Should Apple allow cloneing of iOS to 3ed parties?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by PracticalMac, Jan 10, 2011.

  1. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #1
    Android and WindowsP can be licensed to anyone who makes the hardware, lots of hardware versions to choose from, and highly competitive market.

    Unlike open cloneing, what I suggest is selling it to companies that want to build niche products, such as kiosks, industrial (as in super rugged), water proof, and such, markets Apple would not cater to.
     
  2. MacDawg macrumors P6

    MacDawg

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Location:
    "Between the Hedges"
    #2
    Will.Never.Happen.

    Not in Apple's business model
     
  3. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #3
    They already did this, it didn't work out.

    That way you cannot ensure proper integration between software and hardware.

    A quote Steve Jobs brought to the audience back in 2007 when Apple introduced the iPhone is really relevant.

    And that is what Apple will do. This is about control and you only need one rotten apple to infect the idea and power of the brand.
     
  4. uberamd macrumors 68030

    uberamd

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #4
    No. The reason I like iOS is because of how integrated it is. It feels like it was designed for the hardware, which is ideal.

    Android, in contrast, wasn't designed for a particular device. Thus you have incredibly slow updates being released to customers, if they even get updates at all, because the device manufacturer needs to get the update from Google, modify it to fit the hardware, then push it to end users. Having different hardware outside of the default device makes users dependent on another 3rd party for updates. And guess what, many 3rd parties don't feel obligated to provide updates once they have your money.
     
  5. MrWillie, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011

    MrWillie macrumors 65816

    MrWillie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Location:
    Starlite Starbrite Trailer Court
    #5
    So we can have cheap Chinese knock offs that don't work ? Never. It is bad enough that some people refer to the cheap Andriods as iPads. (See the Walgreen's tablet reviews).


    No, that can't be. Many Andriod fanboys have posted that Andriod is an open system and is not fragmented. So your statement can't be correct. The fanboys aren't wrong. (Insert sarcasm emotion here).
     
  6. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #6
    Apple is a hardware company, not a software company. They make their money on computers and devices. Unless they completely shift their business model to that of a software company (which they sort of tried before with little success), then we won't see this happen.
     
  7. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #7
    You are so wrong.

    They even removed Computers (to Apple Inc.) from their name 4 years ago to reflect this.

    They are both a software and hardware company.
     
  8. MrWillie macrumors 65816

    MrWillie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Location:
    Starlite Starbrite Trailer Court
    #8
    You beat me to it. They are BOTH.
     
  9. BaldiMac macrumors 604

    BaldiMac

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #9
    What would be the benefit to licensing iOS for consumers? There might be some free ePhones instead of $49 iPhones. Does that difference matter to that many people when you are signing a 2 year contract for $70/month?
     
  10. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #10
    They changed the name to reflect all hardware not just computers. The word computer seemed to ignore iPods and other non-computer devices.

    Obviously they produce software, but they are clearly a hardware company. Software is such a small portion of their revenue. Heck, they give iOS away for free.
     
  11. 0815 macrumors 68000

    0815

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    Location:
    here and there but not over there
    #11
    Apple almost went belly up doing this with the OS for the desktops - won't happen again.
     
  12. mheidt macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2005
    #12
    Actually I'm buying Apple because of the software.
    It's both.

    Or is HP an ink and not a printer manufacturer?
     
  13. uberamd macrumors 68030

    uberamd

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #13
    What is a MacBook Pro without OS X? What is an iPhone without iOS? What is an iPad without iOS? Sounds to me like Apple is equally a hardware and software company.
     
  14. grapes911, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011

    grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #14
    I don't think your personal buying habits determine Apple's primary revenue streams.

    HP is and ink and printer manufacturer, but it doesn't change the fact that HP is primarily a hardware company. Microsoft makes the Zune and Xbox, but they are still a software company. Newegg sells T-shirts, it doesn't make them a clothing store.


    Without OS X? The MacBook is a piece of hardware that runs other OSes just like any other hardware manufacturer (HP, Dell, etc.).

    Check an Apple press release about quarterly revenue. The first thing they do is announce how many Macs, iPods, iPhones, and iPads they sold. Nowhere do they ever even mention software.



    Edit: I know it sounds as if we are off topic, but I believe this is the heart of the issue. A software company (like Microsoft) would have licensed their software and operating systems to various hardware companies, such as the OP suggested.
     
  15. uberamd macrumors 68030

    uberamd

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #15
    But where is the incentive to buy a Mac if OS X doesn't come with it? The hardware was tailored for the software, and the software was tailored for the hardware. Apple didn't get where they are today by selling hardware only. To think otherwise is foolish. Each part is equally important. I don't know ANYONE who purchased a Mac so they can exclusively run Windows. I'm sure there are people out there who did, but not many.
     
  16. Winni macrumors 68030

    Winni

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Germany.
    #16
    Software is such a small portion of their revenue? Are you reading other reports than the rest of the world? The entire iTunes and App Store business falls under software, and that's where they shovel the money. No research or engineering and only low operational costs - the iTunes machinery is almost net income.

    They don't have to charge for iOS because its development is subsidized by the iTunes store. If they wanted, they could even give away the iPad for free because the device is almost useless without iTunes pay-for content.
     
  17. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #17
    The hardware just doesn't function without the software.

    They are highly integral part of each other. What makes iOS work is the software and how it interacts with the hardware.

    Software is very important to Apple. This is the front-end, that greets every Apple user. They are very focused on usability.

    I am pretty sure they use more money on software than hardware development.
     
  18. MrWillie macrumors 65816

    MrWillie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Location:
    Starlite Starbrite Trailer Court
    #18
    But without iOS, OSX, iTunes their hardware is nothing.
     
  19. el-John-o, Jan 10, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011

    el-John-o macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Location:
    Missouri
    #19
    I have a little gem at home called a "Power Computer PowerTower Pro", this was a 266MHz PC made by a company OTHER than Apple, and ran Mac OS 8. This was Apples short, failed experiment on licensing their OS to other manufacturers. The problem was, just like the problem with Android in some cases, is that the system was not made up to the standards of the OS maker, and Apple couldn't support it! They got support calls that turned out to be hardware issues, and the manufacturers wouldn't help their customers. Furthermore, they found that some of these models were built so sub-par spec wise, that there were complaints about certain features of the OS not working at all! I upgraded mine to OS 9 but only after upgrading the RAM. I like my PowerTower, but it was nothing near the reliability and performance of the Apple Macs. In fact, if you bumped into it, it crashed, just like that. Literally, completely locked up. It also had this funny thing (and common problem) that it would not boot unless there was some sort of disc in the CD drive. It was also considerably bigger and heavier than any Mac, and it was beige in a time when Apple was trying to prove that Beige was dead!

    All in all, Apple didn't like having their product on a PC like that, it wasn't their business model. Macintosh was supposed to run on streamlined high performance machines (back then, the specs of those machines toppled most PC's in a BIG way, the original PowerBook was the fastest laptop in the world at the time, equivalent of today's macbook having a quad-core i7 and Mobility Radeon HD5870 or something), if companies wanted to build stuff like this, they could use Intel processors and run Windows.

    Another big issue was driver support, mine had a Twin Turbo brand graphics card, it had one version of the driver... ever... Apple didn't make it, and that small group of non-apple hardware manufacturers didn't warrant a big need for hardware makers to make Mac OS drivers. Apple used ATi cards in their machines.

    All in all, Apple only did it for I think 2 years, and were very unhappy with the outcome. Now, most Android devices have some sort of modification to make it cater to THAT device, which is possible with an Open Source OS (only the Nexus phones are Vanilla Android), with iOS it wouldn't be. Not to mention, what is the biggest complaint about Android? That it's not streamlined enough, it's choppy, it's not as "spit and polish" as iOS. That's not COMPLETELY an Android issue, it's an issue of tons of hardware manufacturers trying to run the same OS! Look at the "spit and polish" difference between Windows and Mac! When you make an OS cater to ONE device, you can make it scream, that's what Apple has ALWAYS done, and that is what they will continue to do.

    [​IMG]
    PowerTower Pro circa 1998 - NO USB, NO included modem, Slow

    Came out the same time as

    [​IMG]
    iMac, circa 1998 - Fast, ONLY USB, Built-In Modem for the "Internet Mac"

    See why Apple was unhappy with third party manufacturers?
     
  20. mrboult macrumors 6502

    mrboult

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    London, England
    #20
    ^^^^^^^

    I am pretty sure that Steve/Apple have said in the past that they consider themselves a software company primarily.

    And I would agree. I think more of Apples success is based on their wonderful software than the fact that their hardware looks pretty.

    The primary reason for making their own hardware is to achieve perfect integration with the software.

    I buy apple products because of their great software not because they look pretty. And I think most mac users I know would agree. (not that I don't also enjoy how nice the products are themselves)
     
  21. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #21
    Absolutely not.

    They did this many years ago and it nearly killed them. Apple's software is the mechanism that drives hardware sales. If apple licenses iOS, they'll lose out on hardware sales, pure and simple.
     
  22. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #22
    Apparently, I must be. Here is their report from October. They don't really mention software at all. They make it a point to highlight hardware sales right at the top.

    As for the iTunes and the App Store, I find it difficult to consider them "software". Wouldn't that be similar to calling Amazon a software company?
     
  23. tbrinkma macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    #23
    Priced upwards of $5000/gallon, HP's primary business (so far as inkjet printers goes) is ink.
     
  24. el-John-o macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Location:
    Missouri
    #24
    ABSOLUTELY they are an ink Manufacturer, MOST consumer-grade inkjet printer manufacturers are. Look at Lexark, they practically give away their low end printers! Certain Inket models from several companies actually COST the company money, they sell them BELOW cost, but use chips to prevent refilling, and proprietary (and expensive) ink cartridges!
     
  25. nwcs macrumors 65816

    nwcs

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2009
    Location:
    Tennessee
    #25
    It's actually the reverse razor blade scenario. In that case they supply software in support of their hardware. Gillette, for example, makes money off the razor blades and not on the razor which is why the razors themselves are usually given away. Apple's the reverse. They make a lot of software and basically break even on the digital file front in order to move the hardware. Both are necessary but their bread and butter is in the hardware and not software.
     

Share This Page