Why wouldn't it make sense for Apple to release their OS for non-apple hardware?

[aidanjm]

I'm sure a lot of people would be willing to buy it.

 

[nsafreak]

Because then they cut into their main source of income, selling of Apple PCs. I'm quite sure that there is a percentage of their sales where people buy their PCs not because they want the PC but because they want the operating system that it runs. That and it'd be more taxing on them to support their operating system for the general PC market where there are a billion and one plus different configurations as opposed to their PCs where the number of different configurations is much more limited.

 

[spherrod]

Originally posted by: nsafreak
Because then they cut into their main source of income, selling of Apple PCs. I'm quite sure that there is a percentage of their sales where people buy their PCs not because they want the PC but because they want the operating system that it runs. That and it'd be more taxing on them to support their operating system for the general PC market where there are a billion and one plus different configurations as opposed to their PCs where the number of different configurations is much more limited.

 

[bendixG15]

Because then they would be in the same league as Dell - HP - Gateway.

Fighting to survive on razor t-h-i-n operating profits.

Why should Apple become a Dell.....just a low cost reseller ??

 

[pcgeek11]

Because they would rather sell their mid grade hardware at a premium price. It is a bling bling thing you silly.

pcgeek11

 

[PingSpike]

I think nsageek has it right. The mac platform has become so close to the PC platform that it would be easy enough to make them interchangable. But doing so would destroy the identity of the mac, which is probably its most important asset. The operating system needs to be tied to the computers to sell the computers. Lets face, people aren't flocking to macs as a means of saving cash. Apple would then just become another operating system peddler in the market, with a weak PC sales arm. So they would have to go up against microsoft and linux on the OS front, and up against Dell, HP, Gateway in the hardware front. I think splitting themselves like that would be the road to ruin.

Although it would be nice if when you called up gateway you could choose o install vista or OSX on your new machine.

 

[ForumMaster]

true...although more and more people are realizing that Mac OS X is a much more advanced OS due to the Unix core. And although Apple is making so much $$$ on iPods, their main source of income is still in the Computer market. If they would allowa u 2 install the OS on ur machine, u wouldn't have any reason to go and buy thier computer. so they lose money. make the math...

 

[silverpig]

It's partly the hardware, but it's also because they don't want to have to support all the extra software and devices that come with the PC market. They'd have to re-write their code (well maybe not so much now), but they'd have to ensure driver availability, set up a support system, yada yada yada. It's just a big headache, and like others have already said, they're just taking themselves out of the MacOS hardware monopoly.

 

[magomago]

Wouldn't it also erase apples "stability" myth? Apple OS is made for select hardware that they know will ALWAYS be used over and over again. That way they can tweak to a specific system, something Linux and Windows can't. If they let you run it on any configuration I'm sure bugs would start appearing everywhere that they would have to fix

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
true...although more and more people are realizing that Mac OS X is a much more advanced OS due to the Unix core.

That sounds like something right out of apple marketing (or at least apple fanboy land). What exactly is so much more advanced about it than whatever else is available right now? You can claim security (over microsoft) but I don't think we're ready to buy into that quite yet. Saying 'unix' doesn't automatically buy you better security. The other thing that os x is largely credited with is the user interface, the 3d desktop stuff, search, simplicity and all that. That does not come from unix and none of it is available to the community.

I don't know if those articles that anandtech did on os x vs linux as a server platform are the final word, but they sure indicate to me that being 'unix' does not automatically mean that you're 'advanced' and 'powerful'.

 

[networkman]

Originally posted by: nsafreak
...That and it'd be more taxing on them to support their operating system for the general PC market where there are a billion and one plus different configurations as opposed to their PCs where the number of different configurations is much more limited.

You definitely nailed that one; tech support for myriad hardware configurations would have just as many problems, if not more.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
true...although more and more people are realizing that Mac OS X is a much more advanced OS due to the Unix core.

That sounds like something right out of apple marketing (or at least apple fanboy land). What exactly is so much more advanced about it than whatever else is available right now? You can claim security (over microsoft) but I don't think we're ready to buy into that quite yet. Saying 'unix' doesn't automatically buy you better security. The other thing that os x is largely credited with is the user interface, the 3d desktop stuff, search, simplicity and all that. That does not come from unix and none of it is available to the community.

I don't know if those articles that anandtech did on os x vs linux as a server platform are the final word, but they sure indicate to me that being 'unix' does not automatically mean that you're 'advanced' and 'powerful'.

He didn't say what it was more advanced than. Maybe he meant it's more advanced than OS 9.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
true...although more and more people are realizing that Mac OS X is a much more advanced OS due to the Unix core. (snip)

I thought the Mac OS was based on BSD and not Unix?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
true...although more and more people are realizing that Mac OS X is a much more advanced OS due to the Unix core. (snip)

I thought the Mac OS was based on BSD and not Unix?

Yes, no, maybe, it depends. BSD took from unix, unix took from BSD. The unix history is kind of incestuous.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
true...although more and more people are realizing that Mac OS X is a much more advanced OS due to the Unix core. (snip)

I thought the Mac OS was based on BSD and not Unix?

UNIX it is and here it is from the horses mouth... http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/

But they also say this... "UNIX users will feel at home in Darwin, the robust BSD environment that underlies Mac OS X."

 

[smack Down]

If apple sold OSX people would see how overpriced it is. And there would have to be one fixed price for OSX. Currently OSX cost alot more on highend hardware then low end. Apple would be forced to pick a price and then would lose the high end mac market to the clones.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: smack Down
If apple sold OSX people would see how overpriced it is. And there would have to be one fixed price for OSX. Currently OSX cost alot more on highend hardware then low end. Apple would be forced to pick a price and then would lose the high end mac market to the clones.

Mac OS X (not server, I'm not looking up prices for it) is free with the hardware, $129(I think) retail, and $199 in a 5 license family pack.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
true...although more and more people are realizing that Mac OS X is a much more advanced OS due to the Unix core. (snip)

I thought the Mac OS was based on BSD and not Unix?

UNIX it is and here it is from the horses mouth... http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/

But they also say this... "UNIX users will feel at home in Darwin, the robust BSD environment that underlies Mac OS X."

BSD IS UNIX.

Basicly.

OS X is a conglomeration of BSD code, a older commercial Unix version called Nextstep and OS 9 as well as software from numerious other projects.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: smack Down
If apple sold OSX people would see how overpriced it is. And there would have to be one fixed price for OSX. Currently OSX cost alot more on highend hardware then low end. Apple would be forced to pick a price and then would lose the high end mac market to the clones.

Mac OS X (not server, I'm not looking up prices for it) is free with the hardware, $129(I think) retail, and $199 in a 5 license family pack.

If by free with hardware you mean over paying for teh hardware by 400 dollars or so then I guess you could call it free.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: smack Down
If apple sold OSX people would see how overpriced it is. And there would have to be one fixed price for OSX. Currently OSX cost alot more on highend hardware then low end. Apple would be forced to pick a price and then would lose the high end mac market to the clones.

Mac OS X (not server, I'm not looking up prices for it) is free with the hardware, $129(I think) retail, and $199 in a 5 license family pack.

If by free with hardware you mean over paying for teh hardware by 400 dollars or so then I guess you could call it free.

Where can you get current Macintoshes for $400USD less than on Apple's site?

OS X is free when you buy an Apple Macintosh. Period.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
true...although more and more people are realizing that Mac OS X is a much more advanced OS due to the Unix core.

That sounds like something right out of apple marketing (or at least apple fanboy land). What exactly is so much more advanced about it than whatever else is available right now? You can claim security (over microsoft) but I don't think we're ready to buy into that quite yet. Saying 'unix' doesn't automatically buy you better security. The other thing that os x is largely credited with is the user interface, the 3d desktop stuff, search, simplicity and all that. That does not come from unix and none of it is available to the community.

I don't know if those articles that anandtech did on os x vs linux as a server platform are the final word, but they sure indicate to me that being 'unix' does not automatically mean that you're 'advanced' and 'powerful'.

He didn't say what it was more advanced than. Maybe he meant it's more advanced than OS 9.

I just see those two words together in a sentence and get agitated ('advanced' and 'unix', frequently 'UNIX'). I've never seen a marketing ploy turned into such apparently undebatable truth. When I got my powerbook, I started hanging out at macrumors but I got in a bit of an argument with people who were convinced that os x would forever be perfectly secure because it was based on Open Source UNIX (!!!) and got so sick of it I couldn't stick around. </rant>

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: smack Down
If apple sold OSX people would see how overpriced it is. And there would have to be one fixed price for OSX. Currently OSX cost alot more on highend hardware then low end. Apple would be forced to pick a price and then would lose the high end mac market to the clones.

Mac OS X (not server, I'm not looking up prices for it) is free with the hardware, $129(I think) retail, and $199 in a 5 license family pack.

If by free with hardware you mean over paying for teh hardware by 400 dollars or so then I guess you could call it free.

Where can you get current Macintoshes for $400USD less than on Apple's site?

OS X is free when you buy an Apple Macintosh. Period.

And windows is free when you buy a dell. Just because it is boundled together doesn't make it free.

 

[chcarnage]

The unix-like Darwin base OS X uses is open source. Well I'm not saying OS X will be invulnerable forever but I consider five years without an exploit in the wild something impressive.

Another reason why Apple won't sell OS X for beige boxes is that half of the people suggesting this actually want it for free. Just because something is demanded often in the public doesn't mean there's a market for it. I mean, just look in this thread for some examples of people belittleing the OS X achievements or its performance. Guess what, OS development needs big efforts and can consume a huge pile of money.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: chcarnage
The unix-like Darwin base OS X uses is open source. Well I'm not saying OS X will be invulnerable forever but I consider five years without an exploit in the wild something impressive.

No, I never said it was doing badly. I'm just attacking the people who assume it's the world's best 'core' because of what apple's marketing department tells them.

 

[doan]

Originally posted by: silverpig
It's partly the hardware, but it's also because they don't want to have to support all the extra software and devices that come with the PC market. They'd have to re-write their code (well maybe not so much now), but they'd have to ensure driver availability, set up a support system, yada yada yada. It's just a big headache, and like others have already said, they're just taking themselves out of the MacOS hardware monopoly.

bingo