OS X for PC's!

[robertdrumm]

I'm sure others have wondered this simple question. "If Mac will allow thier computers to run windows, why wont Mac let pc's run windows?" If you think its a dumb question please just ignore. I personally think it would be a major jump in sales for mac. I love the simplicity of OS X, but hate its limitations. If i could switch between them on a PC like you can a mac i would love that and deffinately buy both.
My question is why wouldnt it be a good idea? and how many people would like this option?

 

[Jodell88]

Not gonna happen. Apple relies on their products being "exclusive."

You can try making a hackintosh if you want.

 

[Anteaus]

Apple is predominately a hardware company. They make the bulk of their money selling hardware that is more often than not sold at a higher price point than a similar performing PC. Many people buy Apple hardware in order to use OSX as an alternative to Windows, but if you remove that requirement Apple would lose a lot of sales. Apple fans would still buy them, but they would defintely see a decrease in sales.

 

[WelshBloke]

OSx86

 

[DigDog]

http://www.osx86project.org/

yes. you can.

 

[Subyman]

Part of the reason the Mac experience is so smooth to the general consumer is the tight hardware profile Apple needs to program for. If they opened the doors to all types of hardware it would be a massive undertaking with no reward at the end. MS spends a ton of money trying to drag legacy hardware support along with each new windows version.

 

[dagamer34]

I'm sure others have wondered this simple question. "If Mac will allow thier computers to run windows, why wont Mac let pc's run windows?" If you think its a dumb question please just ignore. I personally think it would be a major jump in sales for mac. I love the simplicity of OS X, but hate its limitations. If i could switch between them on a PC like you can a mac i would love that and deffinately buy both.
My question is why wouldnt it be a good idea? and how many people would like this option?

It's not going to happen for the following reasons:
1) Apple makes money on hardware, not software.
2) Apple is already the most profitable company in the world.
3) OS X is not ready for the onslaught of malware that would come if it gained any significant amount of marketshare.
4) OS X only works because it is designed for a limited number of hardware configurations.
5) Apple supports an operating system for about 4 years. Microsoft commits to software updates for at LEAST 10 years. No business wants to be constantly upgrading operating systems.
6) It would not get massive adoption in businesses because Apple does not give guarantees for amount of time software would be supported.

And I am sure there are several more. Just not happening. Sorry.

 

[WelshBloke]

It's not going to happen for the following reasons:
1) Apple makes money on hardware, not software.
2) Apple is already the most profitable company in the world.
3) OS X is not ready for the onslaught of malware that would come if it gained any significant amount of marketshare.
4) OS X only works because it is designed for a limited number of hardware configurations.
5) Apple supports an operating system for about 4 years. Microsoft commits to software updates for at LEAST 10 years. No business wants to be constantly upgrading operating systems.
6) It would not get massive adoption in businesses because Apple does not give guarantees for amount of time software would be supported.

And I am sure there are several more. Just not happening. Sorry.

It's just number one.

That said a decent osx86 install should be as stable as a native osx one. Could be a damn sight faster depending on the hardware as well.

 

[robertdrumm]

So apple's software will only work with any hardware? or is that something they just claim?

 

[Zaap]

It's just number one.

That said a decent osx86 install should be as stable as a native osx one. Could be a damn sight faster depending on the hardware as well.

Yup.
Quite happily running OSX on my own choice of hardware and loving it. Have been since 2008. Apple assembling the hardware for me (they don't really make any of it, they commission it like everyone else) would tend to be a downgrade, other than the external build quality of a MacBook Pro.

 

[Zaap]

So apple's software will only work with any hardware? or is that something they just claim?

I'm guessing you meant "their own" hardware not "any".

If so: officially yes. In practice, no. Otherwise I wouldn't be responding to this from my Hack running Lion 10.7.3.

 

[Paperlantern]

I'm sure others have wondered this simple question. "If Mac will allow thier computers to run windows, why wont Mac let pc's run windows?" If you think its a dumb question please just ignore. I personally think it would be a major jump in sales for mac. I love the simplicity of OS X, but hate its limitations. If i could switch between them on a PC like you can a mac i would love that and deffinately buy both.
My question is why wouldnt it be a good idea? and how many people would like this option?

Why would "Apple", not Mac, as ou say... Have any say in whether someone could run windows on a pc. Millions of pcs run windows, apple has no say in that. If you actually did mean to say why won't apple let pcs run OSX, like a few people here seemed to have assumed you meant. Then I'll reiterate a couple points. Apple makes money on hardware and software combinations that is second to none when paired. OSX on a MacBook pro hardware is a great experience. Can OSX run on a PC? Yes. Is it the same experience, some would say its close enough to justify the cost different, but no, it isn't. It's the combination that is their hook, if
they let OSX install on all hardware, like windows, not only would heh need to recode a bunch of it, and add a ton more driver support that would create more problems than apple would most likely wan to deal with publicly, it wouldn't be up o their performance standard either.

 

[robertdrumm]

Everyone keeps saying apple's hardware choice is superior, or along that line somewhere. If that's true then why is the hardware specs of a pc workstation not available in any mac? For a consumer computer they maybe superior, but not for business or professional use?

 

[robertdrumm]

I'm guessing you meant "their own" hardware not "any".

If so: officially yes. In practice, no. Otherwise I wouldn't be responding to this from my Hack running Lion 10.7.3.

I never heard of anyone hacking OS X. is certain hardware needed?

 

[lxskllr]

Everyone keeps saying apple's hardware choice is superior, or along that line somewhere. If that's true then why is the hardware specs of a pc workstation not available in any mac? For a consumer computer they maybe superior, but not for business or professional use?

Their hardware isn't superior. They have nice industrial design, but the stuff that actually works is the same as every other computer.

 

[robertdrumm]

so truthfully apple makes its money on software?

 

[lxskllr]

so truthfully apple makes its money on software?

They make their money on the total experience. You buy an Apple computer, and everything's been tested so it's virtually guaranteed to work correctly. Add on to that, the pretty design choices, and they get a nice markup.

Developing computer systems is easy when you have a known target.
I could build you an Ubuntu computer with cherry picked parts, and it would run as reliably as a Mac. It might not look as pretty, but it would be reliable.

 

[Fardringle]

Truthfully, Apple makes its money by putting the shiny apple logo on a (sometimes) nice looking case around average hardware and people pay a big price premium because it "must be better because it's Apple".

 

[dagamer34]

Apple makes a lot of money leveraging their supply chain to build computers with very exclusive components that no other OEM can afford.

 

[Zaap]

Apple makes a lot of money leveraging their supply chain to build computers with very exclusive components that no other OEM can afford.

I'm trying to think of examples.

Retina display maybe?

Originally the dual 6-core CPUs in the MacPro.

Other than that, what?

 

[Zaap]

I never heard of anyone hacking OS X. is certain hardware needed?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=OSx86

No URL shorteners please
-ViRGE

 

[greenhawk]

Everyone keeps saying apple's hardware choice is superior, or along that line somewhere. If that's true then why is the hardware specs of a pc workstation not available in any mac? For a consumer computer they maybe superior, but not for business or professional use?

the issue is one of optimisation as I follow it. Windows has to work on everything so a lot of the code is not really efficient at doing it's task. It is a bit of a one size fits all approach to software writing.

With Apple, they optermise their code to only work on a small set of hardware. As they know the hardware, there is no compatability code needed, so more work/processing gets done on end user code and not on just "working" or being stable. While this does not seem hard, it results in a set hardware profile that the OS works on.

All a hackintosh is, is a home made pc being based on the same hardware and some software hacks (as I follow it) done to trick any small issues (like looking for a specific serial number range on the motherboard located in the bios).

To make OSX work on any hardware, it would need driver support and that path leads to the windows approach and it's, generally, bloated approach and unstable system issues.

The only reason a hackintosh even is possible today is from Apple moving to the x86 chipset and the large number of hackers working on making adjustments to it (possible partly as apple moved OSX towards a linux base vs the older design developed around the RISC processors they used previously.

besides, the cost for OSX (or update or what ever apple call it) I think is in the order of $100, windows is about 3-5 times that and has a larger market to sell to. There is just no viable way for apple to survive from just OS sales with that sort of pricing (which is one reason some people want to move to OSX, the price).

 

[greenhawk]

I'm trying to think of examples.

...

Other than that, what?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook#Aluminum_unibody_model

single piece light weight laptop frames maybe?

 

[robertdrumm]

the issue is one of optimisation as I follow it. Windows has to work on everything so a lot of the code is not really efficient at doing it's task. It is a bit of a one size fits all approach to software writing.

With Apple, they optermise their code to only work on a small set of hardware. As they know the hardware, there is no compatability code needed, so more work/processing gets done on end user code and not on just "working" or being stable. While this does not seem hard, it results in a set hardware profile that the OS works on.

From what i understand your saying apple makes their software for each computer match up with that computers hardware? Is this what makes apple computers initialize faster? Also is changing the code for windows on a single computer possible?

 

[Puddle Jumper]

From what i understand your saying apple makes their software for each computer match up with that computers hardware? Is this what makes apple computers initialize faster? Also is changing the code for windows on a single computer possible?

Actually startup times on Macs aren't verry good, pleny of Windows system are faster.

Apple does a rather poor job of supporting the limited selection of hardware they currently have so expanding support all of the PC hardware out there would be an absolute disaster.