64 replies to this topic

[RetroRen]

Synaesthesia, on Sep 23 2009, 11:07 AM, said:

Apple won't ever do this but anyway.
If Apple sells OS X on the shelf, how many people will switch from Windows to OS X? Most people are used to Windows and the way it works, and don't wanna switch. Most businesses are entrenched in Windows.

I think this is the main reason for Apple not to sell OSX separately for non Apple PC's.
There isnt a big market for it, and Apple is doing great now, market share is rising, stock value is good etc. It would cost a lot to make OSX more compatible for PC components, and to have support for them, and if 50 000 people would switch to OSX, that isnt good enough to make changes.

Just like people already said: Apple is a hardware company. OSX software is excellent, but it's there just to sell the hardware (Mac).

To answer the title question - Apple is selling OSX for PC, just not for all of the PC components and manufacturers.

But I disagree on Apple won't ever do this part. Apple is known for doing drastic changes  more then few times in history. If market situation turns worse for Apple, they will be forced to do some changes, maybe even open OSX to a wider set of PC components.
IMO it's highly unlikely, but it is possible.

Microsoft also doesnt officially support all of the PC hardware. They have a Certified for Windows program with WHQL.

[s@ndro]

i now run windows 7 but i always wanted the look and funcionallity of osx and if they ever sold it for pc i would go and buy it immediatly but i think other people are so used to have a windows pc and dont want ah mac because they dont want to take ah plunge into the deep and unknown there scared and think its ah hard to learn and use os

[Timdphotos]

No they make more money out of people buying their computers just for OSX then they would make out
of selling it to PC users. Also if OSX got released for all the PC users out there then everyone would get it
meaning an increase in people making viruses for OSX, finally OSX looks great on a macbook or Imac or
any other mac and if you use OSX on something that is not a mac then you dont the full experience such
as a multi touch trackpad etc.

[rectifier23]

That would be great
But at the same time I think Billy Gates wouldn't be that happy because I think many windows users would jump to the mac OS. But I don't agree that mac os would getting unstable. Apple just needs to limit the hardware requirements a little bit and everything would be ok. I never understood how people were always saying that windows is unstable, I never had a bluescreen or crash since 2002 and if it crashed it was my own fault because I overclocked the **** outta my CPU

[jeanpave]

I'm not an expert, by any means, but didn't Apple already work too hard to make their OSs incompatible with PC hardware to go now the other way? And, even if they were to make some more money, their image in the eyes of people would not be the same.

[sephira]

monogrim7, on Mar 11 2010, 11:59 AM, said:

if you use OSX on something that is not a mac then you dont the full experience such
as a multi touch trackpad etc.

Thats not really true though is it...?

If you have a laptop with the same (or better) hardware (cam, mic, multi touch trackpad) then what experience are you not getting? Other than looking at your mac and thinking "man if only the hardware was as cheap as a non-mac". I might be wrong but I haven't read of anything you deffinately can not get with a fully working install on a "pc".

[invisiblesurfer]

IMHO should apple make available its os to PCs we are going to find ourselves in the same situation windows users are. Windows has successfully made the os available to a wide range of hardware - with the incompatibilities and annoyances we have all dealt with. Apple optimises its os onto specific pieces of hardware hence the speed and flow. I wouldn't like to see that change. What I would love to change is apple's pricing policy.

[lysid]

Apple won't ever do this;)

[cj95]

they don't have to do much porting .  all drivers are provided by the company you bought your pc from . but lets face it, osx is what makes a mac a mac, and if it goes to pc then everyone will buy pc with osx since it's cheaper , and i could tolerate uglier hardware

[Morphey]

Apple is and underdog to Microsoft, the whole point of apple is to sale to specific consumers that want to feel....special.
thats why there is the Apple cult and not Microsoft cult, because Apple people are unique.
Macs in Israel costs A LOT of money, money i don't have (and not because i don't work, stupid, i'm a soldier).
i always wanted to have a mac but didn't afford it, that's why this great community (yahy!) grew and there a so much hackintosh users this far.
oh, and  btw - probably your friend stole your mac

[grice]

Morphey, on Apr 2 2010, 06:24 PM, said:

Apple is and underdog to Microsoft, the whole point of apple is to sale to specific consumers that want to feel....special.
thats why there is the Apple cult and not Microsoft cult, because Apple people are unique.
Macs in Israel costs A LOT of money, money i don't have (and not because i don't work, stupid, i'm a soldier).
i always wanted to have a mac but didn't afford it, that's why this great community (yahy!) grew and there a so much hackintosh users this far.
oh, and  btw - probably your friend stole your mac

 

We've got the best of both sides and are beholden to neither.

[CardassianVole]

I don't think opening it up to every hardware combination out there is a good idea. I would like to see them license the OS to certain PC manufacturers that could make "Apple Certified" systems that would run OS X or Windows.

[sn0le]

I doubt Apple will ever licence out OSX to be installed on PC's.

First, they would have to make compability lists for which OEM PC's work and doesn't work.
And they would have to have a system to "certify" that this piece of hardware will work with OSX.
It would probably be a huge mess, and a big headache.

Plus, it seems to me that Apple makes their profits on mobile devices and their computers.
So if they sold the OS to people that wants to use it on their Dell, HP (or whatever) they'd lose money.

But one thing that has amazed me is that Snow Leopard is so cheap that they're practically giving it away.
I've never bought a OS this cheap.

[ANARCHiNTOSH]

i know i would hate to see osx being sold with HP or Dell computers.
that nice shiny well-coded solid OS being used to sell piece of crap pre-built corner-cutting machines, it just offends my inner mac.
that should never happen.

however, i would accept it being liscensed to 'hobbyists' or anyone who builds their own PC from parts, for personal use
(not in an office environment).
just keep OSX away from full pc manufacturers. keep it illegal to sell a pc 'designed for mac os x'.
In the EULA reserve the right against those seeking to profit from running OSX on non-apple machines.


with an even greater opensourcing of the OS's core and an end to the purposeful breaking of hackintoshes, Apple could work with the community (not literally, just provide adequate sources) and allow -not certify or attempt in any way to control - individual non-profit people and hobby teams (like Chameleon and Voodoo) to write drivers for the components.
all it would take is the threat of re-illegalisation of OSX86 to keep the community away from supporting pre-built machines, and militant against company's like Psystar.
oh, and keep distro's illegal.

Apple's Software Update would then only support real macs and the community would be left to solve their own problems.

Therefore, Apple could maintain the core OS X to a high standard, gain more sales,
avoid the entrenched Microsoft situation,
avoid increased costs from supporting more hardware, benefit from hacker's works
and license OSX to those who wouldnt have bought a mac anyway.
they would be free from Micro$oft criticisms if something didnt work on someones OSX86 that way, it would be your responsibility to make it work.

this would essentially be legalising OSX86 for non-commercial purposes.
it would be a lovely synthesis of Linux's openness and supportiveness,
whilst still retaining the backbone of surpervised development with a direction for the core os.

[Divine E]

If Apple were to sell their OS for other systems than Macs, they would lose an incredible ammount of revenue, and their OS would become less safe, and would not operate at the same capacity as it would on a normal Mac.

[ANARCHiNTOSH]

Divine E, on Apr 17 2010, 08:46 PM, said:

If Apple were to sell their OS for other systems than Macs, they would lose an incredible ammount of revenue, and their OS would become less safe, and would not operate at the same capacity as it would on a normal Mac.

after actually thinking through my earlier post, im starting to think the same.
i am happy to continue hacking semi-legally, as long as apple do not put too many obstacles in the way
and hacks stays opensource (no psystars)

[poofyhairguy]

Divine E, on Apr 17 2010, 02:46 PM, said:

If Apple were to sell their OS for other systems than Macs, they would lose an incredible ammount of revenue, and their OS would become less safe, and would not operate at the same capacity as it would on a normal Mac.

Exactly. Apple will never sell OSX outside of Macs due to the fact that they would quickly lose the margins that allow them to sell a tenth of what Dell does but make higher profits. We all know about the Apple Tax and why it exists...

With that said, I like the current balance: Macs for normal people, Hackintoshes for geeks while Apple looks the other way.

I don't mind them taking out psystars as I think companies like that (and EFI-X) put only a temporary band-aid on the difficulty of hackintoshing. When the band-aid falls off (say like with EFI-X when we moved to SL) then everyone involved gets hurt except the person making the money off the clones.

I much prefer a vibrant hackintosh community. As long as I know that I can continue to never have to pay out the nose for one of those terrible all-in-one desktops, then I personally am happy.

The EULA issue means nothing to me and many others in the community. Many of us are heavy torrenters anyway- we don't care about things like legal restrictions and copyrights anyway. It is businesses that fear such a risk, and businesses are the exact place hackintoshes should never be.

Actually my only complaint is when Apple tries to purposefully screw over our community- like when they made SL stop working with the Atom right before they released the iPad.

Yes Mr. Jobs, I understand that you don't like netbooks and you feel we should all buy iPads instead. But honestly I can't even handle the iPad's high margins- I will be ready and happy to get a hackintosh iPad when they come available.

It comes down to this: I know how much hardware costs, so I can never buy a real Mac (except maybe a laptop model the day it is released) without feeling guilty that you bilked me. But I have no respect for your copyright- so no matter what you do if I can technically run OSX on my homebuilt PC than I will.

The best Apple can get out of someone like me is a little money for the OS, and the fact that because I used OSX on my hacks I push people to buy real Macs.

But Jobs will never get me to buy a iPad/iMac/ioverpricedhighmarginproduct because I demand the most value for my money......

[habblet]

nice! and cool! totally not trying to get 5 posts

[tacticalapples]

It's probably already been said, but apple needs to keep things proprietary. I still think people would buy macs if OSx were available for PCs just because of aesthetics, but definitely less. Maybe if the OSx86 project gets more user friendly and easier to install jobs will have to rethink his strategy and make it available and with lower price models with less aesthetic bells and whistles.

Just a thought.

[s0101]

i dont think it would be economically convenient, but wouldn't you like OS X to be open sourced? a big chunk of it, the Darwin stuff, is already open source. If The whole API with the Core Services and Cocoa and all that stuff were open source, minimum os x components like the Finder were open sourced, or maybe just Cocoa, what would happen? i mean it could really appeal to PC users to have OS X unrestrictedly running on their PCs with no license problems. an pen source Cocoa and maybe XCode could be ported over to linux and windows, allowing for an army of developers venturing into the OS X programming world without necessarily switching to os x, producing greater software diversity for os x. Apple could still make money from the by keeping sell iLife and iWork and all that stuff as closed software and bundling it with their proprietary build of OS X, maybe for PCs and Macs (of course, Mac people having privileges ). After all, isn't apple a hardware company? according to the legend, Bill Gates was the pioneer at the software business, Apple primarily making $$ from hardware. They'd gain the benefit of having OS X on a large number of PCs (c'mon, everybody loves OS X, and having it for free, why not?), of new developers and new software. And they could keep iPhone OS devices closed still, even with Jobs' praise of open standards to kill off flash from their iTouch stuff. If it were profitable, wouldn't it be great for everyone (except maybe the guys at Redmond)?