He wants to know if you buy Apple because its "Apple"
In his statement, the "mystery computer" runs Apple Software FASTER. Software would look and work the EXACT SAME as it does now.
The hardware is the EXACT SAME HARDWARE that Apple has or will have at one point.
The ONLY DIFFERENCE between what will be made by Apple and what this "computer" is is the fact that Apple does not make it, and that it does not use an APple OS.
Of course since the programs are all Apple programs, then it's basically a mac OS.
Speed and performance or Name-brand and "ease of use" (althogh the ease of use is ther with his mystery comp too).
Basically I'd go for it, if it's 4 times faster and everything works the same. And it looks better too?
In that instance, apple would be a software company, and we'd be able to buy OSX for it.
<strong>Could run Mac software out of the box under emulation 4 times faster than any apple offering
</strong><hr></blockquote>
"Could run Mac software out of the box" implies OS X software as well. Office v.X springs immediately to mind as something that's not available under OS 9, and I'm sure there will be many more in the future. Any such product that will only run OS 9 apps will be kind of still-born.
And if it's emulating Mac OS X 4 times faster than any Apple hardware can run it natively, where can I sign up?
All this does kind of hit home for me, though, because I've been realizing that, as I use OS X, more and more of what I'm doing is "pure UNIX"; i.e. shell work that could just as easily be done on any Linux box. Give me a good browser (which I'm sure they have), Eudora, and the ability to play lots of games (even by switching into Windows momentarily), and I'm seriously tempted. The only thing that's really holding me back is that I know that the Linux user experience is nowhere near as polished as OS X, and there aren't nearly as many commercial-quality apps available for Linux.
Regardless of whether spooky is fishing or not (and if he is, it sounds like he has a kickass product up his sleeve ), I think this topic raises some very good questions.
if it did everything my OS9 machine does, hell yes. Not all of my stuff works in OSX anyway, and i rather like OS9 just wish it were more stable. I dont use apple products because theyre apple i use them because they are the best, for what theyre made for.
<strong>He wants to know if you buy Apple because its "Apple"</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh, right.
No, I don't. I like their OS. If OS X ran on Intel/AMD with access to all the same apps, I'd switch. (And switch back, too, if the PPCs ever got any faster.) The hardware styling is nice, but isn't at all important to me. So I buy Apple because of the software, not the hardware.
On the other hand, I don't buy Microsoft because they're Microsoft.
If it was all made with Apple in mind. ie-Someone loved Apple and started a company to do it his way, the right way with fast hardware and cheap software that was everything we users want from it hard/software wise and the OS rocked in everyway we dream about. Yes. Yes, I would.
If another M$ drone wanting to make money of the mac faithful or steal buyers from Apple by mimicing their appeal. No. Absolutely not.
<strong>If it was all made with Apple in mind. ie-Someone loved Apple and started a company to do it his way, the right way with fast hardware and cheap software that was everything we users want from it hard/software wise and the OS rocked in everyway we dream about. Yes. Yes, I would.
If another M$ drone wanting to make money of the mac faithful or steal buyers from Apple by mimicing their appeal. No. Absolutely not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A number of you seem to get what I'm driving at, the above post probably the closest. If this was a movie I would be asking "Suppose a long time mac fanatic got together with some other mac fabatics and came up with this. . . not because they wanted to compete but becuase they wanted to buld what they felt was a mac that they and other mac lovers wanted. would you switch?"
There was a competitor a long while ago. I think it was called Blue Lightning or something. Basically they took SE Roms and made mac compatible computers with it. They were a non starter as they didn't offer anything apple couldn't or was it becuase mac lovers buy Apple only.
If such a product was available would loyal mac users feel animosity to it becuase it did not carry an apple badge? What do mac people look for?
Lets say it was designed to give users what they might want as opposed to what focus groups said mac users did with their macs.
Even allowing for OS X, and the raftload of odd and unrealistic presumptions: No, I would not switch.
Why not? Because Apple makes the platform. I'd sort of like Macs to stick around, and I don't think Apple could become a pure software house without giving up altogether their ability to bring significant innovations to the market - and, more specifically, without giving up there ability to make machines that are recognizable as Macintoshes.
Realistically, I doubt this hypothetical company could leapfrog Apple's engineering significantly, or achieve Apple's hardware/software integration. There aren't many slouches working for that company. And the sort of power-user machine you describe isn't an ideal Mac to me (a Mac user since 1986). The new iMac is much closer: It's compact, quiet, friendly, powerful, and you can pull it out, plug it in, and do things that were not practicable for the average person little more than a year ago, all for a palatable price. A computer "for the rest of us," not for a few power users clinging to their 9600MPs.
The future compatibility of such a system would be crucial. While I'm no software engineer, I imagine Apple could pretty easily alter the OS enought to disable any 3rd-party attempt to build a Mac clone. Right or not, they could do it. That alone might keep me from making the switch.
<strong>OK, lets say it runs OS X (although in the real world it have to be an X clone or apple would sue the crap out of it)
would you switch?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yup. I'd be worried about incompatibilities that might crop up in later OS versions or being treated as a "second class" Mac OS user, but it sounds like you're saying, "all other things being equal, if you could get better hardware elsewhere, cheaper, would you?" You bet.
what the hell are you trying to prove spooky??????
you must have asked and I quote
[quote] would you switch ?<hr></blockquote>
10 times at least, at the end of like ALL your posts its the same
would you switch
would you change your sex if it allowed you to become the most renowned and respected person on the planet, *by EVERYONE*(I don't even have to mention the benefits there)
This is a non-question not worth answering (but I will anyway ). It's like saying "If you could <insert sex-with-so-and-so, beat-up-so-and-so> and you gauranteed would get it, and there would be no ramifications of your actions, would you do it?" -- No such thing
Show me a system that runs OS X (and all it's apps, few though they are) allows me to continue buying "Apple/Made for Apple" software, and runs all that current and future software at 4 times the speed of current Macs, and what you have is a future Mac (maybe this guy travelled to the future and is selling us futuristic technology, since we're playing "let's pretend" then sure, I'll buy one).
Besides, one of the key things in this post was "emulation" and I have yet to see an emulator that performs as well as native.
This is simply a pipe-dream of what we all want now: better, faster, cheaper....."hey dude, pass me the bong..."
Comments
In his statement, the "mystery computer" runs Apple Software FASTER. Software would look and work the EXACT SAME as it does now.
The hardware is the EXACT SAME HARDWARE that Apple has or will have at one point.
The ONLY DIFFERENCE between what will be made by Apple and what this "computer" is is the fact that Apple does not make it, and that it does not use an APple OS.
Of course since the programs are all Apple programs, then it's basically a mac OS.
Speed and performance or Name-brand and "ease of use" (althogh the ease of use is ther with his mystery comp too).
Basically I'd go for it, if it's 4 times faster and everything works the same. And it looks better too?
In that instance, apple would be a software company, and we'd be able to buy OSX for it.
Andrew
<strong>Could run Mac software out of the box under emulation 4 times faster than any apple offering
</strong><hr></blockquote>
"Could run Mac software out of the box" implies OS X software as well. Office v.X springs immediately to mind as something that's not available under OS 9, and I'm sure there will be many more in the future. Any such product that will only run OS 9 apps will be kind of still-born.
And if it's emulating Mac OS X 4 times faster than any Apple hardware can run it natively, where can I sign up?
All this does kind of hit home for me, though, because I've been realizing that, as I use OS X, more and more of what I'm doing is "pure UNIX"; i.e. shell work that could just as easily be done on any Linux box. Give me a good browser (which I'm sure they have), Eudora, and the ability to play lots of games (even by switching into Windows momentarily), and I'm seriously tempted. The only thing that's really holding me back is that I know that the Linux user experience is nowhere near as polished as OS X, and there aren't nearly as many commercial-quality apps available for Linux.
Regardless of whether spooky is fishing or not (and if he is, it sounds like he has a kickass product up his sleeve
Alex
If it's a beige box, I'll pass.
<strong>He wants to know if you buy Apple because its "Apple"</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh, right.
No, I don't. I like their OS. If OS X ran on Intel/AMD with access to all the same apps, I'd switch. (And switch back, too, if the PPCs ever got any faster.) The hardware styling is nice, but isn't at all important to me. So I buy Apple because of the software, not the hardware.
On the other hand, I don't buy Microsoft because they're Microsoft.
Alex
If another M$ drone wanting to make money of the mac faithful or steal buyers from Apple by mimicing their appeal. No. Absolutely not.
<strong>If it was all made with Apple in mind. ie-Someone loved Apple and started a company to do it his way, the right way with fast hardware and cheap software that was everything we users want from it hard/software wise and the OS rocked in everyway we dream about. Yes. Yes, I would.
If another M$ drone wanting to make money of the mac faithful or steal buyers from Apple by mimicing their appeal. No. Absolutely not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
A number of you seem to get what I'm driving at, the above post probably the closest. If this was a movie I would be asking "Suppose a long time mac fanatic got together with some other mac fabatics and came up with this. . . not because they wanted to compete but becuase they wanted to buld what they felt was a mac that they and other mac lovers wanted. would you switch?"
There was a competitor a long while ago. I think it was called Blue Lightning or something. Basically they took SE Roms and made mac compatible computers with it. They were a non starter as they didn't offer anything apple couldn't or was it becuase mac lovers buy Apple only.
If such a product was available would loyal mac users feel animosity to it becuase it did not carry an apple badge? What do mac people look for?
Lets say it was designed to give users what they might want as opposed to what focus groups said mac users did with their macs.
would you switch ?
The computer would have to deliver on its promis, assure future compatibility for software, and have a lower cost version for home use.
Why not? Because Apple makes the platform. I'd sort of like Macs to stick around, and I don't think Apple could become a pure software house without giving up altogether their ability to bring significant innovations to the market - and, more specifically, without giving up there ability to make machines that are recognizable as Macintoshes.
Realistically, I doubt this hypothetical company could leapfrog Apple's engineering significantly, or achieve Apple's hardware/software integration. There aren't many slouches working for that company. And the sort of power-user machine you describe isn't an ideal Mac to me (a Mac user since 1986). The new iMac is much closer: It's compact, quiet, friendly, powerful, and you can pull it out, plug it in, and do things that were not practicable for the average person little more than a year ago, all for a palatable price. A computer "for the rest of us," not for a few power users clinging to their 9600MPs.
So ask anyone who bought a clone would they do it again and I think almost all would say absolutley!
It is not a matter of loyalty and really at that point elegance of design was not an issue either.
<strong>OK, lets say it runs OS X (although in the real world it have to be an X clone or apple would sue the crap out of it)
would you switch?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yup. I'd be worried about incompatibilities that might crop up in later OS versions or being treated as a "second class" Mac OS user, but it sounds like you're saying, "all other things being equal, if you could get better hardware elsewhere, cheaper, would you?" You bet.
<strong>Am I a crazy man for wanting a command line interface ? A decent one mind you, not a DOS-a-like.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What's wrong with tcsh?
you must have asked and I quote
[quote] would you switch ?<hr></blockquote>
10 times at least, at the end of like ALL your posts its the same
would you switch
would you change your sex if it allowed you to become the most renowned and respected person on the planet, *by EVERYONE*(I don't even have to mention the benefits there)
[ 01-23-2002: Message edited by: Wrong Robot ]</p>
Show me a system that runs OS X (and all it's apps, few though they are) allows me to continue buying "Apple/Made for Apple" software, and runs all that current and future software at 4 times the speed of current Macs, and what you have is a future Mac (maybe this guy travelled to the future and is selling us futuristic technology, since we're playing "let's pretend" then sure, I'll buy one).
Besides, one of the key things in this post was "emulation" and I have yet to see an emulator that performs as well as native.
This is simply a pipe-dream of what we all want now: better, faster, cheaper....."hey dude, pass me the bong..."
[ 01-23-2002: Message edited by: fuzz_ball ]</p>
<strong>
would you change your sex ...
[ 01-23-2002: Message edited by: Wrong Robot ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Could be fun for a day