The x86 OS X Success Strategy


macrumors 65816
Mar 11, 2002
Franklin, TN
begin quote... "blah bla blah blech... apple can't survive .... blah, blah..." end quote...

Apple is successful because they build great computers and have become indespensible in certain industries (ie: print and education)

Porting OSX to other manufacturers (ie: Dell, HP and Compaq) won't do anything but piss off apple support for having to handle support calls on customers installing OSX on Presarios (a sign of the apocolypse)

What I want is a HP pavilion running OSX!!! YAY!! thats going to solve the worlds problems...

You want OSX, buy a mac... this guy is basically saying "i bought a ford, and I just figured out BMW is better; so can I get some BMW seats, and maybe a BMW dashboard..and..."

save us all the trouble and just shoot yourself.. you should have bought a mac..


macrumors god
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
I posted this a while a back in an old thread... here it is copy/pasted:


so... here's my take on the OS X and intel and why it would fail...

First - this is assuming Apple would port OS X to Intel for generic hardware (ie.. Dell, Compaq etc...)

1) Apple makes most of it's money on Hardware. For Q4 2001...
$1,450 million total revenue.
Of that "For Peripherals, SW & Other - $248 million"
so 80% of Apple's revenue is from Hardware.

2) Now... Apple ports to intel... and this would eliminate all classic apps... probably some carbon apps (not sure the details), and would require recompiles of all cocoa apps... So, OS X native recompiled apps ONLY would be available for this platform. No Windows apps, no Classic apps.

If this happens... there are 3 groups of people

a) PC Users - these people who weren't intending to switch anyway. You might win some of them over to OS X Intel... but never to Mac hardware
b) PC Users who intend to switch - these people will certainly go with OS X for intel.
c) Mac users - some will stay with Mac hardware for the design... but a fair number will switch to PC hardware (cheaper).

So, hardware sales will suffer from Apple - and eventually it will be improbable that Apple can support hardware production (ie cost and design will exceed revenue)... so suddenly, Apple will become 1billion in revenue a year company instead of a 6 billion in revenue company...

Can Apple make up for all that revenue and sales with OS X for Intel alone? Maybe.... maybe not... but it's definately not a guarentee...

so why should apple gamble? Apple is profitable _right now_

I see two ways Apple would do this

1) Apple is about to go bankrupt... and as a final push, they'll port to Intel
2) PPC falls way behind or gets discontinued altogether.... then they may come out with a Proprietary x86 Apple machine. Designed just for that one model... not for Dell,compaq etc...



macrumors 6502a
Jan 5, 2002
Why should apple go backwards

I dont think apple will ever port Mac OS X on x86 chips.. Intel itself is trying to get away from it with 64-bit Itanium, which they had little success. Apple/Motorola/IBM is already well ahead of intel chips with its g3/g4/g5 development. why should apple go backwards with a outdated x86 system?
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.