OS X for PC's!

[Zaap]

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

single piece light weight laptop frames maybe?

Meh. The Dell Adamo is a unibody aluminum design. Sony, Samsung, Asus and possibly others also make very nice aluminum designs. (Not sure if unibody, though).

It's not that the other OEMs can't 'afford' to do this. If a buyer starting range is $1200-$1700 and up, then they can get very much the same build quality from a PC laptop.

Anyway, by components I thought we were talking about internal hardware that actually makes a real world difference to computing performance.

Apple has one of the best magic acts going; even tech-minded people that should know better are fooled by the slight of hand. But there's nothing magic going on under the hood of any Mac. They use the same third party components as anyone else, and then allow them to lapse even years behind the curve of the PC world. People forget, Apple was stuck with Core2 hardware for the longest time when the entire PC world had moved on. Currently they're playing catch-up with IvyBridge.

PC OEMs more often use discreet graphics from nVidia and AMD when Apple will fall back on (traditionally worse) onboard GPUs, or GPUs YEARS behind the current best such as with the MacPro.

By the way, this sort of thing is another slight of hand Apple's pulled off to spin a negative into a positive with all of their 'whole widget' lore. The myth is that using better third party components introduces driver issues and instability on the PC side AUTOMAGICALLY, therefore Apple's doing it better by using lesser hardware and fewer choices. The reality is, though some new hardware can introduce instability if the drivers aren't fully worked out, this is hardly a given, and in fact the exception not the rule. Most PC users would not give up newer faster GPUs, or modern audio hardware, for example, for some myth that older, slower (or worse yet, onboard) hardware is always 'more stable'. It's just a myth that Apple's exploited very well for insane profits.

With things like networking hardware, audio components, I/O controllers, Apple is either behind the curve or using the same lackluster components (Realtec, Atheros, Broadcom, Marvell, Intel, etc.) as the most budget of PC makers. Not that there are terrible components in most Apple computers, just nothing all that special and magical like they're made out to be. A quick glance at any Apple hardware troubleshooting forum will reveal users having problems with any of the above, the same as any other make of computer.

 

[JackMDS]

This topic is rather "silly", each manufacturer has the right to build and sell what its deem the best for them, the real Issue will be in about two years when the Millions of iPad 1/2 and iPhone 3/4 will discover that the Li-ion batteries in the Gizmos reached EOL and they are not replaceable (or replacing it will cost more then the value of the Gizmo.

 

[Zaap]

^ Pretty sure iPad 2 and up battery is replaceable. Possibly the 1, I'm not sure.

Definitely iPhone 4 battery is. I just replaced the one in my wife's iPhone. Could hardly have been simpler and cost about $12.

In 2-3 years most people into Apple products will have moved on to wanting the latest Apple stuff anyway.

 

[dagamer34]

I'm trying to think of examples.

Retina display maybe?

Originally the dual 6-core CPUs in the MacPro.

Other than that, what?

1) Retina display in the iPhone 4/4S, iPad 3, and new MacBook Pro.
2) CNC machines needed to make unibody aluminum frames (they actually own the equipment as opposed to Foxconn).
3) Multi-touch displays back when the iPhone first came out in 2007.
4) Massive number of baseband chips for wireless connectivity.
5) High quality camera sensors.
6) Asked Intel to custom build them the low power CPU in the original 2008 MacBook Air which was exclusive to them for several months.
7) Co-developed Thunderbolt with Intel and had an exclusive for a year (I think this one backfired on them though).

They also massively pre-order their components at lower prices such that no other OEM can possibly get the same deal (rarely are you going to order 1-2 million of the same part on the PC side because of the sheer number of models they offer).

So it's a lot of stuff actually.

 

[Zaap]

^ I thought we were discussing Macintosh computers only, not iOS devices.

Apple may have been first, but as said at least Dell makes a unibody aluminum laptop. I don't consider a laptop body a performance feature. (Although it's a great luxury build quality feature).

"Massive number of baseband chips for wireless connectivity."
? What in Apple's wireless connectivity hardware is exclusive and beyond the affordability of any other OEM?

"High quality camera sensors."
I don't really know about this, but I'm assuming (if on subject) we're talking webcam hardware in iMacs and Macbooks? Again, what's beyond the affordability of other OEMs? From my POV, a far greater range (quality, features, and price) of third party hardware on the PC side moots whatever supposed exclusivity of Apple's built-in hardware. I'm guessing if one spends the same $ amounts on PC laptops vs. a Macbook the webcam quality is pretty good as well. (Dunno, don't really care much about webcams).

Apple may have had some custom designed Intel CPU for a time, but practically speaking, the CPU choice and range on the PC side (from integrated ITX, to netbooks -Atom, Ion- to TabletPCs, to ultrabooks to the highest end gaming machines with generations newer CPUs than Apple's offerings) is so much greater and more varied than Apple. The actual value of a custom design for Apple is pretty meaningless if every other OEM offers a much wider range of CPUs in all product categories.

And yeah, Thunderbolt so far hasn't impressed me at all. (Though it probably has great potential). Meanwhile, every other PC has USB 3. Once again, Apple being, as usual, late or complete no-show to a more common standard = avantage: Apple!

"They also massively pre-order their components at lower prices"
Which they usually take advantage of in the form of insane profits, not passing along a great deal to the consumer. (Exception: dual CPUs in the stock dual CPU MacPro). But then again, for laughs, go to Apple's site and add-on components to the Mac Pro and have a good laugh. (IE: $1000 for 32GB ECC RAM- going rate about $300; $150 for a 1 TB hard drive, $250 for an $89 graphic card vintage 2009, $100 for a $20 DVD-R drive!)

Other OEMs can't afford to rip people off this badly and stay in business.

 

[robertdrumm]

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.

In a previous response someone said apple optimizes thier software to match up specifically with the hardware they use. i was wondering if you can do the same with a pc to windows.

 

[dagamer34]

In a previous response someone said apple optimizes thier software to match up specifically with the hardware they use. i was wondering if you can do the same with a pc to windows.

There's little need to optimize because with a PC, it's a lot easier to throw more hardware at the problem. For example, only one Mac has a replaceable video card, and the fastest one available is a 5870 for $500. That's a JOKE.

 

[Paperlantern]

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

No URL shorteners please
-ViRGE

Just as an FYI, let me google that for you is not a URL shortener, that IS the URL for the site.

I know. I removed the URL shortener.
-ViRGE

Oh! Haha! I fail.

 

[Zaap]

Sorry, didn't know URL shorteners weren't allowed.

The 'question' had obviously been answered more than once within the first three posts, so it was just coming off like a troll to get people to continue to rehash the obvious.

 

[serpretetsky]

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.

this. Apple doesn't make a profit on hardware or software alone. They create a complete experience that they have complete control over.

They also don't bother with budget products that other companies may advertise, they go right for the big bucks.

This means apple products are generally pretty expensive, however, it also gives customers the sense that no matter what apple product they get, it will be a quality product.

In other words, i could consider a toshiba, but first i have to do some research on the models i want and how reliable they are and how well they work, etc etc.

On the other hand, i could go buy an apple product feeling fairly confident that it is a quality product that is designed to easily integrate with all other apple products, without researching anything.

I don't think apple really cares that much when the few tinkerers out their try to get MAC OSX running on their PC.

At the same time apple has no incentive to promote this behavior, even if those tinkerers obtain OSX legally from apple, because it would break their reputation of ONLY providing complete and quality experiences.

 

[vailr]

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.

Psystar
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psystar