I agree, no, to do so would be a horrible move for Apple. The biggest blessing and curse for Apple is Mac OS X. Those with Macs see it as a blessing, because it's more stable, yadda yadda. Those with PCs are sometimes turned off by Macs because it's not what they're used to, they can't use all their old software, etc. They don't dislike Macs because of the hardware, they avoid them because of the issues between Windows and OS X. Again, Mac users love Apple hardware because it can run OS X. To release OS X for PC's would mean that now, you don't need to go buy the $999 iMac, you can go get the $499 Gateway and just toss OS X on it for $129. Apple's hardware sales would plummet to include only those people who buy them for the physical design. Let's face it, most Mac users couldn't care less whether their system is a beautiful all-in-one or a half-gutted tower, as long as it's fast and it runs OS X.
I see the offering of Safari to PC users as a huge market strategy. Apple advertises now that if you know itunes you know how to use a mac. Imagine people downloading a web browser (yet another strategy, 99.99999% of people with a computer are on the web) and they become familiar with the web browser and then they decide to try a mac out and when they move to a mac they already know more on how to operate their new machine and software, very smart of apple if you ask me.
I'd bet the ranch that a specific "purpose" for creating a Windows version will become obvious down the road. It wasn't done for grins or just to bring Windows users a nice glass of ice water. And I doubt the purpose will have anything to do with selling hardware from HP or Dell.
My guess would be that it has something to do with a future version of .Mac or other Apple web-based services, possibly something tying into Google as many have been speculating. Or perhaps it will add some functionality or syncability for iPhone users, so there will be a strong incentive for iPhone users to actually download and use Safari even in Windows.
iTunes for Windows also seemed a bit curious when first released. The software was always free, but the plan to generate revenue through it was revealed over time.
Interested to see what, if anything, comes of this...
I agree that most likely it is related with future version of .Mac/online services. Apple wants to have a browser under it's own control. Otherwise, if they offer a service, they will have to check for compatibility with multiple versions of several browsers and try to make workarounds for those browsers bugs. Not that they will not need this anyway, but having own browser under control helps a lot.
As a side effect they will have 3 benefits:
as Safari share grows, more companies will want their sites to work well with Safari. This will help both Mac and iPhone browsing experience.
web designers will be able to check for Safari compatibility without having a Mac, or at least without having to reboot. Some may argue that this may turn them from buying a mac but I believe these are the guys who will just skip over Safari compatibility if they do not have one at hand. Outside US, this is the majority of designers.
more developers and designers will be able to develop and test their sites for iPhone.
iTunes for Windows also seemed a bit curious when first released. The software was always free, but the plan to generate revenue through it was revealed over time.
iTunes for Windows came with the iPod for Windows. There was nothing curious about it.
I think it was John Gruber of Daring Fireball had scuttlebutt that said Apple is in part angling to get search engine referral money. He mentioned that Mozilla got $25M from Google through search engine referrals.
Getting a more consistent experience on and off the iPhone probably is nice too.
I'd like for Apple to just release good versions of their best software for Windows so I can just keep using Windows.
Yes, but then Apple wouldn't sell very much hardware and wouldn't make as much money. Also (although idk how much of a real difference it makes), some (SJ including) would contend that making the hardware and software specifically for each other makes them work the best, and by allowing OS X apps on PC's, the "OS X experience" would be diminished because of compatability and such. If they crashed or something, people would see it as Apple's fault and not the fault of them having messed up hardware, maybe. Just a thought.
Apple will first offer OS X on Sony hardware, you heard it hear first. I'm not into Apple as long as some here, but I was the first that I know of to predict a black iMac, which is going to happen. I was the first to predict Apple making a fully fledged TV to my knowledge, never knew Rolo mentioned one before me, as I wasn't a member when he did. That's another certainty in my book too, and I genuinely and wholeheartedly believe OS X will be announced on new Sony hardware before 2010. Dell, I don't know about that. Apple will make getting OS X a luxury, not something you can get for a cheap Dell box. It will be a luxury item, and will only be available on new hardware from one or two other premium vendors besides Apple. I also believe Apple will set the whole thing up in a way that you need a Mac for a new box upgrade version of OS X to work. If you want an OS X Vaio from example, you'll need to get a brand new one.
Of course anyone can tell you they know it all, we're all guessing. We'll find out the truth over time.
Apple will not offer OS X for PC's. Just wont happen. They wont offer their Pro Apps for PC's it totally defeats the purpose. They are gaining market share now. They don't need to. What they want is people buying Macs. Not people that want Macs buying PC's.
Is Apple slowly transitioning into offering Mac OS X for more hardware? Not for all hardware mind you, but maybe partnerships with HP, Dell, etc.
It wouldn't be that hard. All Apple and intel would have to do is create a reference design based on the EFI implementation instead of BIOS. All the parts and most of the drivers already exist. It would be great for the Mac as a platform, but bad for the zealots who view Apple as some sort of religion and the snobs who buy Macs so they can look down on others.
Apple will not offer OS X for PC's. Just wont happen. They wont offer their Pro Apps for PC's it totally defeats the purpose. They are gaining market share now. They don't need to.
A very insignificant marketshare and pretty much only among the iBooks. We need drasticly more than that.
Quote:
What they want is people buying Macs. Not people that want Macs buying PC's.
Then they better start making Macs that people actually want to buy. The whole converting the masses idea hasn't worked for the last 25 and it will never work. That's why Apple is still sitting at 5% desipite having an operating system that is light year ahead, they don't ever learn. Windows became the dominant player not because anything they release anything that is that good, but because they are business savvy enough to go to the people and let them decide what computer they want instead of treating them like children and making all the decisions for them like Apple does.
Safari on Windows could mean a lot more than just pushing iPhone development.
Looks look at a couple of trends.
1. Web 2.0...today more hype than anything. Sure you can use Ajax and develop some nifty server side web based applications..but that's today what about tomorrow?
2. Adobe's Air (nee Apollo) is an almalgamation of Webkit (Safari's render engine) and other Adobe goodness wrapped up in an environment that gives you Web 2.0 with local file system access. The next logical step.
2.a Microsoft's Silverlight does a similar thing by coalescing Web 2.0 tech and adding more programmability and desktop support.
Apple is a member of the WHATWG group that is defining HTML5. Clearly Webkit and beyond is important to them and we've not seen what they plan to do regarding marrying Web 2.0 and desktop fs. They could piggy back on Adobe Air or Silverlight or both. They could define their own system. Regardless whatever they do has to be cross platform and based on as many open standards as possible.
Thus Safari for Windows isn't a joke or a ploy but rather the first logical step in defining future web standards and web/desktop applications. The desktop isn't going away anytime soon but it's going to be augmented in some powerful ways by the next "version" of the internet.
Comments
Is Apple slowly transitioning into offering Mac OS X for more hardware? Not for all hardware mind you, but maybe partnerships w2ith HP, Dell, etc.
No.
Have a nice day.
No.
Have a nice day.
Thanks, that was such a great post.
Thanks, that was such a great post.
I wasn't trying to be an ass. Really...that's just the answer. It's not going to happen.
And have a nice day. Again.
I agree, no, to do so would be a horrible move for Apple. The biggest blessing and curse for Apple is Mac OS X. Those with Macs see it as a blessing, because it's more stable, yadda yadda. Those with PCs are sometimes turned off by Macs because it's not what they're used to, they can't use all their old software, etc. They don't dislike Macs because of the hardware, they avoid them because of the issues between Windows and OS X. Again, Mac users love Apple hardware because it can run OS X. To release OS X for PC's would mean that now, you don't need to go buy the $999 iMac, you can go get the $499 Gateway and just toss OS X on it for $129. Apple's hardware sales would plummet to include only those people who buy them for the physical design. Let's face it, most Mac users couldn't care less whether their system is a beautiful all-in-one or a half-gutted tower, as long as it's fast and it runs OS X.
My guess would be that it has something to do with a future version of .Mac or other Apple web-based services, possibly something tying into Google as many have been speculating. Or perhaps it will add some functionality or syncability for iPhone users, so there will be a strong incentive for iPhone users to actually download and use Safari even in Windows.
iTunes for Windows also seemed a bit curious when first released. The software was always free, but the plan to generate revenue through it was revealed over time.
Interested to see what, if anything, comes of this...
As a side effect they will have 3 benefits:
iTunes for Windows also seemed a bit curious when first released. The software was always free, but the plan to generate revenue through it was revealed over time.
iTunes for Windows came with the iPod for Windows. There was nothing curious about it.
Is Apple slowly transitioning into offering Mac OS X for more hardware? Not for all hardware mind you, but maybe partnerships with HP, Dell, etc.
Maybe a possible takeover of Windows from within?
I'd like for Apple to just release good versions of their best software for Windows so I can just keep using Windows.
That's exactly what Apple isn't doing it.
Safari on windows is to get more web developers to have safari ready web pages. For the most part that's it. They need it for iPhone.
Getting a more consistent experience on and off the iPhone probably is nice too.
I like IE Explorer better, on XP anyway, mainly for the Favorites pull down menu over the Safari bookmarks.
Is Apple slowly transitioning into offering Mac OS X for more hardware?
Of course. iPhone. That's whole point with Safari on Windows.
I'd like for Apple to just release good versions of their best software for Windows so I can just keep using Windows.
Yes, but then Apple wouldn't sell very much hardware and wouldn't make as much money. Also (although idk how much of a real difference it makes), some (SJ including) would contend that making the hardware and software specifically for each other makes them work the best, and by allowing OS X apps on PC's, the "OS X experience" would be diminished because of compatability and such. If they crashed or something, people would see it as Apple's fault and not the fault of them having messed up hardware, maybe. Just a thought.
Of course anyone can tell you they know it all, we're all guessing. We'll find out the truth over time.
Is Apple slowly transitioning into offering Mac OS X for more hardware? Not for all hardware mind you, but maybe partnerships with HP, Dell, etc.
It wouldn't be that hard. All Apple and intel would have to do is create a reference design based on the EFI implementation instead of BIOS. All the parts and most of the drivers already exist. It would be great for the Mac as a platform, but bad for the zealots who view Apple as some sort of religion and the snobs who buy Macs so they can look down on others.
Apple will not offer OS X for PC's. Just wont happen. They wont offer their Pro Apps for PC's it totally defeats the purpose. They are gaining market share now. They don't need to.
A very insignificant marketshare and pretty much only among the iBooks. We need drasticly more than that.
What they want is people buying Macs. Not people that want Macs buying PC's.
Then they better start making Macs that people actually want to buy. The whole converting the masses idea hasn't worked for the last 25 and it will never work. That's why Apple is still sitting at 5% desipite having an operating system that is light year ahead, they don't ever learn. Windows became the dominant player not because anything they release anything that is that good, but because they are business savvy enough to go to the people and let them decide what computer they want instead of treating them like children and making all the decisions for them like Apple does.
Looks look at a couple of trends.
1. Web 2.0...today more hype than anything. Sure you can use Ajax and develop some nifty server side web based applications..but that's today what about tomorrow?
2. Adobe's Air (nee Apollo) is an almalgamation of Webkit (Safari's render engine) and other Adobe goodness wrapped up in an environment that gives you Web 2.0 with local file system access. The next logical step.
2.a Microsoft's Silverlight does a similar thing by coalescing Web 2.0 tech and adding more programmability and desktop support.
Apple is a member of the WHATWG group that is defining HTML5. Clearly Webkit and beyond is important to them and we've not seen what they plan to do regarding marrying Web 2.0 and desktop fs. They could piggy back on Adobe Air or Silverlight or both. They could define their own system. Regardless whatever they do has to be cross platform and based on as many open standards as possible.
Thus Safari for Windows isn't a joke or a ploy but rather the first logical step in defining future web standards and web/desktop applications. The desktop isn't going away anytime soon but it's going to be augmented in some powerful ways by the next "version" of the internet.