line of reasoning is a little rash. I think that a longer view would be better.
1. Switch to Intel
2. See if the marketshare makes any moves
3. Watch to see if peripheral makers start to really start including Mac support for their devices.
4. Begin secret development to ensure stability on different configurations
5. Release OS X without hardware

or

4. Partner with specific vendors to ensure that only quality components are used

The transition would be longer, but also more guaranteed to succeed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back