"The new, unnamed product will continue to have "technologies and features that others can't match," according to the CFO."
I think that that's probably just marketing hyperbole, so we shouldn't worry too much about which Apple products we think have features that others "can't match". Having said that, I think Messiah's point about OS X (that it's technology others can't match) is valid, so there's a possibility Oppenheimer was referring to OS X, multi-touch or both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriky
"the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals"
Did Oppenheimer actually say "shut out rivals" or is that interpretation by those reporting on the call?
I'm sure this is about either iPods or MacBooks. I really hope it's MacBooks because I'm planning on getting the new MacBook Pro whenever it appears.
It's amazing you are the first to say this after so many posts. It sounds pretty clear to me:
"the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals"
Apple is working hard on Snow Leopard and we all know it won't have much new features. They told us they are improving stability and such. My guess is that they are adding drivers and making the OS ready for mainstream pc's! It's a small step to make while it could mean a huge step in the desktop market. This would be a tremendous hit to Microsoft. Since Vista is doing so terrible companies are looking hard for a replacement and that replacement could very well be OSX. It will put big pressure on the margins on Apple computer hardware, like they said.
We say it over and over again. It's not that it would not be profitable to license OSX to other PC manufacturers, it's just that it wouldn't be possible to do without drastically degrading the high standards of the macOS. The only reason Apple is able to (more or less) keep on top of things with OSX is that they also have control of the hardware that it runs on. I'm not even going to go into the details, because it's been explained millions of times on these forums.
OSX on non apple hardware: you can forget about it.
Quote:
It's a small step to make while it could mean a huge step in the desktop market.
Are you insane? making OSX function on all PCs would cost millions of dollars years and years of work.
It's possible the margin comment and the transition comment were co-mingled and this is causing confusion. If you consider how many iPod touches that Apple is giving away there's no question that margins are going to suffer in this quarter.
They predicted lower margins for the whole of financial 2009. The iPod touch give-away won't last that long.
How about we reread this: the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals.
Whose rivals are they likely or aiming to shut out? I can only think of the iPhone, but I doubt there are any significant changes on the cards for now. Another possibility might be iTunes.
When I think product transition I think of a change in business plan for some particular product or line of products, a change in market or some technological change (like the intel transition).
Although I wouldn't normally think these are probable, they are the only that come to mind that fit "key product transition".
Apple begins to sell off its software products to other companies (cringely claimed before that this is already happening)
Apple starts licensing OSX to other manufacturers OR starts allowing others to make apple approved mac computers (not necessarily PCs with OSX).
An iTunes subscription service, all you can eat movies and music for a flat fee.
Simple: The merger of the MacMini and the Apple Tv. In other words an Apple TV with a disk drive. It will now run OSX as an option: surf the web, shop Amazon, eBay , etc. Choose either Tv or Mac like Parallels.
I hope not. Today you can buy a brand new Windows Vista portable with Centrino 2 inside. On Apple what can you buy? I'll tell you... A very old Macbook Pro design with Santa Rosa platform, a very old case-cracking Macbook with Santa Rosa platform and a ultra-crippled Macbook Air.
As a result, September, correction, before September end , is just too far away. Apple adopted Intel processors, should move at Intel pace.
I hope something surfaces from Apple before July end, not September!
How about a eee-type Apple computer? And a Sony's SZ-type one? Yes, the one I was hopping when they let all vanish in the Air...
Are you insane? making OSX function on all PCs would cost millions of dollars years and years of work.
That's what a number of people were saying about OS X on Intel before it was released. And then SJ dropped the bomb and revealed that Apple had been secretly working on it all along.
OS X already works on PCs - they're just PCs manufactured by Apple. In many respects, if this is the transition in question, Apple has already done all the hard work.
There's no doubt that Mac OS on third party hardware would require some type of certification programme (you can see the mess that the hackintosh crowd get themselves into), but these certification programmes are (I should imagine) self-funding. There are already a number of third party manufacturers that say their products will work with Mac OS and their drivers don't cause too many problems for Apple. Printer manufacturers are a good example.
There are only a handful of processor manufacturers, and a handful of GPU chipset manufacturers, and chances are Apple are in bed with them already. They're probably already in bed with the soundcard manufacturers and everyone else for that matter.
Apple wouldn't have to offer Mac OS support for every single PC component out there ? they may even choose not to offer support for legacy hardware. Apple could set the bar high and stipulate which select PC components were certified, and build the base from there. They would just say 'right, from this point onwards if you want you products to work seamlessly with Mac OS it was to follow these guidelines.
I've always suspected that Boot Camp was a switcher app. Buy an Apple safe in the knowledge that it'll run Windows, but you know, feel free to tinker around with the Mac OS as well, and then you realise that the Mac OS is a better environment and you might switch completely.
Mac OS on third party hardware is simply taking this approach a step further.
I'm interested in two things:
1. the average profit that Apple makes on a boxed copy of Mac OS
2. the average profit that Dell makes on a cheapskate PC
Wouldn't it be great to be able to make money out of the cheapskate PC market without having to manufacture the hardware?
I'd also like to point out at this stage that I don't necessarily think that Mac OS on third party hardware is a good idea ? but I think it will appeal to the current mentality of Apple's board.
When it comes to these rabid speculation threads, AI is the best IMHO, because of the informed and well argued posts by clearly knowledgeable posters, so thank you all for that.
Taking my turn off the diving board, I think the PASemi acquisition is key here. IIRC, before the Intel switch, Apple designed and produced their own logic boards, but after the switch it made sense to take them off-the-shelf from Intel. This would have given a clear cost advantage, but on the downside, as mentioned, open up a Mac and it is exactly the same components as all the rest. Apple and PA had been working together for a few years before the purchase, so perhaps the timing of that was tactical, just as whatever they were working on was ready for implementation.
So what if Apple is going back to designing (possibly in collaboration with Intel) their own logic boards again, but now with a PASemi/Apple secondary chip on there. This could be for video/graphics acceleration, or perhaps something to do with implementing multi-processor friendly hardware. This could (here in speculationland) provide a "revolutionary" advantage across the Mac range, and as it would be due to a proprietary chip rivals would be "locked out" (including all varieties of 'Hackintoshes'). There would be cost implications, hence the trimmed margins, but Apple uniqueness would go back to hardware as well as software. My tuppence.
PS Having recently watched all 16 episodes of "Foyle's War'" on DVD (he's a Detective Chief Superintendent BTW) I agree it is a superb series, and it takes a bit to excite my TV jaded palate these days. My only question is 'how the hell did ITV produce something that good?'
Is there a transcript of the results call online? I think people are reading too much into this and missing the elephant in the room.
The 'product transition' is actually happening now - it's the iPhone 3G and the App store. Apple is hoping to sell a boat load of them next year and the margins on them are slim, like any phone except the old iPhone which had bigger margins. This reduces Apple's overall margins. The fallout financially for Apple won't be in this past quarter's results so as far as a CFO is concerned it's a future transition that isn't reported until the end of the quarter.
Look at the figures they quoted. Reduced margins this quarter are during the iPhone 3G launch - they've 20 more countries to add in August. The more they sell, the more their overall margin goes down.
Then they've got the iPod Touch revision and possibly iPod nano going touch too. They want those to run App Store apps. They'd have to take a significant hit on the nano though to cram in OSX, accelerometers, touch screen and possibly wifi.
Maybe I'm wrong but I really think that's 'all' this is.
[QUOTE=solsun;1282460]"""" "During his quarterly financial results call, Apple's chief financial officer Peter Oppenheimer revealed that the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals." """""
-------------------
The key word here is that it's a "KEY" product transition.. How many "KEY" products does Apple have? Three. The Mac, iPod and iPhone.
The iPhone was just updated. We all know that the entire Mac line is not going to be updated by September, and even if it was and Apple cut Mac prices so that it's profit margin was down to zero, it would still not "shut out rivals."
It's the iPod line folks..[/QUOTE
I agree they will include improvements and changes to the ipod line, but price movement on an updated touch (we want more memory) would be enough - and I maintain they may dump the classic if the touch gets enough memory, but they won't do away with something with a form factor like the existing nano. But that can't be "it," as you suggest. An all touch ipod line would do little more than induce yawns among most. Been there, done that last year (i.e. whats new and better about a smaller itouch. The iphone is already better than that.
If they don't refresh the laptop and desktops, AND either maintain or even lower prices, their upward trends will reverse as better equipped and much cheaper Montevina and Nephalim windows machines (with Blue Ray option) flood the market. I'm betting the big new thing will be the touchscreen notebook a la the patent drawings we've all seen. That would attract a lot of attention. And, at the same time, moving the other macs to touchscreen (longer time frame) would be the next move. If they can upgrade the imac and or macbooks with a touch screen in the near term refresh and even hold price, I think that would be enough of a game changer to live up to the hype.
That's what a number of people were saying about OS X on Intel before it was released. And then SJ dropped the bomb and revealed that Apple had been secretly working on it all along.
OS X already works on PCs - they're just PCs manufactured by Apple. In many respects, if this is the transition in question, Apple has already done all the hard work.
There's no doubt that Mac OS on third party hardware would require some type of certification programme (you can see the mess that the hackintosh crowd get themselves into), but these certification programmes are (I should imagine) self-funding. There are already a number of third party manufacturers that say their products will work with Mac OS and their drivers don't cause too many problems for Apple. Printer manufacturers are a good example.
There are only a handful of processor manufacturers, and a handful of GPU chipset manufacturers, and chances are Apple are in bed with them already. They're probably already in bed with the soundcard manufacturers and everyone else for that matter.
Apple wouldn't have to offer Mac OS support for every single PC component out there ? they may even choose not to offer support for legacy hardware. Apple could set the bar high and stipulate which select PC components were certified, and build the base from there. They would just say 'right, from this point onwards if you want you products to work seamlessly with Mac OS it was to follow these guidelines.
I've always suspected that Boot Camp was a switcher app. Buy an Apple safe in the knowledge that it'll run Windows, but you know, feel free to tinker around with the Mac OS as well, and then you realise that the Mac OS is a better environment and you might switch completely.
Mac OS on third party hardware is simply taking this approach a step further.
I'm interested in two things:
1. the average profit that Apple makes on a boxed copy of Mac OS
2. the average profit that Dell makes on a cheapskate PC
Wouldn't it be great to be able to make money out of the cheapskate PC market without having to manufacture the hardware?
I'd also like to point out at this stage that I don't necessarily think that Mac OS on third party hardware is a good idea ? but I think it will appeal to the current mentality of Apple's board.
You know what? I take back my statement about selling OSX on other hardware possibly being profitable. I forgot about the well known concept that Apple really doesn't make that much money on OSX, instead they make a killing on the hardware that you have to buy in order to run their OS. Now, for them to make decent money by selling retail boxes of OSX to run on 3rd party hardware they would have to make the price quite high (somewhere around vista's $400). So at the same time, if they where to license OSX to Dell etc then they would have to charge quite a bit for that (taking into account the much smaller volume of such "OSX dells" than Vista boxes). I just don't see this being very promising for Apple, especially since in the last few years their market share in computers has grown drastically. Why would they jeopardize their high margin hardware sales if that's been going so well.
As for the technical side of it. I still think that such a strategy would ruin the Apple philosophy of a simple elegant and able package. The truth is that there is actually A LOT of hardware out there, and to write support for it all would just be...ughgh. The certification method you described would greatly limit sales possibilities therefore destroying the whole point of diversifying the OSX (to 3rd parties) platform in the first place.
Yes, macs are basically PCs. But they are PCs with very specific components. Ask any (honest) Hackintosh owner, and he will admit that the whole "it just works" motto doesn't apply to his Frankenmac.
I really think that Apple will start the transition to touch screen desktop, notebooks, and screens now that Snow Leopard will be coming out sometime next year (assuming that Apple will include touch interface in 10.6). Clearly they cannot charge more for a feature that doesn't work yet and they need to sell more 10.6 to those who will be upgrading their Macs. Apple can sell few million Macs with touch screen capability until 10.6 is released and then those who bought them will have to upgrade to enable the new future. I think that new features in Snow Leopard, except for touch UI, will be available for Leopard users.
That has to be Mac OS, because Apple's competitors will be able to match everything else if they put their minds to it.
Mac OS is the only thing that Apple has exclusivity on, and when Apple is selling Mac OS it often refers to it's 'technologies and features'.
If Apple opens up the Mac OS, it still retains exclusivity of the Mac OS. The question is not whether Mac OS will trounce Windows et al, but whether people will still buy Apple hardware - and I think that the MacBook Air has shown that there are a huge number of conspicuous consumers out there with more money than sense. Apple could end up building only high-end, high-margin hardware... whilst still making money out of the budget PC market where there is little or no margin in the hardware itself.
I think Messiah might have nailed it.
I don't think Apple will be moving to sell boxed copies of OS X on your home-built PC. But I can imagine Apple allowing partners to ship OS X on hardware which has passed Apple's ratification process.
At this moment in time, there is massive dis-satifaction with Microsoft from hardware manufacturers. Now would be the perfect time to make the transition.
Imagine if SONY moved its entire VAIO range to Mac OS X, Apple would take a hit in the total number of Macs shipped. But the market penetration for the OS would leap forwards.
Apple *is* a software company. But one which is happens to make its own hardware. By retaining control, it could have the best of both worlds.
During his quarterly financial results call, Apple's chief financial officer Peter Oppenheimer revealed that the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals.
...
The Cupertino, Calif.-based company often introduces products to the market with new technology at a high price, according to the executive, but often seeks to drive the price lower over time. It never wants to create a profit margin so wide that it crease an "umbrella" for rivals that lets them safely undercut Apple's pricing and steal sales.
The new, unnamed product will continue to have "technologies and features that others can't match," according to the CFO.
Sorry mate! If you are talking about notebooks, then your rivals have been already successfully stole your sales. Looks at what the others do, pushing notebooks out with the new C2D and ?45 chipset at the "ready for back-to-school" summer time. Unless, of couse, if you think summer begin at September...
If you are talking about workstations, then you might still have a chance. As we only see the p45 chips in the DIY market, which you are not aiming for...
During the Q3 2007 financial results conference call Apple also noted product transition and lower margins because of this. Few weeks later, on August 7th, the new iMac was introduced. The 24" unit was aggressively priced considering size, old model prices etc. but was not cheap.
The iMac, iPod and iPhone sales gave Apple a good understanding how prices affect volumes.
Currently, the product transition could be new Mac Book and Mac Book Pro models, possibly other new stuff too. Not necessarily a breakthrough new device. If aggressively priced, these could bring Apple to a new shipping volumes level and further accelerate the astonishing growth of Mac sales.
Apple can go ahead with similar steps for the iPhone product line.
Wrong, Apple is a hardware company. This has been discussed over and over again.
Wrong, Apple is neither a software or a hardware company. Apple provides an integrated product.
There are tons of evidence for this. One of the latest:
Consider MBA.
If Apple was a hardware company only it could not afford shipping a notebook w/o DVD drive because Windows does not have the Remote Disk functionality and this would significantly affect product usability.
If Apple was a software company it would have no reason to implement Remote Disk functionality because all laptops have a built-in DVD drive anyway.
Another example: the multi-touchpad and Apple software (iPhoto, Preview, Safari etc.).
Tablet : unlikely, as that would be a totally new product, not a transition.
Mac Mini becomes the xMac: I wish, but I don't think so. Oppenheimer said Apple "often introduces products to the market with new technology at a high price, but often seeks to drive the price lower over time". The Mac Mini is hardly new.
MacBook plastic -> aluminium transition: very likely.
Radical MacBook Air price drop: highly probable.
Brilliant. Essentially it is an ass-whooping rejig of the MacBook Air, MacBook, MacBook Pro. MacBook Air would be the one where their margins would have to drop severely to do some real good price points on that.
Comments
"The new, unnamed product will continue to have "technologies and features that others can't match," according to the CFO."
I think that that's probably just marketing hyperbole, so we shouldn't worry too much about which Apple products we think have features that others "can't match". Having said that, I think Messiah's point about OS X (that it's technology others can't match) is valid, so there's a possibility Oppenheimer was referring to OS X, multi-touch or both.
"the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals"
Did Oppenheimer actually say "shut out rivals" or is that interpretation by those reporting on the call?
I'm sure this is about either iPods or MacBooks. I really hope it's MacBooks because I'm planning on getting the new MacBook Pro whenever it appears.
It's amazing you are the first to say this after so many posts. It sounds pretty clear to me:
"the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals"
Apple is working hard on Snow Leopard and we all know it won't have much new features. They told us they are improving stability and such. My guess is that they are adding drivers and making the OS ready for mainstream pc's! It's a small step to make while it could mean a huge step in the desktop market. This would be a tremendous hit to Microsoft. Since Vista is doing so terrible companies are looking hard for a replacement and that replacement could very well be OSX. It will put big pressure on the margins on Apple computer hardware, like they said.
We say it over and over again. It's not that it would not be profitable to license OSX to other PC manufacturers, it's just that it wouldn't be possible to do without drastically degrading the high standards of the macOS. The only reason Apple is able to (more or less) keep on top of things with OSX is that they also have control of the hardware that it runs on. I'm not even going to go into the details, because it's been explained millions of times on these forums.
OSX on non apple hardware: you can forget about it.
It's a small step to make while it could mean a huge step in the desktop market.
Are you insane? making OSX function on all PCs would cost millions of dollars years and years of work.
It's possible the margin comment and the transition comment were co-mingled and this is causing confusion. If you consider how many iPod touches that Apple is giving away there's no question that margins are going to suffer in this quarter.
They predicted lower margins for the whole of financial 2009. The iPod touch give-away won't last that long.
Whose rivals are they likely or aiming to shut out? I can only think of the iPhone, but I doubt there are any significant changes on the cards for now. Another possibility might be iTunes.
When I think product transition I think of a change in business plan for some particular product or line of products, a change in market or some technological change (like the intel transition).
Although I wouldn't normally think these are probable, they are the only that come to mind that fit "key product transition".
Apple begins to sell off its software products to other companies (cringely claimed before that this is already happening)
Apple starts licensing OSX to other manufacturers OR starts allowing others to make apple approved mac computers (not necessarily PCs with OSX).
An iTunes subscription service, all you can eat movies and music for a flat fee.
Bye, Bye to both - Hello to Mac TV!!!
September?
I hope not. Today you can buy a brand new Windows Vista portable with Centrino 2 inside. On Apple what can you buy? I'll tell you... A very old Macbook Pro design with Santa Rosa platform, a very old case-cracking Macbook with Santa Rosa platform and a ultra-crippled Macbook Air.
As a result, September, correction, before September end
I hope something surfaces from Apple before July end, not September!
How about a eee-type Apple computer? And a Sony's SZ-type one? Yes, the one I was hopping when they let all vanish in the Air...
Best regards everyone,
Gear: Macbook 2.2GHz, 4GB, 200GB 7200
Are you insane? making OSX function on all PCs would cost millions of dollars years and years of work.
That's what a number of people were saying about OS X on Intel before it was released. And then SJ dropped the bomb and revealed that Apple had been secretly working on it all along.
OS X already works on PCs - they're just PCs manufactured by Apple. In many respects, if this is the transition in question, Apple has already done all the hard work.
There's no doubt that Mac OS on third party hardware would require some type of certification programme (you can see the mess that the hackintosh crowd get themselves into), but these certification programmes are (I should imagine) self-funding. There are already a number of third party manufacturers that say their products will work with Mac OS and their drivers don't cause too many problems for Apple. Printer manufacturers are a good example.
There are only a handful of processor manufacturers, and a handful of GPU chipset manufacturers, and chances are Apple are in bed with them already. They're probably already in bed with the soundcard manufacturers and everyone else for that matter.
Apple wouldn't have to offer Mac OS support for every single PC component out there ? they may even choose not to offer support for legacy hardware. Apple could set the bar high and stipulate which select PC components were certified, and build the base from there. They would just say 'right, from this point onwards if you want you products to work seamlessly with Mac OS it was to follow these guidelines.
I've always suspected that Boot Camp was a switcher app. Buy an Apple safe in the knowledge that it'll run Windows, but you know, feel free to tinker around with the Mac OS as well, and then you realise that the Mac OS is a better environment and you might switch completely.
Mac OS on third party hardware is simply taking this approach a step further.
I'm interested in two things:
1. the average profit that Apple makes on a boxed copy of Mac OS
2. the average profit that Dell makes on a cheapskate PC
Wouldn't it be great to be able to make money out of the cheapskate PC market without having to manufacture the hardware?
I'd also like to point out at this stage that I don't necessarily think that Mac OS on third party hardware is a good idea ? but I think it will appeal to the current mentality of Apple's board.
Taking my turn off the diving board, I think the PASemi acquisition is key here. IIRC, before the Intel switch, Apple designed and produced their own logic boards, but after the switch it made sense to take them off-the-shelf from Intel. This would have given a clear cost advantage, but on the downside, as mentioned, open up a Mac and it is exactly the same components as all the rest. Apple and PA had been working together for a few years before the purchase, so perhaps the timing of that was tactical, just as whatever they were working on was ready for implementation.
So what if Apple is going back to designing (possibly in collaboration with Intel) their own logic boards again, but now with a PASemi/Apple secondary chip on there. This could be for video/graphics acceleration, or perhaps something to do with implementing multi-processor friendly hardware. This could (here in speculationland) provide a "revolutionary" advantage across the Mac range, and as it would be due to a proprietary chip rivals would be "locked out" (including all varieties of 'Hackintoshes'). There would be cost implications, hence the trimmed margins, but Apple uniqueness would go back to hardware as well as software. My tuppence.
PS Having recently watched all 16 episodes of "Foyle's War'" on DVD (he's a Detective Chief Superintendent BTW) I agree it is a superb series, and it takes a bit to excite my TV jaded palate these days. My only question is 'how the hell did ITV produce something that good?'
The 'product transition' is actually happening now - it's the iPhone 3G and the App store. Apple is hoping to sell a boat load of them next year and the margins on them are slim, like any phone except the old iPhone which had bigger margins. This reduces Apple's overall margins. The fallout financially for Apple won't be in this past quarter's results so as far as a CFO is concerned it's a future transition that isn't reported until the end of the quarter.
Look at the figures they quoted. Reduced margins this quarter are during the iPhone 3G launch - they've 20 more countries to add in August. The more they sell, the more their overall margin goes down.
Then they've got the iPod Touch revision and possibly iPod nano going touch too. They want those to run App Store apps. They'd have to take a significant hit on the nano though to cram in OSX, accelerometers, touch screen and possibly wifi.
Maybe I'm wrong but I really think that's 'all' this is.
-------------------
The key word here is that it's a "KEY" product transition.. How many "KEY" products does Apple have? Three. The Mac, iPod and iPhone.
The iPhone was just updated. We all know that the entire Mac line is not going to be updated by September, and even if it was and Apple cut Mac prices so that it's profit margin was down to zero, it would still not "shut out rivals."
It's the iPod line folks..[/QUOTE
I agree they will include improvements and changes to the ipod line, but price movement on an updated touch (we want more memory) would be enough - and I maintain they may dump the classic if the touch gets enough memory, but they won't do away with something with a form factor like the existing nano. But that can't be "it," as you suggest. An all touch ipod line would do little more than induce yawns among most. Been there, done that last year (i.e. whats new and better about a smaller itouch. The iphone is already better than that.
If they don't refresh the laptop and desktops, AND either maintain or even lower prices, their upward trends will reverse as better equipped and much cheaper Montevina and Nephalim windows machines (with Blue Ray option) flood the market. I'm betting the big new thing will be the touchscreen notebook a la the patent drawings we've all seen. That would attract a lot of attention. And, at the same time, moving the other macs to touchscreen (longer time frame) would be the next move. If they can upgrade the imac and or macbooks with a touch screen in the near term refresh and even hold price, I think that would be enough of a game changer to live up to the hype.
That's what a number of people were saying about OS X on Intel before it was released. And then SJ dropped the bomb and revealed that Apple had been secretly working on it all along.
OS X already works on PCs - they're just PCs manufactured by Apple. In many respects, if this is the transition in question, Apple has already done all the hard work.
There's no doubt that Mac OS on third party hardware would require some type of certification programme (you can see the mess that the hackintosh crowd get themselves into), but these certification programmes are (I should imagine) self-funding. There are already a number of third party manufacturers that say their products will work with Mac OS and their drivers don't cause too many problems for Apple. Printer manufacturers are a good example.
There are only a handful of processor manufacturers, and a handful of GPU chipset manufacturers, and chances are Apple are in bed with them already. They're probably already in bed with the soundcard manufacturers and everyone else for that matter.
Apple wouldn't have to offer Mac OS support for every single PC component out there ? they may even choose not to offer support for legacy hardware. Apple could set the bar high and stipulate which select PC components were certified, and build the base from there. They would just say 'right, from this point onwards if you want you products to work seamlessly with Mac OS it was to follow these guidelines.
I've always suspected that Boot Camp was a switcher app. Buy an Apple safe in the knowledge that it'll run Windows, but you know, feel free to tinker around with the Mac OS as well, and then you realise that the Mac OS is a better environment and you might switch completely.
Mac OS on third party hardware is simply taking this approach a step further.
I'm interested in two things:
1. the average profit that Apple makes on a boxed copy of Mac OS
2. the average profit that Dell makes on a cheapskate PC
Wouldn't it be great to be able to make money out of the cheapskate PC market without having to manufacture the hardware?
I'd also like to point out at this stage that I don't necessarily think that Mac OS on third party hardware is a good idea ? but I think it will appeal to the current mentality of Apple's board.
You know what? I take back my statement about selling OSX on other hardware possibly being profitable. I forgot about the well known concept that Apple really doesn't make that much money on OSX, instead they make a killing on the hardware that you have to buy in order to run their OS. Now, for them to make decent money by selling retail boxes of OSX to run on 3rd party hardware they would have to make the price quite high (somewhere around vista's $400). So at the same time, if they where to license OSX to Dell etc then they would have to charge quite a bit for that (taking into account the much smaller volume of such "OSX dells" than Vista boxes). I just don't see this being very promising for Apple, especially since in the last few years their market share in computers has grown drastically. Why would they jeopardize their high margin hardware sales if that's been going so well.
As for the technical side of it. I still think that such a strategy would ruin the Apple philosophy of a simple elegant and able package. The truth is that there is actually A LOT of hardware out there, and to write support for it all would just be...ughgh. The certification method you described would greatly limit sales possibilities therefore destroying the whole point of diversifying the OSX (to 3rd parties) platform in the first place.
Yes, macs are basically PCs. But they are PCs with very specific components. Ask any (honest) Hackintosh owner, and he will admit that the whole "it just works" motto doesn't apply to his Frankenmac.
That has to be Mac OS, because Apple's competitors will be able to match everything else if they put their minds to it.
Mac OS is the only thing that Apple has exclusivity on, and when Apple is selling Mac OS it often refers to it's 'technologies and features'.
If Apple opens up the Mac OS, it still retains exclusivity of the Mac OS. The question is not whether Mac OS will trounce Windows et al, but whether people will still buy Apple hardware - and I think that the MacBook Air has shown that there are a huge number of conspicuous consumers out there with more money than sense. Apple could end up building only high-end, high-margin hardware... whilst still making money out of the budget PC market where there is little or no margin in the hardware itself.
I think Messiah might have nailed it.
I don't think Apple will be moving to sell boxed copies of OS X on your home-built PC. But I can imagine Apple allowing partners to ship OS X on hardware which has passed Apple's ratification process.
At this moment in time, there is massive dis-satifaction with Microsoft from hardware manufacturers. Now would be the perfect time to make the transition.
Imagine if SONY moved its entire VAIO range to Mac OS X, Apple would take a hit in the total number of Macs shipped. But the market penetration for the OS would leap forwards.
Apple *is* a software company. But one which is happens to make its own hardware. By retaining control, it could have the best of both worlds.
C.
During his quarterly financial results call, Apple's chief financial officer Peter Oppenheimer revealed that the company will make a key "product transition" that cuts back on its profit margins to help shut out rivals.
...
The Cupertino, Calif.-based company often introduces products to the market with new technology at a high price, according to the executive, but often seeks to drive the price lower over time. It never wants to create a profit margin so wide that it crease an "umbrella" for rivals that lets them safely undercut Apple's pricing and steal sales.
The new, unnamed product will continue to have "technologies and features that others can't match," according to the CFO.
...
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Sorry mate! If you are talking about notebooks, then your rivals have been already successfully stole your sales. Looks at what the others do, pushing notebooks out with the new C2D and ?45 chipset at the "ready for back-to-school" summer time.
If you are talking about workstations, then you might still have a chance. As we only see the p45 chips in the DIY market, which you are not aiming for...
Good Luck mate
I think Messiah might have nailed it.
Apple *is* a software company. But one which is happens to make its own hardware. By retaining control, it could have the best of both worlds.
C.
Wrong, Apple is a hardware company. This has been discussed over and over again.
The iMac, iPod and iPhone sales gave Apple a good understanding how prices affect volumes.
Currently, the product transition could be new Mac Book and Mac Book Pro models, possibly other new stuff too. Not necessarily a breakthrough new device. If aggressively priced, these could bring Apple to a new shipping volumes level and further accelerate the astonishing growth of Mac sales.
Apple can go ahead with similar steps for the iPhone product line.
Wrong, Apple is a hardware company. This has been discussed over and over again.
Wrong, Apple is neither a software or a hardware company. Apple provides an integrated product.
There are tons of evidence for this. One of the latest:
Consider MBA.
If Apple was a hardware company only it could not afford shipping a notebook w/o DVD drive because Windows does not have the Remote Disk functionality and this would significantly affect product usability.
If Apple was a software company it would have no reason to implement Remote Disk functionality because all laptops have a built-in DVD drive anyway.
Another example: the multi-touchpad and Apple software (iPhoto, Preview, Safari etc.).
Yup
Tablet : unlikely, as that would be a totally new product, not a transition.
Mac Mini becomes the xMac: I wish, but I don't think so. Oppenheimer said Apple "often introduces products to the market with new technology at a high price, but often seeks to drive the price lower over time". The Mac Mini is hardly new.
MacBook plastic -> aluminium transition: very likely.
Radical MacBook Air price drop: highly probable.
Brilliant. Essentially it is an ass-whooping rejig of the MacBook Air, MacBook, MacBook Pro. MacBook Air would be the one where their margins would have to drop severely to do some real good price points on that.