MadGhost Posted September 30, 2009 Share Posted September 30, 2009 QUOTE(RedDrag0n)A Nonny Moose was right on the money. �Demoralize the enemy from within by surprise, terror, sabotage, assassination. This is the war of the future.� It's horrible to quote this scum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikecwest Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 To all who think apple is a monopoly because they sell OSX only for Macs.... Does this make Toyota a monoply because they only sell Radios for Toyotas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottapotamas Posted October 1, 2009 Share Posted October 1, 2009 Everything you can do on an Intel CPU you can do on an AMD one. Unless you want to run vanillia OSX... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 To all who think apple is a monopoly because they sell OSX only for Macs.... Does this make Toyota a monoply because they only sell Radios for Toyotas? Apparently so! And yes, OS X and Windows are rather nice substitutes for each other. So is Linux. Just because you can't run iLife on Windows doesn't mean they aren't equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haney Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Apparently so! And yes, OS X and Windows are rather nice substitutes for each other. So is Linux. Just because you can't run iLife on Windows doesn't mean they aren't equal. - "Rather nice" substitutes don't meet the definition of "perfect" substitutes, which is what the theory of supply and demand requires. - Raising price doesn't increase supply of a monopolistic item (with monopolistic defined in economic terms, not legal terms) - And yes, in economic terms because you can't perfectly substitute OSX/Windows/Linux, it really does mean that they're not equal. You really shouldn't tell others to take a class when you are so far off base. M.R. (MS Economics) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Just because you can't run iLife on Windows doesn't mean they aren't substitutes. Period. End of Discussion. The rest is splitting hairs regarding what is "perfect" and what isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haney Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Just because you can't run iLife on Windows doesn't mean they aren'tsubstitutes. Period. End of Discussion. The rest is splitting hairs regarding what is "perfect" and what isn't. Exactly! After all of this back and forth with General Cartman, I'm glad you finally see his point that they are substitutes, and not equals as you were previously arguing. M.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 Exactly! After all of this back and forth with General Cartman, I'm glad you finally see his point that they are substitutes, and not equals as you were previously arguing. M.R. Except that substitutes in economics generally implies they are equal in terms of how they are consumed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General_Cartman Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 Except that substitutes in economics generally implies they are equal in terms of how they are consumed... No it doesn't. It all depends on the utility attached to each substitute by the consumer, and their budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LonelyTV Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Since when did Apple stop selling OS X for use on PCs? Aren't the machines they build PCs? Even when they were using Power PC processors they were still PCs. Apple really has soiled that acronym with their deceptive marketing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbar Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 So, the question WAS "Should Apple Sell OS X For Use On A PC?" From my point of view? Yes, of course. I love the idea of being able to buy cheap open market PC hardware and run a premium OS like leopard on it. Obviously from Apple's viewpoint it makes no sense because they are all about hardware when it comes to PC's and selling you their OS to run on a cheap open market box kind of defeats that purpose doesn't it? Not only that, why would they want to open Pandora's box like Microsoft did and let every fly by night hardware supplier willing to pay the licensing fees start writing bug ridden code for their OS? That's one of the reasons OS X is more stable than MS Windows. That and it's based on UNIX code, not some kludged collection of undercooked spaghetti. What I think you might see if Apple's PC market share continues to rise is a significant enough price drop due to volume sales making it easier to justify buying a Mac. The real hurdle Apple faces is can it withstand the growth without losing control and become just another mediocre corporation with no heart or vision? Don't know about the rest of you but I've seen some recent indications of that trend. I'm personally in favor of open source software and letting the owner of the hardware decide what code THEY want to run. My 2 cents, that's all. If it doesn't match your opinion that's OK. We're all individuals and that just adds to the diversity and flavor of the mix. Beating each other over the head repeatedly in an attempt to convince everyone that only your interpretation is valid frequently leads to making oneself look foolish. Again, my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curlyboy Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 In answer to the ? Should Apple Sell OS X For Use On A PC ? they have been since day 1 lol all apple machines are is pc`s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerberus73 Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 Apple could still have control of the os, and the hardware it runs on, by producing quarterly or bi - annual hardware compatability lists much like the ones found online for current hackintoshes, but slimmed down, and unlike the trial and error and patching that goes on at the moment to get it to run, it would be straightforward and just work, say maybe support a dozen or so motherboards, same with graphics cards, wireless etc, and offer os X at a premium price for generic hardware, ie the current price of $29 for real macs, and a more expensive one for generic PC hardware from there HCL lists, say for around $150, this would ensure the hardware mixes were supported, that the prices were lower, and types of system apple dont built could be had for us users whom want a mid tower somewhere between a mac pro and a imac. Hell they could even colaborate with mainboard manufacturers to produce boards with an apple approved EFI on it, and charge a little more for the board, say an extra $25 on top of the same model BIOS only board, and cream off profit from a mix of osx pricing for these boards, and licensing fees for the EFI code. market penetration would easily double, people would have more choice of the type of system to run os X on top. Sure people like us users on these forums get a kick from making it run on hardware it was never designed to operate on, but for joe bloggs on the street a official licenced for os X line of hardware would give them the re-assurance that they could buy hardware to ensure a smooth experience or a pre built system from the likes of dell, hp, lenovo etc that were made to work out of the box with no patching required. Apples claim that it would be solely responsable for support is wrong, in any pre-built system with windows the onus is on the manufacturer to provide support for windows issues on there hardware, apple could do the same therefore negating the argument that it would be a support nightmare. they could also market special applecare packages for these users as an extra layer of comfort, and another revenue stream. People will always buy Apple made hardware, because it looks better, or is percieved to be more stable etc, i doubt very much that sales of mac hardware would slump, if anything people would try the cheaper alternative, learn to love os X and the next time go for a proper Apple model, much like the mac mini was designed to do... but to be honest has not had the impact in doing so, being to underpowered for all but the most basic of tasks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Headrush69 Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Apples claim that it would be solely responsable for support is wrong, in any pre-built system with windows the onus is on the manufacturer to provide support for windows issues on there hardware, apple could do the same therefore negating the argument that it would be a support nightmare. they could also market special applecare packages for these users as an extra layer of comfort, and another revenue stream. Total fallacy. If a driver causes a BSOD on Windows, the majority of the population blames Windows, not the driver. The same thing would happen on OSX and any problems from people trying it for the first time would reflect poorly on OS X. People will always buy Apple made hardware, because it looks better, or is percieved to be more stable etc, i doubt very much that sales of mac hardware would slump, if anything people would try the cheaper alternative, learn to love os X and the next time go for a proper Apple model, much like the mac mini was designed to do... but to be honest has not had the impact in doing so, being to underpowered for all but the most basic of tasks. Highly doubt it. For the most part consumers aren't usually very smart or not very educated when it comes to technical differences and then tend to only focus on the price and very "abstract/marketing" numbers. When I say abstract numbers, I mean things like a screen size or cpu speed. We know because 2 LCDs are both 15.1" doesn't mean then are equal or that 2 CPUs listed at the same speed can be quite different. Design of computers can only get you so far and eventually you would see hardware sales drastically drop. (At least at their current pricing levels and at drastically lower levels, when does Apple stop being an innovator and just not another box maker like Dell? ) OS X would also have to deal with massive piracy. I know the great utopian idea is that Apple users are good citizens and buy a legal copy of OS X but in practice it would likely be no different than with Windows which we know is pirated at an incredibly high volume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdave54 Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 I hope it never happens the main point that I agree with is, if apple try to write a system for more architecture, more programmers, end up with a buggy OS like Widows. Would it lead to registration keys, activation?? I do purchase the OS's from apple & am a long time Mac user. I went hackintosh because I am retired and cannot afford a new Mac nor even a used machine because of the premium prices used macs demand, which may say something about the quality of Apple hardware. Not even going to try to comment of the econimics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroRen Posted December 1, 2009 Share Posted December 1, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s@ndro Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timdphotos Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rectifier23 Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeanpave Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sephira Posted March 21, 2010 Share Posted March 21, 2010 if you use OSX on something that is not a mac then you dont the full experience suchas 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". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invisiblesurfer Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lysid Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 Apple won't ever do this;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj95 Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morphey Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts