Why doesn't Apple make OS X avilable on all x86 machines?

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

I'm going to use some language that offends some people here, and for that I say it's tough to face reality but it's true.

What does Apple have to lose? I mean seriously the OS is built on a BSD kernel so most of the hardware support is out there. Not to mention that companies will supply their own third party drivers if need be to make their products work.

Apple zealots who drink from the tit of Jobs will continue to buy Apple hardware because it looks better then the Dell or eMachine. Yet people who arent as financially off, or more conscious about the value of their dollar, will go get their own computer, and buy a copy of OS X as well.

This isnt about market share, its about choice. For all the hags that whine about Microsoft being a monopoly for bundling IE, well look at Apple! Want to use our OS? Buy our hardware! If that isnt a monopoly then I dont know what is.

According to the latest financial call, apple sold less than 1.5 million Macs so far in the year 2006. I bet Dell sells that many in a week or less.

Ive had the pleasure of reinstalling Mac OS X once, and seriously it couldnt be easier. I mean they could seriously slap it in a box, and it would work fantastically!

Now I havent tried the illegal form of OS X yet. Personally Im fine with Windows just as it is. 10.4 was a great OS but the three applications I live in dont have adequate equals in the Mac world Im sad to say.

So while some may label me an apple hater, no Im not. I used an Intel iMac for 2.5 months, and then went back to my 2 year old laptop. Vista is around the corner, so is 10.5. If the WWDC wows me then I might pick up another Mac, but until then everything I loved about OS X 10.4 is being thrown into Vista so I see no need to get a Mac.

Bootcamp is amazing because I can run Windows on a Mac. Thats fantastic but I dont want to spend my money on Apple hardware. Pretty as it may be, I want choice.

mad jew · Jul 21, 2006

I love the fact Apple makes the hardware and the software. The integration is one of its greatest strengths. I'd prefer the Apple engineers spend time making OSX great rather than trying to account for all the different configurations of machines that would be possible if OSX could run on anything. Hug me, I'm backward.

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

mad jew said:
I love the fact Apple makes the hardware and the software. The integration is one of its greatest strengths. I'd prefer the Apple engineers spend time making OSX great rather than trying to account for all the different configurations of machines that would be possible if OSX could run on anything. Hug me, I'm backward.

Windows has always had a logo program, you saw a Windows logo on a product and you knew it would work.

How difficult would it be to make a sticker to let consumers know that OS X will work 110% on thier machine?

And I love choice. I love the fact that if I need a piece of crap laptop to put in my kitchen I can buy a $500 Dell. I love the fact that Lenovo, in my honest opinion, makes the best laptops on the planet, the Thinkpad, which I would take over a MacBook Pro or MacBook any day of the week.

I would love to have the freedom of choosing what hardware I want instead of being forced to pay for an overly priced, over designed, machine when all I care about are the guts inside.

mad jew · Jul 21, 2006

DevilsRejection said:
How difficult would it be to make a sticker to let consumers know that OS X will work 110% on thier machine?

I doubt manufacturing the sticker would be difficult, but enforcing strict rules to ensure OSX works with each machine, testing each machine and retesting each machine would take time and money. It's just me, but I prefer having the Apple team focus on a select set of hardware so they can focus more strongly upon their other projects, such as iDisk transfer speeds...

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

mad jew said:
I doubt manufacturing the sticker would be difficult, but enforcing strict rules to ensure OSX works with each machine, testing each machine and retesting each machine would take time and money. It's just me, but I prefer having the Apple team focus on a select set of hardware so they can focus more strongly upon their other projects, such as iDisk transfer speeds...

It is easier than you may think. If the chipset, processor, and video card matches then all is golden. it's not hard to say, why do you think intel has their centrino notebooks? do you know what centrino is? it's an intel processor using an intel chipset with an intel wifi card.

you know what all the macs have in common? intel processor, intel chipset, ati graphics card.

and what makes you think apple can't expand. they've already outsourced the jobs of making ipods and computers to china.

choice, that's all i want. my hardware, not apples. you ever think people don't like macs for that sole reason?

EricNau · Jul 21, 2006

Apple is not a software company; they are a hardware company. The day they start licensing OS X on non-Mac hardware, they will loose virtually all of their business.

Shadow · Jul 21, 2006

Yeah, its better that Apple make the hardware and the software for a number of reasons (it just works, intergration, ect).

And I love choice. I love the fact that if I need a piece of crap laptop to put in my kitchen I can buy a $500 Dell. I love the fact that Lenovo, in my honest opinion, makes the best laptops on the planet, the Thinkpad, which I would take over a MacBook Pro or MacBook any day of the week.

I'm wondering (not being cynical or anything) why Lenevo make the best laptops (suposedly). I've heard good things about them, but they look hideous IMO.

I would love to have the freedom of choosing what hardware I want instead of being forced to pay for an overly priced, over designed, machine when all I care about are the guts inside.

So you would rather have (car analogy coming up!) a old banger with a kick-ass engine over a similarly priced car with a kick-ass chassis (not too clever on cars

) and the same kick-ass engine?

Killyp · Jul 21, 2006

Devilsrejection - OS X really does not work at all like Windows, part of the reason it still works on my old 350 MHz iMac, as well as my 1.83 Duo MacBook Pro is because Apple have far fewer hardware configurations to support. Apple actually builds 'presets' into OS X for all their computers, to ensure that OS X will run well on the computer. Now imagine how much the OS X experience would be spoilt if Apple went and made it work like Windows. It wouldn't run on older computers (imagine XP on a <1GHz machine!!!), it would crash far more often, they would have to spend more money on making it compatible with the different hardware which would mean less going into the R&D which resulted in the revolutionary features in OS X which help to make it such a great OS.

Also, the whole 'Mac experience' is a combination of the hardware and the software. OS X wouldn't be as amazing as it is on a cheapo PC machine, and the Mac hardware is pretty much pointless when it's running Windows.

mad jew · Jul 21, 2006

I'm not trying to get into a fight and I can see where you're coming from. Thankfully I'm happy with the selection of Macs on offer but I recognise that's not the case for everyone. However, I believe it'd be more than just an issue of compliant CPU, and wifi card. Each aspect of the computer should have to be tested before the sticker could be slapped on the side to ensure Apple doesn't have its name tarnished by recommending bad hardware.

Killyp · Jul 21, 2006

We don't want OS X just being an alternative to Windows, because that's what it would become. We want it to stay how it is, a safehaven from the hardware incompatibilities, crashes, viruses and poorly built hardware of PCs....

You can actually install OS X on PCs believe it or not, with the OS X86 project (very illegal), and my best schoolmate (who is a computer genius) is currently struggling to get it working....

Nermal · Jul 21, 2006

EricNau said:
Apple is not a software company; they are a hardware company. The day they start licensing OS X on non-Mac hardware, they will loose virtually all of their business.

Just to further add to this, Apple did license out their OS once. If I recall correctly, it was from 1995 until 1997, and non-Apple systems ended up being much better value, and the extra money made from OS licences did not make up the loss from lack of hardware sales.

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

So while Microsoft works their tail off to make sure that programs, from the freaking 16 bit era work correctly, on all hardware mind you, Apple needs to create an "experience."

God forbid I run Windows XP on less than 1 GHz! Oh wait ... I am! I have my laptop in my lap running off the battery, clocked in at 600 MHz yet I'm watching youtube videos listening to music, talking on AIM and browsing the internet.

Guess what! My 2 year old laptop gets 8 hours of battery life, weighs 3.5 pounds, and is smaller than a 12 inch powerbook.

That my friend is called choice. Apple has lost it's completive edge in the hardware sector in my honest opinion. They used to have incredible notebooks at the time, but now everyone has a thin and light that lasts 4 hours.

But Macs are so pretty! Who... the... hell... cares! When I'm doing my homework am I staring at the white plexi glass admiring its curves?! No!

If Apple got off their ass, and made OS X compatible with every single machine on the planet, then maybe a lot more people's imagination can be unleashed, a lot more people can "think different"

But alas no, I have to use what Apple tells me to use, and it usually costs a lot more.

Don't give me that whole "experience" crap. Users use software. Hardware is just hardware.

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

Nermal said:
Just to further add to this, Apple did license out their OS once. If I recall correctly, it was from 1995 until 1997, and non-Apple systems ended up being much better value, and the extra money made from OS licences did not make up the loss from lack of hardware sales.

And you do realize that if it wasn't for the iPod, Apple wouldn't be alive right?

Nermal · Jul 21, 2006

DevilsRejection said:
But alas no, I have to use what Apple tells me to use, and it usually costs a lot more.

Hopefully it won't blow your mind if I tell you that I bought my first Mac based on its low price

mad jew · Jul 21, 2006

DevilsRejection said:
Users use software. Hardware is just hardware.

So why worry what sort of hardware Apple forces you to use?

DevilsRejection said:
And you do realize that if it wasn't for the iPod, Apple wouldn't be alive right?

Nope. I didn't realise that.

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

Nermal said:
Hopefully it won't blow your mind if I tell you that I bought my first Mac based on its low price

It was probably used or an old model. I'm talking about today, machine A versus machine B. Same specs except one machine has a fruit as a logo, thereby increasing the cost.

mad jew · Jul 21, 2006

DevilsRejection said:
Same specs except one machine has a fruit as a logo, thereby increasing the cost.

If you make a Dell with similar specifications, the price difference is marginal. The difference between the two companies is that relatively speaking, Apple only really gives you the option of the higher specced model, right?

If we could all act less uppity, this thread might have a chance of avoiding the wasteland.

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

mad jew said:
So why worry what sort of hardware Apple forces you to use?

Because some users need more juice then others, and some need less.

You'll never see a celeron in a Mac, and you'll never see an Extreme Edition processor?

Why do I have to wait for Apple to give me a blueray or hddvd drive when I can go get one off newegg?

What if I want to overclock my machine?

What if I really like Hello Kitty, and want to buy that sweet computer case I saw in an import shop in Japan?

Use the motherboard I want to because I like that brand?

Why should I not have the power of a tablet now, because Apple doesn't want to make one?

Why shouldn't I want a better laptop then the one Apple sells!?!

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

mad jew said:
If you make a Dell with similar specifications, the price difference is marginal. The difference between the two companies is that relatively speaking, Apple only really gives you the option of the higher specced model, right?

If we could all act less uppity, this thread might have a chance of avoiding the wasteland.

Because dell sells 800 dollar notebooks and 8000 dollar notebooks. they have more models in their laptop lineup then apple does in it's entire computer division.

I could configure a Dell notebook right now with the same specs as the base price MacBook Pro for about $300 cheaper. That's money that I could spend on a RAM upgrade or a larger hard drive.

Killyp · Jul 21, 2006

DevilsRejection said:
It was probably used or an old model.

Telling other people what computers they own as though they don't know anything is not the way to make friends...

DevilsRejection said:
I'm talking about today, machine A versus machine B. Same specs except one machine has a fruit as a logo, thereby increasing the cost.

Hey dude, we don't buy cars depending on how many BHP they have, or a hifi on how many watts it has, or the biggest screen you can get...

Stop bitching about Macs on a Mac forum, if you want to do it, then go and do it along with the other 95% of the population here

EricNau · Jul 21, 2006

DevilsRejection said:
It was probably used or an old model. I'm talking about today, machine A versus machine B. Same specs except one machine has a fruit as a logo, thereby increasing the cost.

No. Machine B has a fruit logo and runs OS X and comes with iLife. That is what you are paying extra for. It is the experience.

dejo · Jul 21, 2006

Code:

         \|||/       
         (o o)       
,----ooO--(_)-------.
| Please            |
|   don't feed the  |
|     TROLLs !      |
'--------------Ooo--'
        |__|__|      
         || ||       
        ooO Ooo

DevilsRejection · Jul 21, 2006

So back to the thread at hand

OS X in a box, that I can purchase from any one of the amazing online retailers around today, when do you think it will happen?

Mord · Jul 21, 2006

if SJ is willing to do it at all he'd set a target marketshare required before doing so, around 10% or so, then apple would be able to survive the competition enough for marketshare to rocket up to the 30's.

Mord · Jul 21, 2006

he's the reason apple is what they are, if he was not in charge apple would be dead. ives could carry the torch within a few years, but apple needs SJ.

personally for portables i could only ever buy apple hardware, but i'm just a design freak.

Why doesn't Apple make OS X avilable on all x86 machines?

macrumors regular

Moderator emeritus

macrumors regular

Moderator emeritus

macrumors regular

Moderator emeritus

macrumors 68000

macrumors 68040

Moderator emeritus

macrumors 68040

Moderator

macrumors regular

macrumors regular

Moderator

Moderator emeritus

macrumors regular

Moderator emeritus

macrumors regular

macrumors regular

macrumors 68040

Moderator emeritus

Moderator emeritus

macrumors regular

macrumors G4

macrumors G4

Our Staff