money.cnn.com — The kind of software sold by the formidable Parallels is transforming computing and challenging Steve Jobs,." ...'I wonder what Steve Jobs is going to do, because there is so much pressure to run Mac OS on non-Macs. There's no technical reason not to do it. He's so proprietary about everything, yet it could be a very strategic move for him to make
Jan 22, 2007 View in Crawl 4
diddydustinJan 23, 2007
Apple makes Dell OS X. Dell OS X runs on cheaper machines. Competition forces Apple to drop the price in their systems, despite the quality of the hardware. Apple's profit margin suffers, and in turn quality of the hardware begins to suffer... thus, this will NEVER happen.
wallensteinJan 23, 2007
Utterly weird thinking about this issue. It looks to an outsider as if Apple and its fans have gradually become totally rigid and hidebound and unable to bear the thought of any change. There have been indications of this in the past - the refusal to ship a multi-button mouse, the refusal to implement virtual desktops, the chorus of dismay over the move to Intel.This one is a bit more serious, but you see the same thing, a chorus of posts which basically all say, Apple doesn't do this now. The implication being that it is inconceivable that it should ever do anything differently.Notice what the article is saying and not saying. It is not saying that licensing the OS will lead to greater profits for Apple. It is not saying that there will be no support problems. It is not saying that the products that will result will be more attractive, durable, easier to use. It is just saying that market forces are going to oblige Apple to do it. That with the release of retail packs of Leopard for Intel, and with the release of the pending virtualisation features, Apple will end up with OSX running on no-Apple hardware WHETHER IT LIKES IT OR NOT. The argument is, Apple is going to have two choices. Choice one is to carry on as now, in which case people will run OSX on other machines without Apple's approval. Choice two is to license, in which case people will do it with Apple's approval.It is also not saying there should be no Apple branded hardware. In the future envisaged by the article, there would still be what there is now. Its just there would be other alternatives AS WELL.Many of the negative arguments are invalid because they do not address this issue of the market forces and the fact that there would always be Apple branded stuff just as now, so people who want it would not lose, and Apple would not lose those sales. Another big source of invalidity is inconsistency. People want to argue BOTH that Apple machines running OSX are and will always be better and cheaper than alternatives, AND that given a choice Mac buyers will leave Apple for cheaper hardware from white box suppliers. It cannot be both. If it really is better and cheaper, why would they leave?This is really the crux of the issue, and the Apple people need to be consistent on it. Once they are, the arguments about licensing vanish. Think about it. Suppose you take the line that the Mac buyer will leave if he can get OSX any other way. Well, long term, Apple does not have a viable business if their hardware is so uncompetitive. On the other hand, if it is competitive, there will always be the same market for the traditional Mac buyer, and licensing will add the extra market of the new buyers.Make up your minds which you think. But either way, the only arguments against doing it are that we do not do it this way now. That is, we are frozen in a time warp, and cannot bear to face the fact that markets and the world are changing.
kawaJan 23, 2007
I remember Steve Jobs once said Apple is best at making great hardware running great software. That shows in their iMac + OSX, iPod + iTunes, and the coming iPhone + OSX. Apple is not a hardware or a software company; it is not even a computer only company any more.IMHO, it is a consumer electronics company that creates good hardware, good software, and great integrations of the two.
gsneddersJan 23, 2007
@MikeCerm:Only the rev. A MacBook Pro, MacBook and iMac had a TPM module. There were no drivers included, so the OS couldn't do anything with it, at all. It was completely unused. TPM modules have genuine advantages, so I for one am sad they let it go.
archeklaineJan 23, 2007
Why didn't you factor in the fact that dell always has deals going on to reduce the prices of their laptops? You can usually shave off around 10-20% up to 40% or 700 bucks during the best deals. To cut out these coupons is to take out the reasons why it's good to buy at Dell. :P
kingygkJan 24, 2007
I would buy OSX for the pc in a heartbeat. I am so sick of patch tuesday for Windows Xp.
jeffyjonesJan 24, 2007
Actually, there's a really great reason to not try and support OS X on non-Apple hardware: Drivers. Trying to support a wide range of hardware would be very difficult to do.