Mac OS X Running on Non-Apple Hardware

MacBeliever writes "Inevitably, Mac OS X for x86 has been hacked to run on a non-Apple PC. Is this the beginning of the fulfillment of the Dvorak prophecy?" RetrogradeMotion also writes "The OSx86 Project has posted a how-to guide telling how to run OS X on any Windows or Linux-based PC using VMWare." Not 100% corroborated, so ingest with salt.

Comments

Random thoughts on Apple

[bigwavejas]

Ok I'm naïve on the politics of this, so my post is more of a question than a answer. I know this is an argument that has gone back and forth, but here goes again...

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands? Sure, it might detract from them selling hardware (short term), but I can honestly say for me (average Joe) I've never purchased a Mac because they simply don't have the software titles I'm interested in and Windows does. I mean sure, they've got great stuff, but they lack in GAMES, yes games... I've said it, gotten it out. I'm a gamer and so are all of my friends. I'd venture to say a good chunk of those purchasing PC's are in the same group as me (surf the web and play games). So if the Apple OS became more popular, wouldn't more developers consider making a version of their game in the Apple OS flavor?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[dsginter]

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

I've already made comments like this only to get this response in LARGE numbers:

"But Apple is a hardware company."

Apparently, it is impossible for Apple to change into a software company.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Radres]

Ya' know, it's not unlike Steve Jobbs to say one thing and then end up turning around and doing the exact opposite, perhaps with the intent of throwing off his enemies. I can't find the sources right now and get a top post, but as an example, he specifically said that there would never be an iPod cell phone, and a few weeks later there was talk of one. Doesn't surprise me one bit that Apple is taking their OS which is vastly superior to Windows and trying to take on that huge market.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MindStalker]

But how would more games help Apple. Apple doesn't make much money from OS X, and it probably never will. Its money was always from sale of its hardware. If you can run it on any X86, there goes that profit line completly. Though I could see apple doing some sort of driver verification thing, where if you didn't have apple branded MB and apple branded video card etc, even if they were the same thing.. It wouldn't run. Then make the hardware vendors pay a fee for making apple hardware. This could work to consumers advantage even, because apple has historically been known as a stabler operating system, mainly because they can contol what hardware goes into it. So if you want a stable computer go apple, and as a side advantage you will probably get a stable window system to dual boot into.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[DaggertipX]

Not impossible, but it would be a tricky transition for them.

Apple charges a very very large markup on their hardware, I don't think the margin on their software would be nearly as high.

Beyond that, one of the advantages of them controlling hardware and software is the fact that they can do more rigorous quality control, because they KNOW the configuration your machine will be running. This leads to the disadvantage of having a limited and more costly hardware base, but that is why Apple products "just work".

Personally, I think moving Mac OS to mainstream machines with unpredictable hardware would dramatically lower the quality of the software, and I would hate to see that. I would much rather have an Apple piece of hardware that I know was tested well with the operating system on it.

I suppose that viewpoint will put me in the minority here.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Yahweh Doesn't Exist]

1. Apple would have to support a massively larger amount of hardware. 2. there would be a loss of branding and a lowering of the quality associated with OS X. 3. there are plenty of games on the Mac, but if you want the very latest cutting-edge PC games you'd never be satisfied anyway since you'd need ATI/nVidia making their latest cards in Mac versions too. 4. if you DO want games, why do you want a Mac? if Windows works, use it. 5. what is happening to the PC game industry? is it growing/shrinking? will PC games be so important when the latest generation consoles are out? 6. given PC games makers moves to absurd copy-protection methods (drivers), will either the makers or Apple allow the other to do what they want to "secure" the computers?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[slapout]

The problem with an Apple OS running on just any old hardware is that they would then be facing some of the problems that Microsoft faces: making it run on all kinds of different hardware. They would have to support dozens of graphics cards and sound cards and other hardware that has differing standards of production. Getting everything to work right could be a big problem that would require more code in the OS. Right now, they tightly control the hardware, so they are able to make the user experience a nice one. (Which right now is one of their big pluses). If they lose that, they could lose customers.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jimicus]

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

In theory, yes. In practise, show me a company today which has successfully run a business selling operating systems to run on white-box PCs in competition with Microsoft.

I've never purchased a Mac because they simply don't have the software titles I'm interested in and Windows does.

And with an x86-based Mac, you can do both.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Bogtha]

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

Apple are a hardware company. They make a lot of money selling hardware. Selling computers that are capable of running Mac OS X and Windows is probably going to make them even more money as lots of people who are currently buying Dells will opt for the more flexible vendor instead.

Why would they throw away that in order to become a software company, when being a hardware company is working so well for them? Apple have gone from strength to strength in the last few years, it would be madness to completely change the direction of the company now.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Matey-O]

[blockquote]Apparently, it is impossible for Apple to change into a software company. [/blockquote] Not Impossible, just unwise.

IT history is littered with the remains of 'software only' OS firms.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

I've never purchased a Mac because they ... lack in GAMES

I've never understood this argument. You're willing to put up with the sucky OS that is Windows the rest of the time you're using your computer (i.e., when you're not playing games) just so you can play games? If you're that into games, why don't you just get a dedicated game machine, e.g., PS2, Xbox, etc., for games and a Mac to do the rest of your stuff?

Aside from that, I really don't think Apple cares about the gaming market segment, i.e., teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Iriel]

I, also, have heard countless claims that Apple is a hardware company, and it seems quite reasonable still (in my perspective anyway. If you wish to enlighten me, please do so politely). However, here's where I see the basics behind the idea of an OSx86 project and its effects on Apple:

Apple still has the 'trendy computer' kind of image to them in the eyes of many. Whether you see mac users as different or completely zealotous is another issue. However, if Apple can make their system just hackable enough to get it 'mostly' working on non-Apple hardware, they hope that those users will be so amazed as to become legit consumers of Apples. That's just my thoughts.

Also, Apple says that their new mactels will be able to dual-boot OSX and Windows (as well as BSDs and Linux distros retooled for the new macs). From their view, 'why make OSX hobble along on a regular x86 with broken features when you can buy a mac that runs OSX perfectly, and dual-boot Windows for games or anything else that strikes your fancy that OSX doesn't offer? You'd be paying 'a little' more for a high quality system that gives you the best of everything.' This is how I see ideas floating around in the Apple marketing department.

Now go run a hacked OSX so you can convert like Apple wants you to ;)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

But how would more games help Apple.

Example: I finally get around to pirating OSX because it finally works on my home built PC and actually has some use for me (Games). I work with it for a couple of months, and I decide I love it (assuming it's as great as I've been promised). I find alternative applications for all of the "normal" applications I use, such as word processors and browsing the web.

The next month my parents decide they want to upgrade their PC and come to me for advice (because I built their last PC). I have long since decided to tell them to buy stock pcs, as I am through being Tech Support for my family. I say "you know, this mac stuff is much easier and better, buy a mac". Apple gains market share.

My grandfather, a year later, decides to upgrade his PC. He comes to me for advice because I built his last pc. I tell him to buy a Mac. He talks to my parents, they tell him they love their mac (because it's as good as you guys have been promising). He buys a mac. Apple gains market share.

Soon, my aunt, wants to upgrade, repeat above story. Market share continues to grow. Rinse and repeat for my entire family. Rinse and repeat for my friends and their families. In 5 years listen to all of the "Apple is a MONOPOLY" trolls on slashdot. In 10 years my son asks me "What is Microsoft? What is a Dell?"..

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Yocto Yotta]

Well, take this only as my assumption, but Apple would likely charge the same amount as Microsoft for their OS -- if not more (which I'm sure Jobs could justify with his pretty marketing spin) -- if/when they release OS X for open x86 hardware.

Will Apple do such? I don't think many people have any point of reference to make an educated guess about that. They certainly would not sell OS X to the mass market for $129 though.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jcr]

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

It depends on the circumstances in which it does so. If Apple gets paid for it, then the answer is almost certainly yes.

The difference between Apple and MS's situation, is that MS gets to tax nearly all of the intel boxes, and Apple doesn't. If windows gets pirated, then revenue-wise, it's at the noise level.

If OS X were pirated all over the place, and running on 90+% of generic intel machines, then Apple couldn't sell their own hardware anymore, and they'd be screwed.

-jcr

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[grunherz]

I've already made comments like this only to get this response in LARGE numbers:

"But Apple is a hardware company."

It is.

Has been since Jimmy Carter wandered the halls of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Apparently, it is impossible for Apple to change into a software company.

Not impossible, just not likely an easy thing to do after almost thirty years.

I've been watching this argument now for years and it seems the folks who can't understand the concept of Apple being a hardware company aren't regular Mac users or followers of Apple on a regular basis.

If you look at their numbers, they aren't making squat on selling OSX, Final Cut Pro etc. They're raking it in on the huge margins they get on the Macintoshes, PowerBooks and iPods.

Apple is not Microsoft, even though they compete in the same general arena.

The fact that a lot of folks seem to think that Microsoft's software heavy business strategy would somehow work for Apple IMO shows an ignorance towards how Apple Computer actually operates.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jcr]

The problem with an Apple OS running on just any old hardware is that they would then be facing some of the problems that Microsoft faces: making it run on all kinds of different hardware.

That's really not MS's problem. The hardware makers write their own windoze drivers. MS just has to support a handful of CPUs, northbridge/southbridge chips, ethernet controllers, etc.

MS's biggest problem is their incompetence w/r/t security.

-jcr

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[djdavetrouble]

Microsoft has solved that problem already silly, signed drivers. ;)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[hackstraw]

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

No. To paraphrase Douglas Adams "Apple may only have 10% of the computer market, but its definitely the top 10%".

Would it benefit Ferrari in the long run to have every ghetto curb filled with Ferrari's?

In looking at the demo movies, it was impressive to some degree to see OS X running on a cheap Windows PC. But looking more closely, I noticed that the image appeared stretched. I saw that yucky BIOS black screen with white text. However, it looked close to a regular Mac experience.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[The_K4]

If OS X would run on stock PCs I would pay $199 for a Family pack and load it on several machines. I can see the ads now....same prices 5x the computers..... :)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kupek]

Different kinds of games come out on the PC.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pootypeople]

At least with regards to video, they're not working on *known* hardware as much anymore--you can get plenty of add-on video boards. They don't have to deal with processor/motherboard combinations they are unfamiliar with, but even that shouldn't give them that much trouble. Everyone makes a big deal about apple's "control" of hardware and how "good" their hardware is... Okay- I've owned both and my macs have lasted longer; however, there are reasons.

My orginal Mac Plus would not be running today if I hadn't bought an additional fan to cool the power supply--alot of Mac Pluses had this problem.

My Power Mac 6100 blew up a week after the warranty ran out- Apple was nice enough to fix it.

I've had one PC stop working on me- the rest have been retired so quickly they didn't get to die.

The one thing I will say for my macs--they lasted longer. Not longer as in "they were more reliable" but as in "the software didn't get so slow on older hardware it was unusable." That, and I don't remember the old "six months and your computer acts like it's geriatric" thing that windows does so well. I want mac os x... but have nothing but an sse only machine. Gotta go buy a P4 i guess..
james

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[It doesn't come easy]

Apple could justify more for their OS, for one thing because Mac OS X is FAR superior to XP. Regardless, Max OS X on the same hardware as XP would actually create the first real competition Microsoft has seen in many years (sorry Linux users but it is true, at least for now) and might even mean that Windows price would have to drop. Imagine that!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Chosen Reject]

My first question to everyone: Why can't a company be both a hardware AND a software company?

This leads to the disadvantage of having a limited and more costly hardware base, but that is why Apple products "just work".

Why does knowing your hardware make the hardware more expensive?

It seems to me that the reason Apple hardware is more expensive is that only Apple makes Apple hardware. If there were some competition they would become cheaper. I think it might be safe to say Apple also tests their hardware but I doubt they test it anymore than Asus, Intel, AMD, MSI, or whatever. So most of the quality control goes into software. But then do they test it anymore than Adobe or Macromedia or what have you? They have a very limited set of hardware to test on as opposed to those companies who test their software on lots of different hardware. So that means they have actually less testing to do. And since they know the hardware (as they made it) they can optimize. So hardware is more expensive because of lack of competition, software is less expensive because of less testing.

So you are paying for a complete experience. Which I can get from Dell or something similar. So you are paying for what exactly?

If any of this is wrong let me know. I like Apple, but the only reason I see it as more expensive is because there is a subset of the population that is willing to pay for "more expensive".

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Gulthek]

So, in your example. You wouldn't tell your family members to buy Macs if you weren't already using it for games? That's a little weird of you. Why wouldn't you just recommend the best system for their needs?

That's like not recommending a car company to others because they don't have the kind of seats you like.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[mini me]

I think Apple wants people to pirate it. And the reason is this:

Only the people with technical know-how will pirate it. They will start to use it and love it. They will tell all their friends to get it, and that means buying Apple hardware.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[CProgrammer98]

Who is Steve Jobbs and what has he got to do with Apple?

The CEO of Apple, Steve Jobs is just that, the CEO, if he has a desire to make Apple into a major S/W outfit, he will. He usually gets his way. Apple machines are so quiet because of his own personal hatred of ambient noise - just a small example.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[GileadGreene]

Apple is neither a hardware company nor a software company. What Apple sells is user experiences. Apple users don't buy a computer, or a piece of software, they buy an integrated product that lets them get the things done that they want to get done ("It Just Works"(TM)). Both the hardware and the software are integral pieces of that product, and neither is complete without the other.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Octorian]

You're willing to put up with the sucky OS that is Windows the rest of the time you're using your computer (i.e., when you're not playing games) just so you can play games?

I prefer my approach to the problem ;) I put up with the sucky Windows machine while playing games. As soon as the game is over, I hit the input switch on the monitor to go back to my "real" desktop :)

(Though I'll admit that dual-desktops isn't practical for most people, and that I have way too many computers)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple machines are so quiet because of his own personal hatred of ambient noise

funny - I thought it was the liquid cooling that did the trick.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[dsginter]

Apple charges a very very large markup on their hardware, I don't think the margin on their software would be nearly as high.

Why?

People are screaming for an alternate OS to run on commodity hardware. OSS isn't quite there yet. Apple's market share would skyrocket if Dell were able to offer their customers "Dual Boot Apple OSX when your Windows partition becomes too virus infected". Even if they only charged $50 a copy, it wouldn't take a significant percentage of x86 OSX dual-boot to more than make up for their hardware revenue and margin.

Personally, I think moving Mac OS to mainstream machines with unpredictable hardware would dramatically lower the quality of the software, and I would hate to see that.

If Apple can get the stability of Microsoft's Windows XP product (joke all that you want, it is rock solid on good hardware) with their innovative interface, then what isn't to like? If you don't want to run it on cheap hardware, then I'm sure that they'll be happy to sell you their expensive stuff, too.

I just don't get it.

Actually, I do get it. Apple *is* planning on releasing their OS for commodity hardware, they just want to keep the Mac zealots in denial for as long as possible.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[gcondon]

Perhaps Apple doesn't want to change into a software company.

Perhaps they like building computers and maybe, just maybe, their legions of aficionados would like them to continue doing so.

In my opinion, the most significant characteristic of Apple, as a company and a culture, is that they clearly love computers and it shows in everything they build - hardware and software.

Very few other technology companies exhibit this same exuberance that has been an Apple hallmark for many years (esp. under the leadership of the norotiously persnickety Steve Jobs).

I rarely walk away from using a Microsoft product thinking that this was created by someone who loves computers as much as I do.

Not every company needs to (or should) try to maximize sales and market penetration like Microsoft - just like every person doesn't need to try to be as rich as Bill Gates, as musical as Mozart, as tall as Shaq, etc.

Is it inconceivable that Apple might have success criteria that are different from Microsoft? Is it impossible that we, as users, can understand and embrace that kind of diversity of thought in the marketplace?

Hey you, Ferrari - why aren't you selling as many cars as Toyota? Slackers!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[EvilNight]

All of the arguments about being primarily a hardware company aside, I keep seeing people saying that "Apple will have to support 100s of different kinds of hardware products" if they move to standard Intel architecture.

That's bullshit. Apple doesn't have to support anything. They can pick five of each kind of hardware if they want, or none. Look at Solaris-Intel, for example... supports very little of the hardware out there, but folks still use it. There's plenty of PC hardware out there that Linux can't use, and plenty more that it can only use in a rudimentary sense. People would simply have to be more careful about what hardware they buy if they wanted a supported Intel platform for MacOS.

It'd be up to the hardware vendors to match Apple's specs and get the support, just like with Linux and Solaris. Microsoft seems to be the only company making an OS that'll use any junk circuit board with a driver file regardless of quality. Don't make the mistake of assuming Microsoft's way is the only way.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Chosen Reject]

This is absolutely correct. That's why only people with technical know how got Linux, started to use it and love it, and then told all their friends about it. And that is how Linux got to be so big on the desktop!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Deep Fried Geekboy]

Yeah, the hardware support is the killer, and why they won't do it. Where would all the drivers for all the obsolete hardware out there come from? Just getting it to boot on most 3-year old systems would mean having to write tens of thousands of drivers. Not gonna happen.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[DaggertipX]

So because one machine was defective their entire line has got to be bad? That seems like faulty logic to me.

I don't care what type of product you get, sometimes there is the opportunity for there to be defects.

Oh, and so it's cleared up now - I'm not a mac apologist. I actually don't own any apple hardware. I do have respect for the company, however, and am considering making the switch.

I hope your brothers hardware issue works out, getting a faulty piece of equipment (regardless of manufacturer) is a pain.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[CProgrammer98]

I thought MAcs used standard AGP slots? SO ok they still need mac drivers (will linux ones work on OSX? dunno - just askin the Q)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Maserati]

Just to be politically incorrect for a moment....

Would it benefit Ferrari in the long run to have every ghetto curb filled with Ferrari's?

It seems to be working for BMW and Mercedes :-)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[sgant]

Well, since it's the hardware manufacturers that build the drivers for their hardware and NOT the OS makers, perhaps Apple has something else up their sleeves. Perhaps these first Intel based Macs that are out now and the ones that will initially be sold is more of a stalling tactic so the hardware vendors can actually write drivers.

Also, whatever happened to an OS just listing what hardware is supported and what isn't? You build a computer with hardware that's not supported, then call Apple for support, they'll tell you right then it's not officially supported. Or even having companies like Dell or Gateway build "Apple Certified" hardware...which Dell or Gateway will support. The average user doesn't call Microsoft when they're having problems anyway, they call their vendor and complain to them. At least I always did.

Just a thought.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MindStalker]

Believe it or not $199 the operating system is not where Microsoft makes most of its money. It sells XP really cheap to dell and the likes, and sells only a few boxed versions. Its real money is in the server market where it makes tons of money on its high end software. XP is simply a product to create lock-in so it can sell its servers or office software.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

That analogy has been abused for years. While it's true that Apple hardware is higher in quality than a lot of no-name Taiwanese stuff, it's not much different from what HP and Dell would sell you in their mid- and high-end ranges.

The reasons I see for Apple hardware being more expensive are:
1) Lower volumes in manufacturing not allowing the economies of scale that a company like Dell can get.
2) Without direct competition (as in no other vendors making Macs), Apple can charge what they want and people will pay it.

And finally, about the hardware company vs. software company: one point I haven't seen mentioned is that when selling only software a company is bound to suffer some losses from piracy. But when it comes to hardware, people who want the product have no choice but to buy it. Can't exactly burn a copy of an iPod to CD...

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Fussen]

I totally agree. Fake wood inlays on the dashboard are critical to the overall functioning of the vehicle.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Yahweh Doesn't Exist]

AFAIK the hardware is a little different because there are "Mac" versions of cards:

http://www.ati.com/products/mac.html

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Tourney3p0]

Would it benefit Ferrari in the long run to have every ghetto curb filled with Ferrari's? No, it wouldn't. While Ferrari I'm sure makes a hefty profit on each car, there's no way they could build their cars at a cost that would make it reasonable for everyone to be able to afford one. The whole comparison of Macs to Ferraris is stupid. It's more like Macs are Ford and PC's are Chevy. Ooh, my econo-shitbox does this.. Yeah, but MY econo-shitbox does THIS.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Iriel]

You should have payed more attention to my post. I said that as if it were coming from Apple's marketing department. Apple always touts themselves as a vendor of superior quality systems. I was simply reflecting their views, not my own.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[picklepuss]

While this analogy may have made sense at one point in time, it doesn't work anymore. With Apple going to Intel, this is more like the difference between buying a Chrysler and a Mercedes... and, oh yeah... their both made in the same factory by the same disgruntled employees, and all the parts come from the same bin.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Chosen Reject]

So are you saying Apple is better, or just brand-name? Or maybe it's just that Apple creates a more pleasant experience? BMWs, AFAIK, are more reasonably priced over in Germany because they're not imported with fancy taxes brought to you by the letters U, S and A.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[TheRaven64]

Apple have approximately 20% margins on hardware. This is quite high for the computer hardware industry. I imagine that these margins will drop a bit after they transition to x86 so people are not able to compare a Mac to a Dell with identical specs and see a hugely overpriced Mac. In contrast, any copy of OS X sold to someone who would otherwise have used Linux or Windows is 100% profit (well, minus the negligible cost of the DVD, box and manual).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[prell]

If OS X runs on x86, even if it's not widely available, porting games to OS X could become so easy and cheap that there's no reason not to release OS X versions. Don't PC games have some - or a lot of - straight ASM code, for optimizations? That wouldn't have to be changed at all, as far as I can tell. We might need a library to emulate/translate DirectX, though. And if WINE is released for OS X, then any Windows program could be theoretically be run in OS X!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[PhilipMckrack]

No, but you recommend something you are familiar with and can help them with problems if they arise. It's more like being a mechanic and recommending a car company because you can do most of the work if they need it. I realize he said he doesn't do tech support for them, but we all know how that goes.

I'm not in the position to recommend a mac for anyone because I have simply not used one in years and I don't know their capabilities. If I'm trying to help figure out what system suits someone's needs, it helps to know something about that system first.

He's just saying that games are the hook that would get more people familiar with their system and therefore more likely to buy their hardware.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kaa]

If you're that into games, why don't you just get a dedicated game machine, e.g., PS2, Xbox, etc., for games and a Mac to do the rest of your stuff?

I am not the original poster, but games you play on a PC are very different from the ones you play on consoles. If you like MMORPGs (e.g. World of Warcraft), FPSs (e.g. Unreal), RTSs (e.g. Rome: Total War) then having a console does not help you at all.

As for the "rest of your stuff" it very much depends on what kind of stuff this is. For my purposes I am quite happy to have a Windows machine as a gaming/Photoshop/MSOffice box and a Linux machine for heavy lifting. No need for a Mac.

Aside from that, I really don't think Apple cares about the gaming market segment, i.e., teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

The gaming segment by now includes 30-something males and I bet the 20-40 year old demographic has Apple marketers drooling.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Orkie]

In other words, you are paying more for a brand, not a superior product (though actually, I think that Macs are nicer to use but certainly not superior with regards to performance). You also pay a lot because it looks nice and Apple knows that you can't get nice-looking computers anywhere else.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[relentless1914]

Not only that, but we have to remember how rampant piracy would be. To be honest, I think that if given the choice, very few people outside of Apple's core markets would purchase their hardware if they knew they could go to walmart and buy a $299 computer and download OSX from the internet for free. 1. The OS doesn't cost enough for them to recoup the R&D dollars they put into it. 2. If they raise the price, many people will just pirate it, (which of course many people will do anyway) The truth is that Apple has got to STAY in the hardware business if they want to stay in business.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Musteval]

4. if you DO want games, why do you want a Mac? if Windows works, use it.

Because Windows works for games, and nothing else.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought MAcs used standard AGP slots? SO ok they still need mac drivers (will linux ones work on OSX? dunno - just askin the Q)

Dude, you need to ask for a new keyboard for your next birthday -- your shift key keeps sticking on and off, and sometimes the whole thing just stops recognizing keypresses.

Either that or your "linux ones" are a little screwy. ;)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[croddy]

Apple charges a very very large markup on their hardware, I don't think the margin on their software would be nearly as high.

the marginal cost of making a copy of software is near zero.

it would be support that could potentially become expensive, but there's no reason they couldn't offer the software license at low cost, and a separate AppleCare program for their commodity-x86 OS X customers, as long as they price them appropriately.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Orkie]

Why? Because he never would've tried/used it without there being more games for it. You can't really recommend something that you have never actually used.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[erikkemperman]

I've never understood this argument. [...] If you're that into games, why don't you just get a dedicated game machine, e.g., PS2, Xbox, etc., for games and a Mac to do the rest of your stuff?


I, in turn, think I do understand your argument but would like to point out money does not, in most of our backyards, grow from trees. But I guess if you don't mind the Apple brand tax you could probably afford a dedicated game machine as well.

Aside from that, I think you're right that Apple doesn't care much about the gaming market, at least not nearly as much as it cares about A/V editing and such. Which is maybe why they can get away with their ludicrous pricing, many of their users are professionals who just write it off later.

And the pricing really is ludicrous; for fun you could some time check the price of their entry level desktop (which is 1xG5 now) and compare what kind of whitebox frankenbox you could assemble for the same money in stead. Could it really be just because of scales of production that the contrast is so sharp?

Me, lucky me, I'm not a gamer and (gentoo) linux suits my office and development needs just fine -- so I get the stability without any brand tax or even s/w purchase. It's not even that I'd refuse on principle to pay for s/w.. I refuse Windows because it is a crappy OS (for my needs). Having worked with it on occasion, my impression of it is very good: I'd maybe pay for OSX except I object to their pricing of hardware and OS updates.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[shotfeel]

For example, just look at NeXT.

Went from doing both hardware and software, to doing only hardware, back to doing hardware and software (as Apple Computer) -and finally succeeding.

There's also OS2 and Be to add to the list.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[aesiamun]

A better analogy

Lexus vs Toyota
Scion vs Toyota
Acura vs Honda

same chasis, different style

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[LarsG]

What has AGP got to do with driver support?

In order to sell OSX for generic x86 hardware, they'd need lots of drivers. For example:

- motherboard chipsets
- sound cards
- heaps of USB devices
- IDE/SATA/SCSI controllers
- graphics cards
- network cards
- wireless cards

Microsoft would throw a fit if Apple went after their core market. Apple would have to forgo their markup on hardware sales, and the 'it just works' / 'cool design' image that Macs have would disappear.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[relentless1914]

It is NOT like buying a Chrysler and a Mercedes, it's like buying a Neon with Pirelli tires and buying a Lamborghini with Pirelli tires. There's a heck of a lot more to a computer than just the processor.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

I am not the original poster, but games you play on a PC are very different from the ones you play on consoles.

OK, so get a cheap PC instead of a dedicated gaming machine and a Mac.

Incidentally, once Intel Macs are out (and you can boot Windows on them), then there will no longer be a reason to have seperate boxes. You can eat your cake and have it too.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Arker]

I honestly think they can and should do this, with some caveats.

Everyone talks about how their hardware profit margins are high. This is true, but on the other side the marginal cost of more copies of the OS are pretty near null. The worry that people would have bought a mac otherwise could be assuaged in several ways, however. If it can be done in a way that leaves people that would have bought mac hardware, still buying mac hardware, but other people that would not have done this running Mac OS on non-apple hardware, this would be a big win for Apple (with a few caveats.) Those extra sales of the OS are nearly 100% profit, after all, and that profit can be turned around and used to keep Apples own computers on the cutting edge. More people running the OS, regardless of the hardware they use, also means more people developing for it. And once you get a developer to give ObjC and Cocoa a try, he's not likely to want to go back to win32. So that would be a big win too. But you have to find a way to do it without killing Apples hardware sales (unless they decided to take the dive and become a software company, something I don't see happening.)

Now the other big objection is limiting the hardware they have to program for. It's a lot easier for Apple to make things work when they control the hardware, and can limit the number of devices and machine configurations they have to deal with enormously. If they released OSX on the Wintel PC market, there is a serious and reasonable worry that they would quickly be swamped with a support nightmare that would kill them, or at the least kill their reputation.

Now, with all this said, what I would probably do in their shoes would be to *NOT* use any DRM tie-ins and make it quite easy for people to run OSX on non-Apple boxes, but also *NOT* officially support this practice in any way. I'd throw up a warning screen on boot if the OS is running on non-Apple hardware, with a big flashing warning that something is wrong with the hardware and the user should NOT continue, but instead take their machine to the store, blah blah. But go ahead and leave a button for the user to continue anyway. This way they're not on the hook for support, they don't have to write a bunch of new drivers, etc. BUT people that would never have bought an Apple otherwise will still find it relatively easy to put it on their existing machine and give it a try. I predict most will like it, and buy proper Apple hardware the next time they have money to spend on a computer.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jessicavampirehunter]

That would be applicable, if Linux were really ready for the mass-market desktop. OSX is a desktop OS. Linux is not, yet.

Only people with technical know-how use Linux because it requires a high level of techiness even to keep it working and updated. If you tell someone to use Linux, they'll be like "uhh, but I am not a computer genius man". They won't take you seriously. And even if they did try it, they'd be like "this is too hard. I'm going back to Windows, because it's easy and user-friendly and doesn't make me use the command line."

People with technical know-how do the hacking, then let people without know-how use their product. It's totally different.

~Jessica

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[CrazyTalk]

I'm not a gamer, and neither are any of my friends. We do need word processing, graphic design tools, spreadsheets, email, and web browsers, all of which are available in abundance on the Mac. Which is why I have one.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[suzerain]

Would it benefit Ferrari in the long run to have every ghetto curb filled with Ferrari's?

Well....errr....yes. Care to explain to us why it wouldn't?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

[T]he pricing really is ludicrous; for fun you could some time check the price of their entry level desktop (which is 1xG5 now) and compare what kind of whitebox frankenbox you could assemble for the same money in stead.

You get what you pay for: a nicely designed machine with a very nice OS that Just Works(TM).

Do you also think BMW, Mercedes, or Lexus pricing is also ludicrous?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

No, of course I won't. I'm expected to be able to fix these things, over the phone most of the time, when things go wrong. Right now I can boot up XP on my laptop, and step through any problem my family has, right there as I talk to them on the phone. I can tell them each step as I do it, and I can wait for them to finish each step until I do the next. If I tell them to buy Macs, when they call me with problems (WHICH THEY WILL) and I decide to help them (which I will, even if I said above that I'm not going to be tech support anymore, I'm weak willed), I will not have that convience. Which means basically, being the computer literate person in my family, I'm going to be the guy who dictates what people buy. I don't have statistics, but I bet 9 times out of 10, that is how the computer world works (lets just say that every single "Computer Guy" I know runs his families tech support in the same way)..

Be realistic, it's not "weird" of me at all. I choose what my "users" use out of convience for me. I will NEVER tell them to switch to Mac unless I have a Mac sitting around to use to diagnose their problems. And I will never have a Mac sitting around unless I decide I need a Mac or the barrier for entry is much lower than it is today (i.e. I'm not going to buy a Mac Mini so that I can run OSX just to support my family, I will however install a cracked version of OSX just to see what it's like). The only way I'm going to decide I "need" a Mac is if the Mac has some applications (read: games) that I cannot get on the PC. This is the reality of the market, your perception about what the market "should" be like isn't a strong enough force to actually change the market..

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Amiga Trombone]

I've already made comments like this only to get this response in LARGE numbers:

"But Apple is a hardware company."

At one time, that was true. The majority of their revenue came from Mac hardware. It still does, but now they have additional revenue streams such as iPod and iTunes. Also, they've greatly increased their portfolio of software applications. Before, the only software they really could have sold seperate from the hardware would have been Mac OS itself, and a few minor applications. Contrast that to Microsoft who sells an OS, along with the major application suite that runs on it.

If they manage to broaden their product line such that they aren't so dependent on Mac hardware for revenue, such as expanding their application software offerings, then I could imagine them licensing OS X to 3rd parties.

Whether or not they can do that remains to be seen. But I doubt it will happen unless they find some way of making up the revenue stream from the hardware.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MisterSquid]

Considering that you admit to "pirating" the OS, your scenario, I'm guessing, should be revised as follows.

Your parents, your grandparents, your aunts, and the entire within-two-branchings of your family tree all buy a Mac OS-compatible machine on your recommendation and use your pirated copy of the OS.

Result: Apple goes out of business just like Be.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[iluvcapra]

In contrast, any copy of OS X sold to someone who would otherwise have used Linux or Windows is 100% profit (well, minus the negligible cost of the DVD, box and manual).

Minus, as well, the cost of paying all of those people to write it, which I suppose might be more than the cost of the DVD.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jamesborr]

One possible line of thought is that this is a ploy by Apple to first get Microsoft Office ported to the Intel version of MacOSX, before they entertain opening up the software to be more competitive with the Microsoft Windows monopoly.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[ACORN_USER]

Well, that's the beauty of running os-x and mac apps on an x86 PC. You buy yourself a computer, xbox and ps2. In fact, if you're so into games, you buy yourself one desktop, puke windoze onto it and then run os-x through VM ware as-per-the-the-article.

I've got a ps2 and X-box (which I'm not proud of) for games, which I never play. I have G4 powermac for show, because I got it cheap. I have a linux box for work, because I don't like windows. I have a windows box because I've got a girlfriend. Oh, and a couple of sparcs - just because.

Interestingly, the cheapest and lowest spec'd box in my house is the linux box which I use more than all the others ( other than my ibook - which I don't really classify as a box - more a thin helium balloon which floats and glows in the dark. :) )

On another tangent - sure, if you can run a hacked OS-X version on your PC, it's a good thing for the future of Apple. MS-S#ite would not have gotten where it is today had it not been for the vast availability of its predecessors. The morons on the desks around me would not have had visual studios to offer them Idiotic Dummy Environments, had it not been for MS-S#ite's conquest of a world which was locked to its OS - soley because every person's neighbour's son had a copy to upgrade their PC with. Same deal with the most popular choice of games platform being the most popular choice of games platform.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pete_townshend]

Nope, it's a little known fact, but in addition to the Reality Distortion Field, Jobs also emits particles of pure hate, materialized into existence by his loathing of ambient noise and ginormous ego. These particles, called "hatrons", produce a sort of white noise effect when interacting with Apple-brand computers and make them run quite silently.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[LarsG]

That's really not MS's problem

MS tends to get the blame for computers crashing even if the cause is shitty 3rd party hardware or drivers. That's why they have that windows logo program, whql and driver signing.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

Your parents, your grandparents, your aunts, and the entire within-two-branchings of your family tree all buy a Mac OS-compatible machine on your recommendation and use your pirated copy of the OS.

No, I pirate as an early adopter, they buy real versions because they have money to pay for convience. They all purchased real copies of XP when I built their machines, it's just easier that way. They will buy real Apples with real Mac OSX if they ever made the switch. Again, it's just easier that way.

If early adopters pirating really hurt a company Apple, would be the kings of the world and Microsoft would be out of buisness. Notice that hasn't happened.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Bogtha]

The next month my parents decide they want to upgrade their PC and come to me for advice

...and since Mac OS X would be running on commodity x86 hardware in this hypothetical scenario, instead of Apple selling them an expensive computer with bundled software, Dell would be selling them an expensive computer and paying Apple a token amount for the bundled software.

How is this in Apple's best interests again?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[bfree]

Your so close to what I was going to say, and saying expressing it better then I was going to!

If I was Steve Jobs :-P I would start OpenOSX which would be a bit like OpenSolaris, i.e. where they feel they have to it would be binary only, but wherever they can it is Open. Now everyone can run an OSX on their cpu compatible box (you could keep pre-Intel mac owners happy this way also). To get the real OSX though, with support, you have to buy OSX hardware, which for now means Apple. I would expect that Apple would do deals as and when they felt it was in their best interests to provide an OSX-OEM version for manufacturers.

The sneeky way to get real revenues from those OpenOSX users would be to basically let buy and install a real OSX, but it is unsupported unless it's installed onto an Apple box! Don't cripple their experience in any way. How many people would still buy a copy of OSX to run on their Dell even if it came with no official support? Let OEMs sell their OSX discs to anyone, and let those discs also install anywhere ... but without support :-) Still keep it locked in some way to one copy per machine. So if you want OSX, you can:

1. Get a pre-installed machine
2. Install OpenOSX (or a rebuild) and possibly work around limitations (say DVD playback)
3. Buy an OEM OSX and get the official OS, but unsupported
4. Buy a retail OSX and get the full OS, but unsupported

Without the OpenOSX, their probably wouldn't be the community support for the unsupported OSXs, but with it Apple could have a community dealing with the problems associated with running OSX on unofficial hardware.

The key is that Apple are extremely unlikely to lose many of their existing sales to this as very few Apple users will be interested in running unsupported. They would probably manage to create many hardware sales though from people who might have some access to a Mac (or even an ipod) and hence an inclination to try running it themslves and then ... They would also likely create lots of software sales, which will have a near zero marginal cost (developing an OEM OSX) leading to money for nothing (support is the killer cost, offloading most of their support to OEMs is why MS has such massive profit margins, what does an OEM sale of Windows cost them).

Perhaps Apple is hoping and expecting that hardware manufacturers will start to support OSX with their hardware, but I doubt they are depending on it in any way.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[yetdog]

*WooooooooooooooooooooSH* :)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[cbrocious]

Porting the assembly portion of a game is minor. In most cases, you write a C routine and then hand-compile it to assembly and leave the assembly in an #ifdef x86 block anyway. The bigger issue is DirectX. Game developers don't want to run their game in translation, so they port to OpenGL. It's not going to get any easier to port software.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Amouth]

becsue my dual zeon and x800 pro makes your ps2,xbox cry in the corner.. oh and i have a keyboard mouse joystick and a game conroler.. and choices of what i want (alot)

where you have a consol a conroler and a tv.. humm my monitor is bigger than my tv..

i think i will stay with my computer

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jessicavampirehunter]

I'm curious. What applications would you need to find alternatives for? The only browser I know that doesn't really run on non-Windows machines is IE, and I'm a little bit dubious that you actually use that thing for browsing the Internet. And Microsoft Word is also available on Mac. Incidentally, though? IE supports everything. If you want to do development in HTML, XML, SVG, whatever, it actually makes a hella good runtime environment. ~Jessica

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[msoori]

Also, you could partition your hard disk and install several OSes. Install Windows on a seperate partition just for games, Linux or now Mac OSX on seperate partions. This way, you can still run your games with Windows, and boot into a nice OS for real work and for web surfing without the worries of weak MS security.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

How is this in Apple's best interests again?

Again, I've said it 3 times now, but I will repeat, my parents would most likely (since they have the cash) go straight to the horses mouth. They would buy a microsoft pc right now if a) one exists, and b) they thought it would be "better" (which the branding alone would make them think such).

But, lets assume they purchased a PC from Dell with OSX preinstalled (with a licensing fee going to Dell). As we all know, this is a buisness model that will NEVER work. We can verify that by the fact that Microsoft almost went bankrupt while Apple is the richest company in the world.. ohh wait.. that never happened, huh?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[rpdillon]

But software doesn't scale the same way as hardware does. Hardware is a linear scale business. But in software, if you can only spend 50% more time on development, and sell it to 40 times the number of people you have been selling to, you'll make bank. The x86 market is just about 40 times the the Mac market...why *wouldn't* they want to tap it, especially considering that it wouldn't require anything like 40 times the work to support some extra hardware. Heck, make an official "hardware compatibility list", make some delas with hardware manufacturers, and get going. There is money to be made.

I know Apple is a hardware company, but let's face it, if you do it right (hell , you don't even have to do it right, look at MS), you can make a lot of money selling operating systems. Especially now that people are getting increasingly fed up with the lame offerings from Redmond.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[aristotle-dude]

Online gaming is bad for your health.

South Korean man dies.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[cavemanf16]

        I've never purchased a Mac because they ... lack in GAMES

I've never understood this argument. You're willing to put up with the sucky OS that is Windows the rest of the time you're using your computer (i.e., when you're not playing games) just so you can play games?

You don't understand the argument because you can't seem to think that not everyone is like you. For instance, which would I rather do: play Xbox and PS2 games on TV that has the resolution of 1/4th the resolution of my computer monitor? Do you think that I ONLY play Halo? Perhaps I like HL2 and CounterStrike:Source, LIKE being able to use a keyboard for certain games, and dislike the low image resolution of a TV monitor. Not only that, some of us HAVE TO use Windows based on our jobs, schools we attend, etc. so just using a Mac or Linux or whatever for our "daily duties" would make absolutely no sense.

Mind you, I still think the Windows OS sucks pretty bad and Linux is overall better, but then again, that's like saying my Honda Accord sucks just 'cause I drive it every single day and it doesn't look like the fancy Mercedes that I test drove at the dealership the other day.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[nick_danger]

It doesn't really matter if the OS is superior. It's not about the OS. It's about the application stack that rides on that OS. As long as Apple isn't a direct competitor with Microsoft, Apple users can enjoy the availability of a few core application suites from Microsoft (such as Office). As soon as Apple starts competing directly with Microsoft in the OS arena, it's quite conceivable that MS will stop selling the Mac version of these products.

Ok, so before I get a flood of "use open source!" responses, let me add this: The company I work for is a Microsoft shop. Yet there are a few co-workers that have been able to secure Mac Powerbooks as their company issued equipment because Microsoft Office works on the Mac. If MS-Office goes away, a major hurdle is introduced for adoption of Macs in business.

So it wouldn't surprise me at all if Apple's official position will continue to be that they won't sell Mac OSX86 for anything other than Mac hardware. I also seems conceivable that they'll look the other way when crafty individuals figure out how to run it on white boxes. It's free extra sales they won't have to support, it expands the user base for the software vendors, and gives the Apple platform more traction.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

Well, that's sorta my point. Everything I want to do with OSX works out of the box except two things: 1) Most Games, and 2) Running on my pre-built AMD. Thus OSX and Windows are equivelent minus those two items. I would switch to OSX in a heartbeat if they solved those two problems. When/if I ever switch pretty much everyone I know will switch, as I am their primary source of computer advice and tech support. Thus if Apple would drop the "WE'RE A HARDWARE COMPANY NEWB!!!1!" line, they would probably end up with the Monopoly that Microsoft has today. That is assuming that the product they offer is, in reality, much better than Windows, as every Mac user tells me..

The "Apple is a Hardware company!11!" thing is pretty stupid. Apple makes less profit on OSX compared to their hardware, but that can way more than be made up for by VOLUME. Just ask Microsoft, lower profit margin with exponentially higher volume == FAT LOOT.. *shrug*..

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jarich]

Apple charges a very very large markup on their hardware, I don't think the margin on their software would be nearly as high.

???

Microsoft? World's richest guy as the owner?

Software has a fixed cost of creation. You make your money in volume!

Beyond that, one of the advantages of them controlling hardware and software is the fact that they can do more rigorous quality control, because they KNOW the configuration your machine will be running. This leads to the disadvantage of having a limited and more costly hardware base, but that is why Apple products "just work".

Agreed... but it would be entirely possible to only provide support for "approved" hardware.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Syncdata]

Incidentally, once Intel Macs are out (and you can boot Windows on them), then there will no longer be a reason to have seperate boxes. You can eat your cake and have it too.

So long as you don't mind paying 25% more for cake with a mac logo, as opposed to generic PC brand cake.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[LWATCDR]

except that the Apple hardware is their copy protection system. If you only run MacOS on Apple an Apple Computer Apple knows that it got at least a little money from the user.
Why do people always forget the cost of the programmers?
Do you know how little a house costs before you add in the labor and the cost of the plans and permits?
Same thing with software.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[tigersha]

Well, in München (where BMW's HQ is) all the cop cars are BMW. They are better priced here, but hell, tayes are not the only thing, they are also made here so you have less transport costs and such things.

Besides, BMW has a plant in South Carolina.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[gnum]

It's not just higher in quality, but it's HIP. Yes. Sure those Dell/HP dudes can offer "the same", but somehow they do look like shit. This explains huge mod subculture, which reminds me modding Honda Civic's to get them looking like sports cars (the bigger is the exhaust pipe, the better). Also, multiple wannabies as mini ITX etc etc.

So, let's just face it. Some people do care about overall experience and how things they use actually look and fit their homes.

This adds to the cost amongst other factors. The target market is somewhat different.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Beowabbit]

Beyond that, one of the advantages of them controlling hardware and software is the fact that they can do more rigorous quality control, because they KNOW the configuration your machine will be running. This leads to the disadvantage of having a limited and more costly hardware base, but that is why Apple products "just work".

One alternative for them would be to license MacOS X to other hardware vendors, rather than selling it to end users. So Dell or HP has to put the effort in to make OS X work smoothly on their machines, and if the end user has a problem, they get to talk to Dell or HP about it, not Apple. (And probably OS X works a bit more reliably on Apple hardware, since Apple's hardware engineers and software engineers have a better communications path than Apple's software engineers and HP's or Dell's hardware engineers. But again, that's HP's or Dell's problem, not Apple's.) Apple could charge what they liked for OS X, and if the other hardware vendor didn't like it, they could keep selling Windows boxes (and users could keep buying Apple boxes to run OS X on).

I'm sure it's a lot more complex than that in real life, but it seems like it ought to be a net win for Apple

However, Apple actually did that for a few years once (licensing MacOS 6 or 7 or so to beige-box PowerPC vendors), and then they changed their mind and pulled (well, failed to renew) the licenses. So it's not something Apple hasn't considered before.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[picklepuss]

Okay. I'm sorry. But comparing the CPU to a set of tires is a bit off. I agree that there's a heck of a lot more to a computer than just the processor, but a Lamborghini with balding retreads is still going to totally outperform your neon on Pirellis.

If you would have said it's like buying a Neon or a Lamborghini and the engine is exactly the same, you have a valid argument. There is still significant difference in suspension and handling to offer the Lamborghini superior performance. Regardless of how well tuned your PC is, you can only go so far so fast with a fixed processor speed.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Tumbleweed]

IT history is littered with the remains of 'software only' OS firms.

Yeah, but there's that one really BIG one at the top that we all worry about. Sure, they make mice and keyboards, but the vast bulk of their profit comes from Office, or so I've heard.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

So long as you don't mind eating a twinkie snack cake as opposed to, say, German chocolate cake, no.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Tony Hoyle]

They're going to have to do most of that anyway.

Once OSX is on x86 even using apple hardware, people are going to expect to be able to plug in their latest and greatest NVidia card and have it work. Same with all other hardware... odd little USB widgets, etc. Apple get away with it at the moment because the hardware needs a PPC version - hence you have mac specific graphic cards etc. That won't happen on x86.

The only thing that apple will have any control over is the motherboard/cpu, and that's not exactly hard to do.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[rayde]

Hey you, Ferrari - why aren't you selling as many cars as Toyota? Slackers!

oh the beloved car analogy, which still doesn't fit, nor has it ever fit. the standard response: all roads support just about any car. the same is not true for software: not all software supports every computer.

and so, the point of this response is this: apple DOES need to improve it's marketshare if it wishes to move out of its niche market. which i'm certain apple's investors would be happy about.

i think the incessant droning of all of us /.ers about getting Mac OS X on our own hardware is because we agree with you: we see the enthusiasm that Apple puts forth, and we want to be a part of it. We just can't afford the commodity hardware.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Dr. Trevorkian]

When people ask me what kind of game system I think they should get if they're considering buying one, I ask them what games they want to play. You don't buy an Xbox if you want to play Metroid. If you like fighters it's either PS2 or Xbox, and I'd lean toward the PS2. If you want a killer first person shooter, Halo. Xbox.

Video games are not an interchangeable, static quantity across systems. I own a GameCube and a Xbox because there are games for those systems that I want to play. Because the PS2 does not sport any titles that I felt compelled to play, I didn't buy one.

More so than when you compare game libraries between consoles, PC games stand quite apart. World of Warcraft is not available on any game consoles. Unreal Tournament has what I feel is an awful port on Xbox. Deus Ex, X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter (yes, still) and countless others either do not exist in the console gaming world, or have shadows of themselves there that are not worth mentioning.

So if the games you want to play are on the PC, that's the platform you need. And having a PC equipped to satisfy modern gaming requirements means money. They're the most expensive consumer PCs, no contest.

So how likely do you think it is that someone who has bought a system or the parts for a system capable of playing the latest games can sink a bunch of money into an expensive new Mac? Not likely at all, in my experience.

I don't know how your post got modded up, as it struck me as very ignorant. But that last comment is probably right on target.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[The Lynxpro]

"Ok I'm naïve on the politics of this, so my post is more of a question than a answer. I know this is an argument that has gone back and forth, but here goes again...
Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands? Sure, it might detract from them selling hardware (short term), but I can honestly say for me (average Joe) I've never purchased a Mac because they simply don't have the software titles I'm interested in and Windows does. I mean sure, they've got great stuff, but they lack in GAMES, yes games... I've said it, gotten it out. I'm a gamer and so are all of my friends. I'd venture to say a good chunk of those purchasing PC's are in the same group as me (surf the web and play games). So if the Apple OS became more popular, wouldn't more developers consider making a version of their game in the Apple OS flavor?"

I'd say it would help Apple out immensely. Now there are plenty of Apple fans out there ready in the wings to jump out and say this would destroy Apple because Apple makes most of their money on hardware, but they simply haven't adjusted to reality (and out of that distortion field). Next year, when Apple has their machines running on Intel x86 chips, they'll have to be price competitive, or at least with a small premium. Its going to be very difficult to maintain that 20% profit margin on each machine because the prices and features will have to be updated as often as HP and Dell refresh their hardware.

I'm all for releasing OS X on x86 commercially. Apple can sue the pirates, and they'll still have people flocking to buy OS X for their systems. Will it work as good as good as an official Apple Mac? Nope, but again, its another aspect of the "halo" effect. If someone puts OS X on their HP and they like it, then there's a better chance of them going straight to Apple for their next computer purchase. Think about it. If this was not the case, HP would still be offering iPods for resale. However, they saw what this inevitably leads to...people dropping HP out of the equation for their next PC purchase and going to Apple.

The problem is, Apple can't afford to alienate Microsoft just yet, as Dvorak has noted. Wait until they get back up to 10% marketshare or more in the States, and then it can happen. Apple needs more money in the bank to fight Microsoft on antitrust grounds if Microsoft went and cancelled Office for OS X and successfully win. They'd also want to wait until after the 2008 election when a more sympathetic President might hold the office (McCain, for example) who would actually fight to break up Microsoft if they were again proved to violate antitrust laws.*

Apple also has to figure out just how many Macs they can have their subcontractors produce versus how many any licensed manufacturers might sell and what the impact that would be on potential Apple sales. I would venture to speculate Apple does not have the resources to manufacture enough Macs themselves (through the subbies) to provide the American computer market with 15% of all the machines sold at this point. They'd want to grow that market by having other licensees (like Sony) sell beyond Apple's own manufacturing capacity but not rob them of a sale that would otherwise go to Apple themselves.

*I should also mention that it wasn't so much Bush's desire to snatch victory from the Justice Department in ordering them to settle their case with Microsoft due to campaign contributions but more along his philosophical view of not interfering in the market in that case and causing endless appeals considering how the Supreme Court didn't want to deal with the case. A President McCain after 2008 (or a Democrat) would seize the opportunity to smite Microsoft to win easy popular support as long as it was shown that breaking up Microsoft would not cause unnecessary damage to the economy based upon the impact it might cause on large institutional shareholders.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kadin2048]

Microsoft would never allow Dell or any of the other major manufacturers to sell their boxes with an Apple OS.

They give Dell, et al, huge discounts on Windows, which I'm sure would disappear the moment Dell started considering an alternative OS. Dell wouldn't be willing to risk the majority of its sales on the off chance of this new alternative OS taking off.

And I'll restate the point others have made: Apple's superiority in terms of user experience is directly attributable to the tight integration between and control of the hardware. There are far less hardware configurations in any Apple system than a commodity x86 box. Go look for Mac video cards and you'll see what I mean. Apple would be gambling with their one real advantage if they actually marketed their OS for commodity hardware, as opposed to just letting a few hackers here and there play with it.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[sergiolopes]

I guess you're assuming that anyone can afford to buy both a Mac and PS2 or XBox. And that everybody lives alone where they decide how to use the TV (or has more than one TV). I'm both a fan of Linux and OSX, but I do like to be able to do everything in the same machine. Although windows IS sucky as you say, it allows me to do my webdev in it, my surfing, use software like photoshop and illustrator when needed and still play games.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Uber Banker]

Minus, as well, the cost of paying all of those people to write it, which I suppose might be more than the cost of the DVD.

When the software has been developed, replicating it costs no more than the media and cost of physically writing to this media (plus any per-copy royalties). So these extra copies are, more or less, 100% profit. In reality supporting a more diversified hardware base would mean increased driver support which would be additional cost.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jonfelder]

No...you already admit to pirating the OS and building the PCs. I'm not sure how you can recommend buying stock PCs if you build them...but...whatever. It's a lot more likely that it goes like this:

Next month your parents decide they want to upgrade their PC and come to you for advice (because you built their last PC). You tell them to order OS X compatible parts, and you install your pirated copy of the OS on the machine after you build it. Apple gains market share and makes no money.

Your grandfather, a year later, decides to upgrade his PC. He comes to you for advice because you built his last PC. You tell him he should run OS X. He talks to your parents, they tell him they love their OS X compatible PC. He orders OS X compatible parts, and you build the machine and install your pirated copy of OS X. Apple gains market share and makes no money.

Soon your aunt wants to upgrade, repeat above story. Market share continues to grow, but people aren't actually purchasing any Apple products. Rinse and repeat for your entire family. I doubt you build your friend's computers, but if you do...or your friends are similar to you (i.e. technically savy and have copies of OS X) rinse and repeat for them. In 5 years listen to all of the "Apple is DYING" trolls on slashdot because Apple is a hardware company and isn't selling any hardware. In 10 years your son asks you, "What is Apple?" and you tell him, "Oh we're running the last version of their OS on our Dell. Great company, too bad they went under."

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[badriram]

if you have not figured it out yet, that is the reason many give to look "good" in front of slashdot.

Ill tell you why I run Windows,
1) I can get stuff i need done...
2) Just because you do not know enough and just trust everything you hear abt windows does not make windows "awful"
3) Being a sys admin, Windows is by far is easiest to manage when it comes to managing 100s of computers
4) Apple has real few advantages in a managed environment compared to Windows. Windows literally has tons of features that just do not exist in os x for management.
5) dont kid yourself, Windows in a managed environment is as secure as OS x or linux

@ home
1) Media Center
2) Visual Studio
3) Dev tools
4) By far the one of the most accesible platforms, we get commercial software, and open source software. Throw in cygwin or sfu and get a decent unix environment as well.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[loconet]

It's easier to pirate games for the PC.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Steve525]

Would it benefit Ferrari in the long run to have every ghetto curb filled with Ferrari's?

Sure, or else you might get bought out by someone, like, say Fiat?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Orkie]

Why not release MacOS X for standard PCs but state that it will never work as well as it would on Apple hardware - thus giving people a (very complete) taster and if they want it even better (and I doubt it would be much better), but Apple hardware too?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kadin2048]

This is an excellent point. I've stated before that I think it's also the reason why we've never had to deal with serialization or activation in the Mac OS until this point.

Apple knows that you can take a OS X install DVD and pop it into as many computers as you want and pirate like hell, but they've never chosen to do anything about it. Why? Because you can only install it on Apple computers, so they know they've made some money off of you anyway.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

And having a PC equipped to satisfy modern gaming requirements means money. They're the most expensive consumer PCs, no contest.

So how likely do you think it is that someone who has bought a system or the parts for a system capable of playing the latest games can sink a bunch of money into an expensive new Mac? Not likely at all, in my experience.

Presumeably if they had sufficient disposable income to buy the expensive gaming-equipped PC, they'd also have enough to buy a low-end Mac (unless they spent every last penny on the PC that, to me, is foolish).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[rising_hope]

Aside from that, I really don't think Apple cares about the gaming market segment, i.e., teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

They should! 20-something males are probably the most likely group to be buying iPods... They're also the most likely to be just starting a family/having kids. Not caring about them now means Apple won't have much a future in 20 years when their kids grow up.

As a 25yo male, I love games.. Play 'em when I can - but I'm far too busy for games most of the time these days. The complexity of games these days, MMORPG and the like, I really can't get too terribly involved in them. I much prefer consoles, where the experience is simpler and more straight forward. Not having to wait for the OS to boot, too, is quite nice. And, the performance is always smoother, too, even if the graphics aren't up to the latest gen computer graphics card. Ultimately, I'd give up the latest greatest PC games for the time I'd save not having to deal with Spyware (though I've been pretty spyware free since switching to Firefox), Virii, and random slowdowns for no apparent reason. Vista looks promising, though, being more proactive about "health monitoring." I guess we'll have to wait and see!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[TheRaven64]

Did you not read the post you are replying to? I said `any copy of OS X sold to someone who would otherwise have used Linux or Windows.' This mean someone who would not otherwise have bought a Mac. If they sold this person nothing, then they make nothing but they still have to develop OS X. If they sell this person a copy of OS X, then that copy costs them nothing - the cost of developing OS X has already been covered by the people who bought Macs. Of course, they would be crazy not to re-invest some of this money in the next version of OS X.

In short, the cost developing of software is constant, irrespective of how many copies you sell.

I would imagine that within a few years they will be selling hardware at roughly the same price as Dell (because Dell are paying Microsoft, and Apple aren't), and bundling OS X, iLife and iWork (maybe some other things), and selling OS X, iLife and iWork as boxed sets separately. The cost of an entry level Mac will be only slightly more than the cost of all of the software bundled with it.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[chill]

Yeah, the hardware support is the killer, and why they won't do it. Where would all the drivers for all the obsolete hardware out there come from? Just getting it to boot on most 3-year old systems would mean having to write tens of thousands of drivers. Not gonna happen.

Then don't.

If people want to run on non-Mac hardware, draw a line in the cybersand and say "nothing manufactured before 1/1/2006 will we support".

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[johndierks]

So if they "have the cash", why did you build their last PC? Why didn't they call Dell and have one arrive at the door 48 hours later?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[lukket]

This is the exact reason Apple chose to support OpenGL and scrap QuickDraw and QuickDraw 3D. That way they are sure that most third party video cards can be used, and in Tiger they even made a new component, ImageCore which is an interface to OpenGL that can be used by any app. Before this happened, Apple either needed to make the drivers or let third party video card vendors make them specifically for QuickDraw. Since Apple has shopped around between ATi and Nvidia using OpenGL makes sense.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Nasarius]

Yeah, the hardware support is the killer, and why they won't do it. Where would all the drivers for all the obsolete hardware out there come from? Just getting it to boot on most 3-year old systems would mean having to write tens of thousands of drivers. Not gonna happen.

I agree. But theoretically, Apple could switch to the Linux or FreeBSD kernel (rather than the strange hybrid kernel they have now), and work with OSS developers to get the hardware support they need. It won't happen, but it's an interesting possibility.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kadin2048]

While you may be true in the narrow sense of "one more copy" doesn't cost very much, if Apple bought into this line of thinking, it'd be the last version of the Mac OS they ever sold.

They have to recoup the cost of the R&D that went into developing the system, and continually updating it, and producing the next version. These are costs which need to be somehow made up by either OS sales, or (as I suspect they are now) subsidized by hardware sales.

Up until recently, when Apple started charging $200 or whatever it is for a new version of the OS every year or two, and perhaps even now, I'm sure the software side of things ran at a loss. The Mac OS exists principally as a selling point to get people to buy Apple hardware, which is where the profit is.

Similarly, the iTMS, which might be the lifeblood of some other company, exists to Apple almost solely as a way to market iPods, which they make a large profit on.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[tolan-b]

Except that pretty much all the other parts are off the shelf PC components too...

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Nasarius]

If people want to run on non-Mac hardware, draw a line in the cybersand and say "nothing manufactured before 1/1/2006 will we support".

Then you still have the same exact problem. Microsoft doesn't write their own device drivers. Hardware developers write them for Windows. Unless Apple can convince them to write drivers for MacOS too, Apple still has the same problem of scrambling to support every single piece of new hardware. It's a nightmare, and it's nearly impossible.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jessicavampirehunter]

Wow, how off-topic is that. Seriously, dude, no one here cares how big your dick is. Grow up. ~Jessica

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[EggyToast]

Sure, video cards... And don't forget about all the real guts! The network cards, the USB cards, the old soundblasters. Oh and those mainboard drivers. All those people who install on VIA mainboards and get to install the after-install VIA 4in1 drivers? Yeah, you think OS X is going to support you?

Windows supports all that stuff, and arguably that's what eats up all of their development time. Apple releases most of their machines will pretty much all the hardware you need already installed, so you don't need to check for hardware upon install. Heck, I'm sure you've noticed that the past couple revisions have come out with minimum requirements being based on the hardware abilities, not clock speed. "Do you have built-in Firewire? How about USB?"

With x86 computers, you can install on old hardware with mostly random parts. Cheap old NICs, old mainboards with various odds and ends built in (or not). Who's going to support all of that? Apple, despite their resources, would rather spend timem and effort supporting their own hardware accurately. So the job falls to those manufacturers and 3rd party companies. That stuff isn't going to be built into the OS, so how are people going to install it on random, commodity hardware?

To me, the joy of OS X is that it recognizes everything in the box from the very beginning, and I don't need to open the case for anything if I don't want to. It really is a bundled product to me, and that's why I like it. Buying the OS as a piece of software and then fandangling hardware together in hopes that it'll have the drivers in the OS? That doesn't seem appealing to me, who wants a computer to just work. I got sick of building my own years ago.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Dan Ost]

How much of Apple's income comes from iTunes (not counting profit from iPod
sales)?

I would guess very little since everyone keeps talking about iTunes as being
profitable just because it drives iPod sales.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

And we all know that companies that gain nearly 100% of the market share make almost no money. Hence the recent Microsoft bankruptcy..

I pray for Apple's sake that Steve Jobs is smarter than you, because if he doesn't see the HUGE opportunity that OSX has in the marketplace right now, Apple is doomed to be nothing but an iPod manufacturer for the rest of it's time. If there ever has been a time to strike at the heart of Microsoft it's right now, and if there ever has been a company that can pull it off, with the right smarts, it's today's Apple. Apple needs to realize WHY Windows won, if they do that, they'll own the market.

And it's silly to think that Apple will want to stay a "hardware" company when they have the opportunity to be the de facto standard in computing. Microsoft became the 100 lb gorilla it is today with the EXACT buisness model you described above. Why do you think it will only work for them?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[The Lynxpro]

"Not only that, but we have to remember how rampant piracy would be. To be honest, I think that if given the choice, very few people outside of Apple's core markets would purchase their hardware if they knew they could go to walmart and buy a $299 computer and download OSX from the internet for free. 1. The OS doesn't cost enough for them to recoup the R&D dollars they put into it. 2. If they raise the price, many people will just pirate it, (which of course many people will do anyway) The truth is that Apple has got to STAY in the hardware business if they want to stay in business."

Butshite. OS X development only cost $20 million last year. Apple could sell $20 million + in Apple logo merchandise per year to pay for that. Not even counting the iPod and everything else they have up their sleeves, or turtlenecks.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Lodragandraoidh]

Apple can differentiate the two product lines:

Option 1: Run OSX on a high-end Motorola based RISC machine with all the hardware bells and whistles seamlessly integrated with all Apple products.

Option 2: Run OSX on a whitebox without all the tight integration for less. You'll get OSX - but it might not be able to do everything as easily (integrate with non-standard peripheral devices etc.) Of course, OSX will certainly be more integrated than current alternatives that require Unix system administration skills (Linux, FreeBSD etc.)

The traditional market for Apple hardware will continue unabated because these are the folks who don't want to hassle with integration - they want to buy a toaster that does everything they need and connects to all the other high-end toasterettes - and Apple is the only manufacturer that satisfies that need.

Finally, while Apple might not make a lot of money on the whitebox option, they will put a very large dent in Microsoft's market share - people who would then be more likely to upgrade to a 'genuine' Apple.

Either way - it is win-win for Apple and Steve Jobs.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jessicavampirehunter]

WINE comes in tarball format, and you can install it from source on OSX just like you can on Linux with no problems. Also? VirtualPC. ~Jessica

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[RollingThunder]

"Cheap PC" and "Gaming PC" are complete opposites, unless you want to play games that are three years old.

In which case, you may as well have a Mac for gaming. ;)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[relentless1914]

Apple ended the licensing program because instead of gaining new converts to mac, Power COmputing, Motorolla ect were cannibalizing Apples customers. Since the licensing costs were less than the profit Apple made from selling a computer, so they saw that the program was an excercise in futility and scrapped it.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[John Newman]

the effort involved in downloading Kerio, ad-aware and AVG is much much less than the effort required to earn £500 to pay for a Mac

That depends on how much your time, your privacy, and your data are worth to you...

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[mini me]

Wrong market. Pirates don't use Linux because it's already free.

And Linux is pretty big on the desktop, it's right up there with MacOS. Both nothing compared to Windows, but it's still pretty significant.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

Dedicated games machines are aimed at a quite different market. A serious PC games player will pay 4 digit prices for a gaming PC while consoles typically have 3 digit prices. Quite different markets. Someone who has rejected Macs because they lack games is clearly otherwise in the 4 digit market so what you say is irrational and I suspect it was just an excuse to use the offtopic but mod-point attracting phrase "sucky OS".

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

Why not? The last time they wanted a PC I had the free time to build one for them.. this time I won't (I grew up). I'm not sure if you've noticed or not, but the computing world has hardly stayed static in the last 5 years. Things are changing drastically, Dell offers a lot more options today than they offered only a couple of years ago. You're pretending today's market has always existed, when it clearly hasn't. There are easily a dozen reasons that I built my mother's PC and my grandfather's PC and my father in laws PC, but then told my aunt to just order a PC from Dell.. It's silly to say "but you did it this way once, I don't believe you'll EVAR CHANGE!1!".. be realistic..

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[tholomyes]

My Mac does the Photoshop/MSOffice thing, as well as games:MMORPGs (World of Warcraft), FPSs (Unreal), and -- eh, I haven't really played any RTS's since Starcraft, so I can't speak to that.

It can also run the all the nifty open source *nix tools as needed, which I assume do the brunt of the "heavy lifting" to which you refer.

No need for both a Windows *and* a Linux box.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kadin2048]

Actually, your comment about drivers is not true on the Mac.

Apple builds most of the generic drivers (USB Mass Storage, the input device drivers, even generic SCSI card drivers) for commonly available hardware. They do this because they realize their marketshare is too small to rely on aftermarket hardware providers to put the time in to make drivers that are reliable and would maintain a satisfactory user experience.

I have a lot of hardware attached to my Macs, and I can't think of anything that I've actually installed a manufacturer-supplied driver for. Perhaps the printer. But other than that, everything else runs using the default, Apple supplied generic drivers.

Apple doesn't have the market or mind-share to piss away customer goodwill by having them call up and get told that they're SOL because their hardware isn't supported. Better to just make the OS not run on unsupported systems at all, than to run poorly and give Apple and the Mac OS a bad reputation.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[The Lynxpro]

"However, Apple actually did that for a few years once (licensing MacOS 6 or 7 or so to beige-box PowerPC vendors), and then they changed their mind and pulled (well, failed to renew) the licenses. So it's not something Apple hasn't considered before."

Apple's hardware licensing failed back then because they courted third tier computer manufacturers as their licensees. Those licensees "stole" Apple hardware sales by either offering cheaper machines or machines with better features than Apple and competed with Apple for the existing Mac fans. The licensees did not actively go out and expand the Mac platform by courting non-Mac fans. That's a little different than today if Apple decided to license OS X to HP, Gateway, or Sony to bundle in a Media Center PC when Apple had no plans on offering a similar product line.

And you can best bet that if Apple licensed OS X to HP, they'd insist on HP's Unix team to also help out on OS X/Darwin development to defray costs.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[bahamat]

Apparently you haven't heard...

Apple - Mac OS X Downloads - Games

I play lots of games on my computer. Lots of good ones. I own only Macs (well, I own a Sun box too, but who's counting?).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[zagmar]

Well, maybe not. Apple vs PC benchmark tests (especially for graphics/video editing) show that numerically comparable systems perform very differently. If you're a professional, the difference is well worth it, especially when you consider the fact that Macs are much more reliable in terms of crashes.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Fortun L'Escrot]

why don't you just get a dedicated game machine

isn't much better than the argument you never understood. but for one, there are games for pc that will never make it to game machines. and in some cases the pc version of a game is much better than anything the game machines can do. the only differences worth mentioning now are that game machines might start providing exclusive content.

i agree with you about apple not caring about the gaming market, but i honestly do not know who apple or ms or any other big corp cares about. because each one fails for me. they dont care about me...and now i cry about it. sometimes i think even the penguin doesn't care about me so i have to keep spending money to get answers...that sucks

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[The Lynxpro]

"IT history is littered with the remains of 'software only' OS firms."

Yeah, but that's all prior to the Microsoft antitrust settlement too. Apples (pun intended) and oranges.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[databyss]

"we see the enthusiasm that Apple puts forth, and we want to be a part of it. We just can't afford the commodity hardware."

No we all don't. Speak for yourself.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[eLoco]

Apple has high markup on their hardware because they spend oodles on R&D. Contrast this with technology cherry picking Dell.

Which brings up an interesting question: are the margins the same or similar for hardware and software after factoring out the cost of R&D for each? If so, maybe the Intel move really is a way to boost software sales while trying to limit decrease in hardware sales and spread risk out a little.

It seems that if Apple "certifies" the quality/stability of OS X on its hardware but allows it to run on other hardware, they have (potentially) the best of both worlds. Those that require stability and/or cool hardware design will continue to go with Apple hardware, whereas the more adventurous / tech savvy will make it work with "unverified" hardware.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[CptSkippy]

I've never understood this argument. You're willing to put up with the sucky OS that is Windows the rest of the time you're using your computer (i.e., when you're not playing games) just so you can play games?

You've never been to Walmart have you? Walmart Shoppers are a perfect example of the people Apple doesn't cater to. Willing to tolerate shit because it's cheap and gets the job done, and can be replaced in short term for a really low price!

What exactly do you think most people do on their PCs? I'm a software developer and I use the hell out of my machine at work, but at home? Honestly the last time I opened up an office suite application was about 4 years ago to compose a nice threatening letter to DirecTV. Aside from that I use my home PC to check email and browse the web. Most people these days use a web browser to check their email so that's one less application a PC is good for.

Point of fact is that most people use their computer for entertainment purposes and communication. Because of this and the fact that Windows is less problematic with each new release, familiar (biggie), and is considerably cheaper than a Mac most people aren't willing to bite the bullet and transition to a Mac. Windows also has the ability to migrate data and settings from one machine to another, albiet poorly but that's a far site better than the big fat nothing that Mac's come with.

In addition Apple also hasn't really done anything to entice people away from Windows or to accomidate their switch; no migration utility, no good books for switching, and no price accomidating hardware. Sure the Mac Mini is cheap for a Mac, but it's about the cost of a complete PC and it's a pretty weak machine for running OSX. Witty commercials and an air of superiority don't win many converts.

Apple doesn't cater to the Walmart crowd and they would lose their base if they did, just like any luxury brand.

If you're that into games, why don't you just get a dedicated game machine, e.g., PS2, Xbox, etc., for games and a Mac to do the rest of your stuff?

You obviously don't play games. Most people have dedicated systems, but seeing as how I can't play Animal Crossing on PS2 or Xbox, or Half-Life 2 on a Gamecube, or Halo 2 on ... well you get the idea. Hardcore gamers, the people who can afford a Mac, don't but a PC for Office or Windows, they buy it for Half-Life 2, Doom 3, Splinter Cell, Wolrd Of Warcraft, Everquest, Planetside, etc. Aside from games, their PC serves as a web browser and email machine and if it can do those things then why get a Mac?

Aside from that, I really don't think Apple cares about the gaming market segment, i.e., teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

They can afford iPods can't they? It is a mistake to ignore them because their market segment is one of few that has the money and would be willing to spend it on a Mac.

Hope that clears things up for you.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kadin2048]

Or it could backfire horribly, like the "experiment" with clones/CHRP did: Apple's overall market share didn't change, but users who previously had bought Apple hardware migrated to Power Computing and Motorola and UMax boxes, giving Apple only a licensing fee instead of the 20% margin they previously did.

If Mac OS ran on commodity hardware, perhaps they'd pick up a few disgruntled Windows users, and Linux users who want something easier to use, but I suspect any positive movement would be greatly offset by the number of current Mac users who would switch to cheaper hardware and deny Apple profit.

I'm sure there are some potential Mac users waiting in the wings, held off by the high cost of Apple hardware, but this is not a market that I suspect Apple really cares about. Apple switched from PowerPC to Intel because they wanted to get faster processors into their current lineup and maintain and increase the number of people buying Apple boxes, not decimate their hardware division's sales overnight.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[mrchaotica]

I mean sure, they've got great stuff, but they lack in GAMES, yes games... I've said it, gotten it out. I'm a gamer and so are all of my friends.

You should walk into an Apple store sometime. The one around here has an entire aisle of games (and they're the good ones, too -- WoW, Battlefield 1942, UT2004, etc.).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Guspaz]

Problem is if a user pays for software they have a reasonable expectation of support for that software. Not tech support, but general support. Software updates are considered support, for example.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[drix]

It all goes back to the perennial question, "is Apple a hardware or a software company?" This has been debated over and over and over and over and over again. So far as I can tell, no one has a clue. Maybe Steve Jobs. :) The answer this question is basically the answer to yours. If, as has been rumored, they are selling iPods and cheapo Mac minis as loss-leaders to hook people into the software, then yeah, they want OS X installed everywhere.

The fact that they're going to great lengths to stop that from happening tells me that they are profiting from the hardware more than the software, but interpret it however you like. That also bears out if you simply look at how much of a premium they are extracting for iPods and Powerbooks when comparable equipment is available for about half the price. There are MP3 players out there with more features, no battery life problems, better UI, etc. but Apple still gets away with charging twice as much. The real mystery to me is not what kind of company they are but how they keep convincing people it's worth it :)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[timster]

Microsoft's Windows revenues were $3 billion last quarter; Apple's Mac revenues were $1.5 billion.

Apple doesn't break down margins by business unit, but they have a 30% margin overall so the profit on Macs is probably about $450 million. Microsoft says their Windows profit was $2.2 billion, which is a 73% margin.

So Apple, with their little 5% of the market, makes $450 million on Macs. Microsoft, with essentially the rest of the market, only makes five times as much profit.

If the numbers work out for Apple the same way they do for Microsoft, Apple as a software company would need to sell about 4 or 5 times as many copies of OSX as they do Macs now, just to maintain their current level of profitability. Not going to happen, not overnight.

The numbers just don't make sense for Apple to switch to a software company today. They may make sense in the future. In the meantime, though, the bottom line is that Apple is doing very well, and they do not need to reinvent themselves right now.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[wattersa]

Apple marketing owns you, d00d. It is a corporation and does not have feelings, except maybe the feelings of Steve Jobs. The company's purpose is to maximize profit by any means necessary, and their rational decision making settled on the move to Intel to cement Apple's place as the Porsche of the computer world, not to make it some kind of egalitarian, warm and fuzzy place where nothing gets done and no one works because everyone is happy.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

1. Apple would have to support a massively larger amount of hardware.

Due to the lack of formatting (probably not your fault) and because I happen to know quite a bit about the subject, I stopped reading at this sentence..

My nick, pcidevel, comes from the fact that I've spent the last 5 years developing device drivers for pci devices in Windows (as well as Linux, HP-UX, Solaris, etc).. I've never worked for Microsoft that whole time. Microsoft does not develop the device drivers for Windows, the third party manufacturer of the device does. I've written, probably close to a dozen drivers, from niche products to ethernet drivers for Intel (if you use a IBM or Intel ethernet card, you've probably encounterd my code.. yeah it's the shit that made your box BSOD, sorry about that)..

If Apple increases their market share and opens their APIs, hardware manufacturers will flock to OSX with device drivers. Hell I've had companies pay me to develop drivers for HP-UX, and there are probably around 15 people in the WORLD using HP-UX anymore. You can guarantee if there was even a fractional market for OSX using the hardware I've developed for, my boss would have me working on OSX drivers in a heartbeat, i.e. if Apple would let us, we would support them.. hardware manufacturers love cash..

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[erikkemperman]

You get what you pay for: a nicely designed machine with a very nice OS that Just Works(TM).

Like I said, from my modest experience with it I'd say OSX is exceptionally good. I did the experiment I proposed myself; when I bought my current machine recently, I considered the G5 a serious candidate. And I found the contrast truly remarkable. I didn't hold back on the looks and noise/cooling, either.

All in all, I spent about as much as I would have on the entry level G5, at the time. But I have about four times the diskspace, double the memory, and about the same graphics specs I would have got from Apple. I think my venice cpu is about on par with the powerpc alternative I could have had, for what I do at least, most of the time. I guess maybe altivec would've beat the pants off mmx/sse/whathaveyou in some media apps and you can argue cisc is a really bad mistake.. But there you have it, I made a choice.

On the other hand, even to non-gamers I would probably not recommend linux to everyone, not even ubuntu and the like, so yes, in many cases the mac is a really good option.

Do you also think BMW, Mercedes, or Lexus pricing is also ludicrous?

Yes - or rather I think the people who buy them are nutty. Other than racing I can think of very few purposes for which, say, a Volvo or something would not be perfectly adequate. Except if you're on the road for hours on end, day in day out - like the way I use my machine, and you perhaps your nicely designed Apple - the comforts of luxurious interior do probably weigh in.

Mind you, that's more like a BMW or Merc than a Ferrari or a Hummer -- the latter two in my view being truly ludicrous ricercars (yes I know the site) with no place on the public roads. Anyway, somehow people who go shopping in a 4x4, or get stuck in a traffic jam in a Lamorghini never strike me as especially reasonable folk.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

Windows also has the ability to migrate data and settings from one machine to another, albiet poorly but that's a far site better than the big fat nothing that Mac's come with.

You obviously have never migrated from one Mac to another. Put the source Mac into target disk mode, connect it via Firewire to the destination Mac, and run the migrator utility. All user setting are copied and copied well.

[The teenaged-or-twenty-something males] can afford iPods can't they? It is a mistake to ignore them because their market segment is one of few that has the money and would be willing to spend it on a Mac.

I meant: the teenaged-or-twenty-something males that comprise the game market, not all teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[relentless1914]

So are you saying that Apple wrote OSX in just a year? Seeing as the OS is in maintainance and update mode, of course the cost is less than when they were developing, but there is more to the company than just paying programmers. I stand by my statement. While your observation may be correct when looking at last year, it is an unsustainable model to try to make up R&D costs by selling pens and T-shirts.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jessicavampirehunter]

How about Red Hat and Novell?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Dr. Spork]

I really don't think Apple cares about the gaming market segment, i.e., teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

Umm, do you seriously think any retail manufacturer, but especially any builder of computers, could write off this segment? I'd be surprised if the group you describe makes up less than 50% of Apple's customers.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

I disagree.. Lets assume your numbers are correct. If I told my boss that we could go to market with the products that we have today, and could potentially end up with 4-5 times the profit, he'd have a heart attack at the opportunity. If I could promise him that if the gamble failed, we'd still have the iPod to fall back on (which is probably a vast majority of those sales) he'd make me Vice President of the Universe. Buisnesses rarely, if ever, have the opportunity that Apple has today. Moving from $450 million to $2 billion in profits is absurd and unheard of.. And that's assuming your (probably conservative) guess is right..

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[CaptDeuce]

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

Short answer: no.

Longer answer: though theoretically possible in the long term (depending on how you define "long term"), it's highly unlikely.

Here's an only slightly more likely alternative: instead of making their software available to generic x86 boxes, Apple could design a not quite generic x86 box specifically meant to support current x86 operating systems (Windows, Linux, etc).

What would an Apple style generic x86 box look like?

1. No legacy ports, that is, nothing that you wouldn't find on a Mac such as serial & parallel ports.
2. Common components with Mac boxes; video chips, support chips, etc.
3. It will not be able to run Mac OS.
4. It would essentially be a PC mini: no slots that a Mac mini doesn't have.

Assuming they made such a box, Apple will create a niche market machine, most likely the equivelant of the G4 Cube which targeted the executive desktop: a small machine that does everything that 90% of a typical productivity oriented user would need, in a stylish package. It will feature no hassle, "take it out of the box and it works" ease of use. Well, as much as Windows or Linux would allow.

Price difference between a PC mini and a Mac mini? Not much. Why make one? Tap into the market segments of people who absolutely positively must run Windows software, and the Windows Weenie people who would rather drink poison than buy a Mac.

Why won't Apple do this? Most people who would be willing to switch won't. How do we know this? Because people who would have no significant issues at all switching now, are not switching (e.g, running Windows specific software or other specific compatibility issues; think grandmas). There is no certain sign such a Windows to Mac migration is imminent. And if there's no reason for people to change platfor, there's no reason for Apple to change from their current path.

Any other speculative paths run into the same problem: there is no compelling reason for Apple to change what is now a winning -- in the sense of sustainable -- strategy. Whatever would force Apple to change would be forcing the entire PC to change as well. Predictions about the future of the PC industry run 10 cents a million.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[GlassHeart]

Solaris-x86 is hardly a model of success. Linux, on the other hand, already has over a decade of headstart in terms of PC hardware support, plus some users who are philosophically devout, not to mention a zero price tag, yet has not grabbed significant market share on the desktop.

That doesn't mean Apple can't succeed, because MacOS X has strengths that neither Solaris nor Linux has (and weaknesses that they don't have), but it does mean that your examples don't exactly point the way to "Profit!!!".

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Lewisham]

Apple is a brand that is based on quality. What you're advocating is running the brand through the mud, exactly what the company doesn't want.

Not supporting things is sure-fire way for customer support to decline.

Supporting things that cause it to run like crap is a sure-fire way for customer support to decline.

Apple can only, and should only, release OS X on their own hardware, where the quality of user experience is assured.

This is what will happen.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[dduck]

Hmm, I Switched and now keep a PC around for burning CD's (I burn hundreds pr. session on an array of 13 CD burners) and the occational game. The Mac is used for everything else. Much nicer. And it does the heavy lifting quite nicely too, thank you very much ;)

Oh, and I got a PS2 for console games, to be the "grown up" machine to compliment the kids' Gamecube.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kadin2048]

I think this is very true. I was going to make a point like this earlier in the thread: Apple won't release an OS for commodity hardware because they would put them in direct competition with Microsoft.

As much as we like to imagine MS and Apple as die-hard rivals, they really aren't. Microsoft makes important software for the Mac OS (MS Office suite), and basically lets Apple do whatever it wants in its little corner of the market. Apple does a lot of saber-rattling to please the Mac faithful who like to see themselves as partisans fighting the Evil Gates Empire, but doesn't really affect MS's sales.

If Apple ever introduced an OS for commodity hardware, I think you'd see Microsoft's Bad Business Machine rolling like never before. Every contract with every hardware vendor would be used to keep the Mac OS off of mass-market systems. Companies that adopted Macs would probably get threatened with software license audits and junk lawsuits. Every school district in the country would get a special 'one time offer' if they agreed never to buy Apple.

We've all seen the sort of FUD that MS spreads regarding Linux, and I think everyone can agree that Linux is not yet, from a usability standpoint, a direct competitor to Windows XP. If Apple actually brought out an x86 OS that was, you'd see these sort of tactics times a thousand.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Dylan Zimmerman]

I'd love to see a list of these features of Windows that make it easier to manage large numbers of machines. I honestly can't think of any. Mac OS X has Apple Remote Desktop which can send batch commands to entire networks of computers as easily as typing the command and selecting the target machines from a list.

It also has an absolutely fantastic method of networked booting that allows you to flush a machine's hard drive and restore it to a disk image on a server with only a few clicks. This can also be done with groups of computers and is handled with multicasting so as to save on bandwidth.

It's got all of the standard features such as Windows NT compatible ACLs; network software installs and booting; domain management and user authentication through Active Directory, Open Directory, LDAP, NetInfo, and just about anything else I've heard of; standard mounting of SMB shares as well as NFS, AFP, WebDAV, and FTP all trivially and with as strong authentication as the standard supports; Wake on LAN, of course ...

In all seriousness, I'd love to hear what OS X is missing.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[cmorgan47]

Apple charges a very very large markup on their hardware, I don't think the margin on their software would be nearly as high.

you're not joking. i just paid $83 for an iBook ac adapter....had to have one for a weekend trip.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Princeofcups]

> If you're that into games, why don't you just get a dedicated game machine, e.g., PS2, Xbox, etc., for
> games and a Mac to do the rest of your stuff?

>I am not the original poster, but games you play on a PC are very different from the ones you play on
> consoles. If you like MMORPGs (e.g. World of Warcraft), FPSs (e.g. Unreal), RTSs (e.g. Rome:
> Total War) then having a console does not help you at all.

You could always play World of Warcraft or Unreal on your Mac. They are available for MacOS X.

jfs

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MoneyT]

Fuck, Apple can't even get people to understand that they don't support third party product ("What do you mean I have to call griffen to get my year old iTrip fixed?") and don't support HP iPods, you think people are smart enough to read a compatability list. How often to morons ask at the stores "will this game run on my computer" when the minimum system requirements are listed on the box?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[drew]

I'm willing to suffer though rebooting to windows to play games and then reboot to a different OS to get actual work done. If I had an OS that was good for both purposes, I wouldn't have to do that, but in the meantime, I do.

Consoles suck for most of the types of games that I enjoy playing on my PC. Conversely, games that I enjoy on a console tend to not impress me very much if/when I play them on a PC. About the only game that I have played and enjoyed on both platforms was GTA3, but even then, it was almost like playing a completely different game with the same plot.

And lastly, your stereotype is about 5-10 years out of date. As the generation of kids that grew up with Ataris and Nintendos ages, they are bringing the age of the gaming market segment right along with them. The average gamer is now in his late twenties or early thirties. Only about 30% of gamers are under the age of 20.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[timster]

No, none of that money has anything to do with the iPod. Those are Mac numbers.

Apple would only stand to make the $2 billion if they sold as many copies of OS X as Microsoft does of Windows. That's completely unrealistic. If they managed to triple their market share, which is a little more realistic, they would go from making $450 million a quarter on Macs to making something like $300 million on software sales.

Perhaps you believe that 30% of PC purchasers each year really want OS X, not Windows, and buy a PC anyway instead of a Mac. If that is true, then the gambit would work. Apple would need to be very certain about that, though, before abandoning a strategy that is currently very successful.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[the.Ceph]

Unless they spent every last penny on the PC that, to me, is foolish

When I bought my gaming PC last year I didn't spend every last penny I had on it. I did spend every last penny of my electronic toy fund on it though. My other pennies went to tuition, food, and rent.

I'd much rather have a really good PC as opposed to a crappy low end PC and crappy low end Mac.
Also I don't have room for that many machines so the one that I want, is the one I purchase.

Foolish isn't buying a PC to play games, foolish is not understanding how someone uses a computer for something you don't.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kadin2048]

Uhhh....no.

What Apple is going to release are Apple Computers, which just happen to have processors made by Intel. You'd be a fool to think that means you can just plug in a PC video card. It's still going to be a "Macintosh computer," and to users that means that you need to buy Mac-compatible hardware if you want it to work correctly.

In other words, when you want a video card, you go to ATI and pick from the one or two 'Mac' video card versions they sell, or the same from nVidia. Nowhere has Apple done anything to suggest to anyone that this situation will change.

I think people here on Slashdot are making a bigger deal out of the processor change than average Mac users will. They'll still be buying and using those big silver metal boxes with the Apple on the front, and buying hardware that's compatible with it. The advantage of the new processors is increased speed, not wider hardware compatibility.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[baboon]

> 1. Apple would have to support a massively larger amount of hardware.

Ok, but how about if they just support one more piece of "hardware", VMware itself? Officially.

I have one computer [running]. I use VMware on Linux for the sole purpose of maintaining a Win32 build of my project. I would be happy to buy OSX and port to it, but I don't have the space or financial interest to justify purchasing a full dev-worthy Apple box.

Overall, my guess is that Apple will not try very hard to prevent unsupported installs. You can still buy the disk, but they don't have to answer your calls. It would be like a Linux user trying to setup DSL. They won't help you, but they'll be happy to take your money if you can figure it out.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[coolsva]

What you say about hardware compatibility is partly true. However, much of the hardware being connected to a machine now and more so going forward are external talking a standardized language. In the apple world, you connect any digital camera, any external HD or other devices, they just work.
Not many people add hardware inside teh box once it is built and working (we geeks do it all the time). For most such people, MacOS is good enough

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[tanguyr]

Microsoft would never allow Dell or any of the other major manufacturers to sell their boxes with an Apple OS.

Well, Dell already sells machines with factory-installed Linux, so i don't know about *never*, although i do concede that they certainly wouldn't appreciate it, especially since the target market would be different (any maybe bigger? hmmm, something to ponder...)

The real question is what would Apple gain by licensing OSX to Dell (or any other manufacturer/assembler)? They already did licensing deals with a number of third parties way back when, and shut them down post haste when it turned out they where cannibalizing their own sales.

And I'll restate the point others have made: Apple's superiority in terms of user experience is directly attributable to the tight integration between and control of the hardware.

I'll go further than that: Apple's superiority in terms of P/E ratio is directly attributable to the surcharge they can get away with because "they're so pwetty" ;)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Yocto Yotta]

You're absolutely right. I probably should have mentioned that I'm a rabid OS X supporter and 50/50 user between OS X (personal) and XP (business - the sad truth). If Apple's other business stayed the same, OS X could have it's price raised, or if they didn't raise it, Microsoft would have to drop Windows prices for sure. That said, my assumption was based on Apple becoming a software-only company, in which case they'd have to raise prices by default. I'm sure their OS development costs are right in line with Microsoft's (BTW, any real data on this would be awesome. Anyone?), so the retail prices would likely be similar too, IF Apple wasn't selling hardware anymore.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[coolsva]

Hey you, Ferrari - why aren't you selling as many cars as Toyota? Slackers!

I may not compare apple to a ferrari. Apple's key success point is its ease of use (not speed/power) and its exclusivity. I would rather compare it to a Lincon or a Lexus. Of course, too many Lexus's on the road does make it less exclusive and less attractive to buyers who are looking specifically for those criteria, for the rest of us, it is a good thing.
BTW, by lexus, I meant a well built car. And, I do not have any statistics, but I do see a lot more BMW/Lexus/Merc on the roads today than 10 years back and it is definitely a good thing (unless you are GM/Ford etc)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[PurPaBOO]

Apple have approximately 20% margins on hardware.

20%, my arse!

The fact that a replacement power supply for a G4 is £199 is the reason I have never bought a Mac.

Incidentally, its £299 if you want to actually keep the old power supply!

Don't forget to pay your $699 you cock-smoking teabaggers! :-)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Kadin2048]

No, Dell wouldn't be selling Apple anything.

They would have thought about it, for about fifteen seconds, and then realized that if they sold a single computer with Apple's OS, that Microsoft would pull the steep discount they get on Windows licenses (and which allows them to undercut the competition and maintain their marketshare).

If Apple did release an operating system for commodity hardware, it would be the Power Computings and UMaxes of the world that would be selling the systems. MS would never let the major manufacturers touch it.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[phishtrader]

Apple has to cover the cost of developing OS X as well as paying for marketing and other expenses. Also, shareholders expect a profit. The cost of producing shrink-wrapped software is more than the cost of the physical contents of the box. So no, extra copies wouldn't be 100% profit.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

Perhaps you believe that 30% of PC purchasers each year really want OS X, not Windows, and buy a PC anyway instead of a Mac. If that is true, then the gambit would work. Apple would need to be very certain about that, though, before abandoning a strategy that is currently very successful.

I believe they could gain a larger than 30% share, almost overnight, certainly withing a few years. The market is ready for something revolutionary, the early adopters that drive the market just don't want to buy an overpriced Mac to run that revolutionary product. Again, if you read my initial post, I think if OSX ran on commodity hardware, my son would end up reading about Microsoft in a history book.. In fact, I think opening OSX up to commodity hardware would win over the "early adopters", people like me who are going to build their pcs, and we'll recommend it to people who will actually buy real macs, so I hardly think it's far to discount any of the current market share Apple has using real macs. My thesis is, if they can win me over by letting me run OSX on my AMD I put together by hand, it will only serve to INCREASE their hardware sales (as well as their software sales)..

Look at it this way, my parents buy Sony TVs, even though MUCH cheaper TVs exist. They have 4 TVs, every single one is Sony. In fact, I cannot remember them ever buying anything BUT Sony, yet the whole time cheaper TVs have existed. Buying a Sony TV is easy for them, and they have the money to spend to avoid having to research, they know if they buy a Sony TV it will work well and it will do what they want it to do. They do not have the energy or the desire to spend 20 hours on the 'net to find a cheaper TV that is equivelent in quality and ease of use.

If I switch to running OSX on my x86, they will end up buying an Apple PC straight from Apple for the exact same reason that they always buy a Sony TV. They will be interested in buying something that they don't have to research but will be of appropriate quality for their needs. The barrier right now from them buying a Mac is the fact that I don't use a OSX, thus I will not support them using OSX. If I switch to OSX, Apple will increase it's hardware sales, not just it's software sales..

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Blakey Rat]

Or not buy a game console, and own BOTH a Mac and PC... there's nothing in the Mac that will make your PC stop functioning, and vice versa. The whole "switch" mentality is stupid when you can run both.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[techwolf]

My Nike shirts have lasted longer than the Hanes or Cheetah ones I bought for right about $5. There is a quality difference.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jdehnert]

Why would margins drop? Do you expect the Intel hardware will cost Apple more than the PPC?

I'd expect just the opposite to occur, or more likely, for the price to drop.

Intel has a certain economy of scale. If Apple can purchase components at a lower price becuase of that scale then either

a) margins go up since the system now costs less to make

  or

b) costs come down and the margins remain the same as Apple passes the savings on to the consumer in order to increase sales volume.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Tilmitt]

Looks like somebody blew a shitload of money on his rig and by the looks of it this self-mastubatory post is more to reassure himself that he hasn't fucked up than to enlighten us.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Yocto Yotta]

That is true, but if we apply your logic to the particular discussion at hand, Microsoft would have been freely giving away Windows licenses to any bum like you or me long ago. Sure MS makes more in (on? from?) the professional sector, but I don't think they mind the "few" additional billions in their coffer from consumer XP sales. I don't mean to be an ass, as what you say is true, but your comment is completely off-topic.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[TheRaven64]

OS X is very different to the System 7 available with the clones. System 7 had a nice UI (for its time), but was getting very long in the tooth as an OS - it didn't even support pre-emptive multitasking or protected memory so any badly behaved app could kill your system.

At the time, the alternative was Windows 95 or Windows NT 4. 95 had a UI that, at a passing glance, was as good as a Mac, and NT 4 was a real OS. Both supported pre-emptive multitasking, although you needed NT 4 for protected memory.

Now, compare Windows XP to OS X. OS X is slightly behind in a few kernel areas, and ahead in some others. The UI, however, is significantly better - and it has far less of a virus risk (at least, at the moment). Some users may decide to upgrade to Vista but I'm not sure what compelling features this has that OS X doesn't - and it may well cost more.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[naesung]

Fair enough dude. Apple is out to make profits just like every other firm, what else is new? The point is that the people working at Apple are excited and interested in what they are doing. Not every programmer is sitting down at his desk 9-5 writing up proposals of how to make cash, that's something for the big wigs. So why do profit and exuberance need to be mutually exclusive?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[tsm_sf]

I've never purchased a Mac because they simply don't have the software titles I'm interested in and Windows does. I mean sure, they've got great stuff, but they lack in GAMES, yes games... I've said it, gotten it out. I'm a gamer and so are all of my friends. I'd venture to say a good chunk of those purchasing PC's are in the same group as me (surf the web and play games). So if the Apple OS became more popular, wouldn't more developers consider making a version of their game in the Apple OS flavor?

I don't understand... there are versions of both games (WoW and Battlefield) available for Mac right now. And please, don't tell me that there are other games out there... I think I'd have heard about them by now.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[greyranger]

Port OSX to XEN, this would nicely solve the unknown hardware configuration problem and might even make a certain Redmond company consider taking a second look.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[dirty]

My co-worker has an IBM laptop that has been sent in more times than my PowerBook. OMG IBM is a horrible company. WAAAAAH! For the record IBM actually did a damn good job with the replacement. He shipped it out Friday, it was back Monday and has been working fine since. My PowerBook has been trucking along just fine since I got it. No company has perfect quality control, no one could afford the products if they did.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[justins]

Beyond that, one of the advantages of them controlling hardware and software is the fact that they can do more rigorous quality control, because they KNOW the configuration your machine will be running.

There isn't any more or less rigor involved in QA when there are fewer variables. The job just takes less time. /nitpick

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[HTTP Error 403 403.9]

"But Apple is a hardware company."

It is.

Has been since Jimmy Carter wandered the halls of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Actually - has been since Gerald Ford stumbled and tripped the halls of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Golias]

Here is a complete list of all the non-MS operating system companies making money as software only entities over the fifteen years since Microsoft dominated the market:

Any questions?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[timster]

At $50 a copy, Apple would need to sell 35 million copies a year to match their current Mac profits.

Currently they sell something like 5 million Macs a year.

I don't see a sevenfold increase in market share as likely, especially since Microsoft can cut prices at any time. If people aren't willing to pay more for Macs, why are you so sure they'd be willing to pay more for OS X?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[andreMA]

The key is that Apple are extremely unlikely to lose many of their existing sales to this as very few Apple users will be interested in running unsupported.

That might be true in a business setting, but I tend to doubt it for home users. I've run Macs since OS 7.1 and never needed support in any for from Apple. Then again, I didn't mind doing the extension-conflict-shuffle-boot myself, either...

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Lead Butthead]

Apple have approximately 20% margins on hardware

As a point of reference, DELL laptops probably only get about 5%. Most low end storage subsystems (drive enclosures with embedded RAID controllers) gets about 35%.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Zerbs]

Working for a computer system distributor, I've witnessed that software typically has higher margins than hardware, and services having the highest margins of all. That's why IBM dumped it's PC and laptop products and is focusing on its sofware systems and services more and more. Now the iSeries, pSeries, zSeries mid-range and mainframe type computers, yes there are larger margins, but not on desktop / workstation machines.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jav1231]

You lost me at "the stability of XP."

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[ryanov]

They make sure to whip their slave laborers a bit harder than those of the competing factories. That's the Nike difference!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[CptSkippy]

You obviously have never migrated from one Mac to another. Put the source Mac into target disk mode, connect it via Firewire to the destination Mac, and run the migrator utility. All user setting are copied and copied well.

Weren't we talking about people migrating from a Windows PC to a new computer. The ease of Migrating from Mac to Mac is not applicable to someone who is switching from a Windows PC.

I meant: the teenaged-or-twenty-something males that comprise the game market, not all teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

Oh, so... uh... wait all teenaged-or-twenty-something males play games.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[goMac2500]

However Mac got World of Warcraft and Unreal at the same time as Windows.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[NX-47]

Actually, I've long thought that having Mac OS on an Intel box would eventually lead people to buy an actual Mac; given the assumption that Apple's hardware is high end (e.g. superior to most other PC makes), once people see how Mac OS works, they might find that they want to 'go all the way' and buy a full-blown Mac the next time around.

Mac friends of mine have long held that Apple makes higher quality hardware... this move by Apple will finally enable them to quantify their beliefs.

As for me, I'll sit back and watch to see what happens.

LLaP

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Wespionage]

A lot of these "Apple doesn't need to support anything" comments keep missing the point. A good deal of the appeal to the Mac OS is that my dear old mum can get started with a Mac and not have to worry about much of anything. She buys a printer that says it supports the Mac and, odds are, there's nothing to install to just get it working -- device drivers are included in the OS installation. Monitors? Scanners? Cameras? Mobile Phones? It's all the same -- as long as you choose from a decent list of products, you'll know that it will just work. And you have the choice of choosing from other products as well and figuring out how to make them work, but that's not usually for my mum.

Part of what enables Apple to market as they do is the fact that they control a lot of the drivers. It's not every peripheral manufacturer writing drivers in whatever way to provide you with a sometimes/most of the time smooth experience overall. Particularly regarding different versions of the OS -- when my mum upgrades from 10.3 to 10.4, she doesn't have to scramble to download updates for all her peripheral devices.

I think that what a few others have said is that what Apple would lose by relinquishing control or influence in this way is a lot of their marketing clout.

"There's no step 3."

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MarkJenkins]

I've never purchased a Mac because they simply don't have the software titles I'm interested in and Windows does. I mean sure, they've got great stuff, but they lack in GAMES, yes games

How would making Mac OS X available for all x86 machines improve this situation that keeps you from buying a Mac? Just because you have the same hardware arch as windows doesn't mean you can run windows apps.

Yes, there are software solutions to this problem, but they will work just as well on an Apple x86 as on a whitebox x86.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

Weren't we talking about people migrating from a Windows PC to a new computer. The ease of Migrating from Mac to Mac is not applicable to someone who is switching from a Windows PC.

There are 3rd-party apps that migrate from Windows-to-Mac.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[thedarkstorm]

Actually, the car anaogy fits, your logic is flawed.
Roads to Cars would match Electrical Current to Computers. not roads to "Software". A mercede's computer software isn't going to run on a Ferraris's (Yes, car's have quite abit of software in them now).

You cannot take *most* parts out of a Ferrari and lump them into a Toyota or Nissan. yes, some things are *similar*, but not entirely compatible.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[CptSkippy]

In all seriousness, I'd love to hear what OS X is missing.

Windows has the uncanny ability to enable a noob to do something just good enough to merit not needing to hire someone who knows what they're doing be it through the intuitive GUI, enless online support, or the stumble upon factor. Windows Management tools are not the cream of the crop, but there are some idiot trainable GUI interfaces that come on it standard that I know no counter part to in the Mac realm.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[CptSkippy]

There are 3rd-party apps that migrate from Windows-to-Mac.

I think that just about sums up the problem. It's not built in, it's not free, and no one who hasn't had to migrate to Mac knows about it.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MindStalker]

What I meant to add was the Apple stopped their licensing of their OS to white box makers when Jobs came on board for this reason. Apple doesn't make money from selling their OS they make it from selling their hardware.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[theblueprint]

This is too true. My first thought when I read the headline was that I was going to go and grab a copy of OSX...and not at MicroCenter.

I would like to run OSX, and will end up biting the bullet and buying a Mac. But I sure wouldn't make the $2000 investment if I didn't have to. Granted, I really believe that Apple hardware is of superior quality, but my notebook is plenty current now, and no single program/OS is worth two grand.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[The Lynxpro]

"So are you saying that Apple wrote OSX in just a year? Seeing as the OS is in maintainance and update mode, of course the cost is less than when they were developing, but there is more to the company than just paying programmers. I stand by my statement. While your observation may be correct when looking at last year, it is an unsustainable model to try to make up R&D costs by selling pens and T-shirts."

Yeah, but apparently Apple was able to crank out the main elements of Tiger for $20 million last year. Not bad. And certainly easy enough to make back despite this perceived threat to Apple sales via generic x86 machines being able to run Mac OS X.

Its also wise to remember how movie theatres stay in business. Its not because of ticket sales, its because of concession stand sales.

It also makes me wonder what Microsoft is spending billions of dollars on updating their operating system when Apple apparently can do it for a miniscule amount of dollars. Maybe Microsoft is a shell for various black ops development just as the US military supposedly pays $1,000 for a toilet seat yet the money is allegedly funneled elsewhere. :)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[akuma(x86)]

Not every company needs to (or should) try to maximize sales and market penetration like Microsoft - just like every person doesn't need to try to be as rich as Bill Gates, as musical as Mozart, as tall as Shaq, etc.

If you are a private company - fine. You can do that.

But apple is a publicly traded company that has a fiduciary duty to MAXIMIZE profits for their shareholders. Apple would be negligent in this if they did anything less. The shareholders (the board) could have Jobs fired if they felt he wasn't doing everything possible to maximize profit.

If profits and sales stagnate, so will the stock price which will upset shareholders.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

You're right about the not-built-in and not-free part, but if you buy a new Mac at any Apple store and mention you're switching from Windows, the salsperson will most certainly bring the software's existence to your attention.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jimicus]

Sorry, maybe I should have made that clearer.

An operating system marketed first and foremost as a desktop operating system through channels appropriate to desktop use (eg. in PC World or whatever the US equivalent is).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[kalidasa]

Apple tried letting otherss sell clones. It nearly killed them. The first thing Jobs did when he regained control of Apple was kill the clones. Now Apple is profitable. So what do you think?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Salvo]

I'd throw up a warning screen on boot if the OS is running on non-Apple hardware, with a big flashing warning that something is wrong with the hardware and the user should NOT continue, but instead take their machine to the store, blah blah.

Yay! OSX would be nagware!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Binary Boy]

You're completely ignoring support, which *is* the incremental cost of new customers, which is why *no* software is essentially free after the initial development costs. Further, the more customers you have, the more configs you have to support, and ultimately the more development you put in to support those users.

And afterall, a few calls to support can easily erase any profit (even if it was 100%) a business made on the initial sale.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[mr100percent]

Generic iBook AC adaptors are cheaper, I once paid only $50.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Amouth]

if you read the parent he was bashing people for complaining about game support and that if they are going to play games jsut use a consol..

i was just pointing out that getting a consol so i can play games slower and that look crapier than what my computer can do is dumb.. if you think this was a brag post you are mistaken..

and the fact that you can take a simple post and bring it into a sexual context for which it wasn't ment - well we can jsut leave that alone.

the whole point was to make the parent think hey mabey gameing on consols isn't the answer to game support for apple..

please take the time to read a thread and see the comments that cause a response before flaming someone.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Heisenbug]

yeah it's the shit that made your box BSOD, sorry about that

When you pay for a Mac, you expect device drivers *not* to kill your system, and you expect the software to work the first time out. Microsoft is gradually approaching that condition, but the reason is that they pour huge resources into supporting everything whether or not the manufacturer pays someone like you to do it. This even goes so far as to hack APIs around bugs in specific device drivers.

I'm sure that there *would* be increased manufacturer support for Macs if the software picked up market share -- but manufacturer support isn't all it takes to get this kind of user experience. Just ask Microsoft.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Red Leader.]

Ah, but is what's working for BMW and Mercedes sustainable in the long run?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[GlassHeart]

Software has a fixed cost of creation. You make your money in volume!

Exactly, and Microsoft Windows has perhaps 20 times the volume on day zero. In a legitimate (still selling above cost) price war Microsoft would win easily.

it would be entirely possible to only provide support for "approved" hardware.

Sure, in the sense that you might avoid a lawsuit if the user can't get unapproved hardware to work. It's not likely to avoid a return, and it's certainly not the same as "just works".

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[diamondsw]

What utter bullshit. As if Apple is preventing anyone from writing a device driver. I guess those companies providing OS X compatible hardware (ethernet cards, video cards, serial adapters, etc) are pulling the IOKit and API specifications out of thin air!

No, your argument doesn't hold water. Manufacturers create drivers when they feel there is significant demand. Due to Apple including so much on the motherboard of a stock machine, there hasn't been much in the way of demand, so many manufacturers haven't written drivers. Today at least USB and Firewire have allowed lots of things that previously required drivers to use built-in class drivers.

People such as yourself who create custom drivers (for systems such as HPUX, Solaris, AIX, etc) are doing so largely because someone somewhere is deeply tied into a given platform, and is willing to fork over big bucks to support their system. Consumers aren't going to be doing that.

Finally, Apple must continue to control the experience, or we'll get all of the problems that Windows and Linux have with hardware - substandard, feature-incomplete, buggy drivers, and the associated system instability (witness your own BSOD comment).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jedidiah]

An ATI foobar chip is identical to any other copy of that chip found in any other system. This notion that a Apple is a BMW is simply assinine.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[diamondsw]

Nevermind that most games DO come out for the Mac (if you can stand a delay), and you could have a gaming/Photoshop/Office/UNIX box all in one. Hmm, can't imagine why you wouldn't want a Mac. One box that does all of your desktop stuff, and the "heavy lifting" that your Linux box does.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jedidiah]

No, it's like buying a Chevette with a Chevy engine vs. buying one with a Ford engine. Outside of the engine, a Mac and PC are pretty much identical anymore. Except for the CPU, the same parts are coming from the same chinese (or taiwaese) factories.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

What utter bullshit. As if Apple is preventing anyone from writing a device driver. I guess those companies providing OS X compatible hardware (ethernet cards, video cards, serial adapters, etc) are pulling the IOKit and API specifications out of thin air!

No, your argument doesn't hold water. Manufacturers create drivers when they feel there is significant demand. Due to Apple including so much on the motherboard of a stock machine, there hasn't been much in the way of demand, so many manufacturers haven't written drivers. Today at least USB and Firewire have allowed lots of things that previously required drivers to use built-in class drivers.

I think you misunderstood my post, that was exactly my point. If the market share for OSX increases the hardware support will increase (if Apple allows it). I don't know WHAT Apple allows, I assume the APIs are already open, I just threw in the caveat because it's real, if the APIs are open and the demand exists, hardware manufacturers will flock to the platform.

Then you go on to argue out of both sides of your mouth:

As if Apple is preventing anyone from writing a device driver. I guess those companies providing OS X compatible hardware (ethernet cards, video cards, serial adapters, etc) are pulling the IOKit and API specifications out of thin air! ...
Finally, Apple must continue to control the experience

So which is it? Does Apple have an open API (thus, by definition is unable to "control the experience") or does Apple control the experience? Jesus, talk about using two arguments at once.. My point was that increasing the hardware support for OSX isn't really an issue if they shoot for increased market share.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[KingVance]

Yeah but the add-on vendors design their hardware to work with apple hardware and software.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Dylan Zimmerman]

General statements like that are really not helpful. ;p If you've got specific examples, list them. Here are some specific examples I've got:

-- When talking about the non-server version of each, I can't think of anything that's easier to do on Windows than on a Mac. Changing network interface details is about the same on both platforms, as is altering the settings for the general way the OS looks, display preferences such as resolution or refresh rate, power settings, mouse and keyboard settings, date and time ...

Macs have an easier time setting up basic sharing, but it's harder to set up more advanced sharing of specific directories. Then again, sharing only the ~/Public directory provides a rather concrete distinction between what's private and what's public. Both systems have benefits.

Basic user accounts are equally easy to create, and on a Mac, you have more options to tweak them.

Software update is nigh-trivial on Macs, and only slightly harder on Windows. They're about the same in terms of idiot-proof-ness (hooray for new "words"!).

Changing the startup disk and rebooting on a Mac takes literally five mouseclicks. On a windows box, you have to go into the BIOS or use some kind of bootloader. Macs have a bootloader, too, though it generally isn't necessary.

Macs have much more integrated support for assistive devices, though that isn't relevant for most people.

-- As for the server side ... I've not really used any server version of Windows to do much of anything other than basic futzing around. I must, however, say that neither server OS seemed particularly "noob-friendly" in terms of configuring services or anything else.

-- With regards to remote management tools, I've not used any for Windows, so I gave examples of what Apple Remote Desktop does as a sort of "What more could you want?" example. I've never found myself wishing that it had such-and-such a feature or that it could do something easier. Or rather, I have thought repeatedly that faster network scanning would be nice, but that isn't exactly Apple's fault.

I very much like the ability to remotely install packages on user machines as well as the ability to run shell commands on entire batches of machines at once. The ability to share either the admin screen or a client screen with other machines on the network is quite a nice feature, as is the ability to lock screens remotely.

ARD's interface is as close to idiot-proof as any remote management tool can be.

-- I'd really love to hear if I'm wrong about any of this or if I overlooked anything.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[diamondsw]

No, but the network treats them all the same. Meanwhile, any meaningful software runs on both platforms. Finally, with OS X Intel, it's only a matter of time (months? weeks?) before we see ways to run Windows and Linux software as-is under OS X Intel.

So yeah, all software now will run on the platform.

Finally, "can't afford it" my ass. This is also the crowd that has half a dozen machines sitting around, and buys $400 video cards. Don't give me that "I can't afford it" crap. If you value your time and experience using the computer, you'll save a couple hundred extra bucks. If you don't value it, then you won't. But quit your bitching and moaning about it costing too much.

To go back to the car analogy, I'm not sitting here whining that my Camry doesn't handle like a BMW. BMW performance wasn't important to me. A usable and enjoyable computing experience day in and out is, so I drive a Camry and use a Mac. YMMV.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Uber Banker]

See average cost and marginal cost.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[falconwolf]

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

I've already made comments like this only to get this response in LARGE numbers:

"But Apple is a hardware company."

While I'd like to see MacOS in the wild, as I say "Apple is a hardware and a software company." At one tyme Apple did allow Mac clones to be made, however they lost more in hardware sales than they made in licensing the OS. Now that Apple is switching to Intel processors maybe they can make money saling MacOS to third party computer builders and manufactures, however if they try that they very well run the risk of running smack dab into Microsoft.

Apparently, it is impossible for Apple to change into a software company.

While it may be possible for Apple to compleatly turn into a software company, there's two problems with this. The first is Microsoft as mentioned above. The second is because Apple controls thier hardware they are able to make sure Macs just work. If they open up MacOS to allow Mac compatibles then they have to test for different hardware configurations or require others to test for compatibility. As they don't have the clout of MS this may not be feasible. The only other option is to open source MacOS and get others to write drivers and/or allow it to branch off in different directions. But then that would mean Apple would be going into services.

Falcon

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jonfelder]

What huge opportunity? If OSX was really so good as to be capable of overthrowing Microsoft, why hasn't everyone started buying Macs?

It's not like having OSX on PC is all the sudden going to make all your Windows Apps work. Apple serves a niche market, providing an all in one solution. That is you pay a premium, you have to deal with not having all the Windows apps available to you, and in exchange you get a computer that just works (tm).

Moving to PC won't change that. What it will effectively do, however, is bring back the same problems Apple had with the clones. That is people being able to purchase lower priced hardware from other venders, and running their prefered OS on it. This is not a good thing for Apple, as demonstrated by them killing off the clones in the first place. Apple realizes that they have a niche group of people who use their OS...some are loyal...some are not. Those that are not will run OS X on cheaper non-Apple hardware, and Apple will lose that sale.

As to why Microsoft won, it's fairly obvious. The IBM PC was the first widely successful PC. Microsoft provided the operating system for that PC. There was a natural upgrade path from the first IBM PCs to what have today. That is why, despite being such crap, Microsoft continues to dominate the market place. Now tell me, what happened to IBM's marketshare in the PC market when lower priced (but compatible) alternatives started popping up?

With no such logical upgrade path for Apple software, what do you think is going to happen to them if people stop buying Apple hardware? Is OS X so good that people will be willing to fork over the price of OSX plus the price of a Mac for just the software?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[diamondsw]

It may shock you, but some companies do have some ideals guiding them. I'm sure Apple could save money and increase profit by making their computers from cheaper materials and designs. I'm sure they could shave off some of the hardware specs, and *really* make a bargain basement Mac. These would be "rational" decisions that would likely increase their profitability.

Do they? Hell no. Apple does have high standards, an attention to detail, and focus on quality. Some of this is Jobs to be sure, but people don't go to work for Apple to increase shareholder profits.

Meanwhile, look at Google - "do no evil". Gee, that doesn't sound like a strictly rational business-oriented profit-maximizeing priciple to me. They probably could have raked in more money by selling larger and more obtrusive ads, or by selling search placement, etc, just like everyone before them. Instead, they the guts and vision to tell all of these "rational business plans" to take a hike and do it RIGHT. And they've been rewarded for it.

Profit is obviously A motive for a corporation - it is its means of survival. It doesn't have to be the only motive, and it doesn't have to be the primary one. Humans must eat to survive - does this mean that trumps all else, or do we have people that eat enough, and then spend their time pursuing higher goals?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jedidiah]

Why don't you do the same analysis with os+hardware companies? It will also be a very short list.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[SirSlud]

> MAXIMIZE profits for their shareholders

Wrong. It has a fiduciary duty to maximize profits while maintaining a sustainable business. If that means lower profits but a more stable long term outlook, so be it.

'maximizing profits' is a nebulous term, and often not making the maximal profit available today makes sure I can continue making profits tommorow.

The parent poster is only pointing out that not being the market leader tommorow is often a safer strategy for shareholders. Hey, if you end up being a market leading money maker, great, the market loved your products. But the goal to 'maximize profits' is not intended to let the tail wag the dog. One might easily say, "Apple has a fiduciary duty to get into selling toilet paper, because if they made toilet paper AND computers, they could make more money." Obviously, maximizing profits is done within the scope of a defined market strategy to deliver quality products to an identified segment of the market; not always the largest.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Yocto Yotta]

Is anyone following this?

**SLAMS head on desk**

**Ow.**

Okay, again a legitimate, factual point. Perhaps the intention of your parent post was lost in the ensuing replies, but I have been talking about hypothetical "what-ifs." Yes, Apple doesn't make money from selling their OS, but from selling their hardware. We agree on this. Though if Apple sold their OS for open x86 architecture -AND- sold hardware also -OR- only sold software, the price of their OS would most likely rise to match Microsoft's OS costs. That is all that I said. I think. Let me go back and read my posts. Eh, I'm too lazy. And off in 12 minutes. Sweet! Later!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Shanep]

So you are paying for a complete experience. Which I can get from Dell or something similar.

Yeah, I love the full Dell experience. You send them money, then weeks later you get a laptop which comes complete with:

1. A battery which breaks within 3 weeks.
2. A CDROM drive with a dodgy eject button and requires a "right click -> eject".
3. Keyboard marks rubbed onto the screen.
4. A floppy drive which goes out of alignment after you first use it (two weeks after the warrantee ran out, because you don't use floppies that much). They demand money.
5. A trackpad/nipple which have you chanting, "The power of Christ compels you!..."
6. Flimsy build.
7. Poor performance (compared against other x86).
8. Non English speaking support, once they actually answer the phone.
9. An OS made by someone else, with drivers made by yet some other people again. Install media if you are lucky. Roll-your-own if you are not.
11. Anti virus software which takes the performance down by about one hundred annoyance notches. Only to be bothered for money 3 months later.
12. Lots of half baked software which is designed to get you to "upgrade to the pro version which actually works" with yet more money.
13. One hundred and fifty three billion different services installed and set to run by default, with a systray that goes half way across the screen when maximized.
14. A system which could come with any combination of a number of different parts. SOE hell.
15. A lesson in appreciation of quality over barrel bottom scraping "value".
16. I'm sure other /. readers can take it from here...

I support lots of Dells. The desktops... work. But the laptops are not built well enough to be used as laptops in my opinion.

My *opinion* is, that there never has been a Dell laptop which could compare with an Apple Powerbook for build quality or overall system quality. The overall Apple experience is nice. I could never say that about Dell. BTW, I say all this typing from a Sony VAIO.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[SirSlud]

Probably because anybody that ever competed with MS' OS ended up in cement shoes at the bottom of Lake Michigan with a note stapled to their foreheads that read, "Don't get suspicious, his product sucked and was unable to compete in my - er, the free market. Signed, Clippy."

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Emperor Tiberius]

My first question to everyone: Why can't a company be both a hardware AND a software company?

Simple. Assuming aesthetics and hardware quality/performance aren't an issue for you (as they are for a lot of non-geek types), you'd simply take OS X and load it on a $300 Dell. Now here's Apple, trying to sell a machine for thousands, and here's Dell selling one for $300.

Once again this a geek/non-geek difference. I'd much rather have a PowerBook than a Dell laptop. But, honestly, "how" is Apple supposed to take a huge cut, to put OS X on non-Apple systems?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[xbasque]

one more item need to show up in that list : the cost of developing macsox and the ilife suite is fixed , as is the cost of designing chipsets and other hardware R&D . so - the greater the sales volumes , the smaller the costs per unit . (apple spends over half a billion in R&D each year) .

that's to say - the smaller apple's market share , the more expensive the units will be . SO ... if you PC folks stop whining and start buying macs soon , prices will come down substantially by the time you're ready to get your second mac . how's that for a plan ?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's like omfg stfu already vs. omfg stfu right now.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Golias]

Short, but not non-existant.

Apple makes money selling computers. More money than nearly any other computer maker. Their sales are lower than Dell, but their margins are higher. A lot of other computer makers (HP, Gateway, etc.) only wish they made the kind of money on computers that Apple does.

Selling an OS, on the other hand, they would quickly go the way of BeOS and a dozen other failed attempts at creating a rival operating system for third-party commodity systems. It would mean the death of Apple and the end of OS X.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Gondola]

Scoff if you must, but XP is pretty damn solid.

I only reboot once every several weeks, after I play with a lot of weird software (beta stuff, crap from Sourceforge, etc.) On a day-to-day basis, using many applications (Firefox, Office, ABC, AV software, WoW and other games), installing and uninstalling professionally-written software, I do not ever need to reboot. My system was installed months and months ago, and it hasn't gotten sluggish like 98/98se/95 used to get.

I had problems with my P4 and XP, but it was the hardware. This machine seems bulletproof. I don't think I've *ever* gotten a blue screen.

When I first heard that x86 was going to be able to run OSX, I thought, "Wow, finally!" And then I thought, "Well, why bother?"

Pros:
- Pretty, shiny
- Some cool dashboard bar thing
- *nix

Cons:
- I'd have to get all new copies of my software to run on it, 95% of which isn't available for Mac.

If the software I want to run isn't available, migration is never going to happen for me. I might play around with it on a secondary machine, but that's what it would be -- playing.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[_Shorty-dammit]

whether it's a "sucky OS" or not is opinion. Works fine here. I'm 34 and I've been playing video games since I was 8 or 9, and I will never stop. I have friends in their 40s that game with me, some of whom have parents who also game with us. You'd be surprised just how many "older" people game. Lots of old military people love playing DoD and CS. Anyways, saying that someone should buy a console such as a PS2 or Xbox rather than use a computer for gaming is nuts. PC games are NOTHING like console games. Sounds to me like you're saying a game is a game is a game and so *anything* that plays *any* type of game is just fine for everyone. Sorry, but the types of titles available for consoles and the types of titles available for the PC aren't anywhere near the same. Anybody that's fond of PC gaming will be able to tell you a million reasons why consoles just don't do it for them. Consoles are great for the casual gamer, and for those that have never experienced what good PC games can be like. But the best console games don't come near the best PC games, not even the same ballpark. You can keep your PS2 and Xbox, and I'll keep my PC.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Shanep]

This notion that a Apple is a BMW is simply assinine.

Apple OSX is nice, works well and is designed for Apple machines. Has quite strict developer guidelines to maintain intuitive interface.

Windows XP looks better than 2000, works well enough most of the time and is designed to take almost every x86 into account. Developers don't always agree and it shows.

The "full experience" includes support, hardware, OS and applications. Apple do this well, whereas in the Wintel World this ranges from acceptable to terrible. There is so much more than just what chip is in your machine.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[falconwolf]

They give Dell, et al, huge discounts on Windows, which I'm sure would disappear the moment Dell started considering an alternative OS. Dell wouldn't be willing to risk the majority of its sales on the off chance of this new alternative OS taking off.

Actually it's my understanding that MS requires PC manufacturers pay for a license for every PC they sale, you know the Microsoft tax. You take your new PC home and boot, then windows presents the End User License, EUL, and asks if you accept it. If not then you're supposed to return it to wherever you got it or send it to the manufacturer and ask for a refund. I've never done it myself but I've heard quite a few horror stories of people trying to get a refund.

Falcon

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[dustmite]

I don't think I've *ever* gotten a blue screen.

Of course not: Go to Start/Control Panel/System/Advanced, click "Settings" under "Startup and Recovery", then under "System Failure" uncheck "Automatically restart". Voila, you'll have blue screens again ;)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[lgw]

Just set the license fee higher than the profit on a Mac. Problem solved.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[McNally]

Some users may decide to upgrade to Vista but I'm not sure what compelling features this has that OS X doesn't..

Do you mean what compelling features besides backwards compatibility with (nearly?) all of their existing software?

There are plenty of reasons to switch to OS X but customers are going to have to choose between a lot of little reasons and perhaps a few moderately important reasons to switch and one big huge whopper of a reason not to.. Such is the power of monopoly lock-in.. I know we all know that at some level but it's such a fundamental assumption that it becomes easy to lose track of the fact that it's not just a law of nature.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jcr]

If Dell were selling 90+% of their computers with OS X installed, wouldn't Apple be the one with the "tax" ?

Never happen. Dell's sold PCs with other OS's installed before, and they still paid MS the per-unit tax. See the Be v. Microsoft case for the details.

-jcr

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Pharmboy]

Unless Apple can convince them to write drivers for MacOS too, Apple still has the same problem of scrambling to support every single piece of new hardware.

I am not much of a programmer, but since MacOS is loosly based on FreeBSD, and the kernel is very open (Darwin), it would seem that developing drivers for Mac/Linux/BSD would be very similar and easier since they are all unix like.

Linux's popularity has helped push more manufacturers to develop drivers compared to 8-10 years ago when I started using it. Apple would just be adding more incentive. I don't know, but it seems the differences between the drivers would often be trivial if they are both on a x86 platform.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[stevejsmith]

It could also be that the German government, either federal or state, offers the discounts or requires BMW to offer the discounts. I know that Volkswagen is, in fact, mostly owned by a German state, and the German government entities traditionally have a huge amount of control over certain "important national industries," a category in which high-end automobiles certainly falls.

And here in Bucharest -- Romania being a country not even in the EU (yet, although not if you Germans get your way) -- new cop cars are also BMWs, but I think that has a lot more to do with the fact that BMWs are just extremely solid, fast, and easy-to-maintain cars (that and Romanians refuse to drive Mercedes thanks to the ominous "party affiliation" connotation they earned during communism).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[oscast]

Actually, Apples margins are high... nit because they charge more but because they give you less options to buy less.

What that means is, you are paying more because you are getting more. Not because it costs more. If we factor this into the eqution, then Apple's computer prices are very much in tune with the rest of the PC industry if you equip a PC with the same compontents in hardware, software and operating system the Mac will come out the same... often times less.

And... Apple's hardware is more aestheticly pleasing and is of a better build quality than the average PC.

Its misleading when people say that Apple has a higher markup then the average PC.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Pharmboy]

Aside from that, I really don't think Apple cares about the gaming market segment, i.e., teenaged-or-twenty-something males.

I can afford all the new games, the new hardware, and the killer monitors to enjoy them with (answering on a 52" TV for a monitor now). This is BECAUSE I am 40, not in spite of it. Most 20 year olds can't afford to upgrade like this because they are just starting careers, or just have "jobs".

I run Windows because I must, Linux because it is better, and used to use Mac, until you the price/performace/software gap went to hell. Ok, really, I switched for the games.

I game online with lots of guys in the 30-50 year old range. I would hope Apple would be smart enough to understand that we may be a smaller group of buyers than 20s, but we can write the checks, and don't mind paying more for quality.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[TheGavster]

I find remark #2 amusing, in light of Macs not even having dodgy eject buttons on drives, let alone working ones.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MenTaLguY]

They all happen to export a similar API to user-land applications, but the (C++!) driver kits used with Darwin, the FreeBSD kernel and the Linux kernel are all quite different inside. So it's not really trivial at all.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[randyflood]

This would be true except for a couple of things. First of all, the typical Mac user is probably going to just buy Apple hardware for their next computer. You are going to tell your aunt that you will build her a computer and she is going to tell you that she wants the new florecent purple sparkley Intel iMac Thingy.

You will raise an eyebrow as you know that there is really little practical value in the florecent purple sparklies, but, you have to admit that they do look kind of nifty (though you would never say so out loud, or on slashdot, unless it was as an anonymous coward...)

And, Apple is better at selling branded hardware too. Like, don't you want Wireless Access point that Apple designed? Well, your aunt does because she knows that it will "just work" with her computer. Same thing with printers, MP3 players, scanners, and everything else. And Apple is actually pretty good at Marketing whe n they have a good product.

They just have some trouble because of the nature of the market to favor the company with the largest market share.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[DaggertipX]

Manufacturing is far from the only cost associated with software. You're just spending your money on humans instead of metal and plastic.
Also, the support infrastructure for software tends to increase as user base of the software does, and that costs money.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[TheRaven64]

Support calls are only free (where free means `national rate 'phone call where you are kept on hold for 90% of the call and Apple receive a kick-back from the 'phone company for every second the circuit is connected') for the first 90 days unless you but AppleCare. After that, they get really expensive.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Moofie]

Then you have to support all the crappy hardware that's manufactured after 1/1/2006.

This is not a soluble problem. Apple cannot maintain its reputation for a decent computing experience and also support the crap hardware people seem to like buying.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[TheRaven64]

I'd expect margins to drop because now Apple can say `Our 2.7GHz system is a PowerPC chip and is therefore magically faster than a competing AMD/Intel system.' Once you can buy exactly the same hardware from Dell and Apple - component for component, then people will look at the two, and not buy from Apple. The added value is OS X, which (as an OS X user) I would say is a lot more added value than perceived added value. As such, it's going to be very difficult for them to keep costing 15% more than Dells.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[the phantom]

In my family, I am the computer person. Perhaps I am that 10th guy out of 10, but I have recommended time and time again that members of my family get Macs. Five years ago, I told my mother to get a Mac. She is a freelance technical illustrator, and takes jobs when she wants to (my father, a dean, brings home most of the bacon). I told her that she should probably get a Mac. Photoshop runs fine, there is email and web support (duh), and it would be her machine (my younger brother would not bother with it, because it would not play most of the games that he likes to play). Against my advice, she bought a Dell. Inside of a year, my brother had installed a shit-load of crap, and the machine stopped working. After several hundred dollars of tech support, it was reformatted, and XP was installed. This has happened three times now.

Then, my sister went off to college. Again, I recommended a Mac (an iMac in this case, one of the G4 dome things). She needed a machine to write papers and check her email. Against my advice, she got a Dell, and expected me to trouble shoot it when it didn't work.

Then, when my sister left the country, she needed a laptop. I recommended an iBook. She got a Dell. Her desktop machine devolved to my brother, who promptly killed it with spyware.

Last year, my mother finally decided to try and replace the XP box. Her plan was to have a secure box for checking her email, &c., and a non-networked box for work. She once again paid to have the XP box reformatted, and I recommend that she get a Mac Mini or iMac for email -- cheap, easy to use, unlikely to get pwned. Instead, she let herself get talked into a Linux box. Now, I have no objection to Linux, and ran it for several years. I didn't like it for my purposes -- it didn't 'just work' -- but I have no generalized beef against it. It is fine for people who know what they are doing. My mother does not. She hates the box, and never uses it.

Now, my brother is off to college. Because of his propensity to install a lot of shit, I have once again recommended a Mac (either an iMac, or a low end G5 tower -- possibly a beefed up Mac Mini). If he needs to game, he has a PS2, and in reality, he should be working. He is living off campus, so LAN games should not be a concern. We shall see what the family decides...

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[beeblebrox87]

The x86 Macs will be able to dual-boot Windows, so you can buy Apple hardware and still play your games. Apple makes money on the hardware and doesn't really care whether you use their OS on it or not.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Gondola]

Funny, except I've already done that, and I've never had an "automatic restart" either with this hardware.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Knuckles]

They give Dell, et al, huge discounts on Windows, which I'm sure would disappear the moment Dell started considering an alternative OS.

This argument probably holds true for the current state of desktop F/OSS. If MS pulled their discounts if Dell offered SuSE et al., Dell would be in trouble. But with Apple?
If MS pulls the discount, Windows will just be more expensive, and Dell as a wonderful other OS to sell. As another poster noted, if Apple want to pull off such a thing, they -will- have an Office contingency plan. I see no risk for Dell

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Proc6]

Interesting.

I bought a Dell Latitude X-1 which is a super slim 2.9 lb notebook with widescreen (a form factor that doesn't even exist in the Apple world).

1. It is a form factor ideal for my intents and desires and Apple doesn't make one like it.
2. It arrived in about 4 days with free overnight shipping for a total cost of $1,300 loaded.
3. Both batteries that came with it have been recharged and depleted nearly every day for 4 months now and work perfectly.
4. The external DVD drive ejects fine after 4 months of daily use.
5. There are no marks on the pixel perfect LCD screen from the keyboard.
6. The trackpad is a Synaptics that is as accurate as my Logitech MX mouse. (I dont think Dell's have made nipples on their notebooks for years have they?)
7. Solid build. It goes with me everywhere, at all times, and it looks pristine. It has zero flex either in the case or keyboard. Impressively solid for a 3 lb ultralight.
8. The performance is great. I can run multiple virtual machines and VS.NET while burning DVDs and watching a movie on the second screen (both powered by the built in gpu as an extended desktop). It won't play EQ2, but it plays NWN great. Again, for a 1.1Ghz ULV P-M, I'd say impresive considering high end gaming is not this machine's target market.
9. As for software, even though I always format the day I get it. I was amazed to find exactly nothing other than Dell driver related software installed on the notebook. A feature of buying a Latiture through Small Business.
10. When I call 24/7 tech support I speak to an english speaking American in America. A feature of buying a Latiture through Small Business.

    I mean I shouldn't be feeding the trolls, nor am I saying that Dell doesn't make some crap. They make entire PC's with 19" LCDs that sell for like $450. What the fuck do you expect? But if you spend some money (and by "some money" I mean "half what you'd spend on an Apple"), and buy through Small Business, you can get some very nice machines with 3 years of on-site warranty and exactly zero spam/spyware/adware installed by default with english support. Do a little shopping and quit buying the bottom of the barrel and expecting top quality hardware and support. Duh?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[GaryPatterson]

Microsoft... I have heard of them. Didn't they lock in vendors to their products in an illegal use of their monopoly power, as found in court and later in the appeals?

And aren't they in trouble in Japan right now for something very similar?

Yes, Apple should try to compete with a company that has a proven track record of being not only ruthless, but also seems to regard legal issues as secondary to profit.

And considering they're around twenty times larger than Apple, it's bound to be a fair competition!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Sancho]

1. A battery which breaks within 3 weeks.

That's a bit harsh. But it is sad how fast the battery capacity degrades.

2. A CDROM drive with a dodgy eject button and requires a "right click -> eject".

Never had this problem with 3 notebooks from Dell. Actually, usually the eject button is oversensitive. Also, most Dell notebooks have a Fn key combination to eject (my current one is F10)

5. A trackpad/nipple which have you chanting, "The power of Christ compels you!..."

HAHAHA, this is so true! But I've seen the same problem on IBMs (the only other notebook these days that comes with a nipple).

7. Poor performance (compared against other x86).

I've just never seen this.

9. 11. 12. 13.

I always format/reinstall and get rid of the annoying crap. Then (if I must use Windows on it) I use AVG Free for the virus scanner, and other free or cheap tools for the rest. It sucks that you've effectively paid for the crappy software, though. If only Dell would sell notebooks/PCs with no software (including OS!)

Main problems /I've/ had....

17. LCDs that overheat. Seems like a common problem, but I tend to get the high-end displays with billions of pixels.

18. Various system-board components DoA. My last laptop, it was the sound chip. Before that, some on-board memory chip (I didn't think Dell /ever/ had these).

19. The LCD hinges. My god, the LCD hinges. These things become looser than .. well, they become really loose within about a year of purchase.

20. My Precision M70 has had varios bits of UI flake off unexpectedly. If you know the model, it's the battery/power/HD indicator LED covers on the right side hinge panel. It's irritating, but non-essential.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[R3d M3rcury]

"And we all know that companies that gain nearly 100% of the market share make almost no money."

And, yes, the Internet economy rears it's ugly head. It's not profits that are important! It's marketshare! I remember all the .coms that were gonna be the next Microsoft of the Internet by giving away stuff!

Didn't work too well.

"Apple needs to realize WHY Windows won, if they do that, they'll own the market."

I think Apple understands far better than you do "why Windows won." After all, they were there. From the sounds of it, you were not.

First off, Windows didn't win. DOS won. And the reason DOS won is IBM. IBM came out with the PC which convinced businesses that PCs were useful computing tools and not toys. All IBM PCs shipped with PC-DOS, a branded version of MS-DOS.

IBM didn't really actively pursue the PC market because they didn't really believe in it. Others came along and did stuff that IBM didn't--most notably Compaq. Compaq's claim to fame was a "compact" computer (Compact/Compaq. Get it?). Since IBM didn't have one of these and people wanted one, they figured they'd try Compaq's. They discovered it was "just as good" as the IBM machine and clones were given a big push. Compaq and the rest of the clones shipped with MS-DOS, making Microsoft a name known to everyone.

Microsoft began including Windows with DOS for PC companies to install on hard drives. By the time Windows 3.0 rolled around, Microsoft made the requirement that PCs had to start up with Windows. By this point, Microsoft had all of their applications running under Windows and none of their competitors did, letting them leapfrog their competitors in the application space.

And this is WHY Windows won.

Remember that, by far, the vast majority of people get their Windows when they buy their PC. Apple would need to partner with a PC maker to sell sufficient volumes of Mac OS X/86 to make decent money.

Now the PC makers might be willing to carry Mac OS X. But Apple would probably have to sell it for less than Microsoft charges OEMs for Windows. So Apple is making less money than Microsoft on each product sold. Apple would also probably have to do the marketing themselves, as I'm sure Microsoft has exclusive marketing agreements with the major PC companies. This cuts down Apple's profits even more.

Of course, this assumes that Microsoft just wouldn't underbid Apple for operating system software in a race to the bottom. With Microsoft having about ten times Apple's cash, they could sit on Apple for quite some time until they were completely squashed.

Honestly, I'd love to see Apple do Mac OS X for your typical PC. But if they did this, Apple would finally go out of business.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Sancho]

(I dont think Dell's have made nipples on their notebooks for years have they?)

They still do, only on select notebooks. The Precision series still do, and I think the larger Latitudes might as well.

In fact, that heavily weighted my choice in notebooks, since I prefer the nipple to the touchpad anyday.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[tyme]

jonfelder wrote:

you already admit to pirating the OS and building the PCs. I'm not sure how you can recommend buying stock PCs if you build them...but...whatever. It's a lot more likely that it goes like this:

Next month your parents decide they want to upgrade their PC and come to you for advice (because you built their last PC). You tell them to order OS X compatible parts, and you install your pirated copy of the OS on the machine after you build it. Apple gains market share and makes no money.

...

Market share continues to grow, but people aren't actually purchasing any Apple products. Rinse and repeat for your entire family. I doubt you build your friend's computers, but if you do...or your friends are similar to you (i.e. technically savy and have copies of OS X) rinse and repeat for them. In 5 years listen to all of the "Apple is DYING" trolls on slashdot because Apple is a hardware company and isn't selling any hardware. In 10 years your son asks you, "What is Apple?" and you tell him, "Oh we're running the last version of their OS on our Dell. Great company, too bad they went under."

There are two problems with your scenario:

First, buying only OS X86 compatible parts is probably too difficult a task for someone who needs to pirate OS X86 (it's only about $129.00, so what makes you think these folks will be willing to shell out for the $50.00 ethernet card and the $150.00 motherboard when there are "perfectly good" ethernet cards to be had for $10.00 and motherboards to be had for $80.00?). Given that building with OS X86 compatible parts is too much hassle for the pirates, it is likely that the pirated copies of OS X86 will be less stable than the same software running on genuine Apple hardware. This will be a stumbling block to mass adoption of pirated OS X86.

Second, it is unlikely that everyone that wants to run OS X86 on non-Apple hardware would pirate the OS: a copy of OS X is just not expensive enough to deflect all potential customers. Since Apple wouldn't be providing support to all the non-Apple hardware users, even the small fraction of non-Apple hardware users that didn't pirate the OS would be a positive benefit to Apple's bottom line.

Apple doesn't currently do anything to hamper use of OS X (PPC) on older machines (or, for that matter, on machines with processor upgrades), they just don't support it. They would obviously prefer for you to buy a brand spanking new Mac, rather than upgrade you 5 year old machine and slap a $129.00 copy OS X on it, but if you're not going to shell out for new machine, they'd rather get the price of the OS X license than drive you to the competition.

I don't see any good reason to expect this attitude to change very much with OS X86. If anything, the barrier to purchasing a new Mac will decrease, since X86 Macs will be slightly cheaper to manufacture than current PPC machines.

Finally, your implication that an increase in Market share doesn't benefit Apple unless an Apple product (software or hardware) is purchased, is somewhat misleading: Apple has a pretty hard time keeping hardware and software vendors on the platform, mostly due to the small installed base to which Apple-based third party products can be sold (this is the primary reason they switched from ADB to USB, for example). If the installed base were larger, whether or not all (or even much) of that installed base were direct customers of Apple, it would make it much easier for Apple to attact and maintain their flock of third-party vendors.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[steve_bryan]

No, Dell wouldn't be selling Apple anything.

You need to get in touch with Michael Dell to let him know that he doesn't know what he is talking about. He has made statements that contradict what you have said.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[laffer1]

Rebuy all your software? No. Some yes...

You have to rebuy Microsoft office yes...
antivirus is not needed

WOW CD/DVD sets work on both platforms because blizzard is a GOOD company.

Firefox works on a mac as does most of the source forge stuff since its UNIX and has X11 built in. For others, try Fink. You can get gnome, kde, ethereal and tons of other packages by 2 mouse clicks from an optional fink gui for the mac.

As for games, i'm tired of the no games rants. Yes there are more games for windows, but quality games are available for Mac OS X or classic. Lets look at my cd shelf for a minute.. just mac games..

WOW
Warcraft 3 and frozen throne
Warcraft 2
Starcraft and expansion
Diablo 1 and 2
Return to castle wolfenstein
enemy territory
tropico 1 and 2
Railroad tycoon 3
star wars tie fighter
quake 3 arena and expansion
Age of empires II
Star Wars battlegrounds

Plus i have quake 1, doom/doom 2, and a ton of open source games on my mac. If you're into piracy, you can get console emulators for practically anything.

Other games i know that are out for mac:
halo
doom 3
several tom clancy games
neverwinter nights
several unreal tournament games
nascar games
tony hawk pro skater games (2 and 4 for sure)
The sims
The sims 2
expansions for sims games
America's army ...

Its a big list...

The most notable exceptions are Valve games since they won't port steam.

There are a lot of games.. many popular games on that list. Worst case buy an xbox 360 or ps3 when they come out!

I think your 95% number is high unless you like crappy software.

Apps are fairly easy to replace.. thats why people can run mac os x, linux or bsd as their primary desktops! VPC and vmware help the rest of the way.

Windows XP is stable with common cheap hardware.. i.e. built in sound cards, built in nics, intel/ati/nvidia low end cards, ide hard drives. I personally get blue screens thanks to creative's lovely sound blaster audigy driver. It works fine in linux or freebsd though. THe problem with xp isn't stability, its performance. Compare a ping in WOW on a mac vs pc. Its night and day.. and i mean my dual xeon 2 gig vs my wife's powermac g4 dual 867. Her ping is under 100 when mine is over 200. Same network and i have an intel gig e pci-x card. Thats just one case. Try enemy territory in linux vs windows some time. Check your ping. Windows has a slow TCP stack. Try comparing windows vs X11 using a good window manager. (gnome and kde are not peppy! yeah its an environment...)

Finally, here's one more pro for you.. no loss of productivity from viruses or spyware. This may change if the mac platform takes off, but now its lovely to open up emails and not think about it.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[R3d M3rcury]

Actually, what's even worse is that Apple wouldn't even gain market share.

Remember, market share is about units sold. This is why Linux has such a hard time. Someone who downloads Slackware onto his home-built PC isn't counted in any market share measurements because he didn't buy the PC or the OS. This is why you see such odd numbers when you start checking out Windows vs. Linux marketshare--it's difficult to tell how many people are actually using Windows or Linux.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[xero314]

I'm no expert but I wouldn't think apple would not stand to benifit from direct compition with MS in the home PC space. Apple has a certain apeal that they would lose if they became just another OS provider. First they would lose stability because they would nolonger control the hardware as well as the software (this is the reason I own Macs). Second the lack of games and other children's software helps create the feeling that Macs are for intelligent working types, or elitist (Apples bread and butter). I for one would never waist my Macs processing power on games (ok rarely would I) and leave the to the consoles (regardless of performaces differences).

The bottom line is, people buy Apples because they work (99.999% of the time), and if they just provided a generic OS then quality would severly drop (more drivers to develop and test or allowing third parties to develop drivers).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[rakslice]

I think that what the poster is trying to say is that the cost is fixed in the manufacturing sense (not variable with the number of units manufactured). If this is so, any additional copies they can sell are cake.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[decepty]

You're right. They don't put them on the drives... They put them on the keyboard where... you know... your fingers are most of the time.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[falconwolf]

I would like to run OSX, and will end up biting the bullet and buying a Mac. But I sure wouldn't make the $2000 investment if I didn't have to

Going to Apple's online store the only desktop Macs that are $2000 are the Power Macs. Mac Minis start at $500, eMac at $800, and iMac at $1300. Laptops start at $1000 for the iBook and $1500 for the Powerbooks. It depends on what you're using it for but if you're not using any demanding apps there's no reason to pay $2000 for a Mac. But if you're somehow in an industry that requires the latest and greatest and have to have more than one system then you can join the Apple Developer Program, ADP then you can buy Macs at a discount. In about 6 months I plan on getting a 17" Powerbook which in the ADP store costs $2,159.00 base price and in the regular store is $2,699.00. Paying the $500 to join as a Select member, which allows one purchase per year, only saves me $40 but I get additional benefits from membership. If I wanted to and could afford it or had a friend who could I could buy two in which case I'd save $1120. Or if I'm enrolled in classes I can join as a Student member which costs $100 which entitles me to one purchase and saves me $440. A Premier member, which costs $3,500 (US) per year, can make as many purchases as they want.

Falcon

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Tim C]

The only true benefit non-windows systems have to most users is the lack of spyware

How long do you expect that to last? Is there anything in the architecture of OS X or Linux that prevents a user who is authorised to install software from installing spyware?

(Serious question, because after 6+ years of using Linux, I haven't found it yet)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jarich]

Exactly, and Microsoft Windows has perhaps 20 times the volume on day zero. In a legitimate (still selling above cost) price war Microsoft would win easily

You don't have to beat Microsoft and win (your words, not mine) to make a great deal of money.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[akuma(x86)]

'maximizing profits' is a nebulous term, and often not making the maximal profit available today makes sure I can continue making profits tommorow.

How about "Maximizing profits over the lifetime of the corporation"?

A share of stock entitles you to a share of all future earnings. So you value the stock by estimating all future earnings and then discounting that number back to the present value using the prevailing interest/inflation rates.

You wouldn't get into toilet paper sales if you were Apple because some giant consumer product corporation would crush you - you have no toilet paper competitive advantage - you'd probably not be able to secure any reasonable paper pricing and you wouldn't know the first thing about manufacturing toilet paper in an efficient manner. If you did, and had a reasonable business case for making that advantage profitable, then of course you would go into toilet paper - why wouldn't you? GE used to make only lightbulbs 100 years ago, but now they make nuclear reactors and provide financial services. If you can make a buck, you do it. Only the most adaptable businesses survive.

The parent poster is only pointing out that not being the market leader tommorow is often a safer strategy for shareholders

Maybe. But that's debatable. In the technology business, you often see a "winner take all" pattern. See Microsoft, Intel, Dell, Ebay, Adobe, Ipod, etc...

#1's take the prize, #2's still exist, but they stagnate - #3's are rarer still.

The Ipod is the only reason Apple's share price has multiplied over the past few years - in fact in the latest quarter, Ipod sales accounted for near 50% of total profits. It's getting to the point where computer profits will soon be secondary. Another interesting stat from the 10Q is that notebook profits have only grown 7% (vs about 333% for Ipods). In other words, the P/E multiple on Apple (about 36x last years earnings) is based entirely on Ipods.

What would happen to the stock price if Apple didn't have such a dominant position in Ipods? What happens when everybody and their mother has an Ipod? How is deccelerating Ipod growth and stagnant computer growth going to sustain a 36x multiple on the stock? Shareholders want to know...

I don't think that saying - "we're happy being a niche player" is going to cut it on Wall Street.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jcr]

Well, signing drivers only ensures that they come from a known supplier, not that they're any good.

-jcr

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[rekoil]

I think the point isn't so much that Apple hardware is more reliable, as in less prone to hardware failures; it's that because Apple tightly controls the hardware *specifications*, you don't have the dozens to hundreds of hardware configurations that have all their own quirks that Apple has to worry about supporting. Thus, fewer, better-tested hardware drivers, and more reliable software.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jonfelder]

Just like the typical PC user is going to just buy IBM for their next computer, right? If OS X were made readily available to everyone as the grandparent poster indicated, people would undercut Apple on the hardware front. If people want a florescent purple case, people will undercut apple on that too.

Apple is only relavent because people like the hardware and the OS.

Well, with x86 many people can produce the hardware, and Apple just doesn't make that much money from their software. I also seriously doubt they'll have any more success getting people to switch in the future than they have now.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[GlassHeart]

You don't have to beat Microsoft and win (your words, not mine) to make a great deal of money.

Cite an example of somebody who threatened Microsoft Windows directly and walked away with "a great deal of money", please. I can count Geoworks, Be, Stac, and Netscape as counterexamples. Why would Apple incur anything except the full wrath of Microsoft if it challenges the monopoly in the mainstream desktop OS market?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pcidevel]

I was most certainly there (though I certainly wish I was as young as you imply I am)..

You completely gloss over the fact that people didn't have to buy PCs for their home PCs. Those of us working in tech first bought home pcs, and WE'RE the people who told others to buy home PCs when it came time, for OUR convience because WE knew we had to fix those fuckers when they broke.

I still posit, that if you can convince US to switch the rest of the world will switch, i.e. if Apple wins us over they win.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jav1231]

You sound fairly technically minded, though. I can give my Mom a PC with XP (and that's what she's using, BTW) and I have cleanup work when I visit. Spyware, viruses, all kinds of issues and she's on dialup! I wouldn't have those with a Mac. Even beyond that, she's far less likely to mistakenly turn off a feature or install software or disable drivers with a Mac.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[FLEB]

Enlightening analogy! Now I actually get it!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[NoodleSlayer]

While it varies from division to division. I started my Internship at Apple this year. Currently I'm testing on a:

1.8 GHz iMac G5
Dual 866 MHz G4
450 MHz G4
400 MHz "B&W" G3
266 MHz iMac Rev B
233 MHz iMac

So. Even in Apple old hardware is still laying around and being used. Heck that B&W G3 is now nearly six years old and will still "run" Tiger, and it runs Panther rather well.

As it stands the average expected lifetime of a Mac is somewhere between 4-6 years, I've never had a PC longer then 2.5 yrs before upgrading the CPU & Mobo (at least that's what constitutes a "new PC" by my definition, building your own boxes the line can get blurry), and by four years a PC definately showing its age and starts to slow down quite a bit, largely because of Spyware and viruses too.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jonfelder]

First my scenario was poking holes in the parent post where they used the same story but in a favorable to Apple way.

Second why would the average person, who in your first point would have too difficult a time buying OS X compatible parts, not just buy a non x86 mac now? I'd estimate most of the people that are chomping at the bit to run OS X on PC are exactly the type who would buy compatible parts. The rest would already just own a mac.

I'm not sure where you're going with the third point. It's a given that Apple wants you to buy the software to use on your old Mac instead of buying a new PC. However, Apple makes most of its money on hardware. Apple will be in deep trouble if people stop buying Apple hardware. This is exactly what would happen if OS X were made available to everyone as indicated by the parent.

Finally my implication about market share is that it doesn't mean anything if people stop buying Apple hardware. That's great if more 3rd party software venders start supporting OS X. It doesn't do Apple much good if people aren't buying Apple hardware. I seriously doubt enough people will switch to make it worth while for Apple to become predominately a software company.

To expect that Apple will somehow topple Microsoft as the market leader, in my opinion, is quite a stretch. This is because aside from being able to try OS X (something most average users will not do) on your current hardware, the main barrier to switching (application support) hasn't changed. To imply that a switch to x86 is somehow going to result in a massive marketshare switch is a bit silly.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[SA Stevens]

I think what he means is the system doesn't crash. As in: he can leave Mozilla and Word and stuff open and it's still there open next time he needs it.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jonfelder]

What you're glossing over is that once people had their PCs and a significant amount of both time and money invested in their software, they did not want to lose that investment when they bought their next machine.

If the playing field was the same as it was when people were buying PCs for the first time, I'd agree with you. That simply isn't the case now.

The argument that people buy machines because techies encourage them to get things that are convienent for them to fix is wrong too. If that were the case and Macs are so great and problem free, everyone would already own Macs. More appropriately, why do people continue to run Windows which certainly is not convienent or problem free when other alternatives exist?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[syousef]

I've had 3 dell laptops. I've had issues 2,3,5,8,11,12,13 but I've had very little to quibble about in overall build quality. (I've dropped a couple of the laptops a couple of times and no breakage). Every laptop is going to come with issues, but at least this one is cheap Here are my solutions to my problems so far.

2. Live with it. Wasn't totally broken just flakey. Not nice but not a deal breaker.
3. Live with it. Hate this one.
5. The laptop I had this problem with had a trackpoint and trackpad. An install of the correct drivers and disabling the trackpoint fixed this for me. Only had problems after 3 years.
8. Assume you don't have support for anything but a complete breakdown, or buy the additional support. Once you accept that this is how it works, your blood pressure goes down.
11. Don't install or uninstall then apply your preferred AV solution.
12. Don't install or uninstall. Try first if you feel like it.
13. Same as any other x86 running windows. Turn them off.

I can add one other thing...driver hell. I had to hack NVidia drivers to get the latest go5200fx working. (Current supported drivers are buggy and games don't work with them).

I've probably saved a few thousand over the last 6-7 years by going Dell. I'd love more competition and now laptops are finally getting cheaper at the bottom end I have some hope my next laptop might not be a Dell...I just have to wait for this trend to hit the midrange.

I hate Apple and feel I have been done wrong by them too often to buy anything from them. I definitely don't think it's the top end of the market, just the elitist end (and there is a difference). The most expensive computer I ever bought was an Apple IIe and I was left with no easy way to get hold of software when they pulled Apple software out of department stores in the 80s. I have thus far refused to even get an IPod.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[DJ LUCiTE]

All apple uses for its trackpads are synaptics anyway. It's in the driver.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[SA Stevens]

Naw. I buy a skid of Dell Optiplexes at a school auction, hook 'em each up to a port of my KVM and install various OSes on them.

That's the Dell experience from my POV.

New Dells? From a telemarketer or a 'shopping cart' on some website???

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[SA Stevens]

Didn't you know? You drag the drive icon to the trash can. It's a well-thought-out metaphor. You go to the store to buy a new bigger hard drive, then you drag the old icon to the trashcan. No screwdriver needed at all!!

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[SA Stevens]

Apples (pun intended) and oranges

Actually, Orange Computer (makers of a nice Apple ][ clone) might still be in business. They called one of their machines the Orange Peel. But Apple is fond of large burly teams of lawyers and shut 'em down.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[nutshell42]

and you could have a gaming/Photoshop/Office/UNIX box all in one

Yep, my PC does all that.

Hmm, can't imagine why you wouldn't want a Mac.

Hint: It starts with "price" and ends with "tag".

One box that does all of your desktop stuff, and the "heavy lifting" that your Linux box does.

Or you can get two dedicated boxes both optimized for their special function. I think it comes down to whether you want an iPod and a phone or one of those gadgets that can do both.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[SA Stevens]

It may shock you, but some companies do have some ideals guiding them. I'm sure Apple could save money and increase profit by making their computers from cheaper materials and designs. I'm sure they could shave off some of the hardware specs, and *really* make a bargain basement Mac. These would be "rational" decisions that would likely increase their profitability.

Apple has tried all that stuff in the past. It's always failed for them, so they up and dash back to their botique market.

You apparently haven't read many, if any, of the biographies and histories of Apple Computer and Steve Jobs. Ethical? You're kidding, right?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Agent__Smith]

>I get a kick out of hearing people talk about "quality control" from Apple.

Good, then you should really enjoy my story since you claim to derive some type of satisfaction from Apple quality control issues.

About 16 months ago I decided to try my first Apple product ever. I wanted an MP3 player, and decided to give an iPod a try. I purchased a silver MINI. After a few days I was hooked, and was using it all the time. 3 weeks almost to the day after purchasing it the click wheel ceased to function. I was pretty upset, as I had grown accustomed to using it almost all the time, as I travel a lot for work. Makes a great companion while traveling. Anyhow, it stopped working on a Saturday morning. I got onto Apple's website and went through all of the troubleshooting steps. It was indeed dead. I filled out the little form and recieved an e-mail back about half an hour later telling me to expect a box by Tuesday to ship back the defective device, and that once recieved a replacement would follow in a week or so. at 7:30AM Monday morning, approximately 45 hours after making my initial complaint, a box arrived by courier. I set it aside and planned to prepare and ship that night when I returned home from work. That night I opened the box to put the defective unit in for shipping. Lo and behold, there was a brand new sealed iPod mini. I literally had a replacement within 48 hours and it was a weekend. I have never had customer service that prompt from any other electronics or computer company, EVER!

Needless to say, 3 months ago when it was time to replace my aging thinkpad, I took a look at the Mac stuff. I am now the very satisfied owner of a 17" G4 aluminum PowerBook.

I don't expect any companies products to be perfect, but customer service like that I recieved from Apple goes a long way. I am confident that even if I do have trouble that Apple will go out of their way to minimize the inconvenience. I could have spent less and gotten a fine machine from another manufacturer, but it is worth it to me to pay a little more. You typically get what you pay for.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[GaryPatterson]

The APIs are open and well-documented, but that doesn't equate to failing to control the experience. Users don't experience much at the API level anyway.

You need to look up Apple's developer docs, which are freely available on their website. Everything you need to write a device driver for any piece of hardware you can plug into a Mac is documented.

Does that somehow remove control from Apple?

No. Why would it? They control the APIs, after all, and their kernel interfaces with the hardware. I can't see your final point as logical, unless your definition of an API is something that allows you to access hardware directly (which no modern OS should allow).

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Rob_Warwick]

Didn't you know? You drag the drive icon to the trash can. It's a well-thought-out metaphor. You go to the store to buy a new bigger hard drive, then you drag the old icon to the trashcan. No screwdriver needed at all!!

Under OS X, when you drag the disc to the dock, you have an 'eject' icon rather than a trash icon.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[zardie]

1. A battery which breaks within 3 weeks.

One and a half years for mine and I used them everyday. They have a warranty of one year.

2. A CDROM drive with a dodgy eject button and requires a "right click -> eject".

My CDROM drive will randomly eject the tray - although it is a non-standard model for my Dell Inspiron 8200.

3. Keyboard marks rubbed onto the screen.

I get the same problem on my PowerBook G4 Aluminium.

4. A floppy drive which goes out of alignment after you first use it (two weeks after the warrantee ran out, because you don't use floppies that much). They demand money.

Well, the warranty terms are clear. Sony, Apple etc would have the same terms and attitude.

5. A trackpad/nipple which have you chanting, "The power of Christ compels you!..."

Yeah, well, that is an issue with some of the Dell, Toshiba etc notebooks which is why the nipple is starting to appear less and less.

6. Flimsy build.

Depends on the model with all manufacturers. But yes, Dell have a lot of these (so does Toshiba)

7. Poor performance (compared against other x86).

Never had THAT problem in fact my Dell Inspiron 8200 was the best performer at the time when I bought it.

8. Non English speaking support, once they actually answer the phone.

This is pretty frustrating. I hate this too. I find it very annoying when people try to talk down to me when I've simply got a physical or obvious fault and they want me to run the diagnostic CD. Then I have to get them to repeat everything three times because they screwed up the QoS on their VoIP infrastructure.

9. An OS made by someone else, with drivers made by yet some other people again. Install media if you are lucky. Roll-your-own if you are not.

What, Linux? :)

11. Anti virus software which takes the performance down by about one hundred annoyance notches. Only to be bothered for money 3 months later.

Then uninstall it.

12. Lots of half baked software which is designed to get you to "upgrade to the pro version which actually works" with yet more money.

Again, uninstall it or don't use it.

13. One hundred and fifty three billion different services installed and set to run by default, with a systray that goes half way across the screen when maximized.

Not really. Never seen this on a Dell out of the box.

14. A system which could come with any combination of a number of different parts. SOE hell.

Then order a Latitude. They pay careful attention to SOE with those. If you ask for a Seagate drive, nvidia graphics and Intel NICs, you'll get it.

15. A lesson in appreciation of quality over barrel bottom scraping "value".

Or cutting-edge. When I bought my 8200, nobody could offer me two batteries PLUS an optical drive, or the 1600x1200 16ms panel, or the 64MB nVidia 440 Go graphics... or the 5400RPM drive.. or the 2Ghz processor .. etc. The advantage of Dell is that they build to order using the latest components available.

What did Apple have? an 867Mhz Titanium PowerBook G4 with a 60GB drive, 8x combo drive (I got a 24x in the Dell) and a 32MB Radeon 7500.

C'mon.

You say you write that on a Vaio. Tried servicing those? My girlfriend has a Vaio desktop replacement (16" P4 2.6) that routinely overheats and needs to be sent back for them to do *god knows what* with it. That takes them SEVEN WEEKS TO DO.

Seriously, that's just NOT ON in the IT world. My Dell may have broken more, but onsite next-day service makes it a lot easier to swallow.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jocknerd]

You almost had me. I was beginning to believe you until #10.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[bombshelter13]

Keep in mind, though, that the vast, vast majority of video cards you're likely to ever see in a Mac are by nVidia or ATI. In the PC world, at least, I know both companies basically just offer one driver package for each series of cards. Got an ATI card? Download the Catalyst package. Got an nVidia card? Download the Forceware package. The fact that 90% of video cards anyone's likely to use can be supported by basically porting 2 packages likely makes supporting the hardware much easier.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[nighty5]

Insightful?

Don't be so sure, Microsoft needs Dell just as much as Dell needs Microsoft. There will always be a compromise.

Nobody but Dell's gorilla size production house can push Microsoft products out to the corporates.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Thu25245]

I don't know if you've dealt much with the Mac userbase, but here's how we tend to deal with device drivers:

We don't.

We bought Macs because Apple takes care of that for us. Apple either writes its own drivers, or tests third-party drivers, and bundles them with the OS.

Rarely do Mac users install drivers. Even if manufacturers provided them on CD or for download, it would detract from the "plug and play" philosophy that, well, makes OS X more than just a pretty-colored Unix. Changing this would make a number of loyal customers very angry, even as it makes 1337 software pirates very happy.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[spectre_240sx]

Better, but still not great. What happens when grandma sees that eject icon turn back into a trash can as soon as she lets go of the mouse button? Oh no! I thought I dragged it to eject, but it was really the trash! All my files must be gone!

Ok, sure, far fetched. Apple really should have done something about that metaphor though. They did better in finder where you can hit the eject button next to a drive, though. That's really handy.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[spectre_240sx]

tell application "QuickTime Player"
            present front movie
end tell

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[spectre_240sx]

Only if you've got some real issues with the system. Bad drivers, bad hardware... it takes something pretty deep to get XP to bluescreen.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[arminw]

.....Sure, it might detract from them selling hardware.....

Actually, if Apple charges full retail for each copy of OSX, even for any PC manufacturer who might want to install it on their boxes, they should be able to compete pretty well. Letting Dell install OSX on their computers, but making them pay full retail for each copy might work just fine for Apple. Apple's hardware, especially laptops, even if it runs Windows would still be better than Dell's offerings. As for games, PC's good enough to play games are quite costly, so get a specialized computer for games, commonly called a console, such as an x-box or play station.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[arminw]

.......Why does knowing your hardware make the hardware more expensive......

I wish people arond here would finally stop riding that old obsolete hobby horse of more expensive Macs. Other than cheap no-name clones, Apple wares are no more expensive than equivalent stuff from Sony, Toshiba, HP and other name brands except Dell. Dells especially their ugly, heavy laptops are pure garbage. There is no real way to make a decent computer for significantly less because they all use mostly the same major components. Long term, Macs are actually cheaper because they last longer and don't need the hassle of constantly updating against the numerous constantly changing malware that plagues the Windows users. Succeeding Mac OSX run faster and better on the same old hardware, whereas in Windows the opposite is true.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[The Lynxpro]

"Actually, Orange Computer (makers of a nice Apple ][ clone) might still be in business. They called one of their machines the Orange Peel. But Apple is fond of large burly teams of lawyers and shut 'em down."

Didn't Fujitsu UK buy them? No, wait, that was Acorn...

I'm not familiar with an Orange AppleII clone. Only the Laser128s and such...

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Loconut1389]

Take windows on intel: you have an os designed to run with any combination of a million cpus, memory chips, network cards, scanners, and various other peripherals, and can be packaged in a pretty box or a plain one. Either way, there are very few designers, save Sun and SGI that actually design a motherboard with all the surrounding stuff just right to give the cpu that extra boost.

Then take MacOS X on Intel OR PPC which aside from the pretty factor, is a much smaller subset of hardware compatibility, has been run through extensive quality control since it has had nearly the same amount of energy/dollars expended on a much smaller set of parts- Combine that with an OS designed for ease of use and hidden power.

FWIW, I'm a 100% PC guy- the main reason I have never switched is that I am an intel assembly programmer in addition to all of the linux programming, and windows .net programming. If Visual Studio ran on PPC and all my code just worked, I'd switch today. The Intel Apple is my ticket to stability. I can run VMWare or some other equivalent product for my windows development with speed to spare (I'm on a 1ghz PC at the moment) and still have all the perks of MacOS, or worst case, dual/triple boot with linux.

The day the intel macs come out, I'll ditch this 1ghz piece of crap I have and get a real machine.

Now this is a loose analogy, and should not be taken literally and/or to the extremes- it is merely a hint of my thoughts.

Any mac, intel or PPC, with Mac OS X is like a Rolls Royce- power, luxury and classic style and tuned for longevity/stability.

Any PC Compatible on windows, be it a dell, sun, sgi, is more like a Viper- power, a light dusting of design, and designed for speed, regardless of comfort or stability.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jtcedinburgh]

I've got to agree. I currently have about 4 PCs (including one co-located homebrew pizza box server) and a PowerMac G5/2.7 plus a Powerbook G4 12".

Whilst I love the Apple experience, I previously had a Dell Inspiron with a lovely big, bright 1600x1200 screen, and had precisely NO problems with it in three years. I sold it when I decided to switch.

The Dell was a less attractive beast to look at, and much heavier and bulkier, but no less reliable. Sure, it was absolutely top of the line when I bought it in 2001 for £1800 ($3000ish), and so you could hardly consider it 'budget' but it worked fine all of those years, and all I ever needed to replace was the battery (once) due to simply wearing it out over time - which is to be expected.

The Powerbook- yeah, it's sexy and cute and has a cool Apple logo on the back which lights up and if I weren't already married, women would notice me in Starbucks, be impressed with my sensitivity and taste and I'd get laid more (ho hum)...

Anyway, I can quit dreaming now... my point, which is evasive as ever, is that the PB isn't really any better than the Dell in terms of reliability. Sure, it looks better, has better design and feels like more of a designed package - plus, crucially, it runs a proper, sorted OS (and not that Windows crap) but, still, let's be reasonable about it...

I've also bought a couple of pizza box servers from Dell in the past and they've been great. Also, I chose two 20" Dell 2001FP panels instead of 1 Apple 20" non rotating panel for the PowerMac - and have no regrets there.

So, I can't believe I'm writing this next sentence, but here goes...

Let's give Dell a break here, folks...

There. I did it. I need to lie down in a dark room now...

John

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[binarytoaster]

How long do you expect that to last? Is there anything in the architecture of OS X or Linux that prevents a user who is authorised to install software from installing spyware?

"Broken Windows" philosophy. Windows users tolerate crapware because they're used to it (the windows in the neighborhood are broken, so what's one or two more?) - Mac users do not because the neighborhood HAS no broken windows. Someone tried to release a program with spyware for the Mac a while back. (LimeWire, I believe.) It didn't get very far. There was a HUGE outcry against the company.

As far as architecture goes, I know I always start to question it when a password box comes up asking for admin privileges to install software. I know I'd REALLY question it if I didn't even have an installer running at the time (that I knew of).

Mac users (and Linux too) have the benefit of obscurity as well; no one wants to put forth the amount of effort necessary to do the nefarious things spyware does on a totally different platform that only has about 10% of the market.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[el_womble]

I agree, its a stupid metaphore, very un-intuitive. But dragging things is fun! Howeverm until I think of a better metaphore for ejecting an icon I'll keep using Apples.

I personally prefer highlighting the icon and pressing cmd-e.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[mjpaci]

Now that I have a Mighty Mouse, I can right-click the HD icon and hit eject.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[geoffspear]

Do you really think Apple would lower their prices because demand for their products increased? Sure they'd be making more profit, but, umm, that's the whole point of running a business.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pknoll]

Ah, wish I had mod points. =) Thanks for the laugh Maserati, I needed one.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[saintlupus]

I totally agree. Fake wood inlays on the dashboard are critical to the overall functioning of the vehicle.

My entire dashboard is hideous 1970s woodgrain. With an analog clock bigger than the speedometer.

Pimpin' ain't easy.

--saint

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[mdwh2]

I've never understood this argument. You're willing to put up with the sucky OS that is Windows the rest of the time you're using your computer (i.e., when you're not playing games) just so you can play games?

Because not everyone thinks that Windows is "the sucky OS".

Nowhere did the OP say he thought that Windows was sucky. He said he was unwilling to buy into a new platform that lacked software he wanted such as games.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[pauljlucas]

Why would anyone even consider a new platform if they don't think their current one sucks in some way? Clearly, if he were 100% happy on Windows, he wouldn't be lamenting the fact that the Mac doesn't have the games he wants -- he wouldn't care.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[oblivionboy]

I wish I had MOD points right now. You're absolutely bang on. This is pretty much exactly what happened. It was DOS + IBM's initial popularity in the business realm (remember that the Mac always had trouble being seen as a business machine, however IBM PCs WERE the Business machine, esp after Lotus 123) that set the stage (we could say the "standard" as it was), and it was the clones finally that enabled that to proliferate. Compaq being the first BRAND name clone to gain identifiable value, but there were a tonne of clones around. And yes from there basically the future of Windows was pretty much set.

As a note to the parent of this thread, I think he's got it too, and I can't help but wonder if Steve Jobs might actually be wanting to KILL the Mac somehow. He's always said he'll keep with the Mac until they run it into the ground (ie: like a beater), and then move on. Looking at historically how he was involved in creating the Mac (and thought of himself as an artist), I wonder if his trip isn't so much the MAC, but rather creating things. Ala iPod (although of course it was a contracter that did the actual inventing. But perhaps you can consider yourself an artist for just having the ability to recognize good ideas and art).

Perhaps now he's just saying, lets go mass market and see what this thing can do. And if it dies, well that works out well for me because I can go onto the next big thing. You're going to tell me that Jobs is too much of a smart business man for this? I respond with: Apple is the ONLY company right now who has any chance of realizing the set-top box, downloadable media-movie-music center model to the masses, and he's building his company all around the media right now. Love Pixar. Don't be surprised if the Mac somehow becomes just a kind of "token" product to say they still make computers, but that the focus is entirely on Entertainment and Media.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Gulthek]

And you know why we computer guys get roped into doing family tech support? Because PC tech support in a word: sucks.

But it's another thing that Apple has gotten right. I've called Apple tech support a few times and have generally had the level of service I used to expect in the early 90s from tech companies. Plus there's always the Genius Bars at local stores if you are really in trouble.

If that wouldn't work for your family (i.e. they'd insist on talking to you and no one else) then I feel sorry for you.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[laffer1]

Every blizzard release is simultaneous for Mac/PC. Some companies get it right.

Security through obscurity helps linux too. Any system is vulnerable.

I made a list of games I have which do include older ones.

If you want to see a current list lookup Aspyr or MacSoft's current projects on their sites.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Synbiosis]

"Ah, but is what's working for BMW and Mercedes sustainable in the long run?"

Is what's working for the iPod sustainable in the long run? They're both selling a good product based on image, not on features.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[mdwh2]

He never said he considered ditching his current system for a new one, he just stated why he had never purchased one, since sometimes people do buy new computers, and some people are happy to buy a different platform to their previous one.

And yes, all things being equal, one probably wouldn't switch to a new platform either. But he didn't say he wanted a Mac and games were the only reason he couldn't - he just stated games as one reason which was sufficient to prevent him from doing so.

Obviously we can't say anymore about what he thinks of Windows unless he actually says so - until then, I believe it's unfounded to suggest that he, or people in general, are using a system they hate just because of a lack of games on the Mac.

Perhaps next time that a Mac user says they can't use Windows because of viruses, I'll assume that they actually hate Macs, and would be far better off running a virus checker, as it's a small price to pay if it means they get to use the OS they prefer?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[DeadScreenSky]

Even your 'clarified' argument still doesn't make sense. Most of the games released every year simply aren't available on the PC. Graphics aren't everything (though I'll admit I generally play console games partially because they do often have better art). Not sure what you are referring to with slowness - most of my favorite console games run at a solid 60 fps. (Generally smoother than the average PC game on my not too slow PC hardware.)

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jlassen]

sure... something really wrong... like a single bad printer driver that causes the system to reboot whenever word prints...

Sorry, just because its been reliable for you doesn't mean its reliable for everyone else.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[spectre_240sx]

Do you truly expect Microsoft to account for every problem that could possibly make it into a driver? I wouldn't be surprised to see that sort of behavior coming from a bad driver on any system. I would consider a bad driver being installed as something truly wrong with the system.

From what I've seen, an install without corrupt system files, spyware, etc. on a computer without faulty hardware will not give you trouble with BSOD's. I guess the experience I've had working on hundreds of Windows XP machines at the shop doesn't count, though.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[jlassen]

Not saying your experience doesn't count. I'm just saying it doesn't cover EVERYTHING and is not the definitive statement on the matter.
I too have run a shop with over a 100 desktops, and have done so over 6 years, and have gone from NT to 2000 to XP.

And a Microsoft provided print driver, combined with Microsoft word, causing a spontaneous reboot of the system demonstrates quite clearly that it is far from a perfect OS...

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Amouth]

personaly there are very few games i can enjoy playing only on a game controler.

and more recent games hat have a fps aspect are far better when doen with a mouse..

i agree most game srihgt now are going right to the console but they do later move to the PC if they do well. the way i look at it is gameing on a pc is still a major aspect of a pc for many people and using the argument jsut get a console doesn't work. it may work for some but not for alot of people out there.

commenting on the slowness - with a console some types of games are slower to get through do to the controls - other look is last time i played a good game on an xbox or ps2 they lag. God of War amazing game loved it beat it in 2 days on my freinds ps2 i wish it was on the pc, but when you read about it and look at the extra skins that they wanted to use but couldn't because the hardware couldn't handel it - it just made me wish it was on my pc as an option, if you have the hardware great if not sorry, personaly i rather invest my money in my pc rather than a console as i get the gameing aspect and a resource for work.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[R3d M3rcury]

I think, in general, the effect of "techies" on the market is not as large as we all like to believe. And I think it's getting less and less.

Ten years ago, I would have people ask me about buying a computer. Today I very rarely get asked. Why? Advertising.

More than ten years ago, there wasn't much for mainstream PC advertising. So if people were thinking about getting a PC, about the only place to go was the techies. If you didn't want to talk to the techies, you talked to your friends who did or you bought what the company you worked for bought because you already knew how to use it.

Today, there are plenty of sources for information on computers besides the techie. Heck, it is the rare newspaper that doesn't have a "tech" column appearing at least once-per-week. You can't watch a TV show without seeing an ad for HP, Dell, or Gateway. And then there's always the Internet.

So, with all those sources, it's no longer necessary to go see the guy with the pocket protector and have to sit through boring lectures laced with three letter acronyms and obscure measuring units ("What's the difference between a megabyte and a megahertz?"). The TV will tell me what computer to buy, just like it tells me what clothes to buy and what car to buy.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[dave420]

*yaaaawn* been at that there kool-aid again? so predictable. :-P

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MagnusDredd]

1. Apple would have to support a massively larger amount of hardware.

Ummm, no. That's what unsupported means. The old beige Macs are not supported for running OSX. You can do it with a little bit of work, but don't call Apple about it.
Likewise don't call Dell about running Windows XP on a Pentium 233MMX, or Microsoft about Windows 95...
In the real world software and hardware vendors have a list of supported products, and a list of products that are no longer supported.

2. there would be a loss of branding and a lowering of the quality associated with OS X.

Not as much as you might imagine.
Moron: "OSX doesn't work very well on my Dell..."
Apple: "That's because it's not written to run on Dells... If you had one of our shiny new boxes it'd run very well.... We'd be happy to show you, come into a nearby Apple store. Now that you've had a taste, come get the real deal."

3. there are plenty of games on the Mac, but if you want the very latest cutting-edge PC games you'd never be satisfied anyway since you'd need ATI/nVidia making their latest cards in Mac versions too.

Mac versions? WTF are you talking about... Apparently you've not been following that the x86 dev kits are running standard x86 video. Intel GMA 900 series I think. There are only one or two things that differentiate "Mac" Video cards and "PC" ones.
#1 the card must support big endian mode (important data is first in byte order).
#2 the BIOS of the video card must be tweaked in order to respond to the initialization signal that Macs use.

I had an old PCI Voodoo 2000 that I pulled from a PC, and dropped into a G3... OSX doesn't have drivers for it, but then again, XP likewise doesn't have drivers that work very well(last I checked). And if the drivers for XP are any good, it's because they were written by people in their spare time... Kinda like some of the drivers I'm seeing pop up for OSX.

Really there are only a few major differences between the PPC Macs and PCs. Macs use Sun's Open Firmware BIOS, they use IBM or Freescale (Motorola) CPUs, and of course they have a custom motherboard chipset (of which the G5s is rather nice, never thought I'd see crossbar architecture in a machine that cheap this soon).

4. if you DO want games, why do you want a Mac? if Windows works, use it.

*sigh* To get work done perhaps? Not everyone here uses their computer only as a toy. Some of us use them to make websites, write code, edit movies, correspond with friends/family, run the highest rated Genealogy program, create using Adobe apps, do office work using MS Office, read slashdot, perform network maintenence, run a business, or a million other productive things.

And every now and then want to have friends over for a LAN party.

As far as running Windows, the Apple x86 Developer Machines do run Windows.

What rock have you been under... They run on a standard 900 series Intel Chipset, video card is GMA 900 IGP, use DDR2, etc, etc. It may be in a G5 case, but it's simply an off the shelf motherboard. Actually probably everything in the box is off the shelf.

If the shipping machines (towers) are anything close to my guess, they'll use a fairly standard chipset, a standard video card, standard drives and RAM (they already are in the PPC machines), standard cables, standard power supply.... I'm certain that like Dell, HP, and every other PC vendor of any consequence they'll have a cutom board layout.

What this means is that I'll be able to use OS X, and perhaps run Windows XP in something akin to VMware to play those games that aren't ported. Or perhaps just reboot. To the Mac Game developers, if you port it, I'll buy it.

5. what is happening to the PC game industry? is it growing/shrinking? will PC games be so important when the

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[MagnusDredd]

two things that differentiate "Mac" Video cards and "PC" ones.
#1 the card must support big endian mode (important data is first in byte order).
#2 the BIOS of the video card must be tweaked in order to respond to the initialization signal that Macs use.

Crap, apparently I forgot the part about since the change to a non-Big endian CPU, that's no longer valid.
Also if the x86 Macs use the AT BIOS or EFI, then #2 will likewise no longer be valid....

Then it's all about drivers. I'd imagine it'd be in the vid card makers best interests to have monolithic drivers for OS X like the Windows counterparts

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[AttilaSz]

I own a copy of Diablo II, and the contents of the CD are dual PC/Mac. I know someone who recently switched to Mac, and all the Blizzard titles he owns (he also owns Diablo II, as well as Warcraft) work nicely on Mac. He told me Blizzard releases all their titles on CDs that are playable on both a PC and a Mac. Therefore I don't think there's much assembly code in there.

Just out of curiosity, I scooped the OS X games on Amazon, and there's lot of them (you can say that I'm a wannabe Mac switcher myself). I was relieved to know that I won't have to miss nor Sim City 4 nor Civilization III if I switch (although unlike Blizzard titles, I'll have to separately purchase the Mac version). Doom III is also available. So, it's not so bleak when it comes to games. Other than that, I'm seriously entertaining the idea of giving up gaming on my PC altogether. There's just too many things I depend on for living on my primary machine to keep lots of unrelated gunk installed on it. I'm seriously considering buying an Xbox for my Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory needs (played the demo on PC and got rather interested). As well as for Halo 2, of course.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[blueskies]

They give Dell, et al, huge discounts on Windows, which I'm sure would disappear the moment Dell started considering an alternative OS. Dell wouldn't be willing to risk the majority of its sales on the off chance of this new alternative OS taking off.

Uh, linux?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Nitewing98]

I disagree. I think it would benefit Apple to have more of it's software in the public's hands. Douglas Adams was right, in so much as Apple's software has always been more stable than Microsoft's as well as more elegant.

However, Apple has also been an industry leader in new technologies, from the mouse to USB to iMovie. I think the smartest thing Jobs could do is make OS X available for the off-the-shelf PC but continue to make Mac hardware cutting edge hardware.

And I think Jobs will do just that. He has already shown with iChat and the iSight that he's not above making his software work better with his hardware. Oh, sure iChat will work with a different webcam, but it works better with the iSight. I envision the same situation with Mac OSX on x86.

It took him 30 yrs, but he learned Gate's lesson - the money is in the software.

Wouldn't it be funny if, after all these years, he hijacked Microsoft's platform after Gates swiped their software metaphor?

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[Icekold]

My PowerBook has a dedicated eject button on the top row of the keyboard, to the right of the function keys.

My Apple bluetooth keyboard also has a dedicated eject button. It functions exactly as though it were on the drive itself. I see no difference here.

Re:Random thoughts on Apple

[hackstraw]

It took him 30 yrs, but he learned Gate's lesson - the money is in the software.

You just don't get it.

Apple is about making quality end-to-end solutions. They can't do it for free, so they charge for it. They are not bad off financially, in fact they are doing quite well.

Embarrassingly enough, I was watching Monster Garage or one of those chopper shows, and Jesse James was talking about how his business made money making fenders and whatnot to ship to Europe. They pretty much broke even on making bikes, and those bikes go for up to over $100k.

The prefer to make bikes over fenders.

Hey look, the Apple legal team!

[richdun]

Wonder what they're up to today?

Re:Hey look, the Apple legal team!

[yellowbkpk]

Apple Legal has surely known about this site and others like it for ages. They have been working on this since at least the beginning of July. If Apple's legal department hasn't tried to strike them down yet, why would they now?

Press 1 to Install, 2 to Update, 3 to go "WOOT"

[TsukasaZero]

Garage Band at my finger tips....

Re:Press 1 to Install, 2 to Update, 3 to go "WOOT"

[Madd Scientist]

pro tools le is available on windows XP.

Salt?

[BigZaphod]

Putting salt on my monitor didn't make the terrible shock I got while trying to ingest this any better. Did I do something wrong?

VMWare

[WatertonMan]

Running it under VMWare (assuming you have a system that supports SSE3) will be a slow experience for many applications I suspect. Yeah most programs will run fine. But I'd not want to run iMovie or FCP.

Re:VMWare

[meccaneko]

/ingests salt

VMWare is just a start. And since VMWare is meant emulate a PC, surely they cant be too far off getting it to run natively?

Re:VMWare

[randomErr]

I would disagree with that statement. We're talking about x86 emulation on an x86 system. If properly emulated it should keep between 90-99% of its speed original.

Re:VMWare

[Wesley Felter]

That depends on what kind of GPU VMware emulates. Remember that OS X offloads a lot of stuff to the GPU, and only if it's a modern one. If VMware is emulating good ol' VESA, OS X is going to be slow.

Re:VMWare

[jimicus]

The point of VMWare is that it virtualises the whole system. Provided there's nothing else competing for processor time on the box, any given OS running in VMWare should run at near-native speeds.

Re:VMWare

[blackmonday]

If I remember correctly, the developer Intel Macs didn't ship with iLife. I'd be interesting to install them anyway and see what happens.

You'd have to be a masochist to run Final Cut Pro on Rosetta. Thank you sir may I have another!

Re:VMWare

[yellowbkpk]

There are several people who are running it natively on their systems. It turns out most people with Intel chipsets can just boot the Dev DVD (after hacking the rosetta core) normally.

Re:VMWare

[TheRaven64]

Let me guess, you've never looked closely at x86 (and, really, who can blame you)?

There are a small set of (14?) instructions on x86 that can't be easily trapped. You have two choices, paravirtualisation (like Xen) or emulating an entire system but passing through all of the non-privileged instruction. VMWare does the second, and takes a significant (20%+) performance hit from it. In SPEC99, VMWare is under 30% of the speed of the host machine (source).

Re:VMWare

[PayPaI]

FCP probably won't run on Rosetta cause it's known that Rosetta only emulates a G3 and FCP needs a G4.

Re:VMWare

[agent oranje]

You'd have to be a masochist to run Final Cut Pro on Rosetta.

It won't run on Rosetta, as FCP requires a G4, I do believe. For that matter, parts of Apple's pro video line require a G5. So, unfortunately for Mac users like me, it will prove necessary to buy a new version of Final Cut Studio when the P4 PowerMacs come out - which adds like $1200 onto the upgrade price.

Why yes, I am still bitter that my old software isn't going to work. If Apple doesn't make this switch worth while, it's back to Linux for me!

Re:VMWare

[blackmonday]

Your old software will continue to work on your existing machine. In a pro environment you don't switch to the newest versions of OS X / Final Cut Pro immediately anyway. If there's a new feature you absolutely need, go ahead and upgrade your setup. Otherwise, what's wrong with your old system?

As for switching back to Linux, thats cool. I hope you don't try to replace Final Cut Pro with a Linux solution or you're going to get pretty disppointed.

Re:VMWare

[Orkie]

That website already has a link to information on having it run natively.

Re:VMWare

[MrGond]

nobody but VMWare is allowed to do such a comparison, without being sued

Re:VMWare

[WatertonMan]

Except that graphics and especially graphics acceleration aren't handled quite right. This is especially true of 3D features. Yet OSX makes pretty extensive use of this and looks to be increasing its use in the future. So for those things VMWare will do poorly (if it runs right at all) This is why, for instance, VMWare doesn't do so well with games.

Re:VMWare

[WatertonMan]

Here's a simple test. Run DoomIII under VMWare and regularly. Compare the speeds.

Re:VMWare

[hacker]

I would disagree with that statement. We're talking about x86 emulation on an x86 system. If properly emulated it should keep between 90-99% of its speed.

You spelled virtualization wrong.

Re:VMWare

[DongleFondle]

Mod parent up (+1, hilarious Animal House reference)

Re:VMWare

[jafac]

You'd have to be a masochist to run Final Cut Pro on Rosetta. Thank you sir may I have another!

either that or a MacOSXist.

Thank you sir, may I have another (mouse button)?

MS better watch their back

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously. The largest barrier for adoption of OSX has been the high cost of entry (ie buying Mac hardware). This has been slightly reduced with the Mac Mini, but now people can try out OSX without even having to buy new hardware.

Re:MS better watch their back

[TheOtherAgentM]

I don't agree. As someone that grew up on Windows and decided to try out Apple midway through college, it's not that simple. For us here on Slashdot, we realize the programs are similar in nature and are intuitive enough to figure out. However, I have switched many of my friends to Apple, making sure they knew how difficult it would be to unlearn what they already thought about computers. Most of them don't get very far in learning. That may be okay in a lot of cases, but if you are someone that has to be productive and you've learned to do things certain ways, switching is going to make Apple seem real inferior. Switching is not as easy as it appears.

Re:MS better watch their back

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't think so. It'll be the same problem as Linux has. If it doesn't come preinstalled by the big box shifters, forget it for the masses.

Re:MS better watch their back

[pauljlucas]

The largest barrier for adoption of OSX has been the high cost of entry (ie buying Mac hardware).

How long are people going to keep raising this bogus argument? (Probably at least as long as the "no 2-button mouse" argument.)

You can buy a Mac Mini for $499. So... what high cost of entry?

Re:MS better watch their back

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

You can buy a Mac Mini for $499. So... what high cost of entry?

First, $500 is a good amount of money to most people and it is a lot more than $200-$300 for a bottom of the line new PC. Second, there is the cost of all the software that will no longer run, and needs to be repurchased. For existing computer users who use commercial software, the cost is still considerable.

Re:MS better watch their back

[IntergalacticWalrus]

How long are people going to keep raising this bogus argument? (Probably at least as long as the "no 2-button mouse" argument.)

You can buy a Mac Mini for $499. So... what high cost of entry?

How long are people going to keep raising this bogus counter-argument?

The Mac mini is a shitbox. The form factor is very cool but it's basically made out of very outdated components. And if you add up all the options to make it decent, you'll notice it's not that low-priced. Who the hell would abandon its moderately decent PC for a Mac mini?

Just because Apple has whipped up a poor machine and slapped a low price tag on it, doesn't make it an interesting platform to Switch(tm).

Re:MS better watch their back

[pauljlucas]

First, $500 is a good amount of money to most people and it is a lot more than $200-$300 for a bottom of the line new PC.

$35,000 is a good amount of money to most people for a BMW and it's a lot more than what a Honda Civic costs. Know what? BMW doesn't care.

Second, there is the cost of all the software that will no longer run, and needs to be repurchased.

Out of the box, a Mac comes with Safari, Mail, iTunes (and the rest of the iLife suite), iChat, iWork is a mere $49. Hence, pretty much all the software that most people use a computer for is already included (or pretty cheap). Hence, for most people, the "repurchase" argument is also bogus.

Re:MS better watch their back

[Tourney3p0]

You can buy a Mac Mini for $499. So... what high cost of entry?

I think they meant high cost of entry for a machine that doesn't absolutely scrape the bottom of the barrel in performance.

Re:MS better watch their back

[rinoid]

This is such a dead horse.

Not just with the entry of the Mini.

You had been able to get a 1299.00 tower (1999 now which is too high an entry for a tower IMO).
A 799.00 eMac.
A 999.00 iBook.
And now you can even get a multi-button mouse !

The price argument has been gone for a few years now skippy.
These prices are competitive.

I have tried and tried to buy one of those 399.00 - 500.00 WinTel boxen just for a few tasks and games but it's not doable. Those boxes SUCK!!! Once you add the 300.00 video card the price goes up!

The other meme here is about Apple being a HW company, not a SW company.
Look at the SEC filing.
~30% revenue from iPod
~ 33% from CPUs
~ the rest is "Other Music Products, Peripherals & other HW, and Software & Other"

The upshot is not only CPU sales increasing (iPods natch but that's IMO a temporary phenom.) but SW sales are increasing.

True, the Tiger upgrades are a small percentage, but, people buy more CPUs because it runs Tiger, not Windows.

Re:MS better watch their back

[pauljlucas]

The form factor is very cool but it's basically made out of very outdated components.

As long as it surfs the web, allows somebody to check e-mail, write a few papers, most people couldn't care less what's under the hood. Remember that since my argument says that you offload games to a dedicated gaming machine, then you don't need the kind of performance needed for a gaming machine. Also, you aren't representative of the target market.

And if you add up all the options to make it decent, you'll notice it's not that low-priced.

Like what? All it really needs is more RAM which isn't that expensive. You don't need Bluetooth or 802.11g (and most PCs don't have them by default either).

Re:MS better watch their back

[prell]

I think there is a mental barrier that trumps any supposed cost barrier. I think people still think of Mac and Windows computers as living in two different worlds. You even have to purchase them in different locations! I wonder how much Apple would benefit from a well-exposed Mac in a Best Buy store? It's easy to dismiss something (especially citing a $100 or $200 price difference) if you can't even use both things at once. I think if you asked most people what they think of Apple products, they'd say "they're really pretty." That might sound funny, but what might they say about Windows computers in general? I think there is a general liking of Apple stuff, but people still have no direct experience with Apple products (except maybe the iPod). So all that, along with the cost, I think makes Apple look, not unapproachable, but maybe ivory-tower-ish.

Re:MS better watch their back

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

$35,000 is a good amount of money to most people for a BMW and it's a lot more than what a Honda Civic costs. Know what? BMW doesn't care.

Are you implying that cost is not a significant barrier to people buying BMWs? Because that is what we are talking about, the fact that the price is a significant barrier. Maybe you haven't noticed but most people don't drive BMWs. Maybe that is because there aren't any BMW dealers around or because the controls are too confusing. Or maybe it is because they cost more than many can afford?

Out of the box, a Mac comes with...

If you're talking home users that list bloody well better include the five games they've purchased at Walmart and play all the time. If not, that is a significant barrier. If we're talking office workers it better come with excel or a similar spreadsheet or that is a significant barrier.

Hell you can download hundreds of pretty good free games and office applications for the mac, or you can buy the equivalent. Most users won't know how, or won't want to spend the money. Maybe they will, but that does not mean they want to, hence the barrier.

OS X is my favorite workstation OS. I'm typing this up using it right now. It is still foolish to dismiss the cost of migration. It is a real and valid concern for users considering making the move. Pretending otherwise does not help anyone.

Re:MS better watch their back

[Creepy Crawler]

And something about a Xserver being included with GCC.... Wonder what that could allow one to do...

Nawwww...

Re:MS better watch their back

[pauljlucas]

I think they meant high cost of entry for a machine that doesn't absolutely scrape the bottom of the barrel in performance.

And the subtle point you missed is that if you're no longer playing games on it (because you're now playing them on a dedicated gaming machine), then you don't need great performance merely to surf the web and check e-mail.

Re:MS better watch their back

[old-lady-whispering-]

Apple has been supported by brand loyalist who after defecting in the early 90's have returned to the fold in droves with the second coming of Jobs. I personally have never considered myself a brand loyalist but I will be the first to admit that I am entrenched in the Windows world. So you can call me a pragmatic loyalist ready to leave my brand of choice as soon as something better and cheaper arrives. I have tried Linux, the price was excellent but the compatibility was not even close to windows XP. I was also alarmed at how much I had to configure just to get a desktop as compared to Windows XP. I also got VNC running on Linux but man was it a pain as compared to windows. I have also tried the latest Macs but this was at the Apple store in the mall. My impression was that the price is generally not that much higher if at all but Macs have no compelling applications that windows doesn't have and OS X did not impress me so much that I was ready to switch because of it. Considering that Mac loyalist have shown their willingness to eat rotten Apples and not complain to loudly about the stomach ache, while on the other hand mercilessly scrutinizing Windows it makes the praise of Mac ring hollow. All Apple did was realize OS 8 was stinking up the place and began the switch to OS X. The sad thing is that the Mac cult believes OS X will get people to switch in droves when in reality all Apple got was an OS that is not a liability. No compelling, exclusive applications means no Windows users switching. The telling sign that they are drinking the Koolaide is when they can give no other reason to buy Macs other than OS X and how insanely great Apple hardware is. Yes the iPod is insanely great, so some Apple hardware is awesome but what the hell happened to iTunes, it is closer to driving me crazy than revolutionary software. As a consumer I ask myself if Apple can't get iTunes right what else have they screwed up? I obviously have not been spending enough time in devoted prayer to our lord Jobs.

Now the x86 grinder will put Macs through their paces, will it be a road apple or will they achieve insanely great with Intel inside? Apple is not known for timely integration of the latest tech in the Macs. Some will blame IBM for this but Apple has done some stupid things with its tech that no one could claim as great. We shall see if Intel gets blamed as the bottleneck to market this time. Also note that Intel desktop 64bit roadmap is behind both AMD and IBM and it remains to be seen how their future chips will stack up against future releases from competitors. Apple has switched to the current looser in the 64bit desktop market and may still be playing catch up unless Intel somehow pulls ahead. I still can't understand how anyone would think that businesses or consumers would consider switching when there is still an absence of a compelling reason to do so. Apple has refused to Show anyone their product roadmap for Intel inside. I believe Jobs is worried about how the media will react to it. The roadmap is probably has some glaring risks and may not be all that well thought out. But now everyone is going to be jumping on the media event of the first x86 Macs. Apple will be compared with every PC manufacturer in the world for performance, and competitors will be jumping all over each other to prove they are better. I just don't see Apple as having the philosophy or market position to easily prevail. They may just stick with their niche buyers until they see an opportunity. Either way it will be exciting to watch what I would describe as the best tech drama yet for the 21st century.

Re:MS better watch their back

[IntergalacticWalrus]

So basically you're saying people should buy a second computer (and keep the other one around) just so they can use OS X, and wonder why they don't do it?

Here's your high cost of entry.

Re:MS better watch their back

[ratatask]

But not legally, and apple will not make it available for generic PCs.
You will still need apple hardware, the difference is it'll have an Intel processor.

Actions such as these hacks will likely make apple incorporate much more copy protection and drm as the final release rolls. Maybe someone hacks that as well, we will see.

Re:MS better watch their back

[Mirlas]

Keep in mind that, to be fair, you now have to add the cost of the dedicated game machine to the cost of the Mac, since you now have two machines doing the job that was done by one Windows-based PC. In addition, if the games one want's to play are only available on a Windows-based PC, then you essentially have two computers.

Re:MS better watch their back

[legLess]

However, I have switched many of my friends to Apple, making sure they knew how difficult it would be to unlearn what they already thought about computers. Most of them don't get very far in learning.

This is idiotic. You're a piss-poor teacher if you pre-scare students with "Now, this is going to be really hard, and most people I know don't make it very far, and you're going to end up disappointed."

I've helped a number of people switch. I spend about an hour with them, showing them the basics, and leave them alone. My mom was more productive within a week of using her Mac than after years on Windows. Ditto my wife, who still uses Windows full-time at work.

Funny thing, though -- I tell them the exact opposite of what you do. Instead of trying to scare them and lower their expectations, I tell them to trust the computer. I tell them that the entire machine, from the solder to the software, was designed by smart people for the purpose of making their lives easier. If you don't understand something, try it and see what happens, I say.

It works really well. Macs are easier to use, period, hands-down, no rational argument. People are really smart, for the most part, and quickly get used to new things if they're motivated and interested. No surprise that the people you try to terrify don't do so well.

Re:MS better watch their back

[eyeye]

The price argument has been gone for a few years now skippy.
These prices are competitive.

Bollocks, Try comparing like for like fanboy e.g

I have tried and tried to buy one of those 399.00 - 500.00 WinTel boxen just for a few tasks and games but it's not doable. Those boxes SUCK!!! Once you add the 300.00 video card the price goes up!

Do $399-$500 apple computers contain the equivalent of a $300 graphics card?

Finally "CPU" doesn't mean what you seem to think it does.

Re:MS better watch their back

[pauljlucas]

If you play games, say, 20% of the time on your computer, then you're putting up with crappy Windows 80% (!) of the time. That just makes no sense to me.

Re:MS better watch their back

[TheOtherAgentM]

Perhaps I should have been more clear. I am not switching them. Most of the time my friends come to me, telling me they want to try Apple. My only advice is that they have to try hard or they're not going to get the full effect. I don't have the time to teach them. I agree that Macs are easier to use, but unlearning is frustrating when you are so ingrained that things work one way. That was my only point.

Re:MS better watch their back

[Orkie]

With any luck, those people who have got some games won't be disappointed - now Apple is on x86, what is stopping them creating a WINE-like program (or better still, just helping WINE)?

Re:MS better watch their back

[Orkie]

It is a pain to keep switching between OSs. Regardless of how bad Windows may be, it is still an inconvenience to reboot just to play a game. And anyway, Windows isn't so bad (read the whole thing before you moan) if you use it correctly. In fact, Windows XP is so modular that you can rip out all of the rubbish (from IE to explorer) and replace it with whatever you choose - as I have done. The result is that Windows is fairly safe from all kinds of attacks, doesn't crash so often and is very quick to boot up (24 seconds for me on an Athlon XP 3000+ with 512bm RAM - 20 seconds of which is the POST screen, 5 seconds of that is the stupid nVidia thing as the beginning).

Re:MS better watch their back

[databyss]

What do you think this is?!? Some sort of common grounds where people can openly share their experiences and have logical discussions on various topics!?!?

This is /.!

How dare you say something where your words could get misinterpreted and twisted in an anti-mac way!

SHAME ON YOU HEATHEN!

Re:MS better watch their back

[DogDude]

You can buy a Mac Mini for $499. So... what high cost of entry?

Actually, I just got a nice thrift shop machine for $50 that has specs almost identical than the Mac Mini, and I don't have to run out to buy a fancy USB keyboard, USB mouse, an expensive monitor with that newer plug, and all new software. Oh yeah, and Windows 2000 still outperforms OSX by a mile on similar hardware. The basic Mac Mini would have to cost $200 for me to be willing to try it.

Re:MS better watch their back

[elmegil]

"dedicated gaming machine" == CONSOLE. Or aren't you paying attention to the way the market's going?

Re:MS better watch their back

[Krach42]

Yeah, Windows is so much better to use. Like, when I openned up Outlook and wanted to search for some information. I hit CTRL-F (Find in every other application) and guess what? THAT'S NOT IT.

I stumble around the menus until I find "Find..." and guess what? It's CTRL-E, completely dissimilar to every other application. It's not even in the same MENU location as everywhere else.

What makes Macs superior to me is that once you learn where and how things work, everything works that same way. You don't have to learn anything wonky, you just have to learn it once. When I learned that CMD-F is find, and that it's find for all applications, that's easy.

Not like beating my head against windows everyday just to try and be productive.

BTW, yes, someone can write an app where Find were not in the correct Menu location, or have the shortcut CMD-F... AND PEOPLE WOULD COMPLAIN. Because in the Mac world, if an app doesn't conform to the UI standards, it's ANNOYING.

Like in the Army, we had 60 guys all marching together. The one who's out of step (usually me) is WAY easy to pick out, because he's the only one out of 60 doing it wrong. If you have 60 people all marching out of step (Windows world) then you can't notice that every application is doing something different.

*** Views expressed are mine, and do not reflect Microsoft's opinions.

Re:MS better watch their back

[riversky]

The biggest cost is not the hardware but buying all new PowerPC versions of software....With OSX on Intel you could run all the Windows/Linux software right on the box that you invested in. The total cost goes down.... I'd love to run Mac OS X on any machine!

Re:MS better watch their back

[teamhasnoi]

However, I have switched many of my friends to Apple, making sure they knew how difficult it would be to unlearn what they already thought about computers. Most of them don't get very far in learning.

Do these friends ride the short bus to school by chance?

It is impossible to fathom how someone smart enough to become 'productive' on Windows couldn't manage to make the great leap of logic to a consistent hardware/software solution.

Of course, your friends could be chimps or Jack Russel Terriers, in which case congratulations are in order! I can't even get my dog to shake, much less use Powerpoint.

Re:MS better watch their back

[IntergalacticWalrus]

I'm tired of hearing this. Listen clearly: A CONSOLE DOES NOT REPLACE A PC FOR GAMING.

There are many types of games that can't be properly implemented on a console, just as there are other types that would do poorly on a PC.

PCs and consoles are two very different beasts, with different input interfaces, different screens, different capabilities. Please stop saying PCs are obsolete for gaming, it's not true and will most likely never be.

Re:MS better watch their back

[thelexx]

You are seriously arguing that ease of use, not price or availability of apps, is the main barrier to increased sales for Apple? If so, you are a moron. The moroniest moron who ever moroned in fact.

Re:MS better watch their back

[elmegil]

Please stop saying PCs are obsolete for gaming

Please try not to put words in my mouth.

For Joe Sixpack & Jane Plentybutt a console and a mac are ALL THEY NEED. Just because you and I are geeks who like to fiddle with our hardware doesn't mean we come anywhere near the markets that we're talking about.

PC's are great for gaming, and I'd never give mine up. But to say you HAVE TO HAVE two machines, a PC and a mac, is ludicrous because no one HAS to do any of this. And if you WANT primarily to surf, do email, manage your photos, maybe burn some DVDs, all you need is the mac, and all you need is a CHEAP mac at that. If someone wants hardcore gaming, and don't want to have a second PC, they'll go buy a console. DUH.

Re:MS better watch their back

[dfghjk]

"It works really well. Macs are easier to use, period, hands-down, no rational argument. People are really smart, for the most part, and quickly get used to new things if they're motivated and interested. No surprise that the people you try to terrify don't do so well."

What a well thought out paragraph that is! I agree with the "no rational argument" comment as long as it was applying to yours. Apparently you believe that macs are easier to use for really smart people who are motivated and interested. What isn't easy for those people?

Re:MS better watch their back

[legLess]

Apparently you believe that macs are easier to use for really smart people who are motivated and interested.

I'm not sure why you say that, since it's neither stated nor implied by my text. I said several things:

1. Macs are easier to use.
2. Most people are pretty smart.
3. Most people quickly get used to things if they're motivated and interested.

The fact that these points are close together does not imply correlation, or causation. If you want to take issue with one of those points, go ahead. As it is, you're just flailing around. Perhaps you should read a little more carefully.

Re:MS better watch their back

[legLess]

My only advice is that they have to try hard or they're not going to get the full effect.

Seems like solid advice in any area. IMHO, though, OS X pays back your effort much faster than Windows.

unlearning is frustrating when you are so ingrained that things work one way. That was my only point.

Well taken. Even after a couple years on OS X, I find Photoshop frustrating, compared with the Windows version. It's more Adobe's problem than Apple's, but still.

Re:MS better watch their back

[elemental23]

Better than that, every single copy of OS X out there comes not only with gcc, but with Apple's full development suite.

Re:MS better watch their back

[jcr]

The largest barrier for adoption of OSX has been the high cost of entry (ie buying Mac hardware).

I disagree. I'd say that the biggest barrier is legacy apps that customers need to use, and the second biggest barrier is sheer intertia. I'd put cost third.

-jcr

Re:MS better watch their back

[Macgrrl]

However, I have switched many of my friends to Apple, making sure they knew how difficult it would be to unlearn what they already thought about computers. Most of them don't get very far in learning. That may be okay in a lot of cases, but if you are someone that has to be productive and you've learned to do things certain ways, switching is going to make Apple seem real inferior. Switching is not as easy as it appears.

Umm... there will always be people who decide something is too hard to learn - computers are complex, Macs are too difficult...

I 'switch' on a daily basis - Wintel @ work, MacOSX @ home. The biggest problem I have is remembering which set of keyboard shortcuts to use, and that my mouse at work doesn't have a scroll wheel.

Most basic activities on both platforms are done the same - deleted files go to the trash/recycle bin, files are kept in folders, you launch applications by clicking on them or an associated file, etc... The hardware is in essence the same. Are you sure YOU haven't convinced them it's too hard?

Apple be lawyer'n

[EvilMonkeySlayer]

Apple cease and desist in 3.. 2.. 1..

Re:Apple be lawyer'n

[TheRaven64]

Why? Look how much Microsoft benefits from piracy - Apple would be insane not to want a slice of that pie. All of the people who would not buy Macs anyway can pirate OS X, decide they like it, and increase Apple mindshare. Corporate buyers (where the real money is) will have no choice but to use a legal version.

Hardware Hack Required!

[FlameTroll]

Ya have to duct tape the mouse buttons together...

Re:Hardware Hack Required!

[Epistax]

That's much easier! Here I was, chopping off people's middle fingers...

Re:Hardware Hack Required!

[bad_outlook]

I just spit out my drink...nice one! Don't forget to also assume a condesending tone towards Windows 'lusers'!

Re:Hardware Hack Required!

[kristopher]

That's even easier than what I was doing. I was out in the woods chopping off bear claws.

They think they might be able to reattach my left arm..

Re:Hardware Hack Required!

[Nahor]

You mean you don't set your mouse control to left handed? I mean, if you did, then wouldn't "left-click" be the right mouse button controlled by your index finger and "right-click" be the left mouse button controlled by your middle finger? If not, what's the left-handed mouse setting for?

I have no idea what it's for, I never used it.
At first, IIRC, that option didn't exist. Later, when the option was created, since I was sharing the computer with a bunch of right-handed people, I would have had to modify the autoexec.bat each time I booted. Only later was there a menu in autoexec to make it simple.
But then with Windows and its on computer/one account, it required to go to the control panel, mouse,... . Way too complicated, especially since the buttons are reversed!!
Now days it is usable thanks to the one account per user.
Except that it's way too late, I already learned to use my middle finger. Which is not bad anyway since sometimes I use someone else's computer.

(And I use my mouse on the left because that change has always been and still is easy to do)

Re:Hardware Hack Required!

[Nahor]

lol, all lefties should be shot. what a terrible deformity.

You're just jealous. It is well known that we are more intelligent because the right-side of our brain is more developped ;)

Re:Hardware Hack Required!

[UserGoogol]

Do not question Nahor's superior southpaw spelling.

For the love of all that is holy..

[Anonymous Coward]

..please never, ever use Dvorak and Prophecy in the same phrase again.

Re:For the love of all that is holy..

[pixelated77]

Come on! This was the guy that in years past thought that

a) Microsoft would ship a hard drive full of MS Software (you have to go waaaaay back, when PCMag was still a thick magazine)
b) Email would become as slow as snail-mail
c) That the Internet would die a fiery death at least a half-dozen times

His wisdom is peerless and his insights bordering on omiscient.

Re:For the love of all that is holy..

[twocents]

Agreed! And I would add that even quoting Dvorak should be kept to a bare minimum.

Dvorak prophecy?

[Z0mb1eman]

Oh c'mon.

There are only two possible paths for Apple: continue to keep their OS working only on their hardware, or making it also work on x86.

I'm sure everyone who knows what a Mac is has speculated at one point or another what would happen if Apple made their OS work on x86 hardware, and whether they would, and why they would take that decision. Calling it the Dvorak prophecy seems way too pretentious.

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[Lactoso]

Z0mb1eman pecked - "Calling it the Dvorak prophecy seems way too pretentious."

Dvorak, pretentious = redundant

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[ninjakoala]

I bet the real reason why it even took so long, was because it bothered Apple so much that Dvorak would be right for a change.

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[Schlemphfer]

Not to attack or defend Dvorak's point of view on this subject, but the specifics of today's development match phase one of his "prophecy." That is, in his August 8 PC-Mag Article, Dvorak asserts that Apple is putting OSX for Intel out there knowing and expecting and intending for it to be cracked. This would be a way to slowly build up the user base of OSX users on white box systems, and getting them to a point where they are ready to abandon Windows. And the advantage of this strategy is that it Apple can play along acting as if they really aren't trying to compete with Windows, and in so doing perhaps not wake the sleeping giant in Redmond until it's too late.

I don't agree or disagree with Dvorak's column. I personally think Apple sees its long-term revenue in hardware. Regardless of whether Dvorak is guessing correctly here, phase one of his prophecy has now come to pass. Now, over the next few months, we'll see if Apple responds the way Dvorak predicts, and see whether his prophecy comes true. I personally doubt it, but we'll see.

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[Guy Harris]

There are only two possible paths for Apple: continue to keep their OS working only on their hardware, or making it also work on x86.

Presumably by "x86" you mean "generic x86-based personal computers", as it already works on Apple's x86-based developer systems (and will presumably work on future Apple x86-based Macs).

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[fbg111]

Calling it the Dvorak prophecy seems way too pretentious.

Just another flamebait troll in a /. article designed to up the comment count. Nothing to see here, move along please. ;)

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[dangitman]

Sure, but isn't "The Dvorak Prophecy" a great name for a band? Especially one that uses Powerbooks with Logic for their live performances. I think I'll have to start that band.

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[Golias]

The biggest problem with this theory is that it would require the very smart people at Microsoft to fail to notice a conspiracy against them which even Dvorak was able to see coming.

Given how paranoid they are in Redmond, you would have to have a pretty high opinion of yourself to think you are more clued-in than the execs at Microsoft. (Yes, I'm also looking in your direction, Robert X. Cringely...)

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[Guy Harris]

Sure, but isn't "The Dvorak Prophecy" a great name for a band?

Is that you, Dave?

Actually, I think it sounds more like a cheesy thriller.

Re:Dvorak prophecy?

[eshefer]

they would use these as midi controllers, natrully.

Err..

[pickyouupatnine]

Mac OS will only run on non-Mac hardware if there's drivers available for that non-Mac hardware. If say.. nVidia decides not to make a driver for their latest PC Card to run on MacOS.. then you're screwed. I'd rather stick to Linux (cuz methinks it would have better support than Mac OS running on non-Mac approved hardware).

Re:Err..

[randomErr]

Umm... boot it into an emulator that has generic drivers?

Re:Err..

[jagilbertvt]

Yes and no.. The source for Darwin x86 is readily available and it is based on BSD. As such, most BSD drivers will probably work with little or no changes.

Re:Err..

[IntergalacticWalrus]

XNU (the kernel inside Darwin and OS X) is not BSD. It includes some FreeBSD components, but the driver architecture is completely different. So no, it won't "work with little or no changes".

Re:Err..

[yellowbkpk]

Indeed, most of the people running this either have Intel chipsets to run it natively (one person posted some screenshots from their computer that was running a VIA chipset) or are emulating a generic chipset (via VMware).

Audio device support has been spotty (according to reports in the forums, but someone hooked up a Sony USB audio card and it worked flawlessly), along with NIC supprt (it seems 3Com and Intel chips are supported natively) and hardware GUI acceleration.

All of this is from the posts on the forums.

Re:Err..

[jagilbertvt]

Thanks for the correction! I figured someone would prove me wrong.

Re:Err..

[IntergalacticWalrus]

No, they're not. XNU's driver structure is in IOKit, an embedded-C++ driver hierarchy made by Apple that is nothing like FreeBSD has.

That's all good and well...

[TheOtherAgentM]

That works fine until one of Apple's security patches screws things up for those users. The one reason I like Apple is because they can control their hardware market. Lots of times when I did Windows Updates, the patches would be incompatible just because of driver and hardware issues. I know people that still can't installed Service Pack 2 on XP, because of their video cards. I prefer to stick with the hardware Apple is going to sell.

Re:That's all good and well...

[Yahweh Doesn't Exist]

I'm still too scared to touch anything in the "hardware" section of Windows Update after a driver update for my NIC somehow destroyed all OS networking capabilty.

even if Apple hardware wasn't required for OS X, I'd buy it anyway. I love the look and functionality of my iBook.

Re:That's all good and well...

[zoomzit]

With Apple controlling their hardware market, you are stuck with whatever they decide to ship you. You have no options.

But, on my x86, I can choose any ATI Card or Nvidia card and I most certainly will not have XP update issues.

Apple "controlling" their hardware market is unfortunately limiting your choices for no good reason.

Re:That's all good and well...

[Sloppy]

The one reason I like Apple is because they can control their hardware market.

It disappoints me that people think hardware is such a big deal, as though it's hard for people who know what they're doing and have specs, to write perfectly reliable and non-flakey drivers.

One of the neat things about the old 68k MacOS (pre X) is that it was actually awefully portable. I ran MacOS 7.5.5 on my Amiga for years, using a Mac emulator on the Amiga side, which was really just a bunch of drivers that translated MacOS calls into Amiga OS calls. This was very much non-Apple hardware, but it worked just fine. Why? Because writing drivers that don't crash isn't really that big a deal.

Lots of times when I did Windows Updates, the patches would be incompatible just because of driver and hardware issues. I know people that still can't installed Service Pack 2 on XP, because of their video cards.

You can't take a Windows situation and project it onto the real world. Windows is not normal.

The people who have trouble with Windows and think that Windows' problems are due to it having to support a wide variety of hardware, are wrong. The real reason Window sucks, is that Microsoft doesn't give a fuck. Why should they bother to make anyone's machines reliable, when they're already guaranteed a sale thanks to the preload deal? Windows has driver and update problems simply because there is no market force to prevent it.

As long as people who run MacOS on generic hardware actually choose to buy MacOS instead of getting it as a preload, they are not going to have problems. Because if it doesn't work, word will get out and no one is going to buy it. That is fundamentally different than the Windows situation where people buy Windows whether they want to or not and whether it's reliable or not.

Re:That's all good and well...

[tholomyes]

You have no options.

That's odd, because on the Apple Store, it sure looks like you can choose either an ATI Radeon 9600, 9650, x850 XT, or Nvidia GeForce 6800 when you order your PowerMac.

And while that may be "limiting" the options, I would certainly not say you have "no" options. Maybe if you choose a Mac Mini you have no video card options, but, OTOH, you're choosing the Mac Mini.

Re:That's all good and well...

[ferat]

You've clearly never used MacOSX.

Re:That's all good and well...

[Frank Palermo]

Well, remember the articles only refer to hacking the special build of OS X 10.4.1 provided with the Developer Transition Kits to run on generic PC hardware. This isn't a shipping or release version of Mac OS X, just a developer testing tool. Apple makes it crystal clear in the Terms & Conditions you have to agree to in order to get a kit that they are not obligated to provide software updates for them (or much other tech support for that matter, which is one of the reasons I didn't bother ordering one of the kits even though I'm an ADC member [the other being that, as the few software projects I release publicly are all freeware or F/OSS stuff, paying $999 to rent the thing is a bit of a non-starter for me]).

Back to my main point... if by "those users," you mean the group of people running this build of OS X on PCs right now... I don't think they need to worry about a security patch from Apple screwing things up, because even registered developers aren't getting updates for this release of OS X from what I understand. I assume one big reason for that is just what we're discussing here... leaked releases. Apple surely knew it was only a matter of time before somebody got the developer OS X for Intel running on generic PCs, so they want to "reduce the shelf life," if you will, of this OS as much as possible. If they don't release any security patches or other updates... well that helps to limit the period for which the OS is useful to anyone (keeping in mind all developers are going to have to return their test systems and buy production Intel Macs by the end of next year anyway).

As for the bigger question (i.e. if/when the retail/supported & updated OS X for Intel is hacked and run on generic PCs), I suspect Apple will make it a real minefield for unauthorized users trying to get patches. Unfortunately that could also leave room for a flaw in their validation checks to frustrate users of genuine Apple hardware, but we'll just have to see how that one pans out.

-Frank

Re:That's all good and well...

[zoomzit]

I stand corrected. 4 video card options for one system (power mac) and a single option for a second (Mac Mini). Compared to x86, that is pathetic.

The point of my original comment was that someone with XP will not have driver issues if they stay within mainstream hardware providers. In the x86 world, products from mainstream providers are very plentiful.

Ultimately the driver issues for XP are overblown and even if XP users have to limit their options to Nvidia and ATI, they still have many more options than their Apple counterparts.

Re:That's all good and well...

[tholomyes]

I agree that the XP video driver issues are overblown. It will be interesting to see what happens with Apple's x86 machines in this regard; I hope that the Mac gets broader options for video, and I hope that the driver issue is a non-issue.

It seems to be a question, and not just for video, of whether you'd rather have fewer options and greater compatibility (Mac) or a lot of options and questionable compatibility (Linux), with Windows in the middle of that spectrum, which is certainly a part of the broad appeal of Windows.

Re:That's all good and well...

[Sloppy]

Darn, I knew this day would come: AC finally caught me red-handed. He saw my hidden hippie message: that quality needs a free market.

Re:That's all good and well...

[GaryPatterson]

You make the common error of stating that Apple are controlling the hardware of third party providers.

As far as I'm aware, Apple have not stopped ATi or nVidia bringing out any card they like. The interface is standard and open.

The truth is that ATi and nVidia themselves limit what cards they sell on the Mac platform. They do this because they see the platform as not viable for their full range, but viable for a subset.

Are there fewer options for Mac GPUs? Yes.
Is this Apple's fault? Not unless they make the decisions for ATi and nVidia.

The one point you can score here is in Apple's BTO options. There are even several choices there. Certainly not zero.

Re:That's all good and well...

[ruiner13]

"Apple "controlling" their hardware market is unfortunately limiting your choices for no good reason."

You've never had a problem with Windows not detecting a video card. When you control what hardware is made, you ensure the drivers work as advertised, right out of the box. Apple really does a good job with plug and play, and it isn't by accident.

Re:That's all good and well...

[Bert64]

The mac emulators on the Amiga were more virtualizers than emulators, the processor was the same, the amiga generally had a lot of additional hardware which the mac did not, and the emulator generally really did emulate the videocards and io interfaces that a mac would expect to have..
Interestingly, the emulated mac tended to be about 5% faster than a real mac with the same cpu.. the amiga hardware was generally better designed performance wise.

Re:That's all good and well...

[SJ]

Correction, you can choose any ATI Card or Nvidia card that has XP drivers written for it.

Likewise, you can choose any ATI card or Nvidia card that has Mac OS X driver written for it. There is an important distinction that you cleverly avoided.

Intentional or Unintentional?

[Profcrab]

A leaked, cracked version of that OS could quickly become a favorite for non-gaming computers. I have to wonder if this was an intentional leak or not. I dont know if it will supplant 3.11 as the most pirated OS ever, but it will be up there. This could be a market test for Apple to see if the demand is there to sell their OS to the non-Apple hardware crowd.

Re:Intentional or Unintentional?

[BrookHarty]

OSX reminds me of the Amiga, some people never got under the desktop, they just loaded games, and used a word processor. They didnt know a thing about the filesystem, librarys, or anything other than "click the icon to load the application".

But if you open a terminal, you have scripting languages, and extremly functional OS to do anything you want. Add some opensource compilers and applications and you can do almost anything.

As for OSX for free, even if pirated, companies will run OSX servers and pay for support. Apple sells lots of software for the desktop, the revenue that Apple can make after switching to Intel is going to be amazing. If some guy puts a pirated copy of OSX on his intel box, and buys 1 apple software, thats a sale that would have never happened. Later that person will buy an OSX box, with a legit software and hardware. Its worked for Microsoft, it will work for Apple.

Dvorak just playing the odds

[Gothmolly]

Eventually he'll be right, and perhaps, once, before he dies, he'll actually have something insightful to say.

No more.

[ipapusha]

And the OSX86 project is no more, courtesy of your local slashdot.

Key + Lock

[Nom du Keyboard]

Here is the key (OS-X86)
Here is the lock (Dell)
Take as long as you want with them.

YOU DID WHAT?!?!?!

Re:Key + Lock

[peculiarmethod]

I'm gonna waste some karma to support my fellow slashy (shock, horror! commradery on here??).. that was damn funny. give him at least one point.. it's not like he's in the 800Ks of UIDs, anyway.

Re:Key + Lock

[leenks]

What does his UID have to do with anything? I've been reading Slashdot since sometime in 1998, but only registered today. Does the fact that I have a high UID make me a n00b or something?

Re:Key + Lock

[Vorx]

Yes

Re:Key + Lock

[kin_korn_karn]

eh, it's ok. I got a +5 funny for the same joke yesterday, you can't win 'em all :)

everybody, lower your heart rate. except me.

[captnitro]

FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY, SWEET FUCKING CHRIST!!

Can we postpone these stories until the production runs of both the boxes and OS X comes out? Please? All these stories in the past few weeks have read like the following and have steadily decreased in poster IQ:

Apple: Wild speculation abounds on developer-only releases of software, hardware OMGWTF

Apple: Apple may/may not use DRM, based on developer-only releases of software and hardware OMGWTF!!!1

Apple: Teh interface is pretyOMGWTF!!!!!11eleventyone
Anonymous Coward writes: i am LOVE MY MACCY from BITTTORRRENT!!! I kissed it becos it tastES LIKE CANDY!!

Calm down, people. I'm not saying these things will or won't come to pass, but everybody assuming that a developer-only release will be anything like its comparable production release -- not to mention one that won't be available for a year -- is silly.

Disclaimer: Mac user at home.

Re:everybody, lower your heart rate. except me.

[Elwood P Dowd]

Calm down, people.

Iduno, man. I read the post, and I browsed the older comments at -1, and I really don't see too many people going batshit fucking loco. Just you.

So relax.

Disclaimer: I just switched to Windows at home. It's the bomb.

Article already slashdotted

[Penguinoflight]

Here's the link to the article:
http://slashcache.com/stories/8e3fd00a12869f50e7ec c0512672bf76/index.html
and here's a torrent for the x86 dev kit:
http://torrentspy.com/search.asp?mode=torrentdetai ls&id=369442&query=OS+

torrents...anyone?

[bogaboga]

Where can one grab the Mac OSX torrents? I need to try this out.

Re:torrents...anyone?

[smartin]

There is a torrent file called something like "Vware patched files", has anyone tried this? Is it straight forward or does it require the compicated steps involving installing darwin?

So what!

[Goth Biker Babe]

People like Mercedes, BMW, Volvo etc sell cars at a premium because they are good quality and have nice design. In fact I bought an older Volvo precisely for that reason. It was a quality vehicle with the luxury and safety I would expect from the manufacturer. Apple is the same. Yes, may be you could run OS-X on a cheap clone PC, or one made of bits, but I bought Apple after years of such machines, because I wanted a quality machine with nice design and nice construction. Anyone who thinks this will hurt Apple's sales to a great extent is sadly mistaken.

Re:So what!

[It doesn't come easy]

I agree. People buy Apple because they want lots of good things, one of which is seamless operation, another top of the line hardware. People who steal the OS likely wouldn't fork over the cost of buying Apple hardware anyway, so the theft will NOT hurt Apple's bottom line while it MAY help Apple advertise their system. Given enough pirating, it is conceivable that Apple could eventually switch to selling the OS separately for cheap and have an immediate and significant boost to their market share. Hopefully, we'll get some real numbers in the next 24 months instead of all of this speculation...

Re:So what!

[ducttapekz]

Actually I think they just want a few great things. Windows offers lots of good things (More than any user uses). Mac has about 25% of the offerings (fewer hardware and software choices) but they are better than most PC offerings.

Re:So what!

[MrRage]

What if I want to run OS X on a non-"cheap clone PC", i.e. a quality assembled PC? Not everyone buys a PC from Walmart.

Re:So what!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice try.

How about putting it this way: People like Mercedes, BMW, Volvo etc sell cars at a premium because they are good quality and have nice design...Apple, on the other hand, has nice design but generally slower hardware, for a higher price than a more capable machine with similar (or higher) specifications. In addition, the "quality" of their hardware has been less than sound over the years (numerous problems with their laptop series, including some recalls; iPod battery mess and so on).

Your analogy is ridiculous. It's like saying you'd buy a BMW even if it had a lawnmower motor in it, just because it looked nice. Maybe that works if you're vain and arrogant.

Re:So what!

[ratboy666]

Apple build quality hardware?

Is this what you are saying?

The biggest marketing 180 ever done -- Apple goes from CRAP hardware to PREMIUM hardware.

The company that was too cheap to put interrupts and DMA in their systems, and then had the gall to brag about it.

The company that delights in sealed up cases, and consumer lock-in, on really bad hardware (I have purchased "Macs" with unshielded SCSI cables straight from Apple -- and of COURSE they didn't work).

The company that abandons users (hey, I was dumb enough to buy a Newton).

So sure, let the "fanbois" and "fangrrls" have at it.

Ratboy

Re:So what!

[It doesn't come easy]

I used to use Macs exclusively (actually, I used to be a Mac technician back in the 80's and early 90's -- before Mac OS X). I always found that people would argue that the Mac didn't have nearly as much software available for it, even though it had all of the major software packages. However, there was one major lack (the thing I think really made the difference) in that there were almost no popular games available, or they were always very late in being released. As I said when Apple first announced Mac-on-Intel, if it becomes a trivial issue to publish software for both Mac and Windows at the same time (especially games), Windows is in real trouble. Here's hoping :).

Re:So what!

[BobNFloyd]

Your statement is patently false. It's also an example of marketing and poor analogies. I am a reliablity engineer, I'm sorry to tell you that a Mercedes, BMW, and Volvo are not considered quality cars. The old example is the one where someone asks, which car is of higher quality, the Tercel or a S class Mercedes. The answer is the Tercel. 1) Lower Parts count, 2) decreased complexity 3) Less assembly 4) higher volume 5) Toyota has higher quality manufacturing plant 6) higher reliablity. The Mercedes has nicer parts, but the quality and reliability of the Tercel is greater. Everybody always makes this analogy and it's always wrong. If you want to compare the Mac to a high end car, you have to understand that you are comparing a car that is not as high in quality or reliablity. The Tercel will on average, get you from point a to point b much more often, at lower cost, and less hassle. If want a car that has lots of maintenance issues, breaks down often, but looks nice doing it... get a Mac... I mean Mercedes.

Re:So what!

[e40]

I own a MB E420 ('97) and you are definitely the troll. Yes, it's a nice car. Yes, it drives nice. However, it breaks a lot, and when it breaks it is very expensive to fix. My Dad owned an E55. It was in the shop more than not. They (MB USA) even flew an engineer/mechanic in to fix some of the problems. He finally go so sick of the unsolved problems (exessive tire wear), which MB could not fix, he traded it in for a Lexus, which has never had one single problem since he got it (2 years ago).

I think the horrible build quality is a recent thing (of the last 8 years).

Also, grandparent is 100%: people buy these cards for the prestige. I hope to cash in on this when I sell mine.

Re:So what!

[uberotto]

Ford now owns Volvo,
Chrysler owns Mercedes
So should we expect to that soon we will be buying Gateway Apples, Dell Apples or HP Apples?

Re:So what!

[Goth Biker Babe]

Ford now owns Volvo

Which is why I wont be buying one of the latest models. They no longer do rear wheel drive, I will have to pay more for AWD, and Volvo had to fight to prevent the latest models become just reskinned Mondeos and Focuses. Nah, I'm looking at a BMW 5 series estate next.

Re:So what!

[Goth Biker Babe]

I think MBs quality control has fallen quite a bit in recent years. Dad's one (1980s 200 series) was driven for six years without ever requiring anything more than a service.

Re:So what!

[Goth Biker Babe]

Okay, I can understand about Mercedes. They have been going down hill but all the Volvos our family has ever had have been ultra-reliable work horses. The problem with all the Toyotas I have ever driven (BTW the Tercel is a US model) is that they are reliable, good value for money and completely soulless. The exceptions being their sports cars which are expensive and as unreliable as everyone else's.

Your comment is interesting. The best selling marque in the UK is Ford, because taking in to account, price, construction, quality etc (just as you do), they give the best package for the average family at a price they can afford.

But not everyone is like that. Some of us enjoy driving, only need room for our dog, and want a car that has soul. That's why I've always had slightly oddball cars. My current car is a compact Volvo you didn't get in the US (not the 'sports' car) with a sporty engine and lowered and stiffened suspension. It's great to drive around the winding roads of Yorkshire (where I live) and to cruise on the motorway near three figures. When I upgrade it will be to the Volvo T5 (the one used in saloon car racing) or a BMW 5 series sports wagon. The day I have to get something run of the mill will be the day I sell my car.

I want my computing to be similar. Rather than a 'Ford' I want something a little different and it would be very sad if we all ended up using soulless PCs.

Re:So what!

[Mistah Blue]

Chrysler owns Mercedes

Wrong! Daimler-Benz (which owns Mercedes Benz) bought Chrysler to create DaimlerChrysler. The previous CEO of the Chrysler division was a Daimler-Benz guy who has been tapped to be CEO of the parent corporation, DaimlerChrysler.

Re:So what!

[justins]

Anyone who thinks this will hurt Apple's sales to a great extent is sadly mistaken.

Anyone like... Apple? They are putting a lot of money into DRM to keep this from happening.

Re:So what!

[AugstWest]

Hell, the only reason I gave up on Mac was when the power supply went on my Mac Plus, and it was $300 to replace it. Then it went again 6 months later, and I went x86.

It isn't the quality of the hardware, it's the known platform that they have to support.

Fewer drivers == easier to QA. It's that simple.

Re:So what!

[KillShill]

the difference is that porsches, ferraris, bmws, and benz's are actually hardware the is significantly different than ford pintos and yugos.

apple just sells the same hardware plus a 20-50% "value added tax" on top.

i recently compared the price of a top of the line powerbook to a mid-low range amd64 notebook. the amd notebook had 1gig of ram, 100GB HD, 15.4 inch widescreen high res lcd, 2ghz 1mb cache cpu. the powerbook at a 1.54ghz g4, 256MB ram, 40GB HD, 12inch low res lcd. notice if you can that the reason the powerbook is top of the line is because of the fastest available g4 cpu (which btw, is significantly slower than the amd cpu).

the powerbook cost 1499 (read 1500 if you're not propogandized by sleazy marketers) and the amd notebook was 1000.

if you think that isn't an insane markup, then i have a structure carrying a pathway or roadway over a depression or obstacle to sell you.

apple hardware is so overpriced, it's scandalous.

apple sells overpriced hw, microsoft sells overpriced sw.

ultimately, the world will benefit when FREE (libra) takes over hw and sw. computers are commodoties and should be treated that way.

Re:So what!

[agraupe]

Hmmm... how interesting. I never really said anything about MB, so it's entirely possible (even likely) that MB is mostly a prestige brand. BMW, however, is a performance brand. Oddly enough, by dad's SLK hasn't been in the shop for anything except routine maintainance (oil changes and the like), so I suppose it's possible that some people are just unlucky with their cars.

Re:So what!

[e40]

You replied to someone that named MB and BMW, and you called him a troll.

Secondly, get yourself the latest car issue of Consumer Reports. Look at the repair rating for MB. It's the worst possible rating you can have. I'd say your Dad's SLK is one of the rare ones. In the same issue, you'll see that BMW, while it has a better repair history than MB, still sucks.

Re:So what!

[e40]

I just checked the latest issue of CR. The 530i has the worst possible repair history rating... equal to the E320. There was a Jaguar in the same issue which also had the worst possible rating.

The original post is looking more correct all the time, wouldn't you say?

Re:So what!

[agraupe]

As did, I believe, the Ford F150 (if my memory is correct). My dad also owns one of these, which has gone completely without incident. Either he's incredibly lucky, or CR is full of shit. I lean toward the latter. Either way, my post was based upon my own personal experiences, which fly in the face of everything CR has to say.

Re:So what!

[agraupe]

Frankly, I don't give two shits what CR says, because both my BMW and my Dad's MB are working fine, and have never needed any repair, other than when the SLK hit a ladder that dropped off a truck and was sitting in the middle of a highway. The BMW had precisely one incident, involving the drivetrain, that was fixed fully under warranty. Not a bad record, I'd say.

Re:So what!

[Harv]

How many BMW's have you seen with a lawnmower engine in them?

Okay?

[Blindman]

Is running Mac OS X within a virtual machine really that big a deal? If VMware properly simulated Mac hardware, then the operating system believed that it was running on Mac hardware. This is great for VMware, but this isn't the same thing as popping a CD in my x86 computer and installing Mac OS X.

Re:Okay?

[washley]

You can dd the vmware hard disk image over a real hard drive and run it natively. It runs really fast and supports a suprisingly large amount of hardware.

Re:Okay?

[Wesley Felter]

But VMware emulates a generic PC, not a Mactel. Thus if OS X runs on VMware, it's not far from running on a real generic PC.

Re:Okay?

[DarkSarin]

Maybe you got here late like me, but the article explicitly states that there are ways to install it natively to the hard drive and run it from boot. This is obviously not the the same as running the ppc version in vmware.

Re:This is 'news'?

[ZackSchil]

Actually, this story is pretty well-established: hard-to-fake handheld videos of systems cold-booting into OS X, screenshots, torrents, reports from all around that installation is tricky but it works...

It was speculation last week then there were a handful of sketchy screenshots taken in VMWare floating around. Now I'd say it's pretty much fact that it's working at some level.

Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[smileyscout]

This thread http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=937806&p age=1&pp=20 Has some interesting screenies about MacOSX 86 running natively on a laptop. Be sure to check it out.

Re:Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[LordKaT]

And if you go further into the thread, you can see that they're photoshopped.

Re:Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[smileyscout]

And if you put them into a hex editior and look for photoshp tags you wont find any.

Re:Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[che.kai-jei]

man you are a moron.

so osme guys says on the forum thet they are photoshop fakes little diffrent than you saying tey are ?

give me photshop watermarks or some file analsysis.

but just stop talking outta your ass, fool.

god im replying to an idiot on slashdot...

i have sunk this low?

Re:Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[djnes]

It really hasn't been photoshopped. We at the [H] had some people check the headers of the files. We also posted requests for images that were fulfilled. The images definitely are not Photshopped.

Re:Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[gardyloo]

I love the fact that that particular thread was slashdotted, got back up, and, then... EDIT Oh my Godz!! The wiki has been slashdotted into digital dust!

Re:Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[KillShill]

and if you go further than that, you can see they're digitally edited.

Re:Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[smileyscout]

And if you go further you can see the boot log I posted. Be sure to note that I came up with requested pics. On the first post look at the News Sites screenshots. I recieved a screenshot and a webcam photo of CNN.com. If I can really digitally edit that well then, damn, someone should hire me. :-P

Re:Hard OCP HardForum Thread

[KillShill]

hehe. you didn't understand my comment.

photoshopped = digitally edited without the disgusting marketing attached.

tissue vs kleenex.

paper copy vs xeroxed

i am anti-brand/ing.

Handy for testing on Safari

[edxwelch]

That would be handy if it worked. I could test web sites for Safari without having to buy a Mac.

Re:Handy for testing on Safari

[supun]

BTW, you can already test using pearpc, http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/ to emulate a PowerPC platform. It's kind of fragile.

Re:Handy for testing on Safari

[fsterman]

Or you could use any KHTML browser. Not perfect but very close.

Re:Handy for testing on Safari

[edxwelch]

Are you sure? I heard the branch happening such a long time ago, that the code of KHTML has changed radically from Safari

Re:There goes the neighbourhood

[richdun]

Nah, he's tried Mac OS X, but didn't like it, and frankly, Windows XP SP2 is better. (or something along those lines)

Re:Palladium?

[BobVila]

nope they just patched it to get around it.

Not the same thing...

[aardwolf64]

Pardon my ignorance, but isn't running OS X on an emulated PC using VMWare a totally different thing from actually installing it on the PC? Plus, weren't we told that the current dev kits didn't have the mac-only protection built into them yet?

Re:Not the same thing...

[robix_mevdev]

Yeah, that was dispelled right away. it has the chips.

why don't people listen. Who would've even spread that nonesense

Re:Not the same thing...

[LurkerXXX]

VMWare simply emulates a PC with totally vanilla hardware. If you can run it in VMWare, the chances are you are going to be able to run it on your hardware if you have vanilla hardware and not exotic or high-end stuff. It is totally different from running it on 'any' PC hardware.

The other thing is, pretty much any PC can run VMWare, which means if you buy a copy of VMWare, you can run MacOS at only a small performance hit.

Re:Not the same thing...

[LarsG]

What I would like to know, though, is what kind of graphics performance they get when running OSX in VMWare. The VMWare virtual SVGA device requires special drivers for good 2D performance, and I suppose we can just forget about 3D.

tiger server torrent

[Penguinoflight]

http://torrentspy.com/search.asp?mode=torrentdetai ls&id=286275&query=Mac+OS+

Check the comments below the post. Someone added a serial as there wasn't any serial in the release.

Please, never, ever ...

[ubrgeek]

... say, "fulfillment of the Dvorak prophecy." The last thing his ego needs is for /.'ers to agree with him ;)

Re:FP!

[DavidLeblond]

... which would be what the majority of Apple users run.

Re:Palladium?

[richdun]

Actually, if you read the write-up over at Tom's Hardware, you'll remember that Palladium was Microsoft's "Secure Coding" bit back in 2002 that was officially dropped in 2003. The Intel Trusted Platform is code-named "LaGrange". So yes, Palladium will not be in OS X for x86, though the hardware may make use of Intel's LaGrange technology. These guys just found a way around whatever protections are in the dev kit.

Who cares?

[spectrokid]

So a couple of nerds will run OSX -sortish- on non Apple hardware. Any non-apple approved component will cause more instability. To get the full experience, (and be legal!!!!) you will still need to cough up the cash. At worst people will try it on their PC, and buy a real Apple as their next PC. How did Excel beet Lotus 123? Simple: Lotus 123 had copy protection. Where Apple will win big on their Intel-switch is servers. Think of them cooperating with Dell. Their market share for servers is marginal, and hardware esthetics doesn't matter for servers so they have nothing to lose. Suddenly a big player like Dell starts offering servers with Intel-like speed, Dell-like reliability, BSD-like stability and Mac-like userfriendliness. Heck, even I would have to think twice before saying no thanks!

Re:Who cares?

[Roguelazer]

If you have to think twice before saying "no thanks" to Dell, then you have other problems, friend. :)

Re:Who cares?

[NoodleSlayer]

You obviously have not seen the Mac OS X Server benchmarks.

They're pitiful.

Largely its due to OS X's inefficiencies with thread management. This has nothing to do with CPU performance, if you take a real look at some benchmarks the Power processors tend to whipe the floor with Xeons. By no means is it processor speed, and odds are the server products will be one of the last things moved over to x86.

As such OS X Server is mostly used by Schools and other mac heavy environments that want a Mac server.

Yes. It's easy to use. It's reasonably stable. However the limiting factor is OS not the hardware.

Re:Who cares?

[theantipop]

Here is the Anandtech article which does a OSX/Linux/Windows server comparison. Parent's comments are absolutely spot on.

Re:Who cares?

[KillShill]

apple has had the best copy protection for the last 20+ years. the entire hardware is used as the "protection".

Torrents.

[Anonymous Cumshot]

Direct links to torrents of the videos showing OS X running on non-Apple hardware:

1. MacOSX x86 booting natively on a Pc notebook Mitac 8050D (Pentium-M 735/1.6GHz)

2. The boot on the same hardware, the permission error was repaired. We can see the "About this Mac" panel, Apple System Profiler and CHUD prefpane showing information on the processor (frequency, cache etc...)

And yes I know these are linked on the site, but if it gets slashdotted, at least you might be able to still grab the torrents since they appear to be on a different server.

Re:Torrents.

[Dogers]

Interestingly, neither videos appear to play for me :(

Re:Torrents.

[kromozone]

I'm getting the same problem. VLC, WMP, and QT, none of them works.

Re:Torrents.

[Beautyon]

Xine and VLC play them both, and...its like pr0n; OSX running on intel, booting on a laptop FASTER than my G4 powerbook boots.

When someone makes a DVD image of this hideously complicated hack into a neat, apple-like installer that you can run off a single DVD, it will spread like wildfire.

Spinning beach ball?

[bad_outlook]

Now instead of a blue screen, you can have a blue screen with a VMware window displaying the (never stops spinning!) beach ball busy cursor icon! And remember, it's no longer Ctrl-alt-delete - it's 'Force Quit'!

OS X on PCs won't make any difference

[Anonymous Coward]

Once a PC user, always a PC user. After years of careful study, it is now known that while one's personality may determine his or her choice of OS, the reverse is never the case. In other words, nothing can rob these happy souls of their superior creativity, intellect, and style--but then neither, alas, can anything be done to rescue people like these from eternal virginity. No matter how much time they spend in Mac OS X, Darwin, FreeBSD, or Pianos, they are doomed to live as shadows among men. The more fortunate among us should mourn them--for theirs, truly, are the lives of the never-been. It is nature's cruel will.

Re:OS X on PCs won't make any difference

[xenoandroid]

'Homework', of course...

Hold the salt please

[seven5]

This works. This is not running inside of vmware. This is running directly on hardware. No salt needed. I have this running on a dell computer right now. All you need to do is take the vmware image floating around the internet, and use dd to image it to a drive. Boot from the drive and it works.. Requirements include an SSE2 enabled cpu, that would be most p4's and amd64 and higher. Rosetta requires SSE3, so without that you get no ppc apps. Newer p4's using the .90nm process will have SSE3. Make sure you have a great Video card as well soyou have Quartz Extreme running. It is also possible to patch the install dvd and install strait to the hardware. But the Vmware image is the easiest to do. You dont even need vmware, just download the vmware image, and use linux or knoppix to dd it over to a blank drive. The next few weeks should be fun :) Compliant hardware on Ebay is going for $225 or so. Not bad.

Re:Hold the salt please

[orlandomacgeek]

Not being a linux guru, could someone please provide some intructions on converting a VMWare image to a bootable hard drive?

Re:Hold the salt please

[bnenning]

Sweet. I'll have to see if it will run in qemu on my Mac.

Re:Hold the salt please

[OmniVector]

There's no way in hell you have Ph. D in CS. If you did, you sure as hell wouldn't have such a retarded website hosted on geocities.

Re:Hold the salt please

[etymxris]

Just pony up the cash for the real OSX experience, you damn cheapskates

While downloading OSX for i386 is certainly illegal, it's not an issue of cost. OSX for i386 can't even be purchased now (by end users) and will likely never be available for beige box PCs. So I'd hardly call these people "cheapskates".

fucking pirates. if this was my website i would remove this comment at once, and ban your whole subnet!

Thankfully, then, it's not your website. If you run a website, I'm sure threads and comments have a habit of disappearing. Those who get in the habit of deleting comments usually approach the practice with a "I know it when I see it" attitude. This usually turns into draconian moderation over time.

Re:Hold the salt please

[Hrothgar The Great]

Why should he have to justify it to anyone? He spends his time on what he wants to spend his time on.

He wanted to try something out that interested him at the moment. Do you keep a time sheet at home to justify all of YOUR hobbies? How do you justify the time and effort it took you to post on Slashdot?

Re:Hold the salt please

[seven5]

heh, nuff said :)

Re:Long Live Virtual PC's

[richdun]

Nope, you can use any mouse, so long as it is dressed in a yellow jumpsuit wearing a red cape.

"Here I come to save the day!"

Enjoy!

[dduck]

Well, if you are kind of person who actually uses his/her computer for productivity, rather than hacking, fiddeling and games, you are in for a treat.

I switched less than half a year ago, and I am so happy I finaly got around to it. I have saved incredible amounts of time, not to mention aggravation. The UI is not just pretty - it's fast, powerful and easy to use, and the new Spotlight feature is saving me at least an hour of work every single day.

Run a Windows Update and you'll see why

[TheOtherAgentM]

There are so many hardware incompatibilities in Windows that Microsoft has to deal with every time there is a major update. While you are more than assured to be covered with a mainstream computer, like Dell or HP, I've seen Windows Updates go wrong so many times because of hardware. Apple controlling hardware and software makes it a superior product from my experience, even if it does cost more.

Slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

I think their website is running on OS X on VMWare.

Unfortunately, no.

[Zzyzygy]

Unfortunately Rosetta cannot run Garage Band. IIRC Garage Band makes some pretty heavy use of AltiVec instructions.

-Scott

OSX on generic boxes will work for Apple

[Areeves]

*when* OSX retail is hacked to work on a dell or other generic x86 hardware, it will benefit Apple greatly. Look at photoshop for instance, it is the defacto standard in photo manipulation partly due to the rampant copying of its software. The same could easily happen to OSX. While Apple would never support the install, I'm sure they will gain something from it.

Re:OSX on generic boxes will work for Apple

[ReeceTarbert]

Look at photoshop for instance, it is the defacto standard in photo manipulation partly due to the rampant copying of its software

And that would be a good thing for Adobe? Am I missing the obvious, or do you know something I don't? ;-)

Article is wrong and misleading

[IntergalacticWalrus]

It cannot run on any x86. OS X extensively uses SSE2 everywhere, and in some places SSE3 too. You need at least a SSE2-capable CPU to run it (Pentium 4, Pentium M, or any 64-bit AMD), and then again it's apparently not very stable.

Re:Article is wrong and misleading

[timeOday]

Article is wrong and misleading.. it cannot run on any x86.

Speaking of which, you need at least a 386 to run Windows 95, so watch out!

Re:Article is wrong and misleading

[otomo_1001]

and then again it's apparently not very stable.

You do realize this is a developer and a pre-release copy of the os right?

Did you even watch the Keynote with Jobs? There is a reason they are still working on things and that is it.

Would you expect Microsoft to announce Longhorn running on Sparcs tomorrow to be stable? (Bad analogy but you get the idea :)

Playing it both ways

[Fzz]

Wouldn't it benefit Apple in the long run to get more of its software into the public's hands?

Apple is clearly a hardware company, and so they make most of their money from selling hardware. Thus it's very unlikely that Apple would want to support generic x86 boxes.

But Apple has an interesting opportunity here. If they simply ignored people running unlicensed x86 copies, but prevented else anyone selling pre-installed Macs, then they probably wouldn't lose much business. The people who are willing to install MacOS themselves are unlikely to be the people who'd buy Mac hardware in the first place.

However, Apple would gain a lot of mindshare with the kids and with the technically savvy who are happy installing their own OS. In the long run, this will bring many more people to Apple hardware, and to influence their parents/family/employers to buy the supported Apple products.

Seems like Apple can't lose here.

-Fzz

Re:Playing it both ways

[msoori]

Lets say that Apple locks the OS to run only on Apple made PCs. Ignoring those who would hack to get it running on generic PCs, how would this play out?

There are lots of developers, like myself, who are trully fed up with Windows. Given the solid BSD core OSX has, and the nice GUI, OSX is a dream developer machine. If I could buy a box from Apple, and be able to run OSX, Windows and Linux on the same machine, I wouldnt think twice about buying an Apple PC over a Dell, HP, or any other generic PC when it comes time for buying my next PC. I would gladly hand out a little more, and get a PC from Apple. Sure a lot of developers would be pissed at Apple for locking OSX so that it wont be running on generic PCs, but there are lot more who would be bying a new PC as well... so why not get an Apple box in the first place that you know is very well built and capable of running all the OSes you want?

Where would this put Dell, HP and other PC manufactures when the small biz and medium biz companies start realizing that too? I think companies like Dell and HP that sell into the corporate market is going to get hit pretty hard if Apples takes this approach. Apple becomes as big as Dell and get into the corp market at the expense of Dell and HP.

Re:Playing it both ways

[pete-classic]

Seems like Apple can't lose here.

As usual, there's no way that Apple can lose. But they've rarely let that stop them in the past!

-Peter

Re:Playing it both ways

[rbanffy]

Fzz got it right.

By letting OSX be pirated Apple is following the winning strategy of Microsoft. The only difference is that the cheapest way to run MacOS is buying a Mac mini and I am notsure whether the cheapest way to run Windows is to buy a PC pre-installed with Windows or to buy a box with a CD inside.

By allowing PC users that would never buy a real copy of Windows, Microsoft used "virtual dumping" to get rid of any competition (by offering an "unsuported" version of its OS for free) and to increase its market share. When MS got rid of the competition in the OS arena, it had a healthy user base software writers were happy to make software available for.

Apple is using exactly the same strategy. By making OSX "unsuported" available to current PC users, Apple increases its user base, making it more attractive to build software for it and, at the same time, makes people try Apple software in the hopes they get the next PC upgrade.

In the meantime, they pretend that's not what they are doing.

Brilliant

Worked for Scotty!

[XanC]

n/t

'Mactel' good for gamers, just not on Mac OS

[Steve Cowan]

Apple's move to Intel processors is great news for gamers, but bad news for gaming on Mac OS.

When I eventually own an Intel-based Mac I'm sure I'll install Windows on its own partition, just for gaming. After all, when I want to play a game I really don't care about the user experience my OS gives me. When I want to do anything else I'll boot into OS X.

Why would anybody bother to develop or port games for Mac when it will be so easy for Mac gamers to use Windows, and the future of Windows gaming is (sadly) DirectX? As soon as you launch a game the user experience of the OS is gone, and thus so are most of the advantages of OS X from the users' perspective.

Note: my comment about DirectX is not a troll, it is based on the following article from the same site that carries TFA:

Windows Vista does not like OpenGL - Yoc - 18:46:26

the OpenGL community is "boiling" since the release of the beta version of Windows Vista (ex-longhorn), and Microsoft statement regarding OpenGL support in MS future OS. It is known that Vista is rely on DirectX9 for all graphics, animations, etc...

With Windows XP, it is possible to run OpenGL-based application at full speed thanks to OpenGL drivers that have direct access to the hardware.

But it seems that Microsoft has decided to change this direct hardware access for OpenGL in Windows Vista.

Microsoft's current plan for OpenGL on Windows Vista is to layer OpenGL over Direct3D in order to use OpenGL with a composited desktop to obtain the Aeroglass experience. If an OpenGL ICD is run - the desktop compositor will switch off - significantly degrading the user experience.

Not only the OpenGL performance will be significantly reduced, but it will also become impossible tu run 2 applications simultaneously in the same display in frame-mode, one being DirectX-based , the other one being OpenGL-based.

So for the OpenGL community, it is quite clear that Microsoft has decided to force developers to use DirectX for all software if they wish to get full hardware power.

The bad thing for Mac users is of course that less OpenGL applications in PC world means less OpenGL applications ported to Mac.

Let's hope that the OpenGL community will be able to force Microsoft to change its mind...

Microsoft is back with another monopoly game...

Re:'Mactel' good for gamers, just not on Mac OS

[Dr. Sp0ng]

Vista only layers OpenGL over Direct3D if you're running it in a window, which is clearly the only option they had, considering the UI itself is Direct3D-based. If you run an OpenGL app fullscreen, like most games, you'll get full performance.

Re:'Mactel' good for gamers, just not on Mac OS

[mrchaotica]

On the other hand, WINE will suddenly be able to be ported to the Mac!

Re:'Mactel' good for gamers, just not on Mac OS

[Dr. Spork]

Right. This will be huge for Transgaming, suddently their apps will have a much larger customer base to sell to. That might also crank up the quality and quantity of the games that are made compatible.

Re:'Mactel' good for gamers, just not on Mac OS

[mrchaotica]

Especially considering that the Mac crowd is less likely to go for the free CVS version or vanilla WINE.

Re:'Mactel' good for gamers, just not on Mac OS

[OmniVector]

And mac users are more willing to pay for software compared to BSD/Linux users.

Re:'Mactel' good for gamers, just not on Mac OS

[hcdejong]

Why would anybody bother to develop or port games for Mac when it will be so easy for Mac gamers to use Windows,

One of the major reasons I use a Mac is that I won't have to use Windows. There's no way in hell I'm going to spend time installing and maintaining that POS OS just to play games. If a game isn't available for OS X, then I won't buy it. MacTel won't change that.

Good for me!

[mcrbids]

I would LOVE IT if I could run OS/X in VMWare! I run VMWare WorkStation 4.5 on Fedora C3 on my laptop, and develop vertical-market software for schools, in PHP-GTK.

To be able to develop/test for Windows, Linux, AND Apple, all from the same system, from anywhere!?!?!?

Holy F!@king 5h17! I'm going to have to change my underpants... If this project is stable for more than a few months, I'm definitely going to try it!

SOOOO much better than having to port everything to a separate Mac system - with this I could develop on a Win2000 VM, share with Samba, and build installers for ALL THREE platforms with a single script - one shell script to rule them all!

I think I've just died and gone to heaven...

I could buy your analogy......

[Nagatzhul]

if Apple actually had stellar hardware. Oh, it looks nice, but under the hood it is less than quality stuff. If it had been quality, they would never have had to cook the results when they release the G5, for example.

The thing you were really paying for is getting something that did not say Microsoft on it. Anything else simply borders on a religous preference.

Re:I could buy your analogy......

[OmniVector]

Not entirely. You get the privledge of using Mac OS X, a clearly better opearting system.

Re:I could buy your analogy......

[Nagatzhul]

Yes, but OS X is being run on other hardware now, isn't it? So the OS issue is a null point.

Did you read the OP?

Re:Why not offer it for all x86 systems?

[razmaspaz]

NO! Not because they wouldn't sell more copies of OSX, they would...not because they wouldn't ultimately sell more Macs, because they would...but because if they don't sell a version for the PC then they invite (yes invite) piracy. The same way Windows did in the 90's. Imagine if windows was impossible to copy, but every PC in Asia could get a copy of OSX running on it for free. Don't you think Apple would take over 90% of the market at that point? And here in the US, if people could get a pirated copy of OSX, they might like it and just go out and buy a Mac. Who knows. I think piracy is exactly what apple needs.

Proper torrent

[Anonymous Coward]

Be careful, a few GNAA fake torrents are being advertised here and there. Use this one if unsure.

But...

[Orrin Bloquy]

Will it run Virtual PC?

Re:But...

[TheRaven64]

No. The current versions of VirtualPC are either x86/windows or PowerPC/Mac. To run the PowerPC version, you would have to use Rosetta (and even then it might not work, since it relies on a custom kernel module, and I don't think Rosetta works for kernel modules). Rosetta uses the TCPA chip, and so will not work unless the TCPA kernel module is reverse-engineered to spoof a valid TCPA device.

Re:This is 'news'?

[BobVila]

Its not fake

Good Link

[ndansmith]

http://www.strengholt-online.nl/osx_howto/index.ht m

This page has links to all the pertinent sites and torrents. It also lists several alternative methods to those in the main linked article.

Apple x86 hardware = not teh l33t

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as desktops go, apple intel boxes won't be some awesome reliable apple only ordeal. The truth is you'll buy able to buy that same intel mobo/cpu , graphics card, hard drive, etc all from newegg/monarch/zff/etc. So when you pay a premium for the "awesome reliable great" apple hardware, you're just going to be paying a premium for the stuff you could've ordered yourself to make your own computer for much cheaper. Well that and the nice case.

As far as notebooks go I think the T series is one awesome example of great non apple design. And I infact will purchase a next gen T series over a powerbook if it is not as thin/light/well built.

So really all you'll be gettin for paying the premium on intel apple hardware is a nice case and not much else.

Re:Apple x86 hardware = not teh l33t

[Mechcozmo]

Again, you are seeing DEVELOPER stuff now.

Apple motherboards are made by ASUS. So? You can't buy them... same thing with the new Intel boards. They will be customized for Apple only. The current boards? They are custom made to fit the holes in the back of the G5.

Can't buy that, can you?

Re:well, actually

[Zzyzygy]

smacks forehead

Duh, Scott! I didn't get enough coffee this morning. :-)

-Scott

Apple's loss

[Shivetya]

"Aside from that, I really don't think Apple cares about the gaming market segment, i.e., teenaged-or-twenty-something males."
----

and what areas of BB or CC are the largest? The games section. Microsoft realized that games were a major selling point. They even went out and made it easier to write games for the platform; Direct-X.

Apple should care, it is one of the reasons they are in such a distant second place.

That market segment is expanding. I disagree on the sucky part as well, for many of us we don't experience problems with Windows or any other OS we use.

Hopefully you now understand the argument.

Re:Why not offer it for all x86 systems?

[kertong]

Yes, but what good is marketshare if it doesn't bring in revenue?

Dvorak prophecy???

[Jeff Benjamin]

Come on now, it's not like he has predicted a flying pig or christ's return. He has predicted the same thing that EVERY slashdotter had guessed the minute they saw the Apple->x80 article. Even my MOM, who has previously asked me where the 'any' key was located, has suggested that sshe might soon be able to put OS X on her windows box at home.

Um

[mnemonic_]

Do you know what x86 means? A Wikipedia page for you. SSE2 and SSE3 exist within the currently accepted x86 definition. All Pentium and Athlon processors conform to the x86 classification.

Re:Um

[Holi]

Umm, what are you trying to say that all x86 chips support SSE2 and 3? I think you might want to rethink that stance.

Re:Um

[Guy Harris]

Do you know what x86 means?

Do you know that "cannot run on any x86" could either be interpreted as "is incapable of running on x86 processors" or as "does not run on some x86 processors"? (The original poster perhaps either didn't or didn't think it was likely that it would be interpreted in a way in which they didn't intend, as they might have phrased the claim differently otherwise.)

They presumably meant it in the latter sense, i.e. "you need an x86 processor that supports SSE3", not in the former sense.

Re:Um

[Valdrax]

You mean Streaming SIMD Extensions 2 and Streaming SIMD Extensions 3? These are add ons to the Pentium and Athlon lines that do not exist on all x86 processors. The definition of an x86 processor is merely that it be compatible with the ancient, 8-bit 8086 processor or its descendents. Only x86-64 mandates inclusion of SSE2 & SSE3.

Some of VIA's and AMD's 32-bit x86 processors sold today do not have SSE3 support. Current mobile processors like the current Pentium-Ms don't support it.

colour me retarded but...

[a7244270]

I can't either of these movies to play on my 2k machine, and I have tried quicktime, itunes, and windows media player. What software should I use ?

Re:colour me retarded but...

[macffooky]

  VLChttp://www.videolan.org/vlc/

Re: Funniest comment I've read all week

[tigris]

Damn it, I never have mod points when I need them.

Dvorak wasn't the first to make the prediction

[comicnerd]

I don't know if he's commented on it since, but Michael Swaine made a small but amusing prediction that this might happen waaay back in the April 1993 issue of Dr. Dobb's Journal. Here's a link to the Google cache version since the original wasn't coming up for me.

Re:Dvorak wasn't the first to make the prediction

[diamondsw]

Given that Apple was working on Mac OS (classic) for Intel in 1991, that doesn't make 1993 all that groundbreaking either.

"Holy F!@king 5h17!"

[mnemonic_]

You know, you're allowed to swear on slashdot. Here, watch: fuck, shit. See? The worst you might experience is a down-modding. It's not so bad.

Re:"Holy F!@king 5h17!"

[mcrbids]

There's an issue with swearing:

Excessive use of swearing makes you seem "lowbrow" and "trashy", and reduces the strength of those words. Used rarely, profanity can be very strong. Used commonly, profanity merely becomes a sign screaming "I'm a lowbrow trashwad who can't think of anything more intelligent to say!".

By swearing in L337, I largely bypass this, while emphasizing my inner nerd. What's not to like?

It's a bit like using "Bloody" as a swear word in the United States. It doesn't sound nearly so trashy, provides a nice expletive, and hints at a longer, global view, all in the same breath. (Unless you're talking to Brits, then it probably just sounds silly, but I digress)

Re:"Holy F!@king 5h17!"

[Dolly_Llama]

Slashdot has a 'user' that flags you for using naughty words

Profanity Blacklist. Check out the journal

LINK

NeXTStep Rides Again

[Anonymous Coward]

Jobs has made it clear since reigniting the Mac market with the iMac and iPod that the ultimate goal is to reinvent the Mac's mindshare (and marketshare) by resurrecting NeXT and turning it into the platform of the future.

First, he had to get rid of all of the crap that had developed in the Amelio days, including the far-behind System 7/Mac OS 8 and introduce something so radical that Apple would get on the radar again. iMac mania ensues. Introduce some hot new Moto tech from the AIM alliance that rivals and often outperforms other architectures--the G4. Using both of those tools and after wrangling the company into the direction he wants, he begins to resurrect NeXT by launching OS X. (this is rather general and not as impacting as I'd like; I need coffee).

Remember that NeXTStep ran on both proprietary and off-the shelf gear at one point--I'm willing to bet that this paradigm is exactly what he's doing with Apple. Once getting the shambles back together, it's time to continue what failed for him about 10 years ago. Except, in this case, he's learned his lesson and is making sure that his product doesn't get segmented to a particular market like before and is keeping as strong of a grip as possible on it for an indeterminate amount of time.

He'll let it go to Dell, eventually, just wait.

Re:NeXTStep Rides Again

[frostilicus2]

"He'll let it go to Dell, eventually, just wait"

And Dell will be happy to accept...

Dvorak continues to amaze!

[Call Me Black Cloud]

I was intruiged by this "Dvorak Prohpecy". I had never heard of it before. Could it be as signficant as Moore's Law? I clicked on the link and learned that Dvorak made his prophecy 3 days ago! He was able to see past the FUD, hype, marketing, and spam to clearly envision the road ahead...3 days out! Why don't we read more of this wizard's words?

And if that isn't enough astoundment in one day, I think the grilled cheese sandwich I got at the deli today has Dvorak's image on it. Good thing I decided to type this reply instead of eating the sandwich. Clearly we're at the cusp of a new age.

Yes, it's all about games...

[podperson]

OSX offers no compelling advantages, and many disadvantages, as a platform to game developers. Apple has neglected or actively discouraged game developers over a long period of time -- starting with a refusal to produce a joystick standard (so there is still no standard joystick interface after 20 years) through refusing to enable low res graphics back in the early 90s when every hit game (Doom, etc.) relied on them to achieve acceptable frame rates.

Apple's current initiative is actually probably the best move they could make vis-a-vis games.

Currently, a typical Mac gamer owns a PC to play games on. In my case, I upgrade my PC more frequently than my Mac, even though I use my Mac for *paying work*, and the only reason is game performance. Apple can capture a chunk of this money by producing computers that run their OS and the games I want to play.

Whether I have to reboot into Windows or run in a compatibility box, I'd rather upgrade one computer every twelve-eighteen months than upgrade my PC twice and my Mac one every two years.

If Apple released OSX for random PC boxes it would instantly lose its hardware margin, and it might never get significant volume on software. And, frankly, Apple's hardware innovations are as important as its software innovations -- would you like to see Apple out of the hardware market?

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[TheRaven64]

OSX offers no compelling advantages, and many disadvantages, as a platform to game developers

Do OpenGL, QuickTime, OpenPlay, and OpenAL not count as compelling advantage? They are all very easy to use APIs, and if you write a game on the Mac using them it is trivial to port it to Windows or *NIX.

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

OSX offers no compelling advantages, and many disadvantages, as a platform to game developers.

Actually that is mostly untrue. You don't think Carmack develops on a mac because he's a moron do you? The dev tools are very very nice and free.

...through refusing to enable low res graphics back in the early 90s when every hit game (Doom, etc.) relied on them to achieve acceptable frame rates.

Heh, I had both a mac and a PC back in the day when doom came out. At the time when many people were playing Doom 1 and 2, I was playing Marathon 1 and 2. It made all the PC users green with envy. The marathon games were so much better there was no comparison. Good sound, better graphics, better story, multiplayer in teams, voice chat with your team... all this many years before anything comparable was available on the PC. Sorry, but what kept games off the mac was market share, not graphics or device support.

Currently, a typical Mac gamer owns a PC to play games on.

No they don't. Currently, the extreme gamer who uses a mac for work, etc. owns a PC for games. The typical mac gamer owns a console and/or just plays games on their mac. The typical gamer does not actually need to play every game 3 months earlier and does not spend tons of money upgrading their machine every year. You've mistaken yourself for a typical gamer when you are, in fact, quite atypical.

On the plus side as far as you are concerned, Windows will run on your x86 mac, and if you don't like rebooting, within a short period of time it will probably run at near real speeds in emulation. Of course being an extreme gamer you probably need that extra 5 FPS so you will probably reboot it anyway. Good luck.

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[IntergalacticWalrus]

Carmack doesn't develop on a Mac. He does most of its coding in Microsoft Visual Studio.

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[justins]

You don't think Carmack develops on a mac because he's a moron do you?

Calling John Carmack...

Somehow I doubt he has abandoned Visual Studio in favor of apple whatever. The fact that NT versions are always done first makes me doubt this even more. Let me guess, you read somewhere that he owns a Mac?

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[bani]

Actually that is mostly untrue. You don't think Carmack develops on a mac because he's a moron do you? The dev tools are very very nice and free.

carmack doesnt develop on a mac anymore. the ports to mac are all done by third parties (these days, it's usually aspyr).

maybe you're confusing carmack with linus? linus does develop on a ppc mac, but he doesn't use osx.

and the dev tools suck. xcode is a crashy pile of doggie poo. various build utilities have no concept of CWD so it's a pita to script stuff. apple also managed to break pico, of all things (busted line wrap). how anyone can manage to break pico is beyond me -- but it certainly takes talent.

No they don't. Currently, the extreme gamer who uses a mac for work, etc.

yeah, because they don't have much of a choice. most games are for win32 :) (no hl2 for mac, for example.)

disclaimer: I own a mac, and write software for osx.

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[Thu25245]

Apple has neglected or actively discouraged game developers over a long period of time -- starting with a refusal to produce a joystick standard (so there is still no standard joystick interface after 20 years)

Under the Classic Mac OS, Apple had I calledGame Sprockets. It wasn't perfect. Many Mac game companies used it.

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[dmarcoot]

your really full of shi.. yourself arent you?
your are wrong so any ways its funny.

i have mac, and a x-box and eventually a PS3, i will play games on all 3, but why would i waste money on a virile ridden piece of junk which is no better than any of those?

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[Waruwaru]

You've mistaken yourself for a typical gamer when you are, in fact, quite atypical.

I think that is what you have done. A "typical Mac gamer" is not same as a "typical PC gamer". When you say "typical game", you are probably thinking of Sims, Diablo. The Mac gamers doesn't play-games-3-months-earlier or spend-tons-of-money-upgrading-their-machines because they can't. It's like saying 'typical 12 year olds don't drive sports cars', they don't because they aren't allow to drive yet.

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[podperson]

Do OpenGL, QuickTime, OpenPlay, and OpenAL not count as compelling advantage?

Over DirectX?

They are all very easy to use APIs, and if you write a game on the Mac using them it is trivial to port it to Windows or *NIX.

Yes, by using these APIs you can quickly port to 5% of the desktop gaming market and 0% of the console market. By writing to DirectX (which, I am sorry to say, is easier to use than the Open* equivalents) you can target Windows and X-Box.

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[podperson]

At the time when many people were playing Doom 1 and 2, I was playing Marathon 1 and 2.

No, you were playing "Pathways into Darkness" at pathetically low framerates. Go check your history -- Wolf3D shipped in 92. Ultima Underworld also shipped in 92. PiD and DOOM shipped in 93.

Almost all the best games from 1990 through to the present either (a) never shipped on the Mac, (b) shipped later, (c) weren't well-supported on the Mac (e.g. System Shock had fatal bugs that never got fixed), and/or (d) had patches, expansions, or sequels that never made it to the Mac.

Then there's abominations such as EverQuest that shipped 2 years late on the Mac, didn't have the same range of features as the PC version, and restricted Mac players to retarded servers.

The typical gamer does not actually need to play every game 3 months earlier and does not spend tons of money upgrading their machine every year.

Actually, I tend to play games *later* than most people. I particularly like picking up six month old PC games for $10-20 when the alternative is picking up 6 month old PC games ported to the Mac that still sell for $50.

Given a choice, I'll play a game on a Mac. It tends to be a far more pleasant experience (e.g. World of Warcraft runs better on Macs than PCs).

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[podperson]

GameSprockets were nice, but they were if anything an attempt by a small and relatively unsupported group within Apple to counteract the general anti-game bias of the rest of the company.

E.g. the Mac OS deliberately made life difficult for anyone who wanted to take over the entire screen. Perhaps *the most popular* game sprocket feature was a bunch of API calls that made this possible.

Similarly, GameSprockets' InputSprocket tried to solve the "no joystick standard" issue, which really should have been dealt with at OS level (i.e. joysticks should have been treated the same as tablets or trackballs).

To the extent that some GameSprockets technology has made it into the mainstream OS, the demise of Gamesprockets has been a good thing. To the extent that some of the functionality is just gone ... oh well.

Re:Yes, it's all about games...

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

DOOM shipped in 93

Marathon shipped in 94, Doom II in late 94, and marathon 2 in 95. I can't say I ever played "Pathways into Darkness."

Almost all the best games from 1990 through to the present

Well now, that's a pretty subjective term isn't it? I guess it depends on what you consider the best games. All of Blizzard's games, for example ship for the mac at the same time, and are often better on that platform. Bungie games shipped for the Mac first, until Microsoft bought them. How about Myth, it was one of the most popular games of all time? It all depends upon what you call the best.

Of course while not all good games are ported from the pc to the mac, not all the good games from the mac are ported to the pc either. Back in the day I knew people who installed mac emulators and even bought whole machines just to play Realmz.

My original point stands and that is, the mac was not an inherently inferior platform for creating games then and nor is it now. Apple's technology decisions did not stop gaming on the mac. Microsoft's business practices and their resulting market share is the reason why most gaming companies moved to the PC. Of course lately it has been shifting even more to consoles. There have been plenty of great mac first or mac only games.

There's a middle ground!

[katharsis83]

I think that Apple can pull a middle ground here. They can basically do what Microsoft was saying it wanted to do with the XBox 360 accessories.

Apple will sell the OS as a stand-alone software package, but it will also run a hardware certification/licensing program with 3rd party manufacturers. There'll be a shiny "Tested for Apple OSX 10.x.x" hologram sticker on any hardware that the 3rd party manufacturer has submitted to Apple along with a nice hefty licensing fee. This way, Apple can ensure that all of the hardware will interoperate correctly and still rake in huge profits on the "certification/licensing" of hardware.

You maintain the end-user experience while at the same time making unholy amounts of money. Cheapskates can still run un-certified hardware that might or might not work, and those willing to pay extra will still have their "it just works" experience.

...do not be surprise if it disappears

[Anonymous Coward]

"do not be surprise if it disappears"

so I'm putting a copy here for safe keeping:

Wednesday August 10, 2005

- Mac OSX x86 on PC: and now a video! [Upd] - bad_duck - 21:03:35

The Apple Developer kit version of MacOSX x86 has indeed been fully cracked!
An anonymous source has sent us a video showing MacOSX x86 booting natively on a Pc notebook Mitac 8050D (Pentium-M 735/1.6GHz).

Boot Mac OS X 86 (Mpeg4 - 1,5 Mo) - [torrent]

As you can see the boot phase is rather fast, and the error message at the end is simply due to an right/authorization error due to the kext allowing PS/2 support.

[Upd]
Here is a second video showing the boot on the same hardware, the permission error was repaired. We can see the "About this Mac" panel, Apple System Profiler and CHUD prefpane showing information on the processor (frequency, cache etc...).

Boot Mac OS X 86 v2 (.mov - 11,5 Mo) - [torrent]

[Update] - We've added torrent files for the 2 videos to relieve the stress on our server. If you use them, please keep seeding as long as possible, thank you.

[translation by Eric]

[edited - windows vista crap removed]

- Mac OSX x86 on any PC : a reality, current status - Yoc - 14:18:24

Hereafter is the current status of the OSX x86 on any PC project run by PC/Mac "bidouilleurs"

Initial problems

Several system prevent running OSX x86 on any PC:
1. TPM chips from Intel
2. SSE3-enable processor
3. GMA900-based graphic card to natively support Quartz.

First solution: VMWare

simply install VMare on ANYPC, and this application will emulate what needs to be (GMA900, SSE3 ...)
Of course this is only a short-term solution, since it is rather instable, and particularly slow.
since this morning one can find on P2P network an already configures VMWare image OSX x86.

Patches

Several solution have been found. The TPM is cracked, and no one needs it anymore. The SSE3 requirement, can be bypassed via quite complex modifications, and this case several kernels will not work since they REALLY need SSE3. A patch for those kernels is being prepared allowing SSE3 instructions to be translated into their corresponding SSE2 ones.
GMA900 can be avoided by modifying CoreGrapics, patches are also available.

The best solution: the right hardware

The best and the most secure solution is a motherboard from Intel: D915 GA, GL or GU :
http://www.intel.com/design/motherbd/ux/

Excellent results have been obtained with Gigabytes GA-8I915P motherboard card:
http://www.giga-byte.com/Motherboard/Products/Prod ucts_GA-8I915P%20Duo-A.htm

Users with such a motherboard and a Pentium 4 will be able to install MacOSX x86 with the patch for Rosetta (without the patch if you choose a SSE3-enable Pentium4).
Be careful not to use any HD in RAID settings, otherwise it will crash your system.
Use a USB keyboard, PS2 port is not really well supported.

First tests

First tests have shown that MacOSX x86 on PC is very reactive, no crash, iTunes is running perfectly, with Rosetta.
Digital camera work perfectly with iPhoto, as well as digital camcorder with iMovie.

Another solution
The last solution is based on installation of Darw

its all smoke and mirrors

[Captain BooBoo]

Apple makes millions from ipod sales and could give a rats about their computing business...mark my words, Apples OS will be hacked and it will be running on x86 systems sooner than later...its dead jim.

Wait....

[i_will_frag_u_all]

Hasnt Apple already anounced that they will port to non-mac machines? or so says wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSX

Re:Wait....

[What me a Coward]

No they said they will port OSX to intel machines, However the intel machines they mean or meant are apple intel machines sold by apple or by licensed distributers that have a special chip(s) in them that tells OSX that it is a apple machine and then allows OSX to install on that machine. You can also install windows on that machine as well and it will run without problems but the Intel OSX OS will not run on any intel machine without apples special chip(s) unless of course you have something now like VMware that emulates a Dos machine which could emulate the chip and theirby allow the new intel OSX to install in the virtual machine.

    But doing it this way gives you a slower running OS as you are now running a machine with an OS that is running a program the emulates a machine running an OS creating twice the overhead and slowing the emulated OS to half the speed it would have on a native apple intel machine. But it is for apple emulation at least faster than previous offerings from pearpc and others who have come out with apple emulators which ran at about 1/5th the speed if memory serves because of extra overhead emulation of apple hardware that was needed to make the os work.

    So it's a improvement for thoughs who want to run OSX on non apple intel machines but not for people who want to use OSX on a intel machine with the same speed and power of an apple intel machine unless of course their proccessor happens to be twice the speed of intel's proccessor that apple is/will use in their 'apptel machines' (yeah my first catchphrase i came up with it i claim all rights to it :D) otherwise it will be running slower than the apptel machines(ok you can use it but if you make any money off it i get my royalties from it).

    I had talked with my brother about this when apple first anounced going to intel hardware and he said it was a big mistake for apple to go that route as they would never come close to overtaking MS that way and they would remain stuck in a niche market just as before. He's right MS didn't make it's fortune on hardware they made it on software and thats where apple should be setting it's sights but Jobs has never been much for letting loose of apples stranglhold on their customers.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Mod down troll

[geekee]

"I've never understood this argument. You're willing to put up with the sucky OS that is Windows the rest of the time you're using your computer (i.e., when you're not playing games) just so you can play games?"

Windows works just fine for me.

i'm sorry, what was that?

[durangotang]

" IE supports everything."

I cannot believe that I am seeing these letters strung together into these words, thus formlating this sentence.

I hereby discredid any utterance that you manage to put forth!

Shame on you!

:-)

Re:i'm sorry, what was that?

[jessicavampirehunter]

Oh noes, shame! :) Seriously, for web design stuff, it's actually decent. Really. Well, as long as you don't try to use any Netscape-only HTML. But it supports XML and SVG and Java and Javascript pretty darn well. Just don't use it for browsing the Internet. In fact, physically disconnect your computer before opening the program. Or else your computer may fill up with viruses and pee the carpet. :)

Re:i'm sorry, what was that?

[eggsome]

What about the CSS bugs that MS refuses to fix?

Re:i'm sorry, what was that?

[jessicavampirehunter]

I actually don't know...I haven't done any CSS yet. I have never heard a good word about Microsoft and CSS, though...:) ~Jessica

Re:i'm sorry, what was that?

[elemental23]

Seriously, for web design stuff, it's actually decent. Really. Well, as long as you don't try to use any Netscape-only HTML.

1998 called, they want their web technology back.

Re:i'm sorry, what was that?

[eggsome]

What is with your nick anyway, you're not a buffy fan are you...
.shudder.

Predictions

[tgibbs]

1. OSX86 as shipped will not install on a non-Apple PC, and the license agreement will limit its use to Apple hardware.

2. Within a few weeks, a program along the lines of XPostFacto will be available to install OSX86 on generic Intel-compatible hardware. A new version will be required for every major OS X system update.

3. Apple will add "call-home" registration and serial numbering to insure that each copy of OSX will run on only a single computer. The protection will be cracked, but will be restored (and need to be re-cracked) with every system update.

4. People with non-Apple hardware who call up Apple seeking OS X support will get a standard reply: "Buy a real Mac, it will run OS X without any problems, and it can run Windows, too!"

5. Hackers will run OS X on generic hardware. Anybody who wants to do anything serious with it will buy a Mac.

Re:Predictions

[teslar]

Anybody who wants to do anything serious with it will buy a Mac.

I agree. Although I would simply say, any normal person who may even only be slightly tempted by OSX will buy a Mac provided they're not significantly more expensive. After all you'll still be able to run Windows or Linux but you finally get to have a shiny Mac and play around with OSX.

Apple could potentially take over a very significant portion of the x86 market... using the OS as a bait for people to buy the hardware. The only way they could really fuck it up is by stopping other OSes to work on their boxes or by making them too expensive. If they play it right, we're just witnessing the birth of the Golden Age of Apple.

All part of Jobs' plan...

[bshroyer]

Well, perhaps not, but if I were Jobs, it would be going something like this:

1. Develop OSX for x86, in secret
2. Announce it to a stunned audience
3. Seed dev Intel boxes
4. Wait for image to leak
5. Anticipate hackers discover image will boot on SSE3 procs
6. ???
7. Gain market share
8. Profit!!!

The trick is in step 6:

Insert the following code into Aqua:

aqua_speed=1.0;
if (!genuine_apple_hardware_bit) aqua_speed=0.25;

Thus, OSX runs natively on non-Apple hardware, but the GUI runs at quarter speed. If you want full-speed Aqua, you'll need the branded hardware. It's the crack dealer's approach: your first taste is free. There'll be time enough to get your money once you're hooked.

PLEASE don't credit this to Dvorak....

[AugstWest]

The guy gets SO much credit for predicting the obvious that the word "prohecy" really bugs the crap out of me in this context.

Re:PLEASE don't credit this to Dvorak....

[Molecular Mechanic]

The word "prohecy" really bugs me, too.

Neither you nor your mods read the article, right?

[Valdrax]

The software is running on VMware. VMware is PC virtualization software that can emulate SSE3 instructions (and maybe even SSE2 though the article does not say). Of course ignorance didn't really prevent you from "correcting" the article, did it?

Missing the point.

[Run4yourlives]

The grandparent's point doesn't need to rely on actual quality, only on a percieved quality difference.

Like you said it's called marketing. You ask 100 people whether mercedes C class is a better car then a toyota tercel, and 95% will say it is. It doesn't have to be true, the market has already made it so.

Therfore, comparing the perception Apple has (or is trying to achieve) in the marketplace to mercedes is completely valid, and the grandparent's point is also valid, and probably correct.

apple gamers

[Fortun L'Escrot]

i guess it adds up to apple hardware being kinda expensive. its one thing to be a gamer with a pc. you can do that on a budget. get a doom3 box for $1000 or less. can't really say the same for apple.

what i dont understand is why linux doesnt have more recent games for it. drivers are getting better and better every day even tho there are still issues. some of them pretty serious tho, but that just reminds me of DOS.

but bah. maybe its just simply MS strategy. they want you to dual boot if you want access to the goodies. and you gotta pay for the access. its just sad how much of a pity its becoming. i lost my interest connection for a couple weeks, and i couldnt play half life 2. no way to authenticate the game. the offline cache must have been old or something.

apple doesnt need games to be popular. in fact games might taint the apple user experience. there is something punkish about pc gamers that maybe apple does not want associated with their gamers. who knows. i just wish 'desktop' linux would hurry up its evolution...its only going to become more and more like BeOS before it finally breaks out of its shell. i just hope it gets there sooner rather than later.

i am happy that i can play doom3 in linux. no need to dual boot there. i just wish i could also play guildwars, dawn of war, half life 2, and warcraft 3. w/o having to use wine or one of its derivatives. doom3 is slow enough as it is i could never play that game thru wine. but maybe its because of my drivers...and now we return to the popularity thing. linux is popular. where's are the games? popularity is not the only factor nor is it the most important factor to consider when looking to develop games for macosx or linux...

ps. this goes to all developers. you must remember the old days of DOS. and you still developped crazy games to run on it. linux is like that..remember what it felt like? getting a game out and knowing that anyone that had some form of DOS could potentially run it...linux is like that only now you have alsa and opengl extensions and as fast as you can get input system. what else do you need?

Re:apple gamers

[jinzumkei]

A publisher willing to pay for a linux version would be nice.

it's all about the dolla, dolla partner.

Re:apple gamers

[Fortun L'Escrot]

why not release linux binaries? you sell the game as a windows game, but then distribute linux binaries from your website. i think that's what id does. and as the linux drivers get better than they already are, i bet you see more users turning to linux and game sales continuing to increase.

but you are right. at this point in the game id can release linux binaries and continue to make mucha profito.

2c to tha dolla

Mac Clones nearly killed Apple in the 90s

[AHumbleOpinion]

... not because they wouldn't ultimately sell more Macs, because they would ...

It's been tried. When Apple allowed Mac clones in the mid 90s it did not grow the market, it canabalized their sales. It nearly killed them. And this was with them getting a royalty and having some control over the clones. If they had to support any piece of crap PC device the Mac would become far less reliable. So less money, more support, more work ... that's a pretty poor plan.

White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[BawbBitchen]

I have built maybe 30 or so white box intel/amd hardware computer over the years, starting back with the 386. I have also owned a Dual 500 Mac, and 2 iBooks. At the end of the day, I would pay $400 more for the Apple hardware vs. building it myself. My Apple hardware just works, never breaks (and that goes for my friends that have about 20 Macs between them). I cannot say the same thing for any of the PC hardware. Sure I have had some systems, PC, that just keep working, but in the end the quality of the PC systems (not to mention style!) was just not there.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[jvagner]

That's great, but I think the main objection is that the machine that would really replace my home box isn't at the appropraite price point. I want something more like a PowerPC but at a more reasonable price. The Mac mini is cute and neat and wonderful, but it's woefully underpowered. If they used more mainstream, desktop-sized componentry with a real processor, they could deliver something in between the Mac mini and the PowerPC at an in-between price.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[bani]

My Apple hardware just works, never breaks (and that goes for my friends that have about 20 Macs between them).

Tell that to the millions of customers who got stuck with unreliable ibooks which need to be sent in for repair every few months, and all the ipods which destroy their batteries in less than a month. a class action was settled over the ibook,a nd i believe there was one on the ipod too.

apple != 'utterly reliable by default'.

anyone who has followed apple over the years knows apple's had its share of unreliable turkey hardware products.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[outZider]

Well, they're all PowerPC, perhaps you mean G5? If so, there's the iMac G5, that's in between, at an inbetween price.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[Anonymous Coward]

We all know that a Radeon 9600 for mac last much longer than its PC equivalent. Also mac memory modules are so different from the PC hardware. Apple's airport extreme cards with a broadcom chipset are much better than a linksys card with the same chipset. Did I talk about apple's SATA drives from Maxtor/Segate/An_Other_PC_Hardware_Maker?

C'mon mac uses PC hardware except the case, the motherboard and the CPU (those last two are going to be the same in a few years anyways).
Your speech is so 80s.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[Duncan3]

No doubt about that. If you just added up all the time I put into the Win2003 box fixing fans, other hardware, patches, and all the other stuff that goes with using windows, the extra $$$ is more then worth it. Setup and reinstall is measured in days.

I've had a iMac G3, and now an iBook G4, and I think I've spent a grand total of 30 seconds (inserting OS CDs and walking away) maintaining and had one crash in 3 years, and that one was my fault.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[fred fleenblat]

Well, one cool thing about macs is that when your mac breaks, they are engineered so well that everyone else's mac of the same model and year breaks in the same way.

No joke, you get 2500 people complaining about a problem and they will share workarounds on macintouch and present a fairly strong front to apple, who usually cave in after a while and extend the warranty for the issue.

Try that with dell.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[BawbBitchen]

Stuff happends. It is hard to test a life time on a product before it is released. Apple fixed the issues. That is all that matters. Also this is a small subset of the total released product line. In general Apple hardware is very reliable. Now, I worked at a company that had 50 or so Dell desktops. Each one died (differently) inside of 2 years. At another firm we had hugh clusters of Dell servers (over 100). IIRC, we lost about 2 a month (harddive, motherboard, power). Now this was a cluster and dual power, hd, etc. so it kept running but still...I will say that Dell was good about fixing the issues with the servers. The desktop support is lackluster.

On the PC hardware side the only vendor comes in at Apples level of reliability is IBM. Heck, I still have a PS2 9595 that is up and running! I do not have the links handy but for the last few years the surveys for reliablity and customer happiness and hardware reliability have had Apple and IBM at the top. Now both Apple and IBM charge more then the nearest whitle box maker (Dell, et. al.). Seems to me that there is something to it..you get what you pay for.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[kuzb]

Somehow, your post just reminds me of this

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[bani]

what's really telling is that it took a class action to get apple to address the ibook and ipod hardware failures. apple stubbornly refused to address or fix the issues, until a class action forced them to act. they had plenty of notice and warning, and refused to do anything about it.

and sort of related, it took a class action to get apple to own up to its failed promise that osx would fully support g3 macs.

as the saying goes: fool me once shame on you, fool me twice ...

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[dfghjk]

Curious. I've owned two macs and both failed within a month. Every iPod I've owned has failed. In contrast I've owned a large number of Dell laptops (>8) and have never had a failure. Most of my failures in PC's are power supplies and hard drives. Macs have those too.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[dangitman]

We all know that a Radeon 9600 for mac last much longer than its PC equivalent. Also mac memory modules are so different from the PC hardware

The difference is that Apple designs the whole system, and usually pays good attention to things like cooling and thermal properties, and in their portables, things like shock-protection. The components themselves do not constitute the entire design of a system. Too many WinTel and Linux PCs are poorly designed as systems, which puts more strain on the components involved. It's similar to the way you can make a Hi-Fi system out of similar components, but get better performance and longevity by designing the system and its enclosure differently, and building it to higher standards.

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[BawbBitchen]

Well I have had 30+ boxes because I am in the biz and needed them.

I have a nice Sun SPARC 5 under my desk as a firewall that has the uptime over a year and is now over 10 years old with the orginal equipment. Lets see you do that smart ass.

Oh, I have built an Internet backbone or two and server farms over over 1000 machines. Lets talk again when you can say the same thing ;)

Apple makes well thought out hardware with a good designed and pays attention to the details about heat, etc. That is why they last. Not to mention they have some style to them. I am willing to pay for good design & engineering. It is also the reason I drive a MB.

To each his own...

Re:White Box vs. Apple Hardware...

[shentzu]

well i have not built 30 or so, but more like 500 if you include the rebuilds, the take-a-parts, the start overs, and the combining two dead machines into one good machine, and i would pay $1000 more for a Mac, and i will keep my iBook no matter what the get OS X to run on, thanks anyway.....

Look! On topic!

[SPY_jmr1]

You're new here, aren't you?

Dangerous Game...

[Run4yourlives]

There's no guarantee that the code in question won't also be hacked, so that would be a bad business move. The risk is too high.

What's more likely is that the hardware compatibily has been completely ignored in the plans, and that the "hacked", freely available OS has been factored in to a certain percentage of lost hardware sales, and it's still deemed to be a profitable move.

As the author of the tutorial...

[Anonymous Coward]

I can assure everyone that it DOES work as written. PPC apps crap out due to SSE3 lacking on my own system, but the VMware tutorial does the best that can be done with OSX x86 right now.
N.B. NO, I do NOT condone piracy in any way shape or form. Parts I left out deal with the more copyright-worrying issues and I left them out exactly for that reason.
Anyway, hope some/all of you enjoy getting it up and running. I've had exactly four days experience with Darwin and I can repeat the steps and be at GUI in around a half hour. So anyone can. Enjoy,
Kal/"Twigletesque".

Darwin is about evolution...

[mojoNYC]

before is was Apple's name for their OS core, Darwin meant evolution, and this is all part of Apple's plan...

want to try your luck at running OS X on your Intel box? have at it! try to make it run on any old system you'd like, just don't expect any support...

and then you'll find out why Apple makes their own hardware, and either give in and buy a mini, powerbook, g5, etc, or you'll just keep on having your own kind of fun trying to make everything work properly;>

it's fine that some people like Dell hardware so much, and have more time than money to burn--after trying to run OS X on their beige box, some people may even quit complaining about how expensive Apple hardware is, and realize that some things are worth paying for...

say what you will, but Apple knows how to build hardware--the last PC I had was a Dell (and given to me in lieu of a paycheck by a submerging client), and it worked great for a month or so, before the power supply went out, and it became a doorstop, on it's way to the curb!

so if you want to mess with OS X on your pc, go for it! meanwhile, i'll just keep on being productive with my 4 Apple boxen that just keep on working...

Pretty easy solution

[grahamsz]

Compile aqua without optimizations.

It'd be far harder for a hacker to find a way to optimize the binary than change some constant.

Re:Pretty easy solution

[akuma(x86)]

It'd be far harder for a hacker to find a way to optimize the binary than change some constant

Then it's time to bust out the dynamic recompiler

Only the developper kit has been hacked

[Anonymous Coward]

The real hardware level protection has not been activated yet, and it will be only once the system goes on production.

I bet this is happening

[Dr. Spork]

I thought the same thing. The problem with FreeBSD is that they don't support much new hardware. The problem for Apple will be in writing drivers for all that old hardware. It seems like a good fit. I'm just not sure how hard it would be to adapt x86 FreeBSD drivers to work with the Mach kernel. Maybe they could build a porting tool to help automate the process? Surely the hobbyist community would step in, after all, Mach is open source.

So this idea of Apple really selling OSX to for all x86 machines doesn't sound to me as unworkable as the parent post makes it seem. And just like Apple's code monkeys were busy working on Marklar just in case Jobs decided to switch to x86, I bet there is a new gang of code monkeys maintaining a branch of OSX that is designed to run on "uncircumsised" hardware. Funny would be if a build of this got leaked!

Confession: I am a gamer AND a Mac user

[5n3ak3rp1mp]

The irony with that is that what I seem to find more frustrating when I play with PC-gamer friends is not the fact that they're playing games that I don't have (which is, sure, there, but not predominant), it's that their voice chat software (of all things) does often not have a Mac version. (!) So I've just gotten really good at typing messages while moving and shooting. ;)

Here are just a few of the popular games that I've been able to play with PC-using friends while they were still popular:

World of Warcraft
Warcraft III
Starcraft
Call of Duty
Medal of Honor (plus expansions)
Battlefield 1942 (admittedly late, but still heavily played), especially with the Desert Combat mod
C&C:Generals
Homeworld 2
All the Dooms and Quakes (except Doom 3, a little late on that one...)
Neverwinter Nights (and expansions... monks rule!)

And guess what. That's about all I have had time for. I have to admit that I SERIOUSLY consider a "Windows gaming machine" every time Valve's stuff keeps *not* coming out for Mac, but Windows is absolutely awful. Plus, I have a job, and a life outside the computer. And a while back, I discovered that a little exercise really helps you in a lot of little ways, even if it takes a little time to get it in (and at 33 and coding for a living in a sedentary job, you really have to fight off the gut with tooth and nail). So basically, the thin Mac game market is going to hurt the 15-22 year old pimply inactive males who have plenty of time to kill. I'd say it's no huge loss, but in fact it is, as I was once a member of that demographic myself, and those guys will make purchases in the future...

I hope the situation improves, as they say "any good competition helps everyone".

Why's it loading a desktop's NIC?

[nahorniak]

I obtained a transcript of the dmesg output from the guy's laptop. This is what's confusing me - it's loading 3com 3C905C NIC drivers. Ummm... this is a PCI NIC for a desktop system.

dmesg transcript:

standard timeslicing quantum is 10000 us
vm_page_bootstrap: 127181 free pages
mig_table_max_displ = 70
CPU identification: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 Mobile CPU 1.70GHz
CPU features: FPU VME DE PSE TSC MSR PAE MCE CX8 SEP MTRR PGE MCA CMOV PAT PSE36 CLFSH DS ACPI MMX FXSR SSE SSE2 SS HTT TM
HTT: 0 core on a die; 1 logical cpu per core
CPU extended features:
Local APIC discovered and enabled
Enabling XMM register save/restore and SSE/SSE2 opcodes
battery clock configured
[RTCLOCK] frequency 1690000000 (1694981600)
PCI Ver=2.10 BusCount=3 Features=[ BIOS16 CM1 ]
ACPI CA 20050408 [debug level=0 layer=0]
Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.

using 655 buffer headers and 655 cluster IO buffer headers
Security auditing service present
BSM auditing present
disabled
From path: "mach_kernel", Waiting on IOProviderClassIOMediaContentApple_HFS
ACPI: Supported S-states [S0 S3 S4 S5] (S3)
AppleMTRRSupport: Enabled Write-Combining for memory range e0000000:400000
IOPCCard info: Intel PCIC probe: TI 4451 rev 00
IOPCCard info: Intel PCIC probe: , TI 4451 rev 00
AppleIntelPIIXPATA: ICH3 ATA/100 (CMD 0x1f0, CTR 0x3f4, IRQ 14, BM 0xbfa0)
Got boot device = IOService:/AppleACPIPlatformExpert/PCI0@0/AppleACP IPCI/IDE0@1F,1/AppleIntelPIIXATARoot/PRI@0/AppleIn telPIIXPATA/ATADeviceNub@0/IOATABlockStorageDriver /IOATABlockStorageDevice/IOBlockStorageDriver/HITA CHI_DK23DA-40 Media/IOFDiskPartitionScheme/Untitled 1@1
BSD root: disk0s1, major 14, minor 1
jnl: replay_journal: from: 6217728 to: 5309952 (joffset 0x12d000)
FireWire (OHCI) TI ID 8027 PCI now active, GUID 374fc00030d4b021; max speed s400.
Jettisoning kernel linker.
Resetting IOCatalogue.
Matching service count = 2
Matching service count = 4
Matching service count = 4
Matching service count = 4
Matching service count = 4
VID: stalling for module
Apple3Com3C90xB: 3Com EtherLink 3C905C Regs 0xf8fffc00 IRQ 11
Matching service count = 1
ApplePS2Trackpad: ALPS GlidePoint v4.34
raw version: Darwin Kernel Version 8.1.0: Thu May 26 19:10:26 PDT 2005; root:xnu-792.1.82.obj~3/RELEASE_I386
raw version: Darwin Kernel Version 8.1.0: Thu May 26 19:10:26 PDT 2005; root:xnu-792.1.82.obj~3/RELEASE_I386
IPv6 packet filtering initialized, default to accept, logging disabled
Apple3Com3C90xB: Ethernet address 00:06:5b:b9:85:c1
VID: vram [e0000000:08000000]
ERROR - CHUDProf.kext: CHUDProf::attachToChild - chudxnu_trap_callback_enter() error
System Doze

HW and SW must be priced separately

[davidwr]

If Apple is to succeed where its SW can run on commodity HW, it must price its SW and SW support accordingly.

This means the SW and related services must be both competitively priced AND be able to pay for itself.

Likewise, the HW and related services, if sold without operating systems either directly or through OEMs like Yellow Dog Linux, must also pay for itself.

Apple is a high-end company.
If I want to run Linux on their kick-ass boxes, I should pay less than if I'm running OSX. Likewise, if I want to run MacOSX on a generic Intel box or some other vendor's kick-ass box, then I should pay a lot more than for the hardware alone.

This may mean future OS X's retail for a lot more than $129 - MS charges close to $200 for a retail, non-upgrade MS-Home Edition and about half again more for the Pro edition. For upgrades or single-copy OEM pricing, knock off about $100.

Even big-name established Linux dealers charge enough to be profitable, if you include annual subscription fees that businesses gladly pay.

Hopefully, higher OS costs will translate into lower HW costs, so I don't have to pay the "Apple Premium" for a kick-ass Apple box that I want to put Linux on.

hum

[cg0def]

anybody else that STILL doesn't know about this?

Re:I just don't get it...

[frankm_slashdot]

instead of using my mod points to mod down this obvious flamebate... im only gonna offer one answer.

directed at "mac only software that doesnt have a good counterpart in the windows world"...

how about... lets see...
Shake - nothing NOTHING that good on windows.
Final Cut Pro - youre telling me that premiere can compete with FCP5?
Motion - ??
DVD Studio 4 - ???

yeah the list goes on and on. im an independent freelancer and i use a pc for my solidworks and autocad mechanical design work and my mac for video production stuff... could you find me an affordable alternative to those on windows that work as well?? i doubt it.

ah, and my file server runs gentoo linux while my firewall runs openbsd.

**taking my food back from the troll while simultaniously taking off my flame retardant underwear**

No, that's the last thing they need.

[TheLittleJetson]

If you want to play games, you can boot Windows on your x86 Mac. Hopefully someone makes a way to boot Windows as a Mach process and run win32 apps under OSX kinda like you run OS9 apps.

You mentioned Mac games.

[5n3ak3rp1mp]

Just as an FYI: WoW and all the Unreals not only exist on Macs but came out right around the time the PC versions did. It's especially interesting that you mentioned WoW as Blizzard has always been a staunch Mac supporter going all the way back to Warcraft I. I also am under the impression that Rome:TW is on its way. In the meantime, C&C:G works quite nicely.

Sure, we might not get ALL the games as Mac gamers but I'm fine with "the best of the best" as that's all I have time for, really.

See my other post in this forum "Confession: I am a gamer AND a Mac user".

I have a PC I use for testing (unfortunately it's not new enough for games) but the Mac does all the "heavy lifting" AND the game-playing (and the tv watching, the dvd watching and ripping, the HDTV recording, the music library, etc. etc.) AND it gets to sit in the DMZ of my router, handling any and all incoming requests ::gasp!:: Try THAT with a windows machine ;)

Re:In other words, you're a cheapskate

[erikkemperman]

Well, yes, if that means I don't pay extra for crap. That said: I could have been starving poor for all you know, you insensitive clod.

Nothing wrong with that, but at least grow the stones to admit it.

You might want to log in there, my anonymous friend of questionable stonage, before you expect me to be impressed.

Mirrors for video?

[netglen]

Are there mirrors setup for the videos?

Re:Why not offer it for all x86 systems?

[razmaspaz]

iTunes/iPod?
.Mac?
Apple has been hugely successful at selling apple branded subscriptions and devices that are dependent and locked into their software/hardware. They would love for every PC owner to start using iTunes and a $399 iPod, or .Mac on a pirated x86 Mac. It costs $99/year and stores your contacts, your data, your homepage...they have you for life at that point. Plus, when you get frustrated by the crashing that you will inivetably experience from an unsupported OSX, you will come crying home to momma (or Apple as it were) and fork over the premium for the hardware to run your favorite os in a stable manor.

Re:Neither you nor your mods read the article, rig

[That's Unpossible!]

The software is running on VMware.

No it's not. It's an image from vmware that can be written to a hard drive and run from your hardware.

Could anyone help?

[ndansmith]

I am really excited and want to do this project . . .
. . . but I am at work right now.

I would love to see a torrent which contains an ISO which has been patched to that it will boot in my x86 machine and install OSX. Several pages have instructions for making patched bootable ISOs, but they never post the finished result. Can anyone help a brother out?

Serious gamers use PC's

[majest!k]

From a gamers perspective, the main problem with OSX is all the really popular games still don't work with it.

Look at games like Counter-Strike or Battlefield2 - these are two of the biggest online FPS games at the moment, and neither one runs on OSX.

The games that DO run on OSX are generally the less popular kind - such as UT04 and Wolfenstein.

In comparison, the number of people who play CS online is more than three times greater than UT04 and Wolfenstein COMBINED.

Check these numbers out for yourself.

NONE of the top 3 games on that list run on OSX.

That's a major loss for Apple, and things will get worse before they get better as Microsoft pushes DirectX to more and more game developers to lock-in gamers to their platform.

Touting OSX as a gamer-friendly platform is all talk and not much walk at this point - and it will remain so until the most popular, most played games, become compatible with OSX.

Re:Serious gamers use PC's

[tholomyes]

Aside from the fact that list doesn't take into account MMORPGs, by the numbers the most popular games appear to be on consoles.

As of 2004:
-Console and portable software sales: $6.2 billion, up 8% from 2003
-PC game sales: $1.1 billion, down 2% from 2003 (doesn't take subscription revenue or game downloads into account)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game#Sales)

As far as which gamers are more "serious" I can only guess. Personally, I try not to take my games too seriously. Anyway, my friends are all cheap, they play Enemy Territory. :)

old news?

[miruku]

man, that story and the related torrent has been around for at least a week now. slashdot is just so slow these days :(

kind of the Linux thing

[drummr]

Not like I am some Linux power user, and I am not sure if anyone has already mentioned this...But if the main argument is that Apple could control thier support by only dealing with certified hardware, why not have two flavors for OSX? Don't distros like Mandriva put out one version which gives you support and one you can download that says you are pretty much on your own? And not saying Apple should make a free OS, but at lest a disclaimer that non-Apple hardware installations are not subject to support. They already do this with the Applecare system. If it's not covered, we don't want to talk to you. More or less a warranty void. And from what I have been reading on this subject, it's inevitable that someone will eventually hack the OS so it is usable on all x86 hardware. Drivers will be the killer in the end wouldn't they?

Re:kind of the Linux thing

[stilleon]

If end users have a bad experience on non-Apple hardware with an officially endorsed verision, then that colors their perception of OS X as a whole. En users will hear of problems with OS X and judge it wrong. It may not be true, but it does happen. However, I am not so convinced of the "it just works" motto of Apple. I have a production studio with a P4 based video editing system under Windows XP and a G5 running OS X and ProToolsHD. I have had very little problem in the Windows system, but some nightmares with the Apple system. Whatever works for you, that's what you use.

Return Of Anandtech Benchmark?

[cmholm]

I've seen the server benchmark, and it helps explain the rotten Apache test results I've seen in the likes of PCMag. I immediately wondered if the open Darwin code has the same problem, or if the thread handling issue is limited to OSX.

In the meantime, someone's surplus B&W G3 has come my way, so I'm tempted to put a few lunch hours into a three way thread bench test between OSX, Darwin, and Debian. We'll see if temptation overcomes the anticipated boredom from sitting through three different hour long installation sessions.

Is the whole story cached?

[lullabud]

Maybe it's just me not knowing how to work slashcache, but only the first page of that article seems to work, and it has no technical information. All the links point off-site back to the cached archive, and their server isn't responding right now. I was hoping for a printable link with all the info on a single page, but alas it is not there... Anywhere else I can find this educational article which I will only be using for educational purposes?

Re:Is the whole story cached?

[Penguinoflight]

Slashcache is just another name for mirrordot as far as I know. I'm sorry the cache wasn't very good. You'll probably have to wait for PC world or the WSJ to get the article before it can be used for academic educational purposes. I found pcworld invaluable when writing a cpu comparison for technical writing (it didn't turn out too well, not enough sources).

Am I missing the significance of this or what?

[kurbchekt]

I mean, FreeBSD does tend to run well on PC's...

Re:Neither you nor your mods read the article, rig

[Valdrax]

It's both. See Solution #1 -- run VMware so that it will run on any system. It's slow and isn't perfect, but problems are being rapidly addressed. Solution #2 is running it on the right kind of hardware.

I have to upgrade my PC...

[Eminence]

I have an Athlon XP on a MSI motherboard, two years old. Time to upgrade to a P4 to run OS X.

(I would love to upgrade to a Powerbook instead, but I don't have spare $2000 at the moment)

Re:Neither you nor your mods read the article, rig

[smcavoy]

VMware does NOT emulate a CPU in any way. it executes guest os instructions on the CPU. That's why it fairly snappy.
Virtual PC on the Mac actually emulates a x86 CPU which is why it's pig slow.

Watch Office for the Mac disappear

[reptilicus]

If Apple opened their OS to commodity PC's how long do you think it would take for MS to drop Office for the Mac? This would essentially kill the market, leaving Apple with a slow drift into bankruptcy.

Re:Watch Office for the Mac disappear

[Pig Hogger]

If Apple opened their OS to commodity PC's how long do you think it would take for MS to drop Office for the Mac? This would essentially kill the market, leaving Apple with a slow drift into bankruptcy.

It nearly happenned in the past. Right after the mac was launched, Apple was to announce a super-duper "object-oriented basic" that, apparentely, was very powerful AND easy to learn.

Microsoft threatened to pull JAZZ (the ancestor of EXCEL) off the market if Apple went ahead.

Apple canned the O-O Basic...

Re:Watch Office for the Mac disappear

[log0n]

I doubt it. For the corporate user, Apple works pretty well with standard MS stuff (exchange calendars, servers, etc). For the home user, iWork is SIGNIFICANTLY better (easier to use while producing higher quality results - also considering workflow in this comparison) than Office for text publishing, design and layout, etc.

People have been saying for a couple decads that Apple has nowhere to go except bankruptcy court but it seems more like wishful thinking than grounded fact.

OT: Three figures?

[SaDan]

It's great to drive around the winding roads of Yorkshire (where I live) and to cruise on the motorway near three figures.

Is that in kph or mph? :-)

Hopefully

[ApheX]

The wonderful thing about Macs is that its a closed system. Everything works so well because instead of having to always keep the absolute least common denominator in mind (XP running on a 300MHz PII) they can keep the amount of hardware it runs on fairly slim, and not have to go crazy with drivers, support, etc. IMHO that goes a long way keeping the system fast and stable.

I don't have a Mac and would love to have OSX on my thinkpad, but not at the expense of having it run like Windows.

Re:Hopefully

[Budenny]

Apple Macs still will be a closed system. OSX needn't be. The problem though is the demands of the hardware and the software pieces push in different directions. If you have a hardware division it will want to compete with other hardware suppliers, which means get the costs out and sell with whatever OS people want to buy. If you have an OS division, it will want to sell as many as possible, so it will want all features equally good for all platforms and won't favour the in house manufacturer. Its the same kind of thing that sunk people offering bundles of content and network access. The different bits pulling in different directions. But the alternative is retreat to the high price niche, which is what they seem to be doing, and the jury is still out on whether that's sustainable long term.

Re:I just don't get it...

[frankm_slashdot]

haha.. i probably would have taken you more seriously had you not posted as a/c.. but anyway..

other than video production & editing/sound production & editing... there isnt much else offered that isnt meant to be eye catching or anything like that.. so i guess it excells at selling itself to the artsy fartsy types like myself..

i agree 100% about not needing a whole slew of g5 servers running os x to use as an ssh server - theres no point in wasting that kinda money...

honestly even though i have a pc sitting right next to it i tend to use it for my day to day activities as well... itunes is good safari is nice... and pages - its MS Word-alike - is decent...

i guess what it really comes down to is that i sit at both of my machines for business and when i want to do something fun i just do it with whatevers right in front of me.. to the basic end user it really doesnt make a difference and unless you have big bucks to spend and can make use of it - there isnt a point to buy a mac. when they come out on intel it will hopefully lower the price somewhat and then it will just become a matter of a person choosing solely on what they think is "prettier" and the functionality wont matter...

It can be done, we could do it, but it would be

[Orion Blastar]

wrong to do so.

It is unethical and in violation of the Apple EULA to do that. It also may be supporting piracy of OSX, and cut into Macintosh sales if this is allowed to be done unchecked. Besides, it is easier for a layman to spend $500 on a Mac Mini, than hack together an image file that is OSX running on an expensive X86 system using emulators.

Much as I'd like to use and develop for OSX, this is not something I would condone doing or using. Besides I have a lifetime of Apple-bashing and Macintosh-bashing, and now that the PC is the Macintosh and the Macintosh is the PC, I no longer have the need or desire to Apple-bash or Macintosh-bash. I welcome our Macintosh brothers and sisters into the PC Universe, running on X86 processors, and now finally there can be peace in the Universe. Solutions to world hunger, poverty, and a cure for cancer, dogs and cats living together, and the usual signs of the Apocalypse that signal that Jesus is coming back. All that is left is that the Chicago Cubs win a World Series, and we will know for sure if the Apocalypse is true or not. ;)

Re:It can be done, we could do it, but it would be

[jonfr]

It has been done, see here > http://board.tehboard.com/index.php?showtopic=807

I find this to be really intresting feature in MacOS X.

Mod apple bias

[jaypaulw]

I have to say that I really notice a trend that everything thats get modded up is pro apple corporation $ and pro status quo.

I've been moded as a troll for suggesting that apple hardward design isn't anything special (the industrial design is *quite* special)

The bottom line is that the same "generic" (or as I like to call it "standard") hardware is in macs as it is in PCs. The same manufacturers are manufacturing and the same materials are going in to it.

No one on here is really expert enough to know the financial implications of apple's decisions. But I really like OS X. I would love to see Apple compete more directly with microsoft and linux. Technically there is no reason os x shouldn't be able to run *perfectly* well on standard x86 hardware.

It seems like people are able to get linux working well on x86 hardware, and that's without the benefit of the existing hardware support relationships apple has.

anyway i'm glad you people like apple but get over it

and for the love of heaven stop with the car analogies.

Re:Mod apple bias

[Tibor the Hun]

I can see from your post history that you are a serious poster, and not a troll.
I'll point out a couple of things, on which I am not an authority, but which seem to be taken as given on /. in regards to Apple.

I'm not sure what you mean by industrial design being special, while hardware design is not. I do want to point out that the design of hardware inside a G5 is quite special, as there are no wires anywhere.
To different people that may not mean much, but to those of us who replace hardware for living, it means that they took an extra step towards good sense. Whether that is industrial or hardware design, I'll leave to design critics.

The reason why Apple might be hesitant to release OS X for the clusterfuck that is the WinTel world of drivers is the fact that the WinTel world of drivers is pretty well a clusterfuck.
Who's gonna be the first to start rewriting all of their hardware drivers for an OS that has 0 % of the market?

If you are ready to make an argument regarding OS X and drivers please do so now, and explain why you think that OS X should run perfectly on standard x86 hardware.

Ironically, I may well be blowing smoke up my own ass because apple has done some very crazy stuff recently (switched to BSD, released iTunes for windows, switched to Intel). I certainly can't say that they won't release a generic x86 OS, but if you or anyone else could explain the driver situation, I think the rest of us would apprecciate it.

Re:Mod apple bias

[jaypaulw]

Intel motherboard support is probably an easy likely place to start, if selling OS X to a larger market is teh goal. The vast majority of the time of course nearly everything is on the motherboard including the chipset, disk controllers, the NIC, the audio, and quite often the video. Intel really only has had a few dozen of these over the past years. There really isn't the zillions of configurations that people expect there are.

They of course don't have to try and support legacy products right away.

Of course, you realize that your precious macs are very likely going to have pretty much standard intel motherboards in them. That means that dell, who has 33% of the desktop computer market would be able to run OS X without any engineering obstacles at all. It's only going to be an arbitrary/business decision that closes that OS.

As far as wiring, that was a cool trick, not exactly revolutionary, the wires are there I believe they are just hidden. It's a trade off between flexibility and tidyness. You can't exactly add a scsi card and raid array to the inside of one those boxes. The G5 powermac is absolutely beautiful to look at inside and out.

Re:Mod apple bias

[Tibor the Hun]

We'll see. They may very well release it for x86, but I am not so sure that the new motherboards will be standard Intel motherboards. I think they will change them significantly, so that they don't have to deal with DRM for the OS.
But,we'll see, I've been wrong before, and it's not wise to hold speculation as facts...

I bet Apple has a "Plan B" for MS Office, too

[KH2002]

"If Apple opened their OS to commodity PC's how long do you think it would take for MS to drop Office for the Mac? This would essentially kill the market..."

I might have agreed with this a few years ago, but not anymore. Under Steve Jobs II, Apple has shown itself to be a master of "Plan B." After all, OS X was running secretly on Intel for 5 years -- almost no one expected Apple could lose PPC so smoothly.

I suspect Apple has a Plan B for MS Office, too. Anything else would be very unwise, and potentially grounds for a shareholder lawsuit.

Re:I bet Apple has a "Plan B" for MS Office, too

[geoffspear]

They haven't made a single retail sale of an Intel-based Mac, and already you're announcing that the transition went "smoothly"?

Re:I bet Apple has a "Plan B" for MS Office, too

[KH2002]

You're interpreting a past tense into my post that doesn't exist.

What has happened *so far* has been smooth -- growing list of announcements for supported apps; no prominent platform defections or developer complaints; sales of current hardware not just steady, but increasing; analysts happy & press generally quite positive; stock price solid...

I cannot imagine the Intel "Plan B" going smoother *at this stage*, and I can easily imagine it far worse.

really simple questions

[vena]

1. Apple would have to support a massively larger amount of hardware.

why?

2. there would be a loss of branding and a lowering of the quality associated with OS X.

how?

3. there are plenty of games on the Mac, but if you want the very latest cutting-edge PC games you'd never be satisfied anyway since you'd need ATI/nVidia making their latest cards in Mac versions too.

they do. (i know, not a question)

Price of Admission...

[brianimator]

Let's just hope that this translates into more people actually purchasing, and thereby improving OS X. These developments, while exciting, are actually illegal. Should this capability exist when actual "MacTels" ship, do us all a favor, and pay for a legitimate copy - no matter the hardware you use.

All they gotta do is support Linux modules...

[Kazoo the Clown]

Not sure how hard that would be (don't know the OS X kernel), but if they could do that even if just to the extent that a few minor mods were required, a lot of the drivers would be available, and they wouldn't actually have to support them. Plus, flaky drivers in a Unix environment aren't as bad as flaky drivers in Windows, as they won't take the whole system down quite so often-- Unixes are a little more insulated from individual wayward programs than Windows is and the implementations are cleaner (no 16-bit THUNKs to worry about :-)...

Yeah, the hardware support is the killer, and why they won't do it. Where would all the drivers for all the obsolete hardware out there come from? Just getting it to boot on most 3-year old systems would mean having to write tens of thousands of drivers. Not gonna happen.

You have to realize, that if Apple does nothing, Microsoft and Linux are going to be battling it out over the next generation of desktops running on ultracheap commodity hardware. Apple has a unique opportunity here to jump in and really make some inroads into that marketplace, perhaps even to become the major player. They have a mature, solid and easy to use product that would be way ahead of either Microsoft or Linux in their own marketplace, if it could run on that same commodity hardware.

Plus, Apple's hardware has never been their strong point-- early Macs for example, were minimalist hardware, doing everything in software that the competition was doing in hardware. Their "hardware" innovations have been mostly cosmetics-- "toaster computers," "color coordinated computers," etc. Software has always been their business, certainly enhanced by the fact that their expensive "Sharper Image" dongle hardware had huge margins-- but those margins have been dwindling as commodity hardware gets cheaper and cheaper and they have to follow suit to an extent or the price difference gets so large they start losing out too much because of it. Now, they're butting up against the fact that they can't make the hardware themselves anywhere near as cheap as the competitive marketplace is getting it for, so even a 20% margin isn't enough to cover it-- they're experiencing a squeeze that they have to find a solution for, and at the same time there's this new opportunity, see, as Windows is now aged to the point that it's time for a quantum jump into a new product-- a perfect time for Apple to jump in and grab a serious piece of the action. Plus, Linux is whittling on it as well, and can prove to be somewhat of an ally in several ways-- it's another "unix," a source of drivers and other compatible code, etc...

I use Linux a lot now, but if I could get OS-X that would run on my generic '86 boxes, I'd probably move in that direction for the desktop, as Apple's is light years ahead of that KDE/GNOME and dependency hell crap IMHO (I run Linux, but primarily in console mode). Instead of dual-booting to Windows I'd dual boot to OS-X and would probably end up spending more time in OS-X than Linux in the long run...

Mac Mini a far better plan than Mac clones

[AHumbleOpinion]

Well, how come? Mac clones were simply better, i.e. cheaper and more powerful. For example, the first quad-processor Mac came from Daystar and not from Apple.

Wrong, most Mac clones were merely cheaper, both in terms of quality and price. We tried a couple. Without a hardware lockin very few people are going to pay Apple's relatively high premium price. The Mini is a refreshing exception, the "premium" doesn't add much cost there. Introducing the Mini was a far better plan than Mac clones.

Mirror for HOWTO Guide

[tini1212]

http://mirrordot.org/stories/8e3fd00a12869f50e7ecc 0512672bf76/index.html

Re:Random thoughts on games

[xbasque]

i'm not a gamer , i never have been , and frankly i could care less about games . having said that , i understand your point full well .

that's why i think what apple should do (steve - are you listening?) is take WINE and push it to the point where windows games play well on it , integrate it transparently into macosx86 , and release it with the first x86 mac . it's the single move that would most enhance the mac's chances at greatly increasing market share . i bet we could have 10% in the US by the end of the decade .

on the other hand , i'd be reluctant to push for full win32 api compatibility , as that would only encourage developers to drop native osx app development ... and kill the platform .

Try this...

[Sr. Pato]

If you're that into games, why don't you just get a dedicated game machine, e.g., PS2, Xbox, etc., for games and a Mac to do the rest of your stuff?

Try running 'Doom 3' or 'Unreal Tournament 2004' with max graphics enabled on a PC, (with a mouse and keyboard), and then try running it on an XBOX with a gamepad. Then tell me why we put up with Windows.

Re:Why not offer it for all x86 systems?

[KillShill]

and why would you need to buy a specific set of hardware for osx if it worked on any x86 computer?

i have a great computer now... why should i HAVE to buy an apple-based x86 which uses an inferior intel cpu?

clearly, you've been drinking the kool aid.

if they just sold osx and people had the choice of installing it on any computer (choice... something you don't/won't have with apple's unholy marriage to insidious computing) but refusing support for any non-authorized configurations, then everyone would be happy. people could develop drivers for the non-supported hw and have a fully functional osx setup.

apple is not about choice, if they were they would let the OWNER of the software install it where they chose. hell, even microsoft lets people install windows anywhere. it works under linux (wine), mac osx (ironic, no?), unix, any os that chooses to write software to enable support.

when windows is more free than macosx... one has to question why.

oh please

[haaz]

I know this is redundant, but please don't call it the "Dvorak prophecy". It gives him more credit than he's worth, as does this very post. If the so called "Dvorak prophecy" were true, Apple would be another PC clone maker that went out of business in the late 1980s after struggling to introduce a unique flavor to the x86 clone market.

Re:Meh.

[Kynmore]

See, I like his msuic. I don't know the name of any peice, but a friend of mine make me a cassette of one of her CDs for my car. Good stuff.

So, is GNU/Linux low quality software?

[cbreaker]

It runs on just about everything. Yet I still believe it's high quality software.

I don't see MacOS being all that different - it's got it's own GUI on top, and it just talks API's to the kernel which talks to drivers which talk to the hardware. Changing the hardware around in all sorts of ways won't change the GUI any, nor the kernel. Just the drivers.

I think it would still be MacOSX, it would still be just as quality as you percieve it to be now on Apple's own hardware.

Lowering the quality of the hardware would lower the quality of the hardware, not the software. You should keep in mind that Apple doesn't use any higher quality motherboards and CPU's then anyone else.

You are right, however...

[neoshroom]

2 out of 3 of those games are availible for Mac. The OS X port of World of Warcraft is quite nice...level 24 Tauren Hunter myself...;)

Windows XP

[falconwolf]

I had problems with my P4 and XP, but it was the hardware. This machine seems bulletproof. I don't think I've *ever* gotten a blue screen.

I had my first experience using XP in a class in college. It was on a new Dell and when I first walked into class on the first day I turned the PC on. It didn't finish booting up instead I got the BSOD, Blue Screen of Death, and had to give it the three finger salute to reboot. I've heard others say they never had a problem with XP but the first tyme I booted a PC with it I did. If it works for you good but not me. Though I've been using PCs for the past several years as my primary computer I plan on making my next computer a Mac. Intel based or not I'm not sure. I'm looking to get a 17" Powerbook in January or February but if Apple has released an Intel based 17" Powerbook by then I'll compare it's price and performance to a G4 before I decide.

Falcon

Ooh, I don't like XP's activation requirement either.

Re:Windows XP

[Gondola]

Well, to be honest, I've had problems in the past, with a different PC -- I ascribe it to hardware incompatibility or my inexpert handling of parts. I built the other PC (and this one) from parts, and I didn't do due diligence for compatibility on the other one. It always ran hot, IRQ conflicts, etc.

>>Ooh, I don't like XP's activation requirement either.

My copies of XP don't require activation... But yeah, that's very distasteful to me. Big Brother and all that.

Re:Windows XP

[falconwolf]

I've had problems in the past, with a different PC

The PC I'm using now is my fourth with a version of Windows. This one is an HP Pavilion, two others were Gateway laptops, and the other one is a DEC Alpha from Microway. This PC has Windows ME, the first laptop had Win95, the second Win98, and the Alpha, NT4.0. Of the four the only one I haven't had any problems with Windows is the Alpha. However because it's an Alpha not an Intel I haven't been able to get much software installed on it so I haven't used it much, and not at all in more than a couple of years.

My copies of XP don't require activation.

Yea, someone told me that some editions of XP were released that didn't require activation but at the same tyme he said good luck trying to find one. When I get the Powerbook I plan on getting Virtual PC with Win2000 but unless and until Microsoft gets rid of activation I don't plan on getting another Windows OS.

Falcon

Apple is following in the footsteps of Microsoft o

[sagefire.org]

All you had to do to illegally copy MS Word back in the days of DOS was to duplicate the files in the same dir structure on a new machine. back in the days of Single and Double density disks, this took a bit of time, but it worked.

If you tried to do the same with Word Perfect, it did not work.

So, MS Word gained market share through piracy.

In the same way, MacOS X x86 will gain marketshare. If Apple does nothing to stop the geek community running OSX on non-Apple hardware, eventually the IT people among us will start to reccommend OSX to the schools and businesses that we work for.

We may also reccommend macs to friends that we don't have time to build machines for.

So, if Apple learns from old MS strategy on this one, I say they win.

i downloaded the second video using bittorrent

[petermgreen]

and quicktime says it can't find a decompressor

anyone got any hints for actually making it play?

Re:i downloaded the second video using bittorrent

[Swift2001]

It's H.264, according to QT 7. You probably can get it to play with VLC.

Re:I just don't get it...

[dfghjk]

please take off the goggles.

WWJP?

[oaklybonn]

here's a torrent for the x86 dev kit: http://torrentspy.com/search.asp?mode=torrentdetai ls&id=369442&query=OS+ [torrentspy.com]
--
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World" 1 John 4:14

(What would jesus pirate?)

vlc did it

[petermgreen]

i just installed vlc and it played just fine in that

PICO Sucks

[adiposity]

Every version of Red Hat since ~4.0 has had special patches to unbreak it (home/end/pgup/pgdn keys, mostly). I had to apply these patches on FreeBSD since the port uses that vanilla source. Yes, technically this is not a "bug" but it's annoying not having the use of keys that have been on keyboards for 15 years. Of course, I love VI and it has at least as many problems depending on the term type... -Dan

Re:PICO Sucks

[bani]

download the stock pico source, unchanged, compile it on osx and it works perfectly. no patches needed.

pico sucks yeah, but the stock source works perfectly on osx. so how apple managed to break it is beyond me. but they did, and that's quite an accomplishment.

wouldnt be suprised if they broke vi too.

pico breakage is only 1 of 1.58E+93 annoyances/bugs in osx though.

Re:Neither you nor your mods read the article, rig

[yamla]

VMWare does not emulate SSE3 instructions. If your CPU supports SSE3, you'll be able to use these instructions inside of VMWare. If it doesn't, you won't. I think you misunderstand how VMWare works.

Dvorak? This has nothing to do with Dvorak.

[argent]

I predicted this before he did. I predicted this within seconds of Steve Jobs' announcement. Not that this is evidence of any great intellect or precognition -- so did anyone who wasn't either completely out of the loop or deep in the reality alteration field. It was about as hard to predict as sunrise tomorrow.

And just as this doesn't imply anything about my predictive ability, it doesn't imply anything about Dvorak's, nor anything about the validity of any other predictions he's made.

I'd pay Apple's premium to get OSX on a thinkpad.

[argent]

To me, the joy of OS X is that it recognizes everything in the box from the very beginning, and I don't need to open the case for anything if I don't want to.

The same is true of any competant Intel laptop, pretty much. It's certainly true of Thinkpads, and they're better as laptops than any of Apple's 'books as well.

So why am I considering an iBook, even though I hate the 'books?

Because the Joy of OSX is that the software just works. I went through hell getting OSX up in the first place, on a 7500 with third party upgrades and open source patches and XPostFacto to tweak the boot CD. Cheap old NIC, old mainboards with ADB and no USB, no Firewire, no IDE, no DVI, no Altivec, no GPU. But once it was up it was still a joy. Slow, and I wouldn't want to go back to it now... but it worked.

And if it meant I could get OSX on a Thinkpad, and I had to pay Apple the Mac Tax on an iBook in cash, so OSX by itself cost something like $400... I'd still do it. Because OSX is worth it to me.

But I'm not downloading the torrent and cracking OSX and installing it on the sly.

Come on, Apple, get a clue... you can have your cake and eat it too.

You drive a Volvo and you call something soulless.

[HornWumpus]

That's the most ironic thing I've ever seen on slashdot.

Volvos might be reliable but even you don't get in line behind them at red lights do you? No worse drivers on the planet.

upgrading MacOS

[falconwolf]

Apple started charging $200 or whatever it is for a new version of the OS every year or two

The upgrade to Mac OS X v10.4 "Tiger" costs $130. It's the Family Pack which allows up to five Macs to be upgraded that costs $200.

Falcon

Software vs Hardware

[DECS]

Steve Jobs once commented that Apple, like Microsoft, can "print money" in a way that its hardware competitors (like Dell) can't.

But before you get carried away suggesting that Apple throw away their existing computer company and become a software company, consider this:

1) Microsoft isn't rich and powerful because they deliver the best OS technology, or because they compete in software value, but rather because they own a monopoly in the PC OS Software market, a monopoly they built through predatory marketing and anti-competitive deals with hardware makers that killed rivals. Microsoft does not compete in software sales, they have imposed a tax on every PC sold in the last two decades.

2) Free/OSS software is frequently based upon a support business plan. If the world was ready to pay money for software, this might not have been necessary. Nobody is really excited about buying software, unless it is being expertly sold to them with some handholding. As noted above, Microsoft got around this by making Windows sales invisible to hardware buyers.

3) There is a long list of OS efforts that have failed to survive as software only companies: DR-DOS, NeXTStep, BeOS, OS/2, AmigaOS. They didn't succeed, even though they were "printing money" and enjoying those 'high margin profits' on every unit sold.

4) Apple has sucessfully made money selling their own computers as long as they've been around. They currently make higher margins than PC makers. Risking that sucess to take a shot at a software sales business plan with a very high mortality rate does not sound sensible.

5) While common sense suggests the way to make money is by giving away razor handles and selling blades, Apple has managed to sell Macs (handles) at a good profit, while also selling blades (Mac OS X) to their customers better than Microsoft. In 5 years, Apple has sold 4 paid versions of OS X, compared to 2 paid upgrades of Windows from Microsoft. Of course, Microsoft doens't sell their customers many upgrade copies of Windows, they just collect taxes in the form of site licenses and new hardware tariffs. Hard to compete with that.

So do the math. Will Apple benefit from gutting their low end Mac market, and handing their iBook and iMac sales to HP and Dell, on the gamble that users will buy paid upgrades to OS X, rather than pirate it? They would be likely to lose their high end market as well, to Dell, AlienWare and whoever else. And their XServes. Yeah, that sounds bad.

Why not keep those home Mac buyers at the Apple Store, sell them new iBooks and iMacs, and then show them why they also might want iWork, iLife, a printer, an iPod and a new version of OS X, as well as AppleCare and .Mac, and then another iBook and then the next version of OS X?

Or how about education customers, who buy labs of laptops and Airports and XServes and XS RAIDS, should Apple send their customers to Dell for all that gear, and then try to sell them OS X in place of the Windows they already licensed through Dell?

Fucking Duh, yeah they'd be better off just selling an OS X license to a few schlumps who decided not to bother with the torrent download. Of the 100,000 Slashdotters who'd check out OS X on their PC, how many would pay for it in a retail box? A whole lot less than would consider buying a Mac Mini or PowerBook, if the PC wasn't an option.

You better bet Apple will do everything possible to make OS X run clumsily on PCs, and break hacks with every software update. Do you supose Apple will spare PC pirates the indignation they launched upon Real's for their Harmony AAC copy protection designed to play music on the iPod?

6) Apple recently complimented their sucessful hardware and software sales on the Mac platform with the iPod platform, which similarly sells higher margin hardware along with supplementary software sales (iTMS) and peripherals. In the case of the iPod, free software (iTunes) drives hardware sales. Do you think Apple could have sold iTunes and made as much profit as they do now with the iPod? What if they sold iTunes for all the WMA players out there, would that make them lots of money?

So let me get this straight

[OO7david]

You pick a Mac knowing full well what is ahead and then complain about a lack of choices? Wasn't that self-determined when you decided to go Mac?

Furthermore, while you may have more choice with x86 hardware, if you have Windows, what kind of choice do you have software side? If you plan on using Linux, well, that is the most free option, but that has been long established.

By analogy, why buy an embedded device if you can do X with the hardware? Well, you buy it because that choice fills your need.

hardware failures

[falconwolf]

I get a kick out of hearing people talk about "quality control" from Apple.

By brother went to the dark side a few months ago and got a mac laptop. Dont ask me for model type cause I dont know, I've never put one of my fingerprints on it. Anyway, he has had it sent in due to HARDWARE failure more times in the past 3 months then the 2 laptops and 5 desktops have had hardware failures in the past 10 years.

My first PC was a laptop from Gateway and less than a year after I got it the hd died so Gateway sent me a new one. A couple of months later ithe laptop died again and I talked tech support but they couldn't figure out what was wrong so they had me send it in. Once they had it they ran tests on it and found out the motherboard died so they since me a replacement. They sent it second day delivery but I didn't get it so the next day I called and they said it had been delivered and asked me to check with the the leasing office where I lived. But they didn't have it so I called back and they said they's send another one. A week later I still hadn't gotten one back so I called again. They said they were having difficulty getting the parts for a new one but that they'd send it as soon as they could. I finally got it about a month later. The second PC I got was also a laptop from Gateway and about a month later the LCD display cracked, sorry that's not covered, even with the extended service plan I got with it. So I asked how much it would cost to replace and all they could say was up to $1200, not even a firm price, forget that.

The computer I'm using now is my fourth PC and I've had two hds die on it as well as the motherboard. The only PC I've had that didn't have a hardware problem, it's also the only one I didn't have problems with Windows, is a DEC Alpha from Microway.

At the same tyme I've had two Macs, both of which I bought used. The first was a Mac SE/30 I got in 1992. In 2000 the floppy drive finally died. The second one is a PowerMac 7300/200. I got it in 2000 a few months after my first died and I've never had a problem with it.

Falcon

Re:This is 'news'?

[inkswamp]

Actually, this story is pretty well-established: hard-to-fake handheld videos of systems cold-booting into OS X

It certainly is not. Edit together a full-screen film that appears to be the bootup process then run the film through the laptop's screen and film away. That's not hard at all.

Just sell MacOSX without Rosetta

[vhogemann]

PowerMacs will continue to ship with PowerPC 970 for a good period of time, and more likely will be the last piece of hardware they'll migrate to x86.

Most Apple's professional software will continue to be target at PPC, because of the PowerMacs. Hell, if IBM manage to deliver a PPC970 suited for portables probably even the PowerBooks will remain PPC based.

This leaves Apple with a PPC based professional line, and the non-pro stuff will go x86, so they move away from FreeScale.

Ok, now follow me... Rosetta will play an essential role here. Without it, many applications won't run at all on the x86 Macs.

My point is, Apple could sell ( with a low price) an OSX version without Rosetta to run on vanilla PCs! Without the ability to run software like Photoshop, FinalCut, and others it wouldn't hurt their hardware sales... and would help to make MacOSX much more popular.

free porting and driver development for Apple!

[logicpaw]

So Apple has a large portion of the premium market captured because high-end buyers like their pretty boxen and will pay for supported hardware. But how to capture a lot of mindshare by getting OS X into the hands of lots of low-end users without the massive driver development required for it to run on lots of crufty low-end PC's, and the related support costs?

Easy...

1) Put some DRM (but nothing tooo hard to crack) into OS X to rile up the hacking community, and let them do all the "porting" to brand X boxen because "it's a challange".
2) Obviously refuse to support this unlicensed usage.
3) Profit (from the huge user base of people who wouldn't have paid for OS X any way, and the resulting increased mindshare).

Re:Why not offer it for all x86 systems?

[Nonoche]

Why would they, when it makes no business sense? It's not like companies were about giving users choices, especially if such choices would make them lose money...

Re:I just don't get it...

[Nonoche]

well, how about running Photoshop, MS Office, etc, on a Unix machine? How about the security? How about the ease of use? (yes, Mac OS X is a very elegant OS, full of many well-thought details, that helps getting the job done instead of getting in the way, you should try it seriously some day)

The great thing about Macs has always been and always will be their OS. That's what makes Macs.

good job

[Tibor the Hun]

i think efforts like this are important. it shows the desire of x86 users to use the tiger. and who knows, maybe apple will do the unthinkable again. at this point who is to say that they won't?

on behalf of apple users, i'd like to welcome all of you brave X86 adopters out there to the world of OS X. now go and get yourself a powerbook or an ibook and experience the wonders of integrated USB, FireWire and other cool stuff. you're still only getting half of an apple...

Re:Meh.

[Nonoche]

I think it's Dvorjak...

Re:I'd pay Apple's premium to get OSX on a thinkpa

[EggyToast]

Interestingly enough, since there are the occasional unfortunate things that you need Windows for (especially when you mess in multimedia), I picked up a laptop for precisely that reason. I *can't* mess with the guts. It's never obsolete until it breaks, really. They just get less portable.

However, I'm also in the same boat as you with a laptop. Even though I've got the Windows laptop, I want a mac laptop. Just a tiny one, portable, something I can haul around and watch the occasional video, surf, etc. I don't really want to spend the money on it. I've got a nice newer Powermac that's not going anywhere and does most of the work around here. But... There are some things that the Apple laptops do right, like style, styling, portability. But the screens and trackpads turn me right off. I know there are hacks for the trackpad, but nothing's going to make those screens go to a higher resolution.

I'm relieved by the idea that the first Intel products are likely to be the laptop line. More importantly, after they've been out for a while, people will have a chance to test out dual booting other operating systems. The idea that I can wait and have a Mac laptop that lets me switch over to windows for the few times I need to keeps my wallet closed ;D

Are Macs better?

[falconwolf]

So are you saying Apple is better, or just brand-name?

Having been using WinTels almost exclusively the last several years but having used Macs as well I'll say Macs are definitely better. There are some things I prefer about WinTels but I'd bet that given a few weeks with daily Mac use I'll make the adjustments. I've had, owned, four PCs and two Macs. My first Mac I bought used in 1992 and I used it until the floppy drive died in 2000. That was the only problem I ever had with it, well other than the floppy was only 800k double density/double sided and the hd was only 2MB. My second Mac I got in 2000 used and though I haven't booted it in more than a year I never had a technical problem, hardware failure or problem with software, with it.

I've also had four PCs. The first I got in 1997 and it was a laptop. Within a year I had the hd fail and a couple of months later the motherboard died. The next, actually third, PC I had was a second laptop I also got in 2000 and within a couple of months the LCD cracked. Even though I got an extended service plan with it the LCD wasn't covered. The PC I'm using now I got in 2001. Since I've had it I've had two hds die as well as the motherboard. The only PC I got I didn't have hardware or software, ie OS, problems with is a tower I got at the same tyme I got the first laptop. However it has DEC's Alpha processor not an X86, Intel or AMD and because of this I haven't been able to install much software or use it much.

So, from personal experience I definitely say Macs are better than PCs.

Falcon

Re:Are Macs better?

[bhtooefr]

Re: your Alpha rig: It'll run Linux, and it'll run NT4. Run NT4, and it'll run anything a Pentium from whatever era that Alpha came from could run, and at about the same speed.

Re:Are Macs better?

[falconwolf]

Re: your Alpha rig: It'll run Linux, and it'll run NT4. Run NT4, and it'll run anything a Pentium from whatever era that Alpha came from could run, and at about the same speed.

My Alpha does have NT 4.0 on it. The only commercial software I was able to install was Borland C++ Powerbuilder. Other that I did install some shareware programs, Coffeecup HTML and two or three others though I don't recall what. Maybe Paint Shop Pro but I'm not sure. Everything else I tried to install I got an error message saying the cpu was wrong. And yes I used DEC's FX32! and tried to keep it updated.

Fact is is that even with FX32! an Alpha running NT 4.0 won't install and run all the software an Intel or AMD CPU running NT will, unless some esoteric incantation or spell I don't know is needed. I got my first laptop at the same tyme and installed or tried to install all the software I got on both of them. What I liked about it was that the software it ran ran faster than other PCs, which is why I got it.

Falcon

Re:Are Macs better?

[bhtooefr]

Looking at Byte's review of FX!32, here goes:

The real value of FX!32 is that Alpha users no longer need an Intel system to use Win32 applications. For 16-bit Windows applications, however, you'll need Insignia Solutions' SoftWindows, a traditional (slow) emulator.

If there's 16-bit code in there, that explains it.

Torrent of VMWare files here

[Aaron England]

Torrent of VMWare files here

Re:This is 'news'?

[ZackSchil]

He did a pretty good job of pretending to use the computer then.

If this really worked...

[kyhwana]

Why isn't there a working bootable vmware image all setup so you can just boot OS X in vmware without having to screw around, posted somewhere? (Ie, on the illegal torrent sites)

Mac Powerbooks

[falconwolf]

Powerbooks are good, but the current crop of Powerbooks are so underpowered that I think Apple needs to drop the price by 33%. I've got a Pismo that I'm sticking with until the PB finally come with a CPU that was produced after 2000.

I was thinking that was a good reason Apple decided to switch to Intels from PPCs, neither Freescale nor IBM had a G5 that was cool enough to use in a powerbook and they were taking too long to increase the speeds of PPCs. I don't know if it's true but I heard that Powerbooks were Apple's biggest sellers.

Falcon

Re:I'd pay Apple's premium to get OSX on a thinkpa

[falconwolf]

I'm relieved by the idea that the first Intel products are likely to be the laptop line.

I hope so as I'm planning on getting a 17" Powerbook early next year. For one thing I'd hope Intel Powerbooks would drive the price of G4 Powerbooks down. Then I'd also like to compare the price/performance of the two. As for switching to, booting into Windows, I plan on getting Virtual PC with Win2000 so the few tymes I need to I can use Windows with having to reboot. However with a big enough hd or a second one I could both use Virtual PC for lightway work and dual boot for heavier work as well with an Intel Powerbook.

Falcon

Re:This is 'news'?

[TrancePhreak]

So do most actors in movies. It always makes me laugh when there's a computer scene.

Re:OT: Three figures?

[Goth Biker Babe]

MPH of course!

Re:You drive a Volvo and you call something soulle

[Goth Biker Babe]

So is this soulless?.

Even the old 140s and 240s had character. They weren't particularly fast (if fact they were damn right slow) but they had a certain something and went on for ever.

Yes the drivers do have a certain reputation like berks in Mercs, the arrogance of BMW drivers, the hogging of the right lane [in the UK] by Ford Mondeo driving commercial travellers etc. I don't know about the US though but over here that demographic is changing. The traditional drivers are not so keen on the newer models and they are being bought by professionals and young middle-class families now. XC70s and 90s seem to be quite prevalent in my area on the school run.

Of course, in the end, cars are just stationary vehicles which I have to avoid when riding one of these!.

Re:You drive a Volvo and you call something soulle

[Nossie]

I call that an 80s piece of shite...

but then most 80's cars were like that... volvo just remained there.

Re:This is 'news'?

[inkswamp]

That's not hard to fake either, with enough patience and enough takes. The film I watched however does not show him actually using the machine at any point. All I've seen is a boot up process and a shot of the desktop. If there are films of it being used, I haven't seen links to them.

I'm still not sure I'd be convinced anyway. There are other ways to fake this kind of thing too. Can a PC laptop be set up to mirror a Mac's display? Can the PC's keyboard and touchpad be set up to control the Mac? VNC can do that and at full-screen too. So let's see... how could we do this? Run VNC client on the PC and the server on the Mac. Connect to the Mac from the PC. Use any number of Mac freebies out there that will present a movie starting with a black screen. Then, on the Mac, start a full screen movie of the PC bootup that changes to a Mac bootup. Use an Applescript to make the bootup movie vanish. Make sure the desktop is set up just like the end of the movie so we can control the OS X desktop right before your very eyes. Voila! OS X on a PC laptop.

Next, I will saw my lovely assistant in half.

Sorry, but after the iWalk hoax, I will be eternally skeptical about these things.

Potayto, Potahto...

[jtcedinburgh]

Don't be fooled into thinking Apple customer service is necessarily any better than any other company. As I sit here writing this, I am wrangling with Apple's uncaring and ineffective UK Customer Service department, waiting for a refund of £540 (~$1000) which they took from my account in error*. That was in mid June. I am STILL waiting for my refund, even though Apple are knowingly in breach of UK distance selling regulations. Am I pissed off? You betcha! But, hey, what can I do? I can stamp and spit and shout and cry, but short of suing the f**kers the ball is entirely in their court. The moral here being: our own experiences of customer service (or lack of it) colour our viewpoint of a company. A good experience, such as yours, makes you feel great. A bad experience (like mine) makes you want to go down to their offices with a large axe and attack them. Or it would do if it weren't for the tablets. John * Potted history: bought a G5/dual 2.7; it had a defective video card which they agreed to replace. They sent out a replacement and I sent back the dud. They then kindly charged me for the replacement! £540 for a f**king 6800 Ultra!!! At least Dick Turpin wore a mask! They have admitted the error but seem in absolutely no hurry to get their collective fingers out of their asses and Do The Right Thing...

Po-tay-to, Po-tah-to...

[jtcedinburgh]

Don't be fooled into thinking Apple customer service is necessarily any better than any other company. As I sit here writing this, I am wrangling with Apple's uncaring and ineffective UK Customer Service department, waiting for a refund of £540 (~$1000) which they took from my account in error*. That was in mid June. I am STILL waiting for my refund, even though Apple are knowingly in breach of UK distance selling regulations.

Am I pissed off? You betcha! But, hey, what can I do? I can stamp and spit and shout and cry, but short of suing the f**kers the ball is entirely in their court.

The moral here being: our own experiences of customer service (or lack of it) colour our viewpoint of a company. A good experience, such as yours, makes you feel great. A bad experience (like mine) makes you want to go down to their offices with a large axe and attack them. Or it would do if it weren't for the tablets.

John

* Potted history: bought a G5/dual 2.7; it had a defective video card which they agreed to replace. They sent out a replacement and I sent back the dud. They then kindly charged me for the replacement! £540 for a f**king 6800 Ultra!!! At least Dick Turpin wore a mask! They have admitted the error but seem in absolutely no hurry to get their collective fingers out of their asses and Do The Right Thing...

Dupe post!

[jtcedinburgh]

Sorry about this, folks. Having a pre-coffee brain fart - please ignore the parent post as I thought I'd previewed but I must have submitted...

Doh!

John (about to go get a 'coop of char' before I end up doing something like "delete from Users" (forgetting the clausal part, of course ;-))

Re:You drive a Volvo and you call something soulle

[Goth Biker Babe]

Except that it comes from 1996. Okay then, what do you drive? What's it's performance? What did it cost you, what 'toys' does it have?

In my opinion a sub ten second car that does at least 40 mpg on motorways, has full leather, air con, decent sound system, decent build quality and a lower than everage mileage engine for a cost of £1500 is a bargain.

Return of the clones ?

[Pierre-Arnaud]

But then, if Apple can make a Macintosh compatible with Windows, why couldn't they quietly create a new platform based on that, with machine specs defined by them, and let other assemblers slowly propose a new breed of clones ? Couldn't integration be as good as in a genuine Apple Macintosh ? And then let start a market for compatible/checked/approved only peripherals and parts ?

Besides the economic model of Apple being a hardware manufacturer with no competition on OS X... I personnaly think Apple hardware division maintains a quality which would assure them to be competitive in the upper margins sections of a more open market.

The first Mac clones were not compatible with Windows, so the market was for MacOS only, to be divided, and Apple lost shares of what was entirely his before. But with Windows and Linux compatibility, the sharing would be on a potentially much larger market...

Perhaps the launch of their Windows compatible Macintoshes is only the first step... Sell them to new users, assuring recognition and new fidelities, creating a larger market for Macintels (with more potential customers, so more demand for compatible peripherals,accessories and parts), and when this growth field is saturated anew, quietly open the platform with such a plan...

Just questionning.

Note : excuse my english, I'm french...

Um...

[Legion303]

Someone enlighten me. Why is this a big deal when I've been running Panther for months now (maybe close to a year--I don't know because I don't use it much) on PearPC? Granted it runs even slower than Windows, but still...

Re:Um...

[Legion303]

Nevermind, slow brain. I always think of VMWare as an OS emulator when it isn't. So presumably these hacked OSX images run quite a bit faster than the PearPC emulation I'm doing.

Re:Um...

[Hrothgar The Great]

Also, though, you can supposedly write the VMWare volume to a real hard drive and boot using regular hardware instead, getting actual native speed.

But I guess you need SSE3 to really take advantage right now. I have a Pentium IV 3.4 GHz and it doesn't even have SSE3.

DRM?

[setantae]

What about all the DRM you were all getting so upset about last week? That was BS then, right?

a solution for apple

[acidlemon]

i think a good idea for apple would be to realize that they have 3 very sepearate divisions which haper the success of the other.
hardware: macs, ipods, accesories
software:osx, finalcut, etc
itunes: nuff said

by having these three under the branches of one company, and thereby baving a responsibility to the other it hampers their growth.by splitting the company up it will allow apple to grow in leaps and bounds,
  apples hardware is second to none, and people routinely pay a premium to get that quality ipods will still sell well becuse their the best on the market, the pc division may have to be a bit more competitive in their pricing, but that will lower the entrance fee to apple hardware, and market share will increase which equals more profit
same goes for apples software by making the sx and sotware division a seperate company and allowing them to develop for different platforms, the user base will increase dramatically.
and for itunes, yes it was started originally to help sell ipods, but it is now a global brand that is wildly successful (however low their profit margin is) by allowing itunes to run as a seperate company and support other players it will only cement its lead

steave jobs needs to wake up and smell the roses. he has an pportunity 20 years ago for apple to beat microsoft, but he squandered it based upon an ideoligy which while commendable doesnt work in the business world. he now has the opportunity again to create new market share and provide some real competition to the MS's and dells but knowing steve jobs, he'll squander it again

Re:You drive a Volvo and you call something soulle

[Nossie]

---Except that it comes from 1996.---

sorry... but thats my point !! its a box on wheels... a design other manufacturers left at the end of the 80's

I don't drive :P insurance costs etc put me right off... but that aside I wouldnt buy a volvo or rover or, damn, the other car I cant remember that weighs more than 3/4 of a metric ton..

my dad was a mechanic for over 40 years... and I've picked up bits and bobs from there... but if I could drive (to my dads annoyance that I cant), I wouldnt buy a volvo.

because its as asthetically shaped like a brick on wheels.. probably the same handling too.

JIMHO tho...

for £1500 I guess that is a bargin... but probably because nobody wants them for the above reason and they had to fill them full of 'toys aka gimmicks' to sell them in the first place.

a 'decent' BMW costs about 4k second hand these days too many on the road now to be as 'classy' as they used to be, atleast in the uk anyways..

so many cars, so little profit... so does it surprise me your volvo costs £1500? no, not really.

I'm sure the volvo is a good car for the price.. but you did ask.. and I say it has soul, but I dont know whose...

Ian.

again, rhese comments are jimho -- and if I could mod this post I'd make it OT.

Why many people shell out the cash

[Descalzo]

Disclaimer: I am not an expert on Apple. I read the book "No Logo" and it made me feel smart. So keep that in mind. If I am wrong, educate me.

One other reason that Apples cost more is because you are not buying just a computer, you are buying "cool." Apple has become like Nike (more about the brand than the product). Just watch the commercials.

Macs are high-quality products! No denying that. However, the reason we pay extra for Mac is not just for the superior hardware. We pay extra for the name and for the cool.

Watch the TV commercials. Sony is trying to become cool like Apple, but they aren't making it, even though their computers are well-designed, high-quality computers. They haven't become cool like that, though, and I don't think they ever will.

AMD64 is SSE3, too

[hkb]

There seems to be a big misconception that AMD64 chips aren't SSE3 capable, and maybe most aren't, but my Venice core AMD64 chip is most definitely SSE3 capable, so...

Re:I'd pay Apple's premium to get OSX on a thinkpa

[metamatic]

Yeah, my dream system would be a ThinkPad X41 tablet running OS X.

I might even be willing to hack OS X to achieve my dream...

Looking at Byte's review of FX!32, here goes:

[falconwolf]

Gosh I miss and wish they still published the print edition of "Byte" magazine. I especially loved Jerry Pournell's "Chaos Manor" and Steve Ciarcia's "Circuit Cellar".

Falcon

Re: Looking at Byte's review of FX!32, here goes:

[CableModemSniper]

Chaos Manor lives on in Dr. Dobbs' if you really care that much.

Are Macs more expensive, really?

[__aaeaks4554]

When you consider the total cost of ownership over the useful life of the product, plus the great added software that comes standard on a Mac, I don't really parse the argument that Macs are more expensive.

Re:Well, your credibility is shot

[Shanep]

Well, your credibility is shot. Sony computers are the worst. There's nothing good to say about them.

I bought my Sony because of the 1920x1200 LCD and the fast memory. I knew about problems with Sony's, but I researched before I bought. This machine runs FreeBSD 5.4 Release nice and fast and meets my current needs. I quite like the design of this model.

While the box may look sleek and sexy, they use old chipsets so that their performance is just abysmal.

It has an Intel® 915PM Express Chipset.

Sony VGN-A49GP.

I did not write that I use a Sony because I think Sony are better than Dell. I wrote that to show that I'm not a biased Mac zealot blindly defending his PB.

Chaos Manor

[falconwolf]

Chaos Manor lives on in Dr. Dobbs' if you really care that much.

Ok, thanks. I haven't looked at "Dr Dobbs" lately but I will.

Falcon

Re:Not better for users

[AHumbleOpinion]

"double-high cost" ??? Not the Mac Mini.

Yes, I know this is OT. I don't care.

[Ben Urban]

In case you don't know yet, Marathon Infinity was open sourced in 2000, and the Marathon trilogy was released for free early this year. Aleph One, the result, now runs on any SDL-compatible OS, in addition to having a version that uses the native OSX nibs interface (and, of course, the ability to play over the internet). You might want to try it sometime, if you're into nostalgia (or not). Also, the fact that it's been around 10 years since the triolgy's release means that there are literally thousands of maps and mods around to try.

If you're interested, you can find more info at http://source.bungie.org/, and at http://trilogyrelease.bungie.org/, or you can visit the AIM chat room (alephone) and/or the IRC channel (#alephone at freenode).

Re:That is about it.

[AHumbleOpinion]

It's a little higher but not double as previously claimed. That 17" flat panel is a small incremental cost not another $500.

The speed comparison is far more complicated than you suggest. You cannot compare GHz. PowerPC CPUs are generally 25-30% faster than Pentiums of the same clockrate. That Dell probably has a Celeron which will fall short of a real Pentium.

In any case my argument is not price equivalency. My argument is that while most Macs command a high premium the Mini does not, it's a small premium.

Re:There's a lot more.

[AHumbleOpinion]

The low end Dell I see on their page is $600 not $500. The display is 15" not 17". Have a link for the model you referenced?

I ignored the $360 nForce, a stripped down FreeDOS box.

With the Mini you also pay for a small form factor, your full sized desktop comparison is not that useful. Anything larger than a Shuttle is probably not a useful comparison.

No, I am not a system bigot. I buy parts at a local computer show and assemble my own PCs. It doesn't really save money compared to Dell but I have complete control over the components. Usually I'm on your side of this argument, that's why I don't toss out things like where's the Firewire in the Dell, the Mini really is the exception.

Not quite a software company, but

[ShimmyShimmy]

I think the thought that Apple is going to be a software company isn't quite on target. I'm pretty damn sure there are going to be a ton of mac lifers that will buy mac hardware, and buy a mac, from Apple, that "just works".
Of course, there would be changes. On the other hand, there is stuff they'll always have good hardware sales in. Hell, the iPod is doing just fine; but you don't need an Apple computer to run it. Sure there are cheaper alternatives, but people want expensive but cool Apple hardware. The Dell and iRiver mp3 players don't cut it. Nothing is as cool as the iPod.

However, I think they will see changes is some other hardware departments. For example, their DVD burners. $250 for a DVD+-RW. You can call it a SuperDrive if you want, but there's really nothing special about it. Mine actually stopped working a few months ago (CD/DVD gets stuck and it ejects). Searching forums, I found this is a rather common problem. The "super" drives definitely don't have exceptional quality. I just bought a burner for my PC for $40. Works great, installed easy. Why pay $250 for the apple one? It definitely doesn't look that cool. Does it cost them $210 to make it slot loading?

Apple defnitely has a lot of hardware cash cows that aren't going to be around for long, but I have a feeling it'll be better in the long run. I was reluctant to switch to Apple for two reasons. (A) it's expensive. (B) it's theirs. If I hate Apple and want to switch back, I have one useless, expensive computer.

Now, a transition to Apple could be much easier. I can just install it on my current hardware, and if I don't like it, I can switch back. Hell, Apple could even start to milk that as another advantage of switching.

. If not, they could always push their hardware with "support" packages. Offer a promise that if you buy from Apple, everything will "just work", and only offer limited support to "software only customers" such as only offering phone support for a brief period, such as 90 days (cough).

I really think this will catch on, and it will be a big change for Apple no matter what. As long as they don't start manhunting/prosecuting OSx86 users, I think we might even see a more switch-to-able Apple in the future.

RIP SGI

[Simon Brooke]

You have to realize, that if Apple does nothing, Microsoft and Linux are going to be battling it out over the next generation of desktops running on ultracheap commodity hardware. Apple has a unique opportunity here to jump in and really make some inroads into that marketplace, perhaps even to become the major player. They have a mature, solid and easy to use product that would be way ahead of either Microsoft or Linux in their own marketplace, if it could run on that same commodity hardware.

Apple could do this, but in my opinion for commercial reasons they should not and I'm prepared to bet they will not. Apple is a premium brand. Their ability to make a profit depends on it being a premium and an aspirational brand. That brand is built on images of style, quality, ease of use, reliability. It's the quality feel which is Apple's USP, Apple's raison d'etre.

Apple cannot make a profit as a software vendor head to head with increasingly good Linux offerings and the market dominance of Microsoft. Apple have to make a profit on their hardware. But it's their software which, for the average user, actually sets their hardware apart, which gives it its face. If Apple customers can get Apple software on generic hardware, that's going to hurt Apple in two ways: they'll lose the premium hardware revenue stream, which is important to them, and their users will experience unreliability and glitches which are more-or-less inevitable in a commodity hardware environment where many of the device drivers are being written by half trained monkeys over whom Apple have no quality control sanction. And it's Apple's brand image which will be hurt by that.

In my opinion, Apple should look carefully at the fate of Silicon Graphics. SGI, for those who don't remember, used to be a niche maker of UNIX boxes mainly for the design, visualisation, and media markets. They made very very nice hardware, very high quality, running their own UNIX and based on their own MIPS family of RISC processors. They were, as Apple is now, an aspirational brand - a maker of premium and very desirable machines. Then, in the late nineties, they lost confidence in what they were doing and started to ship intel boxes with Windows NT. It was disasterous for them. They couldn't maintain their premium and they diluted their brand value. They've been forced back into their core business - high end visualisation systems on MIPS hardware - but as a much smaller and weaker company.

I think Apple are taking a very big risk with their brand image by moving to Intel at all, not because there's anything wrong with Intel processors as such but because it dilutes their brand differentiation. I think it's vital to them to clearly differentiate between an Apple machine and a generic PC. Even if there were no technical reasons for not using generic hardware, I think there are the strongest possible commercial reasons.