Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cringely Predicts Apple to Ship OS X for Any PC

CowboyNeal posted more than 8 years ago | from the aqua-for-all dept.

789

boosman writes "In his current column, and in a similar op-ed piece in The New York Times, Robert X. Cringely predicts that Apple 'will announce a product similar to Boot Camp to allow OS X to run on bog-standard 32-bit PC hardware.' I dissect why this is unthinkable and challenge Cringely to a public bet on the subject."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

More likely than Apple dropping OS X for Windows (4, Informative)

Nova Express (100383) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090806)

Re:More likely than Apple dropping OS X for Window (3, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090870)

Just about every professional should know when to leave their profession. john Dvorak should have left 10 years ago. He has been wrong on SO many things.

Re:More likely than Apple dropping OS X for Window (4, Insightful)

Afrosheen (42464) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090984)

He's wrong for a reason. Dvorak has found a niche in publishing the unthinkable, and generating endless reams of flamebait from all kinds of industry pundits.

  Basically, he says alot of shit to get people pissed off and therefore generates hits. :)

Re:More likely than Apple dropping OS X for Window (5, Interesting)

jo7hs2 (884069) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090872)

You know, the funny thing is I was wondering if were weren't going to see the exact opposite of what Dvorak is predicting yesterday when pondering boot camp with the local Mac zealot. It struck me that Boot Camp might be the first step in a Microsoft purchase of the Apple OS, allowing Apple to concentrate on being a hardware company. With the delays and problems with their future OS, one can imagine Microsoft quitely purchasing Apple's OS line, or even just licensing it, rewiring the GUI to look like Windows. It would solve some of their security and stability problems, and chances are that they could pull it off without the average user noticing the change.

Re:More likely than Apple dropping OS X for Window (2, Interesting)

/ASCII (86998) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090909)

Microsoft is a company with a lot of talent, if they wanted to write a good new OS, they could do it. The problem is that they need to support DOS, 16-bit Windows apps and all the different incarnations of win32.

Re:More likely than Apple dropping OS X for Window (4, Insightful)

daniel23 (605413) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090947)


They make themself believe they have to. And this is one of the reasons for the mess they brought themselves into.

But this is so last century.

Virtualisation. Obsoletes. This.

Re:More likely than Apple dropping OS X for Window (3, Funny)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090996)

Dvorak, Cringely and Jobs and all the Apple fans should take part in a public mass debate about this.

They may have to (2, Interesting)

IamGarageGuy 2 (687655) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090808)

Someone is going to do it eventually anyway. If apple wants to get any cash from PC's using their OS they will have no choice but to come up with a "real" version to conteract the hacked versions that are undoubtedly going to spring up on every torrent site sometime in the near future (if not already)

Re:They may have to (5, Insightful)

acidblood (247709) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090855)

Someone is going to do it eventually anyway. If apple wants to get any cash from PC's using their OS they will have no choice but to come up with a "real" version to conteract the hacked versions that are undoubtedly going to spring up on every torrent site sometime in the near future (if not already)

Right, because all the big OEMs like Dell install OSes downloaded from The Pirate Bay. Oh, they don't? But surely Joe Sixpack is competent enough to install a new OS and is even aware of the existence of OS X (and hacked OS X)?

Face it, whoever's installing OS X on a non-Apple computer is not Apple's target market anyway. They're not paying now and wouldn't pay if Apple released a legal version, just like they pirate Windows today.

Re:They may have to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090946)

Tou are contradicting yourself:
"Joe Sixpack is competent enough to install a new OS and is even aware of the existence of OS X (and hacked OS X)?

Face it, whoever's installing OS X on a non-Apple computer is not Apple's target market anyway."

If Joe Sixpack isn't even aware of the existence of OS X, then he won't buy a Mac.

Re:They may have to (2, Insightful)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091003)

Face it, whoever's installing OS X on a non-Apple computer is not Apple's target market anyway. They're not paying now and wouldn't pay if Apple released a legal version, just like they pirate Windows today.
Not entirely. For example, I currently own an iMac and an iBook. The iBook is getting obsolete, and I would like to replace it with another Mac, but because Apple refuses to release a damn tablet (or even just a modern Newton!) I'll be forced to buy a Tablet PC of some sort (maybe an "Origami" device) and hack OS X to work on it instead. Luckily, because of the work other people have already put in to it, the only major remaining hurdle is getting Inkwell to work with the Tablet PC digitizer.

They may have to-Blow their seeds. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090858)

In other words piracy means that the content provider competes with a lessor version of themselves. I rather doubt Apple's worried about the "hacked" version since that's a GEEK thing, not a common man thing. Plus the "hacked" version is always going to be the lesser of the two operating systems.

Re:They may have to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090894)

Someone is going to do it eventually anyway. If apple wants to get any cash from PC's using their OS they will have no choice but to come up with a "real" version to conteract the hacked versions that are undoubtedly going to spring up on every torrent site sometime in the near future (if not already)

Right. Because of course NVidia and ATI and everyone is going to release generic OS X drivers for all the non-Apple-specific hardware they make, and OS X is just so kewl that nobody will care that their pirated version will need to be re-hacked for every minor update (as will every application they use).

Or, like, maybe not.

Hardware dongle possible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090920)

If Apple does ever release OS X able to run on commodity x86 32-bit PCs, you can be sure that a limited hardware compatibility list will be all that is supported, but I can also imagine them also shipping a hardware dongle (probably USB) containing some kind of clever encrypted key code with each and every copy of the OS, and branded with that copy's serial number. Some kind of "product activation" process will likely also be included too, to write a signature of your hardware into a flash area of the dongle as well as the product activation data too.

Re:They may have to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15091002)

If apple wants to get any cash from PC's using their OS they will have no choice but to come up with a "real" version to conteract the hacked versions

You seriously expect them to spend the time and money developing umpteen drivers, just so they can make a little more money selling OS X and lose a lot more money selling fewer Macs?

OS X is a major differentiator in the home computer market. Apple hardware isn't a major differentiator in the home computer market. They'd be trading in a huge advantage for very little.

Not necessarily (5, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091020)

Apple's value lies in its name, not in its propagation. Apple has been selling by the credo of "unpack - plug in - work", i.e. their stuff is known to work. Unlike Windows, which is more renowned for installing, downloading and installing drivers, downloading and installing patches, tinkering with this or that to make it work, etc.

The hacked OS doesn't hurt them. It's neither a damage to the brand nor to the sales. It doesn't work? So? WE DIDN'T MAKE IT! It works? So? You wouldn't have bought it anyway. If you did, you would've bought a Mac as well.

If they did make a "PC OSX", though, it could hurt the brand. It could drop Mac sales, and most likely it would suffer from driver problems, at least in the first year or so. A year is a long time, time enough to ruin a brand name for sure.

Re:They may have to (1)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091025)

Someone is going to do it eventually anyway.

That's just not the same thing. Look at what just happened, for instance. Booting XP on a Mac was already accomplished, with little impact from the "outside world." Apple then does it officially and gains nine billion dollars in market cap.

Nice plug... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090809)

...dork.

Makes perfect sense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090810)

Windows is the 800 lb Gorilla that forces all the manufacturers to toe up to its standard, now that the standard is there, you won't have compatability issues (at least not much), and the anti-MS group will jump at the chance.

Re:Makes perfect sense (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090940)

If you REALLY think that there are that many people who are anti-MS out there to put a dent into MS YOU ARE OUT OF YOUR MIND.

Why don't you alternate OS people get this through your skulls? Most people aren't looking to leave MS, you have to offer them a reason to leave MS for something BETTER. But as long as you idiots keeps shouting about how "bad" MS is the more they're just going to shrug at you and walk away. YOU need to OFFER them better, not just tell them what they have is junk. I still have yet to see anyone who has given me a reason to leave windows. The few apple converts I've known in the past few years have gone back to windows and linux? Hell, all the arguing about what distro to use, the driver support problems and the "inside" linux people still saying it's not ready for desktop... why would I want to deal with that.

4 minutes (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090811)

and no comments....whats going on here

Re:4 minutes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090866)

You see, it's because slashdot sucks anymore and is no longer the thriving technological discussion system it once was...

Well that and the fact that I'd have no life if I took the time to investigate the ramblings of every self-important prick out there. This guy has a blog and is taking on a seasoned vet? Well, I guess it could be worse, you know, like those fucktards who think that they have the singular insight into large R&D projects lead by real engineers who combined have hundreds of years of experience behind them. You know these guys, they're the ones that discuss alternative energy sources with their D&D buddies after they get off their shift of delivering pizzas and they think they're the only one with enough insight to see through "the man's" latest scam as reported on slashdot. I like to call them armchair engineers but I think that's giving them way too much credit.

Choke on it (-1, Offtopic)

BobVila (592015) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090812)

Cringley can choke on my wang. Dvorak can too.

Fruity Lust (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090821)

"In his current column, and in a similar op-ed piece in The New York Times, Robert X. Cringely predicts that Apple 'will announce a product similar to Boot Camp to allow OS X to run on bog-standard 32-bit PC hardware."

Half the goodness without buying the hardware. Boy some people just have lust in their veins.* Hope you all are stockholders.

*Either a testament to how good Apple is, or how bad Microsoft is. Anyway it's funny watching people fall all over themselves for the Apple experience.

That's telling him! (3, Funny)

maggard (5579) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090824)

Oooohhh!

Random blogger issues challenge to PBS columnist / NYT editorialist!

ASCII animation at 11pm...

Mod parent up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090922)

Who cares what this Bossman blogger says. I want to hear from Dvorak. His has the amazing ability of predicting things that will never happen, and if he concurs with Bossman, then Cringely is right.

Re:That's telling him! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15091016)

Random blogger issues challenge to PBS columnist / NYT editorialist!

Random slashdotter makes ad-homenim dismissal rather than confront the actual content. Examples at any time of the day or night.

idiots (0, Troll)

TK2K (834353) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090826)

this is just stupid, no way in hell apple will open it up to normal pc's, it would kill them, it really would.

Re:idiots (1, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090854)

this is just stupid, no way in hell apple will open it up to normal pc's, it would kill them, it really would.

Like it killed Microsoft?

Come on - Microsoft is vulnerable - Vista is severely wounded, the vendors are all looking for something new for the fall back-to-school and christmas seasons - this could be IT.

And which are they going to have bigger profit margins on - a CD that they sell for $200 or a mac mini at $500?

Plus, how many companies would like to get off the MS treadmill?

This could quadruple their market share in the next 12 months.

Re:idiots (5, Insightful)

tktk (540564) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090998)

And which are they going to have bigger profit margins on - a CD that they sell for $200 or a mac mini at $500?

Well, that depends on how much it cost them to make the software on the CD and how much it cost to create the mac mini. These things just don't appear in the stores automagically.

I think one of the biggest factors against OS X on PC's is the tech support. Getting hardware makers to provide OS X drivers should be easy. But then customers would call asking whether the Start button is. Or they'd call asking how to eject a CD. Answering those questions will cost Apple time and money. If if there's no solution, it'll cost them goodwill.

People like Apple because it just works. Put OS X on any PC and that advantage goes away.

Re:idiots (1)

Ibanez (37490) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091033)

Right. An OS is nothing without applications. Explain how Apple can release OS X for a generic PC and have people buy it when there are no applications for it. What's the replacement for Office? Oh, that's right. When Apple competes directly with with MS, there WILL NOT be Office for OS X.

Yeah, it's not nearly as simple as you think.

Re:idiots (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090863)

this is just stupid, no way in hell apple will open it up to normal pc's, it would kill them, it really would.

Don't be dumb. Apple is miniscule in the PC marketplace. They ALWAYS have been. If they were to sell OS/X for any Intel PC, it would be a BIG bonus to their bottom line. Not many people buy Apple computers FOR OS/X - please don't be so naive. However, if they could sell it for the PC...even if it were something to let folks dual boot....or install natively....much less make deals with PC makers to allow it to be sold pre-installed, it would be good for EVERYONE.

It would be good for Apple - as they would have a revenue stream they have NEVER had in their lifetime.

It would be good for MS - another retail, commercial, VIABLE, desktop OS....they could make it even easier by helping Apple let their systems interoperate even better. This will make MS look better to governments around the world.

It would be good for consumers. OS/X is a decent OS. It's really good for grandma and grandpa with it's simplicity.

This is the first time EVER that Apple could actually open up and do something good - for themselves, and the marketplace, and all it will take is some driver coding and some tweaks - not much work at all really - and whammo....

The only other issue would be them NOT overpricing it. People won't buy it if they try and sell it for like $300. An $89 upgrade and $149 full version will be a godsend. And if they can manage to get in with the likes of Dell, Gateway, Toshiba, etc, etc, for options for consumers...

Re:idiots (1)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090926)

OS/X is a decent OS. It's really good for grandma and grandpa with it's simplicity.

Huh? Examples, please, of things grandparents are likely to want to do which are noticably simpler in OS X than in Windows or Linux.

(Speaking from my own, purely anecdotal experience, I find people have a far, far harder time figuring out how the hell the dock is supposed to work than they do using the applications-menu system common to all the other major desktop environments. Maybe OS X is simpler for setting up wireless networks or something. But that's not something my grandparents are likely to want to do.)

Don't be so sure. (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090925)

They couldn't do it today, but once iWork is finished they can handle MS cutting off development of Office for OS X.

Unlike Be, Apple's not a competitor that Microsoft can simply destroy by threatening anyone who might include OS X on their PCs. They sell their own hardware, and also unlike Be, they could offer enough of a benefit to the Dells and Sonys of the world to be worth standing up to MS over.

Steve put a lot of things in play that had been considered over and done with for many years. I wouldn't rule out a play for OS dominance within ten years, especially if all he needs to do is top Vista.

-jcr

yet another blogger (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090840)

who are you and why should i care what you think?

Aint Godda Happun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090841)

No way dude! Apple needs nown hardware configerashun.

If you want an apple, buy one. (1)

ECXStar (533351) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090842)

That's what I did and have looked back after using Windows since Windows 1.0! Microsoft could do something about it but they would have to do like Apple did, leave backward compatibility behind and rearchitect the whole OS; start with a clean slate. To cover your base with backward compatibility, bundle VPC! They already bundle everything else.

I want OSX on my Dell (3, Interesting)

drewzhrodague (606182) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090843)

Seriously. I want OSX on my Dell laptop. This isn't rocket science, people. Even operating system development isn't rocket science -- it's computer science. If some guy on the Internet can put OSX on a generic PC, why won't Apple? I would pay $200 to put OSX on my Dell, maybe even more if it comes with all the extra bits. And if not? I'll still use Centos [centos.org] , if Apple doesn't want me as a customer.

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (3, Informative)

ral8158 (947954) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090873)

Guess what? ...
They don't.

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (2, Insightful)

gellenburg (61212) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090877)

What is your reason for wanting OSX on a generic "Dell" as opposed to a Mac Book Pro?

Is it simply because you already have the hardware and can't justify spending money on new hardware? Do you feel the Mac Book Pro doesn't have the same cost/ value quotient as your Dell?

If such is the case, then perhaps you should wait three years when your Dell becomes obsolete, and when it comes time to replace it, replace it with a MacBook Pro (or equivalent). That way, you'd be able to run OS X, Yellow Dog Linux, and probably Windows Vista if you so desired (something which I doubt your Latitude or Inspiron notebook won't be able to do.)

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090914)

What is your reason for wanting OSX on a generic "Dell" as opposed to a Mac Book Pro?

three mouse buttons?

it's one thing to say you can plug any ol' mouse into an apple desktop, but i can. not. do. my. work. with one mouse button, and i'm not going to buy a laptop that lacks a pointing device that meets my needs.

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (1)

Tezkah (771144) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090938)

You're talking about the trackpad, right?

On OS X you only need one mouse button, you can access context sensitive menus by ctrl+clicking or holding down the mouse button. It also supports scrolling (put two fingers on the trackpad, move in the direction you want to scroll).

How often to you right click with your trackpad? I usually just use it to tap things, its too awkward to right click using the button. If you want hardware developed for Windows, buy a Dell. If you want hardware developed for MacOS, buy a Mac. Its not that hard to understand.

Jack it, boyeee! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090957)

Using the mouse shouldn't be more complicated than masturbation.

Re:Jack it, boyeee! (1)

gellenburg (61212) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091004)

Obviously you haven't reached the stage of enlightenment yet to recognize that the only part of your body necessary for masturbation is only your mind.

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (0, Flamebait)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090951)

And is the MacBook Pro the perfect laptop?

Obviously it has the look, and it's got great specs. But it's also hobbled by a terrible keyboard that's missing a lot of standard keys and a single mouse button. And there's no docking station available. Bottom line is that it's kick-ass laptop with a totally luser-style keyboard/mouse setup (for no reason other than that's what Apple came up with 10 years ago). Hard thing to over look for my $two grand.

But that's all personal choice, which is the key here. Apple only offers a handful of laptops, and they're all limited in one way or another, and fairly pricey to boot. Which might be fine for *some people*, but if you can't find an Apple model that you want to buy, you really have no choice but to not run OS X. Which is why people want "OSX on Dell" -- because Dell and the rest of the PC world offers a lot more choice in terms of size/feature/price than Apple does.

(Personally, I want "OS X on ThinkPad" -- but I know I'll probably never get it legally.)

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (1)

Millenniumman (924859) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090967)

Well, I guess I can understand being used to a two button trackpad button, although I dislike them. Apple should come out with something like the mighty mouse, where there is one button that can function as one or two. Two button scrolling is really nice, though.

I really like the keyboard, though. The keys are nice and the backlighting is convenient. What buttons is it missing?

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (2, Interesting)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091005)

I just had an idea. I never use the actual physical button on my trackpad, always the tapping. I love the two finger scrolling. How about two finger tapping for a right click?

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (4, Insightful)

gellenburg (61212) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090968)

it's also hobbled by a terrible keyboard that's missing a lot of standard keys and a single mouse button.

Have you typed for any length of time on a MacBook Pro's keyboard where you can honestly make this assertion or is your assertion simply based on speculation and presumption?


With regards to missing standard keys, could you be more specific? Are you referring to "Prt Scr," "Sys Rq," etc? Which keys are missing that are considered "standard"?


Re:I want OSX on my Dell (1)

Been on TV (886187) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091030)

The MacBook Pro's got all the keys and buttons you need to run Mac OS X.

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (1)

shawb (16347) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090897)

The reason Apple can't do it is because if it doesn't work on someone's particular configuration, "Some random guy on the internet" isn't going to have to put in all the tech support trying to get it working right and suffer massive PR flack for messing it up in the first place. Apple will have all that against them. That means that Apple has to make their bootstrapper much more robust and flexible than SRGOTI.

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (1)

xdroop (4039) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090974)

And if not? I'll still use Centos, if Apple doesn't want me as a customer.
Apple does want you as a customer -- they want you to be a customer for their fine hardware.

Do try to keep up.

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (2, Funny)

bloodstains (676306) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090992)

...and I want a Pony...

Re:I want OSX on my Dell (1)

OmegaBlac (752432) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091009)

...if Apple doesn't want me as a customer.
But Apple does want you as a customer. They just want you to buy a Mac with OS X preinstalled in order to become that customer.

I'll bet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090845)

I'll do you both one better:

Microsoft buys Apple and releases OS X in place of longhorn/vista/vaporware

iheartbeer!

Not any time soon, but eventually this will happen (3, Interesting)

3seas (184403) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090846)

The reason is simple. Linux is shaping up to be better and better at being user friendly and desktop quality. Apple will have to compete with that.

I'm actually interested in getting a linux box up at work, as an introduction to what office software is available on it..

Re:Not any time soon, but eventually this will hap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090852)

what? you're on drugs, there's no competition there. apple's OS is light years beyond linux on the desktop...

Re:Not any time soon, but eventually this will hap (4, Insightful)

acidblood (247709) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090949)

Linux is shaping up to be better and better at being user friendly and desktop quality.

Yeah, right. They may be `shaping up', but it will take at least a decade before they reach the level of Apple in 2006. Never mind that they'll have to catch up with Apple's 2016 experience then.

That's from a former on-and-off Linux user since 1998, full time user since 2001, who switched to Macs in 2005 and isn't looking back in the least. I had to suffer (strong emphasis on suffer) Ubuntu for a couple of days in February, and I was reminded how painful Linux is and seriously wondered how I managed these four years as a Linux-only user. Windows is paradise in comparison. (Oh, by the way: I've never seen such blatant imitation as KDE's Control Center is of OS X's System Preferences. I actually laughed out loud the first time I saw it. I'll forever use it as an anecdote to characterize open source developers and their culture of imitation.)

Not any time soon-Tape Measures at dawn. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090964)

Oh Lord! Another "just you wait till I start playing with it, then you'll see how big it really is" post. How about the rest of the world pause for a year, and give you all time to grow that thing. Then we can do tape measures at dawn, and see if this is the year for "Desktop Linux".

Re:Not any time soon, but eventually this will hap (1)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091028)

you got be kidding yourself if you think Linux is even close to Windows in usability... Linux is 10-15 years behind Apple in a stable OS. Its dead for all except people who like to tinker with things just to get them running.

Resistance is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090847)

o allow OS X to run on bog-standard 32-bit PC hardware.

You forgot the "r" in "borg" standard.

TF rebuttal is flawed as well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090848)

The whole "OS X is so stable because it only runs on limited hardware" is nothing but US Grade A BOLLOCKS. Apple actually has a quite variety of hardware within their own line. It's only an issue of drivers, and MS doesn't support a whole lot anyway. The architecture of the whole OS is just much better than Windows', because it was designed with more than one dried up brain cell. Take Linux or BSD for example. They run on almost any vanilla PC hardware, and are more stable and secure than Windows. And their drivers are often just reverse engineered since the HW vendors are often not forthcoming about the HW specs.

It's an interesting idea (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090849)

But:
1) as the article mentions, it undercuts Apple's hardware business. It only makes sense if Apple is going to become a software-only business (except for items such as the iPod); and
2) Jobs already went down that road with the x86 version of NextStep, and then OpenStep, when NeXT stopped making hardware. They couldn't make sufficient money on it, even with OS prices of several hundred dollars per unit. How has the equation changed?
3) Should Apple price their OS X on x86 offering at a level comparable to Windows, MS would do everything it could to undercut them -- it has deep pockets and an entrenched position with vendors. I.e. MS wouldn't stay still.

I think "no" is a pretty safe bet unless something fundamental changes (even more fundamental than Intel Macs!).

Re:It's an interesting idea (1)

shawb (16347) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090917)

Jobs already went down that road with the x86 version of NextStep, and then OpenStep, when NeXT stopped making hardware. They couldn't make sufficient money on it, even with OS prices of several hundred dollars per unit. How has the equation changed?

The equation has changed in that OSX is a product that a large number of consumers have heard of and, more importantly, may be interested in. NeXT was something that only a limited number of people had even heard about (I'm talking Joe Sixpack and Aunt Tillie here... people for who MacOS would be vastly more suited than windows is.

I wish I had challenged some Apple fans... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090850)

For a bet few years ago. The subject of the bet could have been: "Will Apple use Intel's x86 chips in next 5 years?".

I would be very rich by now...

More Likely: Windows OEM (5, Insightful)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090862)

The eternal question about Apple is if they're a software company or a hardware company ... and when it comes down to it, I think they'll choose hardware.

The release of the Bootcamp Beta opens the door for Apple becoming a Windows OEM and shipping dualboot systems with Windows and OS X. Apple still has decent margins on their hardware, and can make plenty of money selling to customers that just want a stylish Wintel box. Plus it gives people a low-risk opportunity to try OS X.

Apple has also had a very strong relationship with Microsoft in recent years, and I don't see them competiting head-to-head for Dell's sales.

Re:More Likely: Windows OEM (2, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090950)

The release of the Bootcamp Beta opens the door for Apple becoming a Windows OEM and shipping dualboot systems with Windows and OS X.

Apple's not going to go down the Windows rathole. They're very clear, right on the Boot Camp web page that they don't sell or support windows.

Remember, Steve was selling OpenStep for Windows back in '97, and it was not a pleasant thing to be dependent on MS's good will to stay in business. I'm sure that's why iWork was started, and I'm just as sure that the iWork crew are hard at work on replacing every part of MS Office with an app that stands head and shoulders above its counterpart, just as Keynote does.

-jcr

Re:More Likely: Windows OEM (1)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091013)

Apple's not going to go down the Windows rathole.

File this next to:
+ Apple will never ship Intel x86 CISC
+ Apple will never ship an obsolete BIOS

It's high time that people stop thinking of Apple's Mac Strategy in terms of 2004 and earlier. At this point it's a basic Occam's Razor issue -- why would Apple create a Windows boot environment, if they weren't planning on selling it.

> I'm sure that's why iWork was started, and I'm just as sure that the iWork crew are hard at work on replacing every part of MS Office

I'm sure that Apple will do everything within their power to keep Microsoft Office on Mac OS X. It's the highest selling software package for their platform, and absolutely critical to their corporate customers. Steve Jobs himself made that absolutely clear. I know the Appleheads hate to acknowledge it, but Apple and MS are buddies [time.com] .

So, in conclusion, your message is standard MacZealot-talk, and MacZealots have a horrible track record predicting Apple's next move over the last year.

Re: More Likely: Windows OEM (1)

gidds (56397) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091001)

The eternal question about Apple is if they're a software company or a hardware company...

(Er, technically it's not, coz the answer's a simple "Yes". The question is whether they're a software company or a hardware company. But anyway...)

Why must it be one or the other? Why can't it be both?

AISI, Apple is a hardware company in the sense that they make most of their money from selling hardware. But they're not just selling the hardware; otherwise they'd just be another Dell, and we know that's not it. Macs aren't just about the hardware: they have a unique selling point, which is OS X and its applications. And Apple makes OS X and some of those applications. So they're also a software company; but instead of that software being completely separate, they use it an an incentive to buy their hardware.

In other words, you can't separate the two. Apple isn't a hardware company like Dell and all the other hardware companies. Neither are they a software company like Microsoft and all the other software companies. Instead, they're linking the two. People buy Mac hardware in order to run Mac software.

Which is why Windows-on-Mac-hardware isn't a problem; it's adding an extra incentive to buy Mac hardware on top of the existing one. But (legal, supported) OS-X-on-PC-hardware would break the link, destroy that Apple synergy, and remove the main reason for buying Mac hardware. It would separate Apple's hardware and software divisions and force them both to stand on their own, each lacking their main advantage. And, in a marketplace which is extremely far from level and with huge inertia, the results would not be pretty.

Re:More Likely: Windows OEM (5, Interesting)

znu (31198) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091019)

I think you've got it exactly backwards. Apple's move to Intel hardware, and especially its decision to use off-the-shelf Intel chipsets, demonstrates that Apple has decided to leave the heavy hardware engineering to someone else, and concentrate instead on software. OS X is the big thing Apple has that e.g. Dell doesn't. Pretty cases are nice, but not something on which to base a serious grab for market share.

If you look at how Apple is presenting Boot Camp, everything from the text of the press release to the design of the icon suggests Apple is positioning it as the new Classic; it's a tool to allow people to run their old apps while they transition to OS X. In other words, the shift here is that Apple is positioning OS X not just as an alternative to Windows, but as a successor.

So, why shouldn't Apple bundle Windows, then? After all, they bundled OS 9 with OS X, for use in the Classic environment. Well, I don't think there's much point in this case. Regular users are not going to be interested in dual booting; they can barely use one operating system. Two markets will take an interest: the enterprise market, and tech enthusiasts. In both of these markets, people don't really care if Windows is pre-installed, as they probably have copies kicking around already. As such there's no good reason for Apple to put itself in a position where it's relying on Microsoft for OEM copies of Windows.

I think Cocoa apps on Win is more likely (5, Interesting)

Psykechan (255694) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090865)

I have to agree with this site [macosrumors.com] that talks about Apple possibly resurrecting "Yellow Box" for Windows which would allow for running Cocoa (and possibly Carbon) apps under Windows after a paltry 150MB install. Sort of a sanctioned WINE for running OS X apps cross platform.

This would allow developers to continue developing Cocoa for Mac and have instant ports to Windows; no dual booting or emulation involved.

Not going to happen. (5, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090956)

As I said over on Macslash:

I was yelling as loud as anyone else when Apple reneged on the promise they'd made at WWDC three years in a row that a Cocoa runtime would be available for windows, at no charge. I still think it's something Apple probably should have done, since MS's hammer-lock on the industry isn't because of their crap knock-off the the Mac's UI, it's the number of developers who are locked into their APIs. If Yellow box had been kept alive, .NOT wouldn't have been able to take over the windows developers quite so easily.

Nevertheless, the yellow box depended on Display Postscript, which Apple and Adobe couldn't come to terms on licensing (Probably because anyone could have written far better PDF-manipulating app that Acrobat in about a week using Cocoa.)

When Apple abandoned DPS for Quartz 2D, the amount of work necessary to implement Cocoa on windows got a lot bigger. Windows simply doesn't have a lot of the underlying facilties on which Cocoa depends today. Their POSIX layer is a joke. Their graphics are only begining to catch up to Jaguar. Their reliability? Well, don't get me started.

But, all that being said, the main reason why Apple's not going to revive Cocoa on Windows is that there just isn't enough money to be made selling developer tools on Windows. Compare Apple's revenues to RealBasic, Delphi, and CodeWarrior combined. It's not worth it just so that Apple can make life better for developers on the other platform.

-jcr

Re:Not going to happen. (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091031)

Just to your last point about selling developer tools on Windows -- if I were Apple I DEFINITELY WOULDN'T DO THAT.

Continue to give away developer tools on the Mac. Developers buy Macs, develop their software, and sell it to Windows users (and Mac users). The Mac gets lots more software and Apple sells lots of Macs to developers and a growing number of users.

It's too bad, there isn't ANY good cross platform GUI API.

face it, its over... (-1, Flamebait)

Connie_Lingus (317691) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090867)

I believe the forces of entropy have finally whittled away at Jobs' "aesthetic of the Mac" cult mindset, and the glory days of look-at-me-my-Mac-is-cool are over. Yes, I know ye Mac faithful will fight, then mourn the lost "glory days" of fanaticism, but the party is over and the only ones left are the dudes who couldn't get a chick drunk enough to leave with...

OS X almost assuredly will, at some future date, become YAOS (yet another operation system), down-loadable for a song at alt.binaries.warez...

Re:face it, its over... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090943)

Did the switch to Intel precipitate all this? I think so. I think Apple may look back and say, "Man, we should have never changed over to Intel. It ended up destroying us."

- A disgruntled Mac PPC user

Why pay attention? (3, Insightful)

bokmann (323771) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090878)

Why does anyone pay attention to Cringley? I mean, do any of these 'industry pundits' ever have to keep track of the accuracy of their 'predictions'? No... they just make ever-outlandish predictions because it gets them some publicity and gets some eyeballs for ad revenue over to their website. Just say 'no'.

Nothing to see here except a crank who made a fairly obvious, if not very likely prediction.

Re:Why pay attention? (4, Informative)

taskforce (866056) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091011)

I mean, do any of these 'industry pundits' ever have to keep track of the accuracy of their 'predictions'? No...

Actually, funnily enough he does: Each year. [pbs.org] Although his definition of correct is a bit liberal, at least he tries.

Re:Why pay attention? (2, Informative)

Sheriff Fatman (602092) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091024)

"I mean, do any of these 'industry pundits' ever have to keep track of the accuracy of their 'predictions'?"

No, they don't have to... but Bob Cringely is one of the few who does, albeit to a limited extent. Each January, his column starts by analysing all the predictions he made in last years' column, and seeing how accurate they turned out. He then goes on to predict what he thinks the coming year has in store.

You can find this year's column here [pbs.org] , and previous columns are all linked from his archive [pbs.org]

I think he has it backwards (4, Interesting)

Cthefuture (665326) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090881)

Much more likely that Apple will start selling hardware to run Windows. It will be marketed as a "high-end" Windows platform that is certified and all that jazz. The drivers and everything will be tested (or written) by Apple just like they do now for OS X so they system will function as a cohesive unit much like OS X + Apple hardware does now.

Re:I think he has it backwards (1)

hsmith (818216) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090997)

I agree. Mac doesn't want to deal with supporting shit hardware. More than likely they are setting themselves up to be a "high end" windows hardware developer as well as still pump out OSX for the machines.

It would be a nice revenue stream, but... (1, Interesting)

oscartheduck (866357) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090882)

Apple doesn't seem to make much money on its OS. Think about it: Microsoft Windows ships for about 25 cents a copy. They have the code ready after all the R&D, it just gets burned to a CD and has a huge price tag to offset the massive amounts of cash spent developing the OS. But that price tag is enough to earn a lot of money, eventually.

Mac OS, on the other hand, ships on media that costs something approaching a thousand dollars in some cases, as you can only buy it on a computer. And the hardware that comes with that OS cost apple money. This is one of the reasons, I believe, that Mac OS is based upon Free/Net/Open BSD; to help offset R&D costs becuase the OS itself isn't that profitable. SO this would make sense as a revenue stream.

But the reason why Apple has such a great reputation for a solid OS that crashes considerably less than average is twofold:

1) It's based on other OSes that have a sane drivers/program space implementation, such that a single bad driver or program doesn't collapse the system
2) It only supports around ten computers.

The latter is very important. The real reason why Windows XP has retained the nastiness of BSOD is third party drivers being pieces of shit.

It's tempting to say that Apple would want to make a shitload of cash on their OS, but at the same time I don't think they want to have to surmount the drivers issue and start getting a piece of shit reputation.

Re:It would be a nice revenue stream, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090959)

"Mac OS, on the other hand, ships on media that costs something approaching a thousand dollars in some cases, as you can only buy it on a computer."

Uh... WHAT?

I know what you're trying to say, dude, but you can buy OSX in a box for $109, and install it on older (cheap) Macs, and have it run pretty well. Saying that OSX effectively costs "a thousand dollars in some cases" is just ludicrous.

Re:It would be a nice revenue stream, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090988)

Your signature is a very poor example of how to use the coral cache.

First, you're using it for a site that's fast -- it took about 30 seconds to load the coral cached version. I was able to load the actual page about 15 times while I was waiting for the coral cache to get its shit together. All you're doing is wasting coral resources.

Second, the images in the page still load from slashdot.org. The coral cache is only useful when you have control over the content of the page and can ensure that your images are using relative URLs.

I'm curious. What's your understanding of the problem that the coral cache aims to solve? And what is your understanding of the strategy it is using to solve that problem?

This old debate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090891)

I've people talk about this forever, even before the switch to Intel was announced. "If only Apple would make OS X for all PC's, they could take on Microsoft." I think Apple is always ready to do something like that, but only as some sort of backup plan. Like they've had Intel OS X as a backup plan all along. What would prompt them to do this? I don't know, but it's not going to happen any time soon if it does. They are just getting their feet wet with the switch to Intel.

If they were going to do anything, they would license installation of OS X to 3rd party PC builders (but very strict requirements so that hardware is stable), a repeat of the clones. But they are going to be very cautious going into something like that. Only after they have success with those types of arrangements would they allow OS X on arbitrary PC's. And that would only happen in some scenario where they have to do it. The only scenario I can think of is if some OS comes into existance that competes with their OS on all levels (and runs on all PC's) and starts to eat their market share.

Like that's going to happen (5, Informative)

EMB Numbers (934125) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090895)

I am the founder and owner of probably the most successful formerly Openstep based software companies. We were very successful, and I suspect but can't prove that we made a lot more money from Openstep than NeXT ever did. Apple acquired NeXT and after a couple of years refused to sell more Openstep deployment licenses at any price (reneging on a couple of years of promises to the contrary that I personally heard emanate from Steve Job's mouth).

We sold specialized vertical market software for a lot of money. We could easily have bundled a Mac with each license to use our applications as long as Apple let our customers toss the Mac in a dumpster and run the software on an embedded Intel based single board computer. Apple clearly did not regard such a proposition as an adequate business model for selling Openstep deployment licenses.

Neither Apple nor Mr. Jobs nor market conditions have changed in any way that would change this. Yellow Box is not coming back. OS X on generic Intel will not be sanctioned by Apple any time soon. The rules of doing business with Apple have become painfully clear.

I predicted this in January (1)

smoothwallsamuel (753105) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090899)

Hmmm, I predicted this [samuelgordonstewart.com] in January. To quote from my article:

"With the recent raft of underwhelming presentations on Windows Vista and the gradual loss of originally planned features in it, and Apple Macintosh moving to Intel processors, it wouldn't be unreasonable to see Macintosh gain ground this year, here's how I think it will happen.

Microsoft will release Vista with their usual marketing hype, claiming that it is fantastic and probably bring back the "10 reasons to upgrade". Apple will release their next version of Macintosh with a lot of marketing along the lines of "most of the stuff in Vista we had five years ago, and look what we've got now...even better, it runs on YOUR PC", effectively canning their "Mac Box Only" pseudo-restrictions. Apple, with their increased presence, thanks to the iPod, will gain customers with the more secure, and more impressive OS.

I am really gaining the impression that Apple have lost their "also-ran" status from public perception with the iPod and iTunes and their general "nice guy" appearance, this will help them win customers from Microsoft. Also I think the general public are starting to wake up to the fact that, despite Microsoft claims, new versions of Windows are rarely more stable than the last, and the "new features" aren't all that exciting after all. Whilst the general public will see this as a way to escape the MS security problems, IT people will see it as a way to make vulnerabilities less attractive to "malicious users" as they won't have the same large scale effect.

I forsee Open Office using this to their advantage, perhaps making a deal with Apple to include Open Office in Mac OS."


Samuel Gordon-Stewart
Canberra

boutique hardware (2, Insightful)

_|()|\| (159991) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090901)

Cringely discounts the significance of Boot Camp:
While Boot Camp might help show prospective purchasers the superiority of Apple hardware, those purchasers would have to buy their Macs first and then convince themselves that they had done the right thing, which is totally backwards.
It's not that Apple hardware is superior, it's that it occupies a part of the market with relatively little competition. The iMac is the best all-in-one I've seen, and the Mac mini is virtually unique. With officially sanctioned drivers and a boot loader, I can see lots of people buying a Mac just to run Windows. The fact that it comes with OS X is just icing on the cake.

Re:boutique hardware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090999)

"Mac mini is virtually unique."

Yeah right, Shuttle released their mini PC with similar size in 2001 [anandtech.com] , over two years before Mac mini.

Sorry, I forgot that in a world of Apple fanatics technology doesn't exist until Apple creates a product based on it.

Saddle up! (1)

ILKO_deresolution (352578) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090905)

We need more bets on this sort of subject, public bets, in front of all /.

Is this really Apples goal? (0, Troll)

slashbob22 (918040) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090907)

Call me cynical, because I am. I would first like to clarify that I am not a Redmond Junkie.

I had a long discussion over lunch the other day about the future of Apple and the timing and purpose of Boot Camp. While I would like to see OSX more widely used, and I am sure there will be some individuals who will dual-boot and decide that they like OSX better, I see that vast majority of dual-booters using Windows on a unique, and expensive, piece of hardware.

I am concerned that there may not be a business case for Apple to maintain OSX. Why continue to branch an OS while windows is available? The bulk of Apples Revenues are from the iPod and iTunes. I believe that prevailing software laws indicate that you must support it for around 3 years after release and the move to Intel architecture could be the beginning of this phase out.

Contrary to Cringely, I can certainly foresee a day where "Mac" hardware will, by default, ship with Windows.

B level Blogger to A+ Level Blogger... (1)

marz007 (72932) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090910)

In reference to a recent User Friendly story plot line...

Nicely done though.. :) I totally agree, Jobs isn't that dumb.

I think Cringley was just offering some wishful thinking, not really expecting it to happen. I doubt he'd take that bet, even for $1US.

-=TekMage

I honestly don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090918)

Whether its Apple or Microsoft, having one company in charge is a bad thing, period. I more in favor of Linux desktops continuing to get improved interfaces and OEM support.

BTW - I still remember when Slashdot was more about open source and less about being gaga over Apple.

One vote for the blogger - Apple won't do it (4, Insightful)

PenguinOpus (556138) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090931)

Boosman's response is far better than Cringely's column in pointing out the real problem: device driver management.

My experience with OSX drivers is that Apple barely gets enough support from device manufacturers (DMs) to stay above water. In some cases they bring development in-house to try to improve quality. Doing so in the Darwinistic land of PC hardware is impossible: the DMs must provide good drivers. Getting OSX marketshare up to the 25-50% level necessary for DMs to pay real attention will require years. During that time, OSX-on-nonApple-HW customers would provide a stream of complaints that would tarnish Apple's reputation but, more importantly, would slow down their development of OSX and give Microsoft a chance to catch up.

I personally would love to run OSX on other hardware right now, but PC hardware is getting _so_ commoditized that prices are falling to the point where the human cost of a poor operating system may outweigh the marginal cost Apple charges for their hardware for many people.

    Apple is now 100% on that commodity train and as long as their marginal cost stays rational, they'll slowly grow marketshare.

Direct competition at last (1)

Bombula (670389) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090932)

I'm not much of a Mac person, nor much of a computer person for that matter. So I think I can speak better for the unwashed masses than most other slashdotters! From my POV, this has been a very, very long time coming. Being a PC user isn't really a choice in my line of work - I'm stuck on the bandwagon with the dominant M$ market standards of Windows and Office. And I'm not wealthy, so buying a good Mac has never been an option (I almost got an iMac once though...). But if I can run OSX and XP/Vista out of the same box just by choosing between the two on start-up, that is absolutely ideal.

Basically, the benefits will come to the consumer as a result of teir being genuine direct competition in the marketplace. Right now, competition between Mac and PC is not as direct as it could be because of the hardware divide. Hardware commonality means that Mac OS and MS Windows will finally get to go head-to-head. And guess who wins? The consumer! Speaking for casual users, I think that's what we've all been waiting for.

And lastly, I think this will serve to bring down the wall between the Mac and PC camp, and hopefully help to get rid of some of the Us versus Them mentality, especially among casual computer users.

What a waste of good bits. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090934)

Running OS X on a Gateway? Sounds like gilding a turd!

Cringley *Re*predicts (4, Informative)

earthbound kid (859282) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090941)

This isn't the first time Cringley has predicted OS X on generic hardware see also his January 12th column [pbs.org] .

"Here's how I believe it will work. Apple won't offer versions of OS X for generic Intel hardware because the drivers and the support obligation would be too huge. But just as you can buy a shrink-wrapped copy of 10.4 for your iMac, they'll gladly sell you a shrink-wrapped Intel version intended for an Intel Mac, but of course YOU CAN PUT IT ON ANY MACHINE YOU LIKE. The key here is to offer no guarantees and only limited support, patterned on the kind you get for most Open Source packages -- a web site, forums, download section. and a wiki. Apple will help users help themselves. With two to three engineers and some outreach to hackers and hardware makers, Apple could put together an unofficial program that could easily attract two to three million Windows users per year to migrate their old machines to the new OS. Imagine the profit margins of three engineers effectively generating $300-plus million per year in sales."


There's nothing new about his prediction in this week's column, he's just confirming that he still think it's going to happen, even though they released the reverse product from the one he said they would. In the same column he predicted "two new Intel Macs with huge plasma displays, but with keyboards and mice as options -- literally big-screen TVs that just happen to be computers, too" and an expanded .Mac service. The year is only a quarter out, so there's still time for him to have been right, but I'm still a little skeptical. Then again, it's Apple, so you never know what they'll do next. Last year at this time, who'd a believed in Intel iMacs?

Where does bog-standard come from? (1)

StateOfTheUnion (762194) | more than 8 years ago | (#15090952)

I've often wondered where the term bog-standard comes from. My friends from South England use it all the time . . .

Never happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15090981)

Think about boot camp. It's actually a stroke of genius. Joe Sixpack walks into the Compuseless and likes the look of the mac mini. Says to sales flunkie " I really like it but all my stuff is on windows"
Sales flunkie says, "that's OK this will run windows as well" just download this and throw in your windows CD"
It will be a slow erosion of standard windows boxes and the Mac Mini will lead the way. When Joes XP blows up with spyware, malware etc Joe Sixpack will say "Fuck it I just need my email lets see if I can get it with OS X" I will fix/ reload windows later"

A public bet ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15091017)

A public bet ? Lame. And less space than a Nomad...

** ducks **

A deal with the devil (1)

jacken (98085) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091023)

Microsoft promised to continue to make Office for Mac for another five years. It's pretty obvious that Apple had to pay back. My wild guess is that they promised not to release a generic version of Mac OS X for another five years.

Apple Maths (1)

nowaycomputer (920206) | more than 8 years ago | (#15091032)

There's no sensible reason for Apple to consider allowing OSX to be run on generic x86 hardware, consider the relative costs of hardware and software:

  • Apple stand to gain from more people buying macs (average cost $x000) with the knowledge of XP compatibility
  • Microsoft stand to gain from Mac-users buying XP ($x00)
  • Apple stand to LOSE from people buying generic hardware over apple hardware ($x000) to run OSX.


It would be madness to open a new market for the hope of gaining profits on a $x00 profit at the risk of the profits of a $x000 product.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?