Just wondering ...
If IBM woulf release their own boxes using this CPU ... wouldn't that effectively be creating a mac clone since it is using PowerPC techonology ...Possibly being able to install MacOS on it too (abeit maybe easier said than done) ???
Comments
Let IBM build the high end server and license OS X server from Apple. Both will be happy.
The answer is: No.
The odds are: 0%.
No.
<strong>Just wondering ...
If IBM woulf release their own boxes using this CPU ... wouldn't that effectively be creating a mac clone since it is using PowerPC techonology ...Possibly being able to install MacOS on it too (abeit maybe easier said than done) ???</strong><hr></blockquote>
And have the IBM clones ONLY available to business/corporate/enterprise customers. This way the clones don't complete with bread and butter customers.
If someone has the balls to post Darwin drivers for generic OpenFirmware PowerPCs, I salute you. Until then, we'll all be stuck running X inside Linux.
Barto
This would be a very different arrangement than the cloning disaster of the '90s, and comparing the two is misleading.
StarMax 4000/200
200MHz 604e
32MB (96MB in, 160Max)
40MHz bus
2.5GB HD
8X CD-Rom (i think)
beige out the wa-zoo
[QB]I think its entirely possible that we'll see IBM offering MacOS X as an option on their hardware. <hr></blockquote>
But who makes the money from the hardware sales from the above scenario? And who has to pay for server software that would otherwise be free?
Still, an interesting scenario.
"Then we'll have options, we and we like to have options."
<strong>Mac's all still contain proprietary boot ROMs, they are just much smaller than they used to be and have been jealously guarded on the legal fronts, unlike the old BIOS that IBM let out of the bag to that Compaq et.al. in the early 80's. Where do you think OpenFirmware lives???</strong><hr></blockquote>IBM did not let anything out of the bag with Compaq. The BIOS in Compaq's computers was reverse engineered to be a functional replacement for the IBM BIOS. However, the IBM PC BIOS was and is IBM's intellectual property.
<strong>
And have the IBM clones ONLY available to business/corporate/enterprise customers. This way the clones don't complete with bread and butter customers.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Then who buys the Xserve?
I don't see it happening. Nope. I just don't see steve giving away sales of the Xserve and 970 beast tower for IBM to sell it's hardware to it's huge market running X. As much as I'd like to see X with 95% of the market, I don't think Steve has the mentality ot let someone else steal his thunder. The only way would be some type of licensing agreement and fee with each OS, a microsoft type of move or a % of each sale or something.
[edit] Or what about a non mac hardware fee? Like buy X in a mac and it's free, buy it with an IBM and it's $350 or something?
[ 10-21-2002: Message edited by: KidRed ]</p>
<strong>
But who makes the money from the hardware sales from the above scenario? And who has to pay for server software that would otherwise be free?
Still, an interesting scenario.
"Then we'll have options, we and we like to have options."</strong><hr></blockquote>
IBM has always (or most always) focused on being a service oriented company. As a service oriented company they do charge a bit more for the hardware - but they are really making most of their money out of the service contracts. So IBM would get money for the chip they sold Apple. Apple would get money for the box they designed. IBM would get money for _selling_ the box. And IBM would get a service contract for it. And IBM can sell boxes in places Apple doesn't even know of. If an IBM client demanded Mac OS X on one of IBM's bigger machines... then Apple only gets the cost of Mac OS X out of them. Maybe a little more if Apple gets into a contract of some sort w/IBM.
_IF_ Apple really has made a unix-based OS that is easy to administer, then IBM would be able to make more money out of servicing Mac OS X than out of servicing their AIX guys.
One of the other directions IBM is moving is the whole 'Virtual Linux server' direction. Where a (very) expensive IBM box pretends to be a pile of Linux boxes. It sounds like it could pretend to be a pile of Darwin boxes if there was an interest, doesn't it?
Oh, '...and who pays for the server software that would otherwise be free?' = the customer of course Mac OS X Server uses a LOT of common and free/OS tools. The value added part is the easy configuration, the easy maintenance, and the access to a mainstream desktop OS at the same time.
The key thing is that this is all 'unlimited clients'. Practically the motto of everyone not based in Redmond WA.
[quote]Mac's all still contain proprietary boot ROMs, they are just much smaller than they used to be and have been jealously guarded on the legal fronts, unlike the old BIOS that IBM let out of the bag to that Compaq et.al. in the early 80's. Where do you think OpenFirmware lives???<hr></blockquote>
However, it is worth to notice that OpenFirmware ist an open standard that is used by sun and possibly others as well as Apple. So, whoever wanted to build a clone would need a licence for OF which should be relatively easy to obtain and a modified Darwin. Because Darwin is essentially OpenSource it would be easy to make it run on a PPC-based mainboard if you provided some drivers for your ASICs, 3-button mice and other off-the-shelves PC hardware. Then you might need to do some severe hacking to prevent the Apple installer from overwriting the existing Darwin but essentially it should be much easier to build X-only clones than Sys8/9-capable ones.
Rampant cloning cannot happen because Apple would simply prohibit its sale with unauthorized hardware. Sure hardware hacks and geeks hand build systems and then buy Jaguar (or whatever) to run on it... but that is tiny little market, and being able to do that kind of stuff would actually attract more geeks to the platform, which is a good thing. No company could stay in business selling PPC boxes with the OS pre-installed, and the vast majority of the market wants exactly that... along with the support that a company like Apple or IBM provides. The clones are dead and they'll stay that way because Apple simply won't allow their OS to legally run on any hardware that they don't approve -- at least in any volume that matters.