Regarding the problem of supporting thousands of drivers 'a la Windows....
1. Apple won't really have to do that for awhile because as others have said, only geeks are going to hack the systems to work on Dell and AlienWare boxes.
2. The problem comes two years down the road when someone wants to add a cheap second harddrive or upgrade a videocard that they bought on eBay. Then driver hell happens. This means Apple will probably make their boxes at least as difficult to upgrade as they do now. This means a tendency in two directions: more Mac Mini types of boxes that need "qualified" techs and uberpriced PowerMacs that can only be bought by pros who know what to do or have IT staff to do the upgrades.
I see the prosumer as the one getting pinched ... kinda like the middle class in America now.
The people hacking into OSX aren't concerned about stability problems.
No the people hacking into OS X are not concerned about stability problems, and may be fine with figuring out, and writing code to get around problems.
The whole purpose of the Macintosh platform is so you don't have to do any of this.
If one likes to dig into the code of their OS, that's what Linux is for.
Yes the hacker community will get around whatever Apple uses. But what's the point if its not usable for the average joe and jane.
Quote:
Will the new chips have a completely incompatible instruction set? If there's just a software check that looks for the CPU type...
At this point only Apple and Intel know for sure.
Jobs is a master at the art of slight of hand.
While the hacker community is busy taking apart the TPM, the actual Macintel will run in a totally different way.
While everyone looks at the Pentium D, Yonah, Merom and try and guess which one Apple will use.
Apple and Intel may release an entirely different chip set.
This means Apple will probably make their boxes at least as difficult to upgrade as they do now. This means a tendency in two directions: more Mac Mini types of boxes that need "qualified" techs and uberpriced PowerMacs that can only be bought by pros who know what to do or have IT staff to do the upgrades.
I see the prosumer as the one getting pinched ...
On the flip side of that is a difference between Mac and PC users. Mac users are used to computer longevity. The initial cost of the computer is off set by the life of its productivity.
I know people right now who are using 1999 iMac's running OS X Panther. The iMac's generally still have all of their original hardware. Their ports are compatible with all of the current peripherals (printers, scanners, digital cameras, DVD burners, PDA's.)
Computer longevity is something not as widely shared in the PC world.
Completely agree with Crazy Wingman ... the writing here is not objective; it seeks to influence rather than inform. Someone asked for detail so here's a key quote:
"By issuing e-mail-based cease and desist orders, Apple is effectively validating the the claims made by the news sites, as well as the work of the hackers in conquering the TMP scheme. "
No trained journalist would write such nonsense. The hackers did not conquer anything ... they hacked something that did not belong to them, on an advance developer build that clearly flags such behavior as illegal and unlicensed, and then publicised their break-in. Apple Legal acting to protect their IP is absolutely not validating what these people did.
It's no big deal that some hackers are managing to get OS X to run on plain PC's. Certainly, Apple has to keep reminding the computer enthusiast community that it is illegal.
No institution is going to accept illegal, unsupported systems on its networks, nor are the vast majority of ordinary computer users going to possess unsupported Frankenstein boxes.
Any effort to make the DRM more than somewhat challenging will be wasted.
Extortion is a criminal offense, which occurs when a person obtains money, behaviour, or other goods and/or services from another by wrongfully threatening or inflicting harm to his person, reputation, or property. Euphemistically, refraining from doing harm is sometimes called protection.
Apple-Legal: Hey I gotta offer you can't refuse.
Web Site: Uh... what would that be kind sirs?
Apple-Legal: We don't like you linking to those other web sites that have those videos
Web Site: Ah... err... but they aren't my web sites - I'm just linking to them...
Apple-Legal: Tomaytoes, Toemotoes ... Fact is WE DON'T LIKE IT AND YOU WILL STOP IT!!
Web Site: Oh, yea, sure... whatever you say Fat Tony I'll stop linking to those sites.
Interesting screenplay DaveGee but that's not what's happening here.
Apple offered members of their developer program advance access to a set of technologies that are important to the future product roadmap. It goes without saying that the intent was to facilitate those developers in ensuring a smooth transition to the new Intel-based HW/OS combination that would come to market starting in 2006.
One (maybe more) of those developers has breached the license that they signed up to and as a result, there's a video that essentially says "look at me ... I'm not very trustworthy but I am clever, and hey, future Mac OS X releases can be made to run on non-Apple hardware".
So Apple have no choice but to flag this as unacceptable and to try to stop the damage. If they didn't they would weaken their own recourse if they wish to bring the offending developer(s) to court. Just as with employee breach of confidentiality, they have to do so if they're to manage their own product roadmap and avoid promoting mis-information.
Woah - can we please get an ombudsman in here? This has to be one of the most sensational articles I've ever seen on AppleInsider (don't let my post count or join date fool you - I've been lurking for around a year). I realize that those running AI may sympathize with other Apple forum owners, but can we be a little less biased please? True, nothing in the post is actually incorrect, but the way in which it is worded is just so slanted it's sad.
Hey, leave politics at the door. I love fox news. It's the other news agencies that are biased.
Ok, I'll take my own advice now and leave politics at the door.
Anyway, I doubt that this will become a huge issue. But either way it goes, I hope apple continues to squash these hackers like bugs, but only if they try to make a profit off of their hack or distribute their hack. Because I for one would think it'd be cool if I could get OS X to run on the Piece of Crap in my room that I'm forced to use for school.
Computer longevity is something not as widely shared in the PC world.
I've always doubted if that's true and am curious where the idea (myth?) originated. There must be tons of tired old PCs around, still running Windows 98 (and even lower). Many of my non-technical family and friends have hung on to their antique PCs for as long as they're still able to run the few apps they use and can get on the net. Unless something compels them to upgrade (most likely a significant hardware failure) they never will.
And the more technically inclined often find ways to squeeze as much longevity as possible out of old hardware. Until migrating to an nearly-all-Mac household a couple years ago I kept an old SPARC-5 alive for miscellaneous server-type functions and my wife was temporarily using an older SPARC just for web access.
If apple started selling a boxed OS X for x86, their OS advantage would be gone. it works because they can test ALL the drivers and make sure they are almost perfect. With the myriad of cheapo PC parts out there, OSX would become just as unstable as Windows.
Not to mention it would butcher their hardware sales, which is where apple makes their money.
What if Apple wrote the drivers for a few plain white chip sets? That way Dell and Apple could use the best the Intel had to offer, in whole chip set packages, and still Apple would not have to support everything PC, just what they would already for the Apple Macs. I think that because of the security issues with Windows, Apple should position itself ready to fill the void if Vista is cracked early. Lots of people will want access to the internet from a home PC and Apple is the next likely choice, but Apple cannot supply this market. This could be several times larger than what Apple is currently serving. The only logical thing to do is to license OSX on a very limited chip set. Then as when Apple has the time and money they could begin to take back control of that market. I know that people are looking for a solution to the virus issues of windows but they still want to play games and have a very easy to understand GUI. Apple fits that market and the MiniMac fits that market well, but Apple could go further, by opening up the gates and licensing the OS. For those that think that there is little money in software look at MS they have been down in the market forever but they still generate huge stock piles of cash every quarter. What if Apple charged $200 to $300 per copy of OSX? And say they only get 5% of what Dell is shipping because of pricing differences and the fact that OSX is just different. Now what if Apple also got 5% of HPs and Gateways customers. Add that up and you could see that Apple would make huge dollars on white boxes.
What if Apple charged $200 to $300 per copy of OSX? And say they only get 5% of what Dell is shipping because of pricing differences and the fact that OSX is just different. Now what if Apple also got 5% of HPs and Gateways customers. Add that up and you could see that Apple would make huge dollars on white boxes.
You know one of the reasons why I'm a fan of Apple. I die hard crazy fan? It's because Apple isn't about simply making money. Don't take that the wrong way. They are definitely about trying to make money. But Steve's goal has always been to enhance the average joe schmo's computer using experience! Since 1984, Steve hasn't changed that much, I don't think. He'll never license Mac to PCs it will NEVER happen. And Apple as a company will be better for it. You can't enhance the user experience when your using junky Dell's.
You know one of the reasons why I'm a fan of Apple. I die hard crazy fan? It's because Apple isn't about simply making money. Don't take that the wrong way. They are definitely about trying to make money. But Steve's goal has always been to enhance the average joe schmo's computer using experience! Since 1984, Steve hasn't changed that much, I don't think. He'll never license Mac to PCs it will NEVER happen. And Apple as a company will be better for it. You can't enhance the user experience when your using junky Dell's.
I don't know what Steve is thinking. As far as junky, what I see is that if the chip set is very limited then so are the options for junky computers. Dell and the others have a vested interest in selling good products. Dell is not doing that bad of a job, as far as the box goes. What I feel is that there is beginning to be a growing demand for virus free computing, Apple can fill that void and still enhance the user experience and still sell their own HW. I would buy a Mac, someone else may buy a Dell with OSX to try it, because that way he still has a fully functional PC sold to him by the same company that sold him his last PC. What I am saying is that Apple could and should position themselves to provide solutions to the customer base that may want to try OSX if Vista is cracked open like a wallnut.
A 1999 iMac running OS X Panther with present day OS X software. Connected to current peripherals through firewire and USB.
A 1999 Dell running Windows 98 with older Windows software. Connected to older peripherals using color coordinated parallel ports.
Which one would be considered as having the most productive longevity.
I don't understand your point. The requirements for Windows has grown. Apple will be positioned to provide this longevity to their customers when they are on x86 HW. In short the requirements for running newer versions of Windows has out stripped the Dell HW. More to the point what will be the difference between the chip set that Apple will be using next June and what Dell is using next June, not much. Like Steve said, "It is the software".
Comments
1. Apple won't really have to do that for awhile because as others have said, only geeks are going to hack the systems to work on Dell and AlienWare boxes.
2. The problem comes two years down the road when someone wants to add a cheap second harddrive or upgrade a videocard that they bought on eBay. Then driver hell happens. This means Apple will probably make their boxes at least as difficult to upgrade as they do now. This means a tendency in two directions: more Mac Mini types of boxes that need "qualified" techs and uberpriced PowerMacs that can only be bought by pros who know what to do or have IT staff to do the upgrades.
I see the prosumer as the one getting pinched ... kinda like the middle class in America now.
The people hacking into OSX aren't concerned about stability problems.
No the people hacking into OS X are not concerned about stability problems, and may be fine with figuring out, and writing code to get around problems.
The whole purpose of the Macintosh platform is so you don't have to do any of this.
If one likes to dig into the code of their OS, that's what Linux is for.
Yes the hacker community will get around whatever Apple uses. But what's the point if its not usable for the average joe and jane.
Will the new chips have a completely incompatible instruction set? If there's just a software check that looks for the CPU type...
At this point only Apple and Intel know for sure.
Jobs is a master at the art of slight of hand.
While the hacker community is busy taking apart the TPM, the actual Macintel will run in a totally different way.
While everyone looks at the Pentium D, Yonah, Merom and try and guess which one Apple will use.
Apple and Intel may release an entirely different chip set.
This means Apple will probably make their boxes at least as difficult to upgrade as they do now. This means a tendency in two directions: more Mac Mini types of boxes that need "qualified" techs and uberpriced PowerMacs that can only be bought by pros who know what to do or have IT staff to do the upgrades.
I see the prosumer as the one getting pinched ...
On the flip side of that is a difference between Mac and PC users. Mac users are used to computer longevity. The initial cost of the computer is off set by the life of its productivity.
I know people right now who are using 1999 iMac's running OS X Panther. The iMac's generally still have all of their original hardware. Their ports are compatible with all of the current peripherals (printers, scanners, digital cameras, DVD burners, PDA's.)
Computer longevity is something not as widely shared in the PC world.
"By issuing e-mail-based cease and desist orders, Apple is effectively validating the the claims made by the news sites, as well as the work of the hackers in conquering the TMP scheme. "
No trained journalist would write such nonsense. The hackers did not conquer anything ... they hacked something that did not belong to them, on an advance developer build that clearly flags such behavior as illegal and unlicensed, and then publicised their break-in. Apple Legal acting to protect their IP is absolutely not validating what these people did.
No institution is going to accept illegal, unsupported systems on its networks, nor are the vast majority of ordinary computer users going to possess unsupported Frankenstein boxes.
Any effort to make the DRM more than somewhat challenging will be wasted.
Originally posted by Robin Hood
Apple are perfectly, 100% within their right to do what they are doing.
Yea... Do do know that when a group of 3 or more people of Italian decent do it they have a special name for Apples actions...
EXTORTION!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
Extortion is a criminal offense, which occurs when a person obtains money, behaviour, or other goods and/or services from another by wrongfully threatening or inflicting harm to his person, reputation, or property. Euphemistically, refraining from doing harm is sometimes called protection.
Apple-Legal: Hey I gotta offer you can't refuse.
Web Site: Uh... what would that be kind sirs?
Apple-Legal: We don't like you linking to those other web sites that have those videos
Web Site: Ah... err... but they aren't my web sites - I'm just linking to them...
Apple-Legal: Tomaytoes, Toemotoes ... Fact is WE DON'T LIKE IT AND YOU WILL STOP IT!!
Web Site: Oh, yea, sure... whatever you say Fat Tony I'll stop linking to those sites.
What a freakin joke!
Dave
Apple offered members of their developer program advance access to a set of technologies that are important to the future product roadmap. It goes without saying that the intent was to facilitate those developers in ensuring a smooth transition to the new Intel-based HW/OS combination that would come to market starting in 2006.
One (maybe more) of those developers has breached the license that they signed up to and as a result, there's a video that essentially says "look at me ... I'm not very trustworthy but I am clever, and hey, future Mac OS X releases can be made to run on non-Apple hardware".
So Apple have no choice but to flag this as unacceptable and to try to stop the damage. If they didn't they would weaken their own recourse if they wish to bring the offending developer(s) to court. Just as with employee breach of confidentiality, they have to do so if they're to manage their own product roadmap and avoid promoting mis-information.
Originally posted by zunx
It seems that Apple is playing stupid... again!
You should have stopped at three.
Originally posted by BealBocht
No trained journalist would write such nonsense.
Not from around here, are you?
http://www.foxnews.com/
Originally posted by wilco
Not from around here, are you?
http://www.foxnews.com/
Too funny ... no, I'm Irish but spend enough time here to get your point.
Originally posted by TenoBell
If you want an open OS that can run on generic parts, that is the point of owning Windows.
Since when is Windows an open OS? I'll pretend you typed Linux.
Originally posted by CrazyWingman
Woah - can we please get an ombudsman in here? This has to be one of the most sensational articles I've ever seen on AppleInsider (don't let my post count or join date fool you - I've been lurking for around a year). I realize that those running AI may sympathize with other Apple forum owners, but can we be a little less biased please? True, nothing in the post is actually incorrect, but the way in which it is worded is just so slanted it's sad.
Let's not let this site deteriorate.
give me a break
The OS X on x86 Stronghold
Either Apple does it or other people do.
Originally posted by wilco
Not from around here, are you?
http://www.foxnews.com/
Hey, leave politics at the door. I love fox news. It's the other news agencies that are biased.
Ok, I'll take my own advice now and leave politics at the door.
Anyway, I doubt that this will become a huge issue. But either way it goes, I hope apple continues to squash these hackers like bugs, but only if they try to make a profit off of their hack or distribute their hack. Because I for one would think it'd be cool if I could get OS X to run on the Piece of Crap in my room that I'm forced to use for school.
Originally posted by TenoBell
Computer longevity is something not as widely shared in the PC world.
I've always doubted if that's true and am curious where the idea (myth?) originated. There must be tons of tired old PCs around, still running Windows 98 (and even lower). Many of my non-technical family and friends have hung on to their antique PCs for as long as they're still able to run the few apps they use and can get on the net. Unless something compels them to upgrade (most likely a significant hardware failure) they never will.
And the more technically inclined often find ways to squeeze as much longevity as possible out of old hardware. Until migrating to an nearly-all-Mac household a couple years ago I kept an old SPARC-5 alive for miscellaneous server-type functions and my wife was temporarily using an older SPARC just for web access.
Originally posted by mox358
If apple started selling a boxed OS X for x86, their OS advantage would be gone. it works because they can test ALL the drivers and make sure they are almost perfect. With the myriad of cheapo PC parts out there, OSX would become just as unstable as Windows.
Not to mention it would butcher their hardware sales, which is where apple makes their money.
What if Apple wrote the drivers for a few plain white chip sets? That way Dell and Apple could use the best the Intel had to offer, in whole chip set packages, and still Apple would not have to support everything PC, just what they would already for the Apple Macs. I think that because of the security issues with Windows, Apple should position itself ready to fill the void if Vista is cracked early. Lots of people will want access to the internet from a home PC and Apple is the next likely choice, but Apple cannot supply this market. This could be several times larger than what Apple is currently serving. The only logical thing to do is to license OSX on a very limited chip set. Then as when Apple has the time and money they could begin to take back control of that market. I know that people are looking for a solution to the virus issues of windows but they still want to play games and have a very easy to understand GUI. Apple fits that market and the MiniMac fits that market well, but Apple could go further, by opening up the gates and licensing the OS. For those that think that there is little money in software look at MS they have been down in the market forever but they still generate huge stock piles of cash every quarter. What if Apple charged $200 to $300 per copy of OSX? And say they only get 5% of what Dell is shipping because of pricing differences and the fact that OSX is just different. Now what if Apple also got 5% of HPs and Gateways customers. Add that up and you could see that Apple would make huge dollars on white boxes.
Originally posted by Brendon
What if Apple charged $200 to $300 per copy of OSX? And say they only get 5% of what Dell is shipping because of pricing differences and the fact that OSX is just different. Now what if Apple also got 5% of HPs and Gateways customers. Add that up and you could see that Apple would make huge dollars on white boxes.
You know one of the reasons why I'm a fan of Apple. I die hard crazy fan? It's because Apple isn't about simply making money. Don't take that the wrong way. They are definitely about trying to make money. But Steve's goal has always been to enhance the average joe schmo's computer using experience! Since 1984, Steve hasn't changed that much, I don't think. He'll never license Mac to PCs it will NEVER happen. And Apple as a company will be better for it. You can't enhance the user experience when your using junky Dell's.
A 1999 iMac running OS X Panther with present day OS X software. Connected to current peripherals through firewire and USB.
A 1999 Dell running Windows 98 with older Windows software. Connected to older peripherals using color coordinated parallel ports.
Which one would be considered as having the most productive longevity.
Originally posted by DeaPeaJay
You know one of the reasons why I'm a fan of Apple. I die hard crazy fan? It's because Apple isn't about simply making money. Don't take that the wrong way. They are definitely about trying to make money. But Steve's goal has always been to enhance the average joe schmo's computer using experience! Since 1984, Steve hasn't changed that much, I don't think. He'll never license Mac to PCs it will NEVER happen. And Apple as a company will be better for it. You can't enhance the user experience when your using junky Dell's.
I don't know what Steve is thinking. As far as junky, what I see is that if the chip set is very limited then so are the options for junky computers. Dell and the others have a vested interest in selling good products. Dell is not doing that bad of a job, as far as the box goes. What I feel is that there is beginning to be a growing demand for virus free computing, Apple can fill that void and still enhance the user experience and still sell their own HW. I would buy a Mac, someone else may buy a Dell with OSX to try it, because that way he still has a fully functional PC sold to him by the same company that sold him his last PC. What I am saying is that Apple could and should position themselves to provide solutions to the customer base that may want to try OSX if Vista is cracked open like a wallnut.
Originally posted by TenoBell
What is the difference between these two?
A 1999 iMac running OS X Panther with present day OS X software. Connected to current peripherals through firewire and USB.
A 1999 Dell running Windows 98 with older Windows software. Connected to older peripherals using color coordinated parallel ports.
Which one would be considered as having the most productive longevity.
I don't understand your point. The requirements for Windows has grown. Apple will be positioned to provide this longevity to their customers when they are on x86 HW. In short the requirements for running newer versions of Windows has out stripped the Dell HW. More to the point what will be the difference between the chip set that Apple will be using next June and what Dell is using next June, not much. Like Steve said, "It is the software".