X on x86?

in General Discussion edited January 2014
I originally posted this pretty far down in another thread... and I think it got lost in there. With all the talk of Linux gaining momentum... I thought I'd bring this up. I'm a new Mac owner... and I know this has been a hot topic in the past (which was why I waited so long to actually go out and get a Mac)... so I'm not sure if anything has changed...

How could Apple make sure they get in on this market and keep Linux from being the future OS of choice for the thrifty? This would seem to be an easy answer (and an idea that goes back a while).... port a version of X over to x86. Granted... one of the biggest benefits to running X on Apples hardware is the tight integration between the hardware and the OS... so the user experience on Apple hardware will likely be better for quite sometime... but I think an x86 port would be a real reasonable alternative to Windows. People could learn the OS on their current hardware... realize how much they like it... then go out and get one of those "cool" macs... Since they'll be familiar with the OS, they won't have to worry about going out to buy a new Mac and not knowing if they would be able to use it. I got my iBook as an alternative to a Windows notebook.... but I'm sure alot of people would rather just put a new OS on their current hardware... my PC notebook is a 2.6GHz P4.... most people won't go out an buy a new notebook when the one they have is more than powerful enough. And lets not forget that Microsoft made their $$ on their software.... not hardware... so as the movement to move away from Microsoft continues... it would be nice to have OS X placed to take advantage of that early on.


  • Reply 1 of 2
    *reminds self to finish writing that article about why Mac OS X on x86 can never happen*

    - Apple as hardware company

    - no longer controlling the "whole widget"

    - suddenly having to support thousands more configurations rather than a few dozen, tech support hell

    - Classic would no longer exist.

    - fighting for developer support on very different architectures

    I think I'm leaving out a big one... oh yeah:

    - all third party software would cease to run.


  • Reply 2 of 2
    Although OSX could be ported to X86 that's not what would get Apple. It would be trying to support the thousands of devices and motherboards with a working system.

    What is the real impetus for OSX on Intel. Do we "really" think PC users will shell out $129 for OSX Intel? Despite the hyperbole of PCs being so cheap one has to wonder why Piracy is so prevalent in the PC world which is filled with such amazing low-cost bargains.

    X86 is in the throes of chang. You have AMDs 64bit implementation and Intel with another one. You have Itanic and EPIC. Should Apple really worry about getting into this mess or should they stay with their current and elegant system with PPC?

    Linux on the desktop has a ways to go before it's a threat. They definitely need more applications that the typical desktop user would like...err make that "high quality applications"

    I think Apple is doing the right thing. The only way to use the advantage that they have is to remain focused on PPC and OS X. If they do that well PC people will come over and the market will be there. OS X on Intel is no guarantee that it's experience will be akin to that of OS X on PPC.
Sign In or Register to comment.