Apple orders Mac sites to remove OS X on x86 videos

1356710

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 187
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Another example.



    A friend of mine replaced his Dual 800 Quicksilver Power Mac G4 last year (2004) with a new G5.



    He put the PM G4 on eBay for sell. He expected to sell it for $800 at the most.



    He ended up selling it for $1200.



    The reason he was able to sell a three year old computer for that amount, is because of Apple's tenacity for software and hardware integration.



    This year, that now four year old Dual 800 PM G4 is able to run Tiger and current OS X applications with no problems.



    Even more come late '06 to early 07 that five year old computer will be able to run Leopard as well as future OS X applications.



    The reason for this is Apple's singular support for computers it builds, and does not have to support thousands of different configurations.
  • Reply 42 of 187
    brendonbrendon Posts: 642member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TenoBell





    SNIP



    The reason for this is Apple's singular support for computers it builds, and does not have to support thousands of different configurations.




    Again, Apple will most likely build their computers using the same Intel Chipset that Dell will use. PCs are becomming more standardized. It would not be difficult to tell Dell that they will have to use Intel chip set XXX in thier OSX boxes and they will. The thousands of different configurations come from all of the thousands of different chips that could be used. As far as drives, most use generic drivers, and that could also be an area of agreement. As far as USB and the like devices, the mac would be no more connected than they already are. Again most drivers are becomming generic, and as for Video again that could be an area of agreement. Like Apple saying here is the list of possible video boards, or other HW, and here is what we will support. Dell and the others would know that the Mac OSX boxes would have the option for three video boards. Dell would have the option of just about any HD, and about two or three DVD drives.
  • Reply 43 of 187
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    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".



    Its a good bet Apple will continue its level of service into the x86 transition.



    I seriously doubt the interior of the x86 PowerMac will be resemble the interior of a commodity Dell.



    When has Steve ever done things like everyone else?
  • Reply 44 of 187
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    Again, Apple will most likely build their computers using the same Intel Chipset that Dell will use. PCs are becomming more standardized.



    You are making the assumption that Apple will enter the x86 market just to become a commodity PC maker like Dell, HP, and Gateway.



    Take a careful review Steve Jobs as well as Apple's past. If that is what you really believe, you are in for a big surprise come June 2006.
  • Reply 45 of 187
    brendonbrendon Posts: 642member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TenoBell

    Its a good bet Apple will continue its level of service into the x86 transition.



    I seriously doubt the interior of the x86 PowerMac will be resemble the interior of a commodity Dell.




    If you are correct then Apple will be losing a huge benefit in going to Intel, it is not just about the processors, it is about the whole package. Intel will have chip sets that come with WiMax, bluetooth, USB, etc. Why would Apple buy the processor and build the chipset when Intel is building great functionality already into their chipsets. If that were the case they could have just plucked down the cash and had IBM design them a lower power processor, and still Apple is leaving, even with the 970MP. I believe that this is about the whole chipset not just the processors, if not it would be like looking a gift horse in the mouth.
  • Reply 46 of 187
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    I don't know if Apple will build its own chipset or use one from Intel.



    What I am sure of, whatever Apple does use will fit with Apple's legacy of software and hardware inegration.



    A level of integration that Microsoft nor Dell is able to meet.
  • Reply 47 of 187
    sjksjk Posts: 603member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TenoBell

    I seriously doubt the interior of the x86 PowerMac will be resemble the interior of a commodity Dell.



    Let's hope the main board doesn't look like that yukky thing in the x86 developer boxes.
  • Reply 48 of 187
    Many of you are wrong when talking terms of support from Apple if they were to license OSX for x86. If you notice Microsoft offers no free supoort to anyone except in Windows Activation Issues. All of the Windows support is done by the OEM's. Also given the fact that you know, many companies use unified drivers now, like ATI and Nvidia. Apple could easily do it, they just don't want to. Lets call it for what it is.



    I also agree that by pulling the videos, it had confirmed reports that hackers have pwn'd Apple. When I have free time I plan to boot OSX on my Athlon 64.
  • Reply 49 of 187
    Originally posted by Brendon

    Quote:

    I don't understand your point.



    in relation to longevity.



    I thought it was clear. My g/f has a 1999 iMac, running Panther, connected to USB printers, scanners, and a digital camcorder I bought last year.



    If I had a 1999 PC I doubt very much it could run XP. Remember, Win98 did not have video support, so to connect my camera I'd have had to upgrade the OS. A 1999 PC would probably not have had firewire as standard (actually, the one I had didn't. I bought a firewire card for it before I realised win98 couldn't cope with video).



    That's why Macs have a longer productive timescale. I expect it to continue.



    But I am biased!



    David
  • Reply 50 of 187
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    If you notice Microsoft offers no free supoort to anyone except in Windows Activation Issues. All of the Windows support is done by the OEM's. Also given the fact that you know, many companies use unified drivers now, like ATI and Nvidia. Apple could easily do it, they just don't want to. Lets call it for what it is.



    Looking at the reality of PC support and longevity. As far as I can see there is no OEM support of its hardware to the level that Apple is able to maintain.



    The ability to use a four/five year old Mac with the latest software. Largely in the PC world to do this would require an update somewhere in hardware.



    Apple does not want to be Microsoft or Dell.



    And why should they try to become them.
  • Reply 51 of 187
    So what your saying is, that Apple should try to remain a small computer company with low market share, verses trying to expand and become a more successful company. Maybe I should sell my stock now if they aren't going to go after the market. This is business not some holy religion. Apple eventually will need to license the OS to remain competitive, it's smart business sense.
  • Reply 52 of 187
    flounderflounder Posts: 2,674member
    I think they might liscense eventually, but I think that is probably a good five years away from being a real possibility.
  • Reply 53 of 187
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by scavanger

    So what your saying is, that Apple should try to remain a small computer company with low market share, verses trying to expand and become a more successful company. Maybe I should sell my stock now if they aren't going to go after the market. This is business not some holy religion. Apple eventually will need to license the OS to remain competitive, it's smart business sense.



    What people are saying is that this change won't happen over night. Or it'll clobber Apple. Have a little bit of patience.
  • Reply 54 of 187
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by scavanger

    Apple eventually will need to license the OS to remain competitive, it's smart business sense.



    I'm sure that Apple has run the numbers and knows a lot more about how licensing would affect the company than any of us here.



    Remember the last time when Amelio licensed the OS? Apple lost $200 on every computer sold.



    Apple has increasing profits nearly every quarter, their stock has more than tripled, their market share is going up, they have 80% of the legal music download market, 92% of the hard-drive music player market, and 70% of the whole portable music player market. And no malware.



    If it were clear that licensing the OS would result in more revenue and profit, they would have done it. Therefore the numbers must show that at this time it would not.
  • Reply 55 of 187
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    There is a difference between growth and sustainable growth. Just because a company sells more and grows larger does not guarantee its future success.



    I actually do believe Apple will eventually share OS X.



    But Apple will do so in its own time, under its own circumstances.



    My guess is they will share OS X with select OEM's (such as Sony - HP). Apple will license OS X with strict hardware guidelines that will guarantee customers will have a consistent experience with the OS.
  • Reply 56 of 187
    brendonbrendon Posts: 642member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TenoBell

    There is a difference between growth and sustainable growth. Just because a company sells more and grows larger does not guarantee its future success.



    I actually do believe Apple will eventually share OS X.



    But Apple will do so in its own time, under its own circumstances.



    My guess is they will share OS X with select OEM's (such as Sony - HP). Apple will license OS X with strict hardware guidelines that will guarantee customers will have a consistent experience with the OS.




    Well, well... It is about time you came around. I wondered when, and speaking of when it appears that now we only differ on timing. I say sooner you say later, but we both say the same is inevitable. Nice debate.
  • Reply 57 of 187
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Brendon

    Well, well... It is about time you came around. I wondered when, and speaking of when it appears that now we only differ on timing. I say sooner you say later, but we both say the same is inevitable. Nice debate.



    I still think it will never happen, at least I HOPE it will never happen. Because:



    1. For one, Dell's are ugly, apple's are pretty

    2. Secondly, it would take control out of Apple's hands. No matter what strict guidelines they could put on Dell or HP to be able to market OS X, they would still lose control of quality assurance, etc. Apple now ships all their hardware with 512 MB of Ram now I think. No other PC manufacturer does that. Also, when I was comparison shopping PC laptops and Apple laptops, I was astonished to learn how much of a better bargain an Apple was! I had always heard that PCs were cheaper. They weren't where I was looking. The ones that were were stripped down. All mac laptops come standard with cd burners, DVD roms, firewire, bluetooth! You think they'd be able to force Dell to make sure all their mac loaded hardware was on the same level? I doubt it. A standard Dell laptop now doesn't even compare!

    3. Apple can tweak their hardware on a whim to work better with OS X. They wouldn't be able to do any of that on a whim if they licensed OS X. They don't want to lose the power of control they have. To do so would be suicide.
  • Reply 58 of 187
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Right, I never meant to say that Apple would never share OS X.



    I don't believe it would be in Apple's best interest to release it far and wide the same as Microsoft. To do that would unravel all that Apple has done to this point.



    Apple eventually will need to share OS X. But what will make this different is the Vaio OS X may potentially run on will more resemble a Macintosh than it will an off the shelf commodity box.



    It is possible for Apple and its partners to hold a tight reign of OS X's use.



    But yes there will be a minority of hackers who will figure out how to get around any protection.
  • Reply 59 of 187
    brendonbrendon Posts: 642member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by DeaPeaJay

    I still think it will never happen, at least I HOPE it will never happen. Because:

    -SNIP-



    3. Apple can tweak their hardware on a whim to work better with OS X. They wouldn't be able to do any of that on a whim if they licensed OS X. They don't want to lose the power of control they have. To do so would be suicide.




    Help me out here, give me a few examples, I'm slow. How does Apple 'tweak' the hardware?
  • Reply 60 of 187
    sjksjk Posts: 603member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TenoBell

    Apple eventually will need to share OS X. But what will make this different is the Vaio OS X may potentially run on will more resemble a Macintosh than it will an off the shelf commodity box.



    And I think that would be the kiss-of-death for Apple's computer hardware business unless their products were differentiated significantly enough from other vendors' to be worthwhile for customers to purchase.



    Apple's hardware has always had an enticing uniqueness that many people prefer and value. Lose that edge and the game's over for that aspect of Apple as we've known it. And that's not necessarily a negative thing in the hypothetical future although the thought of that happening right now is disheartening. Still, I don't want to get pre-nostalgic over the eventual and inevitable fate of today's computing world.



    Hmm, seems I'm sort of rehashing and agreeing with some comments DeaPeaJay wrote just a couple posts ago. Sorry for any redundancy.
Sign In or Register to comment.