V Plamondon Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 If anyone is interested in trying to convince Apple to release OS X as a consumer OS available for everyone I have started a pledge at http://www.pledgebank.com/osx4everyone. If we could show Apple how many people would be willing to buy OS X, maybe they will change their mind about not releasing OS X for non Apple hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mifki Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 lol, not another one..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cringemaster Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Rofl, do u really think apple is gonna release it just because we want it? Its proprietary software that apple wants running only on its hardware line, not generic x86 boxes. Youre better off asking them to release the source code of Mac OS X or to have them release iWork or iLife for free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
errandwolfe Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 I have to agree here. Apple is very much aware of how many people would want OS X without having to buy a Mac. The fact is that at least for the foreseeable future, they will do everything they can to keep the software tied to the hardware. You MAY see licensing agreements with the likes of Dell or some other mainline PC producer within the next year or two, but even then expect very tight controls on exactly what hardware is in those machines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzuka Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Never gunna happen, don't even bother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_muad_dib Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 and... how this thread could belong to this section? it's for news, only. teleporting.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ramm Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 It is not going to happen, even if 3 billion people wanted it. Apple would make less money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFI Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Not gonna happen mate. Apple is all to well and aware of how many people would love to run OS X on their PC's. Its just not profitable for Apple in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ramm Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Besides, they already know that anyone wanting OSX on the x86 box probably already has it, if you know what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Plamondon Posted May 2, 2007 Author Share Posted May 2, 2007 I think you are missing the point. The point of the pledge is to say to Apple that if OS X was released tomorrow, X number of people who would not even be buying their hardware anyway, would definitely buy their software. I am well aware of the fact that it is unlikely that Apple will change their mind, but unless their potential customers step up to the plate and say "I am putting my money where my mouth is and I would purchase OS X if it was available for me to do so" There is a large portion of the computer market, where people prefer to select their own hardware and match it with the software of their choice. For myself as an example all my computers and most of my friends and families computers are running Ubuntu Linux as I find it has excellent driver support, is relatively painless to install and setup and is relatively easy for me to maintain my friends and families computers. If OS X became available, I would be installing it on all of the approximately dozen computers I maintain, because it is easier for the computer helpless people to learn to use. I think this is where Apple is seriously underestimating the influence of people like myself. Most of the people I know have already switched to Ubuntu Linux almost entirely by my influence, and those that haven't have not done so because of fear of the learning curve of learning it would entail. If OS X were available, I could easily allay those fears, and I could move them away from the mess that is windows, and the regular help they require with their computers would be substantially reduced. Another thing to remember is that if OS X remains largely unavailable to the general open source community, than although large mainstream open source projects will be ported to OS X, most of the tens of thousands of open source programs won't ever be ported to OS X. If you don't believe the influence you can have on friends and family, see for yourself. Talk to them about the strengths and failings of the OS they use now, and see if you can set up their computer with an alternate OS they might prefer (using dual booting of course). Everyone I know that I have given an opportunity to try an alternate OS such as Ubuntu or OSX86, have decided to purge windows from their computers after only a week or two. On another note I am well aware that OSX86 can be installed on most intel based computers, but if one doesn't taylor a computers hardware with all the right parts, improper hardware may restrict and limit what OSX86 can be capable of. Even though I prefer to assemble and setup my own computers, I prefer computer newbies to purchase complete computers from Dell or Compaq with good product support because I prefer not to spend all my time fixing stupid little hardware quirks. There are many reasons why it would be a good idea for Apple to release OS X as a consumer OS and I will continue to add reasons to this thread as I think of them. If you would like to see OS X as an available alternative OS I would be dissapointed if anyone fell into the trap of believing "thats the way it is" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ramm Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Be that as it may, a few PC nuts are not going to change Apples prerogative. If they want to use OS X, they need to conform to the suppliers requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFI Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 @ V Plamondon - See the thing is if Apple were to some how release OS X for PC's...then they would have to beef up their hardware support by 10 folds, if not more, and there is no way they would be willing to do that. And becuase they would have to increase their support for a wide range of hardware, their quality and OS X's stability would also slowly begin to decline, and I for one would not want to see that day. I dont mean to shatter dreams or anything, but dont even in your wildest dreams imagine this to happen, lol, it wont. Right now, because they have few hardware to support, they can concentrate on other things, such as the core OS, or other products. Apple's size as a general thing is also not big enough to be able to make this move...they would need to hire a lot of developers, more beta testers, etc, etc...and all this doesnt come cheap either. A restructure like this would cost in the high millions of dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Plamondon Posted May 2, 2007 Author Share Posted May 2, 2007 Hmmm... let me ponder that carefully. You obviously don't believe that hardware manufacturers that might ship OSX with their systems will program drivers, those in the community will not program drivers (even though the community is already doing so) and oh boy, increasing their hardware support will cost millions. We have already seen in the unix and osx86 communities that people who want drivers for their hardware will simply program drivers for their hardware. In the case of harware vendors, if people started to throw their hardware in legit OSX systems on a larger scale than obviously many vendors are going to start programming drivers for their hardware under OSX. Also remember, if Apple only sold an extra 100000 copies of OSX a year, than Apple gains to pocket an extra 10 to 15 million dollars a year. Somehow, I don't think that if made available as an alternate OS, OSX is only going to sell a meager 100000 copies a year. So far I am quite disappointed in the response I am getting from the hackintosh community. "Apple has made up their mind so why bother" People make decisions because they believe those decisions are in their best interest. Apple seems to have made the decision of Apple software on Apple hardware to protect their hardware sales. If Apple could be shown that not only will their hardware sales not be affected, but that all the benefits that could be reaped would be enormous. I believe that Darwin was an attempt on Apples part to embrace the open source community and it failed spectacularly. Do you know why? Do you think that the average open source developer is going to run out and spend a couple of thousand dollars on an additional computer so that they can support an additional OS? I imagine that if available a good portion of open source developers would pay 1 or 2 hundred dollars for OSX so that an additional OS could be supported. Heck, even Windows gets a lot of support from the open source community. In fact, if I was Apple, I would have sent free copies of OSX to the developers of all the mainstream open source developers to encourage this to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ramm Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Hmmm... let me ponder that carefully. You obviously don't believe that hardware manufacturers that might ship OSX with their systems will program drivers, those in the community will not program drivers (even though the community is already doing so) and oh boy, increasing their hardware support will cost millions. Spot on. Increasing their hardware support would cost time, effort, money, and resources. Too much of each one. The OS would die a slow painful death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenwk Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 maybe a good example to look at is their apple ipods. now at nano, it's 1 nano, plenty of different colours and storage capacity. nothing else more fancy. unlike sony, too many products, too expensive to market thru ads all their products on a individual ads each. =) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Plamondon Posted May 3, 2007 Author Share Posted May 3, 2007 Spot on. Increasing their hardware support would cost time, effort, money, and resources. Too much of each one. The OS would die a slow painful death. Maybe instead of reading the first portion of my reply and using it to justify your argument, you might consider reading the entire post. It is really annoying outlining my points and trying to back them with reasonable arguments and have immature people turn around with vague "thats the way it is and I am not interested in s explaining or justifying why I believe so". If someone disagrees with me, I am fine with that, and if someone disagrees with me and wants to enter into an intellectual argument about our differing viewpoints whilst supporting and explaining their viewpoints, I am fine with that too. If you just want to regale us with your opinions, but you aren't really interested in anyone elses opinion, than I suggest you depart from this topic and don't come back. Freedom of speech is an important commodity in our day and age, but if any individuals opinions are already made up, they are wasting everyone's time if they want to negate or invalidate anyone elses opinions or arguments with out any constructive critizism about why those opinions or arguments may be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ramm Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Oh I read the entire post. I don't read and assume. It just seemed like your first paragraph was most accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzuka Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 If OS X was fully supported by Apple, Insted of buying my $1,200 iMac, I'd buy a $130 OS X and build my own computer, they would lose money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rez. Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 If OS X was fully supported by Apple, Insted of buying my $1,200 iMac, I'd buy a $130 OS X and build my own computer, they would lose money Not really. If Apple began selling OS X as a standalone OS, They'd be selling it for alot more than $130. Hell, They could sell it for $400 and still undercut the competition by around $200. Every 3 copies sold would be equal to one of their precious Macs. That's alot of hard cold cash ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Hmmm... let me ponder that carefully. You obviously don't believe that hardware manufacturers that might ship OSX with their systems will program drivers, those in the community will not program drivers (even though the community is already doing so) and oh boy, increasing their hardware support will cost millions. Apple is a HARDWARE COMPANY and clones , during the clone era, only took away from Apple's hardware sales rather than add new customers to the fold. It has never been and is not currently a software company. Yes, they sell software, but it's so you buy the hardware more so than making a buck off of software. We have already seen in the unix and osx86 communities that people who want drivers for their hardware will simply program drivers for their hardware. In the case of harware vendors, if people started to throw their hardware in legit OSX systems on a larger scale than obviously many vendors are going to start programming drivers for their hardware under OSX. No they won't, because if it isn't Windows, it won't sell. People are too used to Windows and anything different is inherently "different and unusable." Also remember, if Apple only sold an extra 100000 copies of OSX a year, than Apple gains to pocket an extra 10 to 15 million dollars a year. Somehow, I don't think that if made available as an alternate OS, OSX is only going to sell a meager 100000 copies a year. Apple would need to sell more software (which won't happen--see above) OR raise prices (creating a surplus of goods that won't be sold) in order to make up for the lost revenue from hardware sales. So far I am quite disappointed in the response I am getting from the hackintosh community. "Apple has made up their mind so why bother" Apple has made up their mind and currently, they don't want to change it because of the fact that Apple is a hardware company and the fact that history shows us clones only took away hardware sales. People make decisions because they believe those decisions are in their best interest. Apple seems to have made the decision of Apple software on Apple hardware to protect their hardware sales. If Apple could be shown that not only will their hardware sales not be affected, but that all the benefits that could be reaped would be enormous. IT HAS BEEN SHOWN THAT APPLE'S HARDWARE SALES ARE AFFECTED BY CLONES. I believe that Darwin was an attempt on Apples part to embrace the open source community and it failed spectacularly. Many people I know of won't use OS X "because it isn't free as in beer." There is a huge difference between free (idea) and free (beer) but many *nix users just don't understand the difference. Do you know why? Do you think that the average open source developer is going to run out and spend a couple of thousand dollars on an additional computer so that they can support an additional OS? I imagine that if available a good portion of open source developers would pay 1 or 2 hundred dollars for OSX so that an additional OS could be supported. Heck, even Windows gets a lot of support from the open source community. In fact, if I was Apple, I would have sent free copies of OSX to the developers of all the mainstream open source developers to encourage this to happen. Apple's hardware is not overpriced. Now stop trying to spread FUD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Plamondon Posted May 3, 2007 Author Share Posted May 3, 2007 Apple is a HARDWARE COMPANY and clones , during the clone era, only took away from Apple's hardware sales rather than add new customers to the fold. It has never been and is not currently a software company. Yes, they sell software, but it's so you buy the hardware more so than making a buck off of software. Apple clones never took away from Apple's hardware sales. By the second year the clone program was in operation, Apple sold more computers than they ever have until the year 2005. By the end of the program Apple's market share declined by 4.55% while the licensed clone manufacturers only managed to capture a 0.5% market share. Apple continued to lose market share until 2005. Apple terminated the clone program because the manufacturers didn't want to pay the price Apple wanted to license their software, and I really can't blame them. I am well aware that Apple is a hardware company and not a software company. However as a consumer, I AM WILLING to pay what Apple wants for it's software if it was made available for my hardware. I understand that licensing OSX to other hardware vendors is a losing proposition if done according to the hardware vendors terms, but who says Apple has to do that. No they won't, because if it isn't Windows, it won't sell. People are too used to Windows and anything different is inherently "different and unusable." My personal experience is that if you give someone a reasonable alternative to Windows, they usually never return to windows. If you don't want to take my word for it, TRY IT OUT FOR YOURSELF. Apple would need to sell more software (which won't happen--see above) OR raise prices (creating a surplus of goods that won't be sold) in order to make up for the lost revenue from hardware sales. The facts are that Apple has been rapidly gaining market share since 2005, and even more so since they have moved over to the intel architecture. In fact, Apple has already earned a record profit of over one billion dollars in their first quarter of 2007. Just the fact that consumers are buying Apple computers and installing other OS's such as Windows or Linux shows that Apple computers sell because Apple makes good hardware. Apple has made up their mind and currently, they don't want to change it because of the fact that Apple is a hardware company and the fact that history shows us clones only took away hardware sales. Yes, I know Apple has made up their mind, but you won't know if we can change their minds if we don't try. IT HAS BEEN SHOWN THAT APPLE'S HARDWARE SALES ARE AFFECTED BY CLONES. Clones do not take away from Apple's hardware sales and I have already backed that statement with FACTS. If you disagree, please point out some FACTS that support your argument. Many people I know of won't use OS X "because it isn't free as in beer." There is a huge difference between free (idea) and free (beer) but many *nix users just don't understand the difference. Ok, you lost me. What relevence does this statement have with this thread? Apple's hardware is not overpriced. Now stop trying to spread FUD Who said Apple's hardware is overpriced? Who's spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt? Personally, I don't think Apple's hardware is overpriced, and I believe it is actually quite good. If it weren't for the fact that ATI's drivers were garbage under linux, or if the Intel GMA 950 had more oomph, I would have bought a Macbook or Macbook Pro last month instead of the notebook I did buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ictinike Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Can we please put a ban on these topics somehow? These are really annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Apple clones never took away from Apple's hardware sales. By the second year the clone program was in operation, Apple sold more computers than they ever have until the year 2005. By the end of the program Apple's market share declined by 4.55% while the licensed clone manufacturers only managed to capture a 0.5% market share. Apple continued to lose market share until 2005. Apple terminated the clone program because the manufacturers didn't want to pay the price Apple wanted to license their software, and I really can't blame them. Yeah, you're so right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ramm Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Eh can we just lock this. It seems to be turning into a fight now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 Why don't we just allow this topic to die a noble death and not bump it up anymore? ooops... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts