OS X coming to PCs...What the hell?

[asstastic]

This doesn't matter IF you own the actual hardware companies that build the components you emulate.

 

E.g. IF Apple should own intel why would they encourage intel-emulation when they'd make more money by actually selling you intel cpu's and intel chipsets (whether in an Apple PC or generic mainboard). And in this scenario they still own and drive the actuall supported hardware while allowing generic PC's to be used which aren't so "generic" anymore by then.

 

This is especially the case with AMD now. If Apple would buy AMD then they'd have a high profile video-card developer/manufacturor, chipset/mainboard developer/manufacturor AND CPU developer/manufactor... virtually all the components needed to build PC's (or at least the most important parts). Why would they let you buy a emulated ATI-card then if they can sell you the real thing. By allowing exclusive support for e.g. ATI-cards then, they'd still controll the hardware part and therefore still give the impression of increased stability in OSX.

 

In fact IF Apple would buy AMD they could also bring stability in PC-part pricing policies. And build their own computers a lot cheaper which would answers Tiqo's whishes :-)

 

Just my 2 cents,

 

EPDM

 

 

Don't get emulation of software and hardware confused. In my example I was trying to illustrate how virtualization would remove the burden of supporting a gadzillion different types of hardware found in non-Apple PCs. Basicaly, in a virtualized environment the operating system sees a virtual video card, a virtual network device, a virtual optical drive, etc. These emulated components might recieve occasional software updates but they will be the same no matter what components are actualy found on the host system. Thus, Apple has the relatively simple task of making sure that their network kexts/drivers support the Parallels virtual network card. In summary, supporting virtualization would be a good compromise fo Apple, alowing PC owners to use OSX on whatever system they choose without needing to support the myriad of components available for these machines. Granted this would cut Mac hardware sales, but not as much as opening the operating system to any PC or making an agreement with specific vendors such as Dell. There's a good chance that such a move could significantly bolster Apple's market share, expanding the user base of OSX which wouldn't be suca a bad thing for the company.

 

Also, complete vertical integration just doesn't make sense for computer manufacurers. For one, Apple doesn't have nearly enough capitol to purchase AMD, Intel or even a PC company like Dell or Gateway. Microsoft doesn't manufacture xboxes, they liscense production out to a company in Mexico. Neither ATI nor nVidia manufacture the chips that power their video cards. The cost of building and running your own chip fabrication plant is just too much. It's easier to design the product and then let a plant process your order along with those of a handfull of other companies. Much better to let ASUS(they build some damn fine notebooks under their own brand by the way) build those macbooks IMHO.

[The Dew]

If Apple made mac for all X86 and X64 processors, I think they would actually have a shot at coming up to Microsoft.

[.Dani]

If Apple made mac for all X86 and X64 processors, I think they would actually have a shot at coming up to Microsoft.

It's been said, and I'll say it again: Apple doesn't want to make it available for regular PCs because no-one would buy their -expensive- Macintosh computers anymore! Why should I buy an overpriced Mac if I can simply buy Tiger/Leopard and install it on my self-built $800,- PC? Think of all the Apple Stores ... It would be a disaster for their hardware sales (read: Mac sales).

 

On the other hand ofcourse, you can argue if Microsoft gets filthy rich of just selling software -let's face it, they do get damn rich-, why shouldn't Apple be able to do so with, according to most (biased, that is) people here, a superior piece of software -OS X- ?

 

Either way it will be interesting Poor students like myself won't exactly be able to finance a -good- Mac, neither will I be fortunate enough to suddenly find a pot of gold at a rainbow's end in order to purchase one (man am I feeling bad about the latter ).

 

Anyway, we will just have to wait and see, now won't we

 

-Dani

Edited January 27, 2007 by .Dani

[macgirl]

It's been said, and I'll say it again: Apple doesn't want to make it available for regular PCs because no-one would buy their -expensive- Macintosh computers anymore! Why should I buy an overpriced Mac if I can simply buy Tiger/Leopard and install it on my self-built $800,- PC? Think of all the Apple Stores ... It would be a disaster for their hardware sales (read: Mac sales).

Talk for yourself, If Apple came with a OSX for vanilla PC I bought a Mac anyway. And of course the Vanilla OSX for my no-$800 PC

[A Nonny Moose]

How bout Ubuntu insert CD press enter to install... doubleclick install chose username/password install? hard I think not things just work? I think so! Stop acting like Microsoft Fudmachine.

 

Yeah, because Linuz is sooooooooooo flawless.

[A Nonny Moose]

It's been said, and I'll say it again: Apple doesn't want to make it available for regular PCs because no-one would buy their -expensive- Macintosh computers anymore! Why should I buy an overpriced Mac if I can simply buy Tiger/Leopard and install it on my self-built $800,- PC? Think of all the Apple Stores ... It would be a disaster for their hardware sales (read: Mac sales).

 

You're on the right track, but it has to do with profit margins rather than "overpriced hardware" (which has been debunked). Profit margins on hardware are higher than it is for software. In order to make a similar profit margin as a strictly software company, Apple has to either:

 

1. Sell more copies (which won't happen) or

2. Raise prices (which increases supply but reduces demand, meaning they'll sell even less than they do now).

 

So unless you're rooting for Apple to go bankrupt and have their software in the $5 reject bins, then you need to keep Apple as a hardware vendor.

[The Dew]

It's been said, and I'll say it again: Apple doesn't want to make it available for regular PCs because no-one would buy their -expensive- Macintosh computers anymore! Why should I buy an overpriced Mac if I can simply buy Tiger/Leopard and install it on my self-built $800,- PC? Think of all the Apple Stores ... It would be a disaster for their hardware sales (read: Mac sales).

They should just quit selling them overpriced machines which I would never buy. They should just start making new machines with regular PC based hardware. Either way, they ain't going to make anymore money because I havn't talked to one person who has bought a mac.

Edited January 28, 2007 by The Dew

[Ferret-Simpson]

They should just start making new machines with regular PC based hardware.

 

 

You mean a new Intel Mac?

 

Apple machines are Standard machines. That's what the whole "Install OS X On your PC with jAS!" thing is all about. There are a few technical issues which Apple would need to fix before they could sell MacOS X to the GU anyway. 80% is the drivers, 20% is copy protection.

 

Every Homebrew Mac user knows that there aren't enough drivers for OS X. My system (Apart from a few specialities) is almost identical in hardware to a standard Mac, which is why about 60% of it works out of the box. The other 40% are the wifi, (Not sure why that doesn't work, it's the same chipset as a normal Mac's wifi - AR5006EG [Confirmed from DevID's in atheros 5454 kext plist]), Battery (Also should be out-of-box and isn't. Still checking the Plists onthat one.) and hardware that Apple don't use: Cardbus, integral Media Reader, Sigmatel Codec, Wacom, FujiButtons. They'd need to negotiate with a hell of a lot of corporations to get the support needed, and for Apple that's not currently financially viable: Enough people buy "Macs" to make it a waste of time. The preferences would also need a lot of work to allow PC users to play with the hardware the same way they do on windows. . . As of right now, OS X doesn't allow you to configure devices that aren't detected as standard to work with drivers that are installed. (Example, the Wacom Serial Penabled devices: 16X50 but not autodetected. Just need to point the OS to the right port.)

[The Dew]

You mean a new Intel Mac?

 

Apple machines are Standard machines. That's what the whole "Install OS X On your PC with jAS!" thing is all about. There are a few technical issues which Apple would need to fix before they could sell MacOS X to the GU anyway. 80% is the drivers, 20% is copy protection.

 

Every Homebrew Mac user knows that there aren't enough drivers for OS X. My system (Apart from a few specialities) is almost identical in hardware to a standard Mac, which is why about 60% of it works out of the box. The other 40% are the wifi, (Not sure why that doesn't work, it's the same chipset as a normal Mac's wifi - AR5006EG [Confirmed from DevID's in atheros 5454 kext plist]), Battery (Also should be out-of-box and isn't. Still checking the Plists onthat one.) and hardware that Apple don't use: Cardbus, integral Media Reader, Sigmatel Codec, Wacom, FujiButtons. They'd need to negotiate with a hell of a lot of corporations to get the support needed, and for Apple that's not currently financially viable: Enough people buy "Macs" to make it a waste of time. The preferences would also need a lot of work to allow PC users to play with the hardware the same way they do on windows. . . As of right now, OS X doesn't allow you to configure devices that aren't detected as standard to work with drivers that are installed. (Example, the Wacom Serial Penabled devices: 16X50 but not autodetected. Just need to point the OS to the right port.)

 

Ya, I know, but start selling it for all kinds of hardware(PC Based), kinda like Dell and Gateway Does.

[Mr. Bond]

Ya, I know, but start selling it for all kinds of hardware(PC Based), kinda like Dell and Gateway Does.

 

Essentially, you mean the licensing of OS X to third-party manufacturers, such as Dell, HP, etc. It's a topic that's been discussed quite a few times already, and one people never get tired of. It has pro's and cons of course, but I don't want to get into that discussion again, at the moment.

 

Although your comment about Apple's overpriced hardware is a tad ignorant. Recently, particularly with the switch to Intel, you can easily grab a Macbook for $1200 (Canadian, perhaps even less if you bargain hunt), and a mini for even less. Mac's are definetly not as expensive as they used to be...the added expense comes, in part, from the very limited, sometimes custom-built hardware that has to be made to adhere to the OS X platform. Apple doesn't quite have the ability to skimp out on componenets and accesories, much like their Windows-toting competetors.

[joe75]

your comment about Apple's overpriced hardware is a tad ignorant.

 

the added expense comes, in part, from the very limited, sometimes custom-built hardware that has to be made to adhere to the OS X platform.

There is nothing ignorant in thinking Apple is overpriced and I think it's ignorant to think Apple has superior hardware.

 

What is this custom hardware you're talking about, a $2 chip or 30 cent transformers

Edited January 28, 2007 by joe75

[henchman]

Although your comment about Apple's overpriced hardware is a tad ignorant. Recently, particularly with the switch to Intel, you can easily grab a Macbook for $1200 (Canadian, perhaps even less if you bargain hunt), and a mini for even less. Mac's are definetly not as expensive as they used to be...the added expense comes, in part, from the very limited, sometimes custom-built hardware that has to be made to adhere to the OS X platform. Apple doesn't quite have the ability to skimp out on componenets and accesories, much like their Windows-toting competetors.

 

It's not ignorant. It's still the truth.

Apple goes out of their way to have hardware add-ons made that will only work on a mac. Inferior, lower powered videocards at twice the price of the same card for a PC.

Ok, let's look at your Macbook.

 

Small 13.1 inch screen

Craptacular Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 950 video card

No Expresscard slot

and for a 2 gig RAM, 2ghz version the total is: $1474

[Mr. Bond]

While I may have been a little rash to state that it would be ignorant, I do think its still untrue to say that Apple still overprices their hardware to the extent that was occuring pre-Intel. What I was going to add earlier, is the fact that not everyone is looking for some sort of powerhouse like a Mac(book) Pro. What I've found personally, is that it's not just Apple, but many computer manufacturers, who charge upwards of $2000 - $3000 dollars, if you want a solid, top-of the line PC. I think it's because of this point that I feel that Apple is not necessarilly overpricing to the extent that many still think they are; consider that you can now by a Mac Pro for less the price of a G5...and with 10x the power (or whatever the numbers are...just trying to explain a point).

[bluedragon1971]

It's not ignorant. It's still the truth.

Apple goes out of their way to have hardware add-ons made that will only work on a mac. Inferior, lower powered videocards at twice the price of the same card for a PC.

Ok, let's look at your Macbook.

 

Small 13.1 inch screen

Craptacular Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 950 video card

No Expresscard slot

and for a 2 gig RAM, 2ghz version the total is: $1474

 

You are ignorant, period. I just priced out a Dell E1405 with specs as close as possible to the Macbook you quoted, and it came up to $1759, nearly $300 more than the Macbook. Admittedly, the Dell has a 14.1" screen instead of 13.1", but it does not have a built in camera, which the Macbook does have. Comparisons like this have been shown to ignorant people like you over and over again, but still the rants about "overpriced Macs" still go on.

[henchman]

While I may have been a little rash to state that it would be ignorant, I do think its still untrue to say that Apple still overprices their hardware to the extent that was occuring pre-Intel. What I was going to add earlier, is the fact that not everyone is looking for some sort of powerhouse like a Mac(book) Pro. What I've found personally, is that it's not just Apple, but many computer manufacturers, who charge upwards of $2000 - $3000 dollars, if you want a solid, top-of the line PC. I think it's because of this point that I feel that Apple is not necessarilly overpricing to the extent that many still think they are; consider that you can now by a Mac Pro for less the price of a G5...and with 10x the power (or whatever the numbers are...just trying to explain a point).

 

See, to me, there are 2 type of users. Power users that really need the power, options, expandability. I fall in that category, as I use my dell D820 for all my high end audio-production needs.

And then, you have the low end users. People who do email, ty0e letters, and watch youtube videos.

 

So, On the Apple side, you have the mow end macbook, which is still $1500,-. As 512meg, IMO, is completely usless these days.

 

If I want a low end PC laptop, I can still pick up a decent one for $700,- and up.

 

And I just bought my Dell last week.

I didn't get a MBP, because it simply didn't have the options that I wanted and needed, like:

Dual harddrive option.

PCMCIA and Expresscard slots

Upgradeble, socketed CPU

Physical switch to turn off wirless and bluetooth. (Amust with audio applications. Most of them insist you turn ogg your wirless and buetooth for them to operate properly).

3 year onsite repair. ( no shipping in or driving aorund town if there's a problem)

 

And it came with a bunch of things that I didn't needD like:

Broadband wireless capability via an internal card.

Biometric copy protection.

 

All for less than a MBP.

Edited January 29, 2007 by henchman

[bluedragon1971]

Physical switch to turn off wirless and bluetooth. (Amust with audio applications. Most of them insist you turn ogg your wirless and buetooth for them to operate properly).

Only on Windows would application programmers insist on the user turning off their wireless connnection to run a program! That's just plain stupid. What if the user has their files stored on another computer? What if they are wanting to use a Bluetooth headset to listen to the audio files they are working on? They are just screwed then, right?

Edited January 29, 2007 by bluedragon1971

[henchman]

Only on Windows would application programmers insist on the user turning off their wireless connnection to run a program! That's just plain stupid. What if the user has their files stored on another computer? What if they are wanting to use a Bluetooth headset to listen to the audio files they are working on? They are just screwed then, right?

 

 

Yeah, well, you have to do it both on Mac's AND PC's smartass.

Guess you don't know as much as you think you do.

Edited January 29, 2007 by henchman

[bluedragon1971]

Yeah, well, you have to do it both on Mac's AND PC's smartass.

Guess you don't know as much as you think you do.

 

I don't use high end audio apps, so I've never run into this, or even heard of it before you mentioned it. It sounds rediculous to me. What apps in particular have this kind of insane requirement, so I can be sure never to bother with them? Oh, and I notice that you didn't bother to reply to my price comparison of the Dell E1405 and the Macbook.

 

In a few Google searches, this one link is the only thing I can find referring to what you are talking about: http://www.apogeedigital.com/support/docum...w=ensemble#3732

Edited January 29, 2007 by bluedragon1971

[joe75]

You are ignorant, period. I just priced out a Dell E1405 with specs as close as possible to the Macbook you quoted, and it came up to $1759, nearly $300 more than the Macbook.

My 1405 was $1300 something with upgraded processor and extended replacement warranty, and I received a $50 rebate. The same machine was on sale at Xmas time for $750

[bluedragon1971]

My 1405 was $1300 something with upgraded processor and extended replacement warranty, and I received a $50 rebate. The same machine was on sale at Xmas time for $750

 

Yeah, you can get one a lot lower, but in doing so, you have to give up many of the options that are standard on the Macbook. I priced this one out to best match Henchman's hypothetical 2Ghz, 2GB Macbook. The point being: to get a Dell with the same features as the Macbook, you have to pay more for it. Kind of kills the "overpriced Mac" argument.

[joe75]

I think everything with Apples name on it is overpriced because of branding and I don't buy Apple products and I wouldn't buy a pre built PC.

The only thing I wanted extra, besides the cpu, was a better video card. The card cant be upgraded because there's no room and I would've had to go with the 1505. I wanted the smaller size and the 1405 has awesome battery life.

[henchman]

I don't use high end audio apps, so I've never run into this, or even heard of it before you mentioned it. It sounds rediculous to me. What apps in particular have this kind of insane requirement, so I can be sure never to bother with them? [/url]

 

Pro-Tools, Nuendo, Logic Audio, Digital Performer. etc.

Edited January 29, 2007 by henchman

[bluedragon1971]

Pro-Tools, Nuendo, Logic Audio, Digital Performer. etc.

 

Thanks for that info . It is worth noting that it's very easy to turn off Airport Extreme on a Mac, just two clicks. http://oit.nd.edu/network/mac_disable.shtml I'm not sure about Bluetooth, since I've never used a Mac that had it.

Edited January 29, 2007 by bluedragon1971

[mac-mini]

its the same as airport. click the bluetooth menu then click turn bluetooth off

[yaduhin]

Hi.

I'm graphic designer - architectural visualiser. I hate desktop computers, so I only work on laptops.

Some time ago, I was buing new lap - I had to choose between mac book pro 17" and one of toshiba models - both with almost the same procesor, ram amount, etc. Toshiba has better graphic card, with 512 mb ram. Mac has build in camera (i don't need this) and... mac osx (which I LOVE!).

MAC costs (in my country - Poland) about 2815 eur, toshiba about 1900 eur.

I choose toshiba. I know mac books have beautiful design, etc. but it was not enough to pay that extra 915 eur.... esp. that there will be no SPEED boost, witch is so important to me - I would rather buy for that money extra memory upgrade from 2GB to 4GB ram.

 

BUT: even if OSX for PC would cost 500 eur - I would buy it.

Edited February 2, 2007 by yaduhin