Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
One of the many reasons I dished out over 5 grand on my Mac Pro upgrade from a Power Mac G5 was Apple's commitment to quality, which is primarily obtained through strict hardware control. More importantly, if the mainstream public begins utilizing Mac OS you can absolutely kiss viral security out the window, something I am not willing to allow :mad: (assuming I have a say of course lol). :rolleyes:
 
As long as no vendor advertised the capability to run Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware with any product, and didn't provide official support mechanisms, list it in product specifications, and so on, I can't see any valid legal complaint Apple could possibly have with a future product that might coincidentally enable Mac OS X to be easily run/installed unmodified on non-Apple hardware. I don't see VMWare doing this, because they've got a whole slew of established products that don't implement EFI, and even if they did, it would probably only be on their Apple products. However, Parallels is working on this for the core of its next products now - including server virtualization products. There is also a misconception that Apple uses TPM to tie Mac OS X to Apple hardware. They do not.

Since no one has recognized your well thought out analysis, I thought I'd applaud you. =) It's amusing how everyone went into panic mode at the mention of OS X on a PC, even before the full statement can be made:

"In today's news, hackers may have found a way to make Mac OS X run on a PC but - " "Whaaaattt!?!?!?!?! Arrrghhhhh!!!! This can't be, blah blah blah" LOL

Simmer down kiddies, I don't think the sky is falling or ever will ;)
 
Dude, that would be sweet to run Mac OS X on all of my PC's... that why my apples can live happily ever after with my pc's.

I don't like restrictions and think that Apple moving against this would be illogical and worse, very prohibitive.
 
Doesn't bother microsoft, they'll still sell plenty of Vista copies.
Dropping a DOA OS on their user base doesn't bother Microsoft? They already scrapped the program once because it was horribly flawed and followed by pulling promised features out, while pushing back the release date over and over and over again.

Apple are not ( effective ) competition against microsoft - 2.4% marketshare worldwide? microsoft aren't worried.
You obviously overlooked the recently leaked internal memo; and Vista's remarkable similarity to OS X; and the Zune.
 
Everybody knows PC hardware is much better

In your opinion.

Not always true.

It doesn't always work completely well together.

I'll take the Mac's fully integrated standardized and tested hardware build model, thanks.
 
Your twisting my words, sigh.

DOA are your words, which isn't actually the case. Vista may sell initially slow to businesses, but consumers will buy Vista, and businesses will follow suite soon after.

Once again, Apple, with 2.4% marketshare are no threat to microsoft.

Only Apple fanboi's would believe that Apple offer any threat to microsoft consumer desktop domination.

2.4% worldwide markshare. Not a threat at all. Firefox is more of a threat to microsoft.

Dropping a DOA OS on their user base doesn't bother Microsoft? They already scrapped the program once because it was horribly flawed and followed by pulling promised features out, while pushing back the release date over and over and over again.

You obviously overlooked the recently leaked internal memo; and Vista's remarkable similarity to OS X; and the Zune.
 
I don't like restrictions and think that Apple moving against this would be illogical and worse, very prohibitive.
Restrictions?

Like preventing a large number of Windoze users from upgrading to Vista due to their underpowered machines?

Like the 7-step deletion process incorporated with Vista?

Your hands are far more tied as a Windoze user than an Apple user.
 
Too late for what? Windoze Vista is DOA. Windoze users are the ones in panic mode. OS X users are sitting up on the hilltop, enjoying the carnage below.
First of all, try to understand that 8 of 10 Win users barely knows what is a Apple and Mac. Even when they are in panic, so may be because of terrorism, global warming, gas prices etc., but definitely not of Mac and Mac OS X existence.
Secondly when I see a man who thinks that only he knows what is best, and others suffer and leave in darkness, that doomsday is coming and that only his way can help to be saved - this is nothing more than religious fanaticism.
 
Your hands are far more tied as a Windoze user than an Apple user.


Which is all the more reason why it would be nice to be able to install the Mac OS X operating system on a non-mac PC.

I have one apple computer. One. Between work, my wife, my relatives, my friends I am on 10 different PC's.

Personally, I would like to have the opportunity to install OS X onto PC's. I didn't buy my iBook because of its incredible hardware -- its hardware was underpowered and outdated when I bought it brand new over a year ago -- but its OS remains cutting edge and much easier to use the Windows.
 
A lot of users don't want to run Mac OS X on cheap computers

I can build any computer (desktop obviously) that's better and cheaper than whatever Apple sells. With the Core 2 Quad even the Mac Pro is a easy target.

So what I would like is to run Mac OS X on one of my computers. They are perfect for my needs. After all they are my computers...

But I know that won't happen at least in a reasonable time frame. Apple needs its hardware sales, its all in one experience, its controlled environment...

That's why my next laptop will be a Mac probably a MBP. I like decent graphics and a nice box. But not my desktop. Apple desktop range .... not good.
 
OS X will be released to OEM for other computer manafacturers. It's only a matter of time, the right time. Apple has never really marketed itself in the enterprise and has no plans on doing so. Their strategy is home / education / research markets.

When Apple releases OS X to OEM the operating system will gain wider acceptance. Large enterprises will have the ability to evaluate it and even deploy it. With greater acceptance will come increased market share. Many software companies who do not develop for OS X will be forced to do so to compete.

There is a huge backlash brewing against Microsoft. Everyone knows Microsoft is falling apart. They are completely lost as a company. They are all over the map just throwing crap against the wall to see what sticks. They can't deliver. They can't innovate. Their software is sub-standard and over priced. Vista is a joke. The problem is no real alternative has existed -- until now. OS X can do what Linux never will -- make Unix mainstream. As OS X is accepted on a much wider level so will people's interest in Apple and all their other products.

The OEM of OS X will not result in lower Apple hardware sales! Market dynamics are extremely different than the clone days; it will increase Apple hardware sales and exponentially increase OSX market share. Apple makes the best, most beautiful, and most functional computers bar none. That won't change even if the likes of Dell are selling OS X.

Many people buy Windows and PCs because they don't know better. Apple still seems fringe, different, or hard. When OS X starts showing up at their work and is accepted over Windows they will want it for their home computer. When they look at an iMac and compare it to some black and grey Dell, the iMac will be going home. Apple will provide superior computers and a superior computing and computing buying experiance for their target market. Apple's hardware sales will thrive.

Apple's overall market share will jump dramatically into the 30% - 40% range quicly and Microsoft will collapse, open source, break up, or actually innovate for a change.

It's coming. Apple is leading a revolution in computing and no one really believes it yet. OS X is so far superior to Windows in every way that matters -- and everyone knows it. Dell, HP, and others are desperate to sell it. Pressure will force Jobs to capitulate, if he's even the reason it hasn't happened yet. I personally think Steve Jobs has been waiting for the oppertune time to make the move; and I feel it's getting very close. Apple's share holders will start demanding it. The market will be demanding it to keep that astronomically high stock price shooting upward. Pressure is indeed growing.

Apple is changing, growing, diversifying, maturing, but that doesn't mean they will stop selling computers; far from it, they will sell more computers then they ever have and much more. Your precious Mac experiance will not go away; only the crappy Microsoft experiance will.

Apple will become the undisputed leader in technology!

It's going to happen. :apple:


Sing it Brother!
A lot of people here make the statement thta "Apple makes their money on hardware." I think Steve is making the point in the name change that computer hardware is not where they want to make the majority of their money. They just can't compete in price. However, on iPhone with a reportedly 50% markup, the iPod (not sure the mark up on that) Apple TV... the point it that they have other markets that will soak up any computer hardware money loss. Apple is diversifying. They want to be Sony. Heck, they are better at being Sony than Sony is!
My prediction is that OSX Leopard will be open to all for the very reason outlined by this gentleman (or gentlewoman as the case may be... if neither than don't tell me because it will freak me out.) Another poster made mention of Apple's other software offerings. FCP: $1300, iLife: $79, iWork: $79... By opening up OSX Apple opens up markets for all these other products.
Apple will continue to make hardware. It will be priced competitively and it will still be lickably-liscous. But it will no longer be the focus of Apple. Just like their name change.
 
For the last time Macs ARE PCs

It just doesnt feel right to run mac os on a pc ,I had once a transformation pack of Mac OS before I switched and it was bad on a PC, with bad I mean it just didnt look right on a PC - its different, and now I have a mac.

. . .

A 'PC', under current normal usage of the term, is simply a collection of hardware that natively supports the x86 ISA. Macs are now PCs, the run x86 and can run any OS designed for x86. Apple is a now a PC manufacturer that also builds a proprietary OS.

FYI Apple's OS is technically bound to Apple hardware through the use of the Intel TPM (Trusted Platform Module). This was the infamous device originally called Palladium. And people were up in arms over the idea that Microsoft was going to bind Longhorn (now Vista), to the TPM. Well able did the same thing that tons of people tried to stop MS from doing.

Anyway having said all this I'm sure Parrallels and VMwares latest moves have much less to do with Apple and much more to do with getting Vista and it's encryption and DRM schemes to work with Parrellels and VMware. As a side effect it probably becomes easier to put MacOS X on VMware.

Anyware, saying this as a person that owns an Macbook Pro, Dual 1.25 Ghz MDD, Emac 1.0 ghz (when dual boot meant OSX and OS 9), Blue&White G3 rev2, Powermac 7500, Power Computing PowerCenter Pro, PowerBook Duo 210 and an Apple IIe (got it new in 4th grade), I'm currently writing this on Pentium D 820, with an Intel motherboard with the 950 graphics set, placed it in a nice ThermalTake Mambo case with 2 DVD-Rs, ESATA, 8 usb2 ports, and a really nice MacOS 10.4.8, and a an internal SD/CF/XD/MS/Floppy drive. Built the box back in March with OS 10.4.3, and it has been smooth sailing every since. System is completely silent and cost about $700. I've never used anything but my own Apple Pro Keyboard, so I guess I'm running Apple hardware:)

I just built the system for fun as an experiment at the same time I bought my MacBook Pro. I think as you can see I've given quite a chunk of change to Apple, but I can tell you this is the best Mac I've ever own. It boots in 20 seconds and runs with fewer problems than the MBP. In short, it's the Mac mid-tower that I always wanted.
 
2.4% worldwide markshare. Not a threat at all. Firefox is more of a threat to microsoft.
Perhaps you also neglected to read the topic of this thread. The reason so many people are pushing for Apple to release OS X in the first place is precisely because they are fed up with Windoze.

To assume that 97.6% market share means that MS has nothing to worry about shows a complete lack of business sense. Besides, if Apple were a non-factor, you wouldn't even waste your time in this forum.
 
Whatever, but I for one, will not buy a pc just to install mac os on it. Nor will I allow any vm on my mac or pc. My mac is married to me and I won't share it with anyone. period.:D
 
i think it would help apple to sell os x buy itself.....but i can see also why they don't want to do it.....

You mean that it would help 1337 h4X0r5 install pirated copies that they download from [insert torrent site here].
 
Steve may not see it this way, but this might actually be a positive situation for Apple:

1. Apple wants to grow and whilst the ipod/iphone etc is gaining "mind share", it hasn't made a substantial difference to overall computer market share.

2. Licensing os x for generic PC's, would almost certainly be a profitable enterprise and generate significant os market share. However, it does come with support headaches, that they may not want to deal with.

3. Piracy of windows/microsoft software during the 90's has almost certainly played a contributing factor to their position as a monopoly - indeed they made very little effort to kerb piracy, until they had reached this status.

So what does this mean for Apple? I see this as an opportunity for Apple to turn a blind-eye to individuals running OS X on their own hardware, whilst gaining mind-share in the PC market. It's still mostly a techy hack, so I don't think there is anything for Apple to fear in terms of lost margins - is there really anything for them to lose anyway??

The "mac faithfull" are not going to be doing this, business's are unikely to be doing this (unless it's officially sanctioned), but exposure to OS X on daily basis may generate future hardware sales and switchers. Admittedly, Apple may not gain financially in the short term, but equally, it's not costing them in support and bad publicity.

Apple could play this very strategically, by presenting official corporate resistance, but without placing to many technical hurdles. This may be what they are doing, although I wouldn't expect it from Steve...

J
 
I wanted to use OS X and have some of the iApps so I bought a Mac Mini about two years ago. I built an AMD X2 system about a year ago. I am a gamer and I program for Windows professionally so I need (and want) a Windows box. Windows XP is a great OS, IMO. I also want to be able to use OS X and I'd really rather not have to invest into two separate pieces of hardware.

One possible solution would be to buy a Mac Pro now and dual boot it. However, that wasn't an option when I needed to upgrade my computer and even now that it is an option I wouldn't do it because it's not worth the money to buy the top of the line Apple hardware. Their consumer products have become more competitive on pricing, which is good. Their Macbooks and iMacs are good values for all that you get (hardware and software). However, their Pro products are still too pricey for me and I like greater control offered by building my hardware. I can pick the components and set it up how I wish.

I just wish I could dual boot with OS X. If Apple ever offers OS X, even if it is $200-300 dollars, I'd pay the price. I have refrained from trying to hack OS X to get it running on my system so far. I don't want to bother with the hassle and I get by on my Mac Mini. If it ever becomes easy to put OS X on generic x86 hardware, I'd definitely do it.
 
First off Apple would never willingly port the MacOS to a PC. Steve has said this and the reasons are logical, it would be a nightmare to support all the PC pereferals that or on all PCs, there are just too many combos. That said a Virtualization software would be best, though you would never be able to boot in OSX. Other than that there has been previous attempts at this, such as Cherry PC, which worked to some extent. So this is nothing new. I don't think apple will make a big deal of it and if anything will allow them to sell more software. The only thing is that they WILL need to start working on is preventing sharing of the macOS. Other that that apples only recourse is making the macOS call a dongle in the mac that PCs will not have and that would be too hard to install, and making a doup of the dongle would be a trademark infringement. That would work.
 
I'm being realistic - which a lot of people are'nt on these forums.

I think its a case of a vocal minority who are pushing for OSX to be made available to non Apple hardware.

A lot of people are quite happy with windows - does everything they want it to do - so there is no need for them to change.

A lot of people don't realise that Word is available for OSX - and they won't bother finding out any different.

Perhaps you also neglected to read the topic of this thread. The reason so many people are pushing for Apple to release OS X in the first place is precisely because they are fed up with Windoze.

To assume that 97.6% market share means that MS has nothing to worry about shows a complete lack of business sense. Besides, if Apple were a non-factor, you wouldn't even waste your time in this forum.

By having an x86 version - Apple already have made the port.

But, your very correct about the range of pherriarals ( i can't spell it either!) - Apple would need to write them initially because those manufacturers wouldn't themselves. Microsoft don't write the drivers, the manufacturers do - on the whole.

First off Apple would never willingly port the MacOS to a PC. Steve has said this and the reasons are logical, it would be a nightmare to support all the PC pereferals that or on all PCs, there are just too many combos. That said a Virtualization software would be best, though you would never be able to boot in OSX. Other than that there has been previous attempts at this, such as Cherry PC, which worked to some extent. So this is nothing new. I don't think apple will make a big deal of it and if anything will allow them to sell more software. The only thing is that they WILL need to start working on is preventing sharing of the macOS. Other that that apples only recourse is making the macOS call a dongle in the mac that PCs will not have and that would be too hard to install, and making a doup of the dongle would be a trademark infringement. That would work.
 
Apple could still sell tons of hardware, while also growing the Mac platform and making tons more by selling OS X for PCs.

They could pick their timing and do it strategically.

They could pick their market: just to selected box assemblers, or just standalone (for DIYers), or whatever way they want to start.

They could offer sidegrade pricing--like $100 off if you buy a Mac after buying OS X for PCs.

This would allow Apple to grow faster and reach more customers than their Mac product line currently can.

All of this has no downside--just as long as Apple does not SUPPORT that other hadware (an endless chaotic sea of widely varied components). And just as long as Apple doesn't add complexity or bloat to OS X to allow this other hardware to work (like extra drivers that all must stay compatible with each OS revision). And just as long as this other hardware doesn't require Apple to spend additional time, staff, or money on development and testing of their OS and related products…

Good points here.

These are probably the reasons Apple doesn't want this, cost to keep a Software machine humming. If they don't support PC users using OS X, they'll make enemies. If they DO support it, they'll lose money, which will put them more into a support situation than keep them innovating. They're tight right now for that very reason, they have a tight grasp on all their products and can support them. Slowly but surely they are building up, but if they do this, they open a floodgate, bigger than they can handle.

With that, I do think that if they did it, the price tag on OS X for PC needs to be higher (stays the same for Mac), they need to limit the amount of support they do give (i.e. Dell or any other PC company has to make a few choice boxes with options/drivers that Apple supports), and they need to phase it in (control how fast this happens). I wouldn't mind seeing this happen, but I also would only do it if the PC is of high quality parts, the biggest problem isn't necessarily Windows, as much as it is the hardware. :eek:
 
all of you.. I read these rumors every day.. why ? can't remember.. but still I do.. like to be informed perhaps.. but please for g*d sake stop these nonsense discussions that are going absolutely no where..

Apple is not gonna release OSX for pc users.. simple.. for to many reasons to inmagine.. and Apple does not want to become the new microsoft.. they don't care about that.. Apple is a hardware company.. and has always been.. propably always will be.. the fact you won't be able to install just any third party app on the upcomming iPhone should be proof enough of that.. they don't want people messing around with their software and neither with their hardware.
 
Jobs should just go ahead and OK the development of an OSX to run natively on PCs. Then he can "claim his castle" that gates took away from him. Or at least the castle that he thinks is his. *cough... xerox". Leave Windows in the dust.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.