What about a re-branded computer. Like the HP iPod (I miss it soooooo much, bring it back, Pleeease!). Throw an extra logo on the back there you go. HP iMac, HP Macbook, HP Mac Pro, HP Mac mini, HP Macbook Pro. Hell, you could do software too, HP Mac OS X Leopard, HP iLife '08, HP Aperture, HP iWork '08, HP Final Cut Pro Studio. Yea!
iPhone has a calendar app built in... logic tells me, this will be able to interact with iCal in someway shape or phone...
Problem, iCal isnt available to Windows users... does this mean iCal to be released for Windows sometime soon?
Also, since Apple is migrating to these so called "closed appliances" as a core part of their business strategy, isn't it maybe not so far fetched that MacOSX will infact be lincensed to generic PC's to interact with these new appliances?
The margins in the computer market are razor thin to begin with, and even if Apple does indeed license MacOSX, they'll still have that group of clients who will still buy an Apple branded computer and pay a premium for something well designed. Thus, i still don't see how licensing MacOSX will be detrimental to Apple. In fact, i see it as a good way to spread the MacOSX virus into the fabric of everyday living. Think, every major device, personal or otherwise, running MacOSX... as the iPod clearly shows, the personal computer industry isn't where the real money is...
Think this scenario, Joe Blow buys a cheap dell w/ MacOSX installed on it... Apple makes a cut. Impressed, he then decides to get an iPod.... Apple makes a bigger cut. Now a raving Apple fanboy, Joe Blow buys an AppleTV for the novelty factor, Apple makes another juicy cut.
Ok enough ranting, but seriously, this is just the whole "APPLE WILL NEVER USE INTEL CHIPS" thing all over again... Step back, think logically and long term... it doesn't seem as crazy as it sounds.
Remember back 2 or so years ago. There were "unsubstantiated rumors" of how Apple was gonna go Intel.
Some very technically adept posters stated that this could not/would not happen. That the x86 ISA was running out of steam, and some even suggested that Apple in the very least would go to ITANIUM instead!!! Well well well ... funny how things work out. Don't count out releasing a Mac OS for generic wintel boxes. Yes, I've read the posts of how Apple makes money off of HW and that SW support costs would go up. EULAs can be customed tailored to work around these ... lawyers can be pretty creative and downright immoral but hey, it's there job (no pun intended).
If Google ends up diminishing the pre-eminence of Windows on the Desktop, what has Apple to lose? Any gain for Google will come primarily at Mircosoft's expense ... Apple can dive in and seize the advantage and hawk their OS without losing HW sales. Let's face it ... apple's HW still appeals to a mostly upper/middle clientelle. Their pricing (in most cases) still reflects this. They will NOT lose HW sales if the release Mac OS as a standalone product. Won't happen.
Steve Jobs says that Mac OS X (10.5) "Leopard" will Work on my PowerPC Mac Computer. Plus, when You GoTo the Google's Web Site on the side it'll say Mac OS X (10.5) "Leopard" for Mac Intel and Mac PowerPC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kompressor
Remember back 2 or so years ago. There were "unsubstantiated rumors" of how Apple was gonna go Intel.
Some very technically adept posters stated that this could not/would not happen. That the x86 ISA was running out of steam, and some even suggested that Apple in the very least would go to ITANIUM instead!!! Well well well ... funny how things work out. Don't count out releasing a Mac OS for generic wintel boxes. Yes, I've read the posts of how Apple makes money off of HW and that SW support costs would go up. EULAs can be customed tailored to work around these ... lawyers can be pretty creative and downright immoral but hey, it's there job (no pun intended).
If Google ends up diminishing the pre-eminence of Windows on the Desktop, what has Apple to lose? Any gain for Google will come primarily at Mircosoft's expense ... Apple can dive in and seize the advantage and hawk their OS without losing HW sales. Let's face it ... apple's HW still appeals to a mostly upper/middle clientelle. Their pricing (in most cases) still reflects this. They will NOT lose HW sales if the release Mac OS as a standalone product. Won't happen.
Comments
HP iPod Hifi, HP iPod Socks...
Problem, iCal isnt available to Windows users... does this mean iCal to be released for Windows sometime soon?
Also, since Apple is migrating to these so called "closed appliances" as a core part of their business strategy, isn't it maybe not so far fetched that MacOSX will infact be lincensed to generic PC's to interact with these new appliances?
The margins in the computer market are razor thin to begin with, and even if Apple does indeed license MacOSX, they'll still have that group of clients who will still buy an Apple branded computer and pay a premium for something well designed. Thus, i still don't see how licensing MacOSX will be detrimental to Apple. In fact, i see it as a good way to spread the MacOSX virus into the fabric of everyday living. Think, every major device, personal or otherwise, running MacOSX... as the iPod clearly shows, the personal computer industry isn't where the real money is...
Think this scenario, Joe Blow buys a cheap dell w/ MacOSX installed on it... Apple makes a cut. Impressed, he then decides to get an iPod.... Apple makes a bigger cut. Now a raving Apple fanboy, Joe Blow buys an AppleTV for the novelty factor, Apple makes another juicy cut.
Ok enough ranting, but seriously, this is just the whole "APPLE WILL NEVER USE INTEL CHIPS" thing all over again... Step back, think logically and long term... it doesn't seem as crazy as it sounds.
Best,
Steve
and very useful information.Thanks.
Some very technically adept posters stated that this could not/would not happen. That the x86 ISA was running out of steam, and some even suggested that Apple in the very least would go to ITANIUM instead!!! Well well well ... funny how things work out. Don't count out releasing a Mac OS for generic wintel boxes. Yes, I've read the posts of how Apple makes money off of HW and that SW support costs would go up. EULAs can be customed tailored to work around these ... lawyers can be pretty creative and downright immoral but hey, it's there job (no pun intended).
If Google ends up diminishing the pre-eminence of Windows on the Desktop, what has Apple to lose? Any gain for Google will come primarily at Mircosoft's expense ... Apple can dive in and seize the advantage and hawk their OS without losing HW sales. Let's face it ... apple's HW still appeals to a mostly upper/middle clientelle. Their pricing (in most cases) still reflects this. They will NOT lose HW sales if the release Mac OS as a standalone product. Won't happen.
Remember back 2 or so years ago. There were "unsubstantiated rumors" of how Apple was gonna go Intel.
Some very technically adept posters stated that this could not/would not happen. That the x86 ISA was running out of steam, and some even suggested that Apple in the very least would go to ITANIUM instead!!! Well well well ... funny how things work out. Don't count out releasing a Mac OS for generic wintel boxes. Yes, I've read the posts of how Apple makes money off of HW and that SW support costs would go up. EULAs can be customed tailored to work around these ... lawyers can be pretty creative and downright immoral but hey, it's there job (no pun intended).
If Google ends up diminishing the pre-eminence of Windows on the Desktop, what has Apple to lose? Any gain for Google will come primarily at Mircosoft's expense ... Apple can dive in and seize the advantage and hawk their OS without losing HW sales. Let's face it ... apple's HW still appeals to a mostly upper/middle clientelle. Their pricing (in most cases) still reflects this. They will NOT lose HW sales if the release Mac OS as a standalone product. Won't happen.