Apple's Future Linux Killing Hardware

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 31
    xypexype Posts: 672member
    [quote]Originally posted by FotNS:

    <strong>OS X that comes with a system is not free, the price is built into the machine. So there.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    No is not.
  • Reply 22 of 31
    fotnsfotns Posts: 301member
    Yes it is. Nothing is free, that cost is incorporated into the price of the machine. It is called economics, look into it.
  • Reply 23 of 31
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    [quote]Originally posted by FotNS:

    <strong>Yes it is. Nothing is free, that cost is incorporated into the price of the machine. It is called economics, look into it.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    There is no evidence to suggest charges for OS X with new hardware and to dispute that OS X with hardware is given away free.



    In fact with my last computer invoice it is specifically listed with a 0.00 beside it.



    Whether there is a cost to them isn't under debate only the cost to the consumer and that's an argument you won't win.
  • Reply 24 of 31
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    [quote]Originally posted by long AAPL:

    <strong>



    If Linux continues to gain more market share -- say it takes 6% of the desktop market.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Even if this unlikely situation would arise, that 6% would be heavily fragmented between a few distros with different software packages, package management utilities, over-all personalities. Also, there are probably quite a few Linux installs dual boot configs counted but never actually used.
  • Reply 25 of 31
    [quote]Originally posted by vr6.1:

    <strong>

    Linux and Macintosh have very few overlapping markets at all - and so the whole subject of the article is moot.

    </strong>

    <hr></blockquote>



    This guy (and a few others that stated similar)is correct.



    The point of the article was not to boost Linux, it was to attack Apple. It's a popular pastime with on-line journalists who see massive increases in traffic as soon as they attack Apple. The articles are usually very badly written and usually sprinkled with inane comments from MS loving analysts.



    The point, as stated above, is moot as Apple and Linux do not compete in many important markets and Linux is mainly stealing shares of servers, old machines and corporate installs i.e. overwhelmingly MS machines.



    However, attacking Linux in return makes as little sense as pitting them against each other in the first place. At the moment Linux (and other less pressworthy unixes) and Apple are helping each other, not battling as this article would like you to think.



    Putting Linux down doesn't make Apple any better and acting like a fanboy because some MS loving journo is trying to stir up trouble won't help either.



    sidenote: Darwin will never compete with Linux, ever.



    Someone mentioned Darwin running on a 970. And which company makes the 970? IBM, the biggest supporters of Linux, employing at least half of the people working on the kernel.



    Darwin has no advantage over Linux for anyone other than Apple and no mindshare to speak of. It is nonsensical to match them against each other or recommend one as a replacement for the other.
  • Reply 26 of 31
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    [quote]There is no evidence to suggest charges for OS X with new hardware and to dispute that OS X with hardware is given away free.



    In fact with my last computer invoice it is specifically listed with a 0.00 beside it.



    Whether there is a cost to them isn't under debate only the cost to the consumer and that's an argument you won't win.<hr></blockquote>The reality is that very few people go out shopping for an OS and come home with a computer. They go out shopping for a computer that happens to come with an OS. And on that basis there is a premium to paid, and that is a fight Apple will likely never win.
  • Reply 27 of 31
    xypexype Posts: 672member
    [quote]Originally posted by Telomar:

    <strong>In fact with my last computer invoice it is specifically listed with a 0.00 beside it.



    Whether there is a cost to them isn't under debate only the cost to the consumer and that's an argument you won't win.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Exactly my point - while consumers _pay_ for XP directly they don't so for OSX. Besides Apple sells hardware. What they do with the money earned with that (whether pick their nose with a golden spoon or develop OSX) is their problem.
  • Reply 28 of 31
    fotnsfotns Posts: 301member
    [quote]Originally posted by Telomar:

    <strong>



    There is no evidence to suggest charges for OS X with new hardware and to dispute that OS X with hardware is given away free.



    In fact with my last computer invoice it is specifically listed with a 0.00 beside it.



    Whether there is a cost to them isn't under debate only the cost to the consumer and that's an argument you won't win.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    You do not ever see the cost of the OS because there is no choice or options when buying a Mac, the OS along with it's added price is included. If however, Apple sold Macs without an OS for those that may already have a copy or might want to run linux they would have to sell them at a cheaper price or there would be no incentive to buy this configuration. This illustrates the added value and price OS X adds to the machines.

    This concept seems so clear <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[surprised]" />
  • Reply 29 of 31
    [quote]Originally posted by FotNS:

    <strong>If however, Apple sold Macs without an OS for those that may already have a copy or might want to run linux they would have to sell them at a cheaper price or there would be no incentive to buy this configuration. This illustrates the added value and price OS X adds to the machines.

    This concept seems so clear <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[surprised]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

    Either way you look at it, it's just an artifact of accounting. Apple sells Mac platforms -- the cost of software development, R&D, operations, it's all factored into the price of each and every machine. You pay for it whether you want it or not because Apple isn't selling just hardware or software, they're selling the whole platform. They're the only computer company left that does.
  • Reply 30 of 31
    [quote]Originally posted by long AAPL:

    <strong>While checking the latest market news on Apple I found this article?



    <a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20030122/bs_nf/20535"; target="_blank">http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nf/20030122/bs_nf/20535</a>;



    Basically it says Linux will continue to gain market share while Apple will fade away. The main argument the author uses is:



    "Hardware is always the millstone that sinks Macintosh. Someone decided that if you want Macintosh, you have to buy an expensive Apple computer. It may have been the single worst business decision in tech history (closely followed by the merger of AOL and Time Warner).



    But Linux works on any old box. And all those old PCs that people leave laying around after they've bought a newer, faster one? 'Hey, let's try this new Linux thing on that Dell in the basement.'"



    What is Apple to do? Should/could Apple sell at Wal-Mart as well? They could still have their awesome product line as we know it today, but something for the masses as well. That way Linux doesn't take away Macintosh developers because we all know company's like Adobe will always support Windows.



    Food for thought...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Recently put RH 8 on an old P3. It's nice and a change from XP. I suppose you could say I've switched.
  • Reply 31 of 31
    [quote] God. The Internet has made it far too easy to write...even under the absence of talent. <hr></blockquote>



    I like that.



    Hmurch' dishes a post I almost overwhelmingly agree with.



    Linux overtake Mac? I don't think so. Certainly not as a 'desktop' computer. Not unless it gets a decent gui, alot easier to use...gets M$ apps and Adobe apps...no...wait...that's a Mac. Linux wants to be a Mac OS TEN when it grows up.



    Seriously, now that the Mac has joined the baltic states of Linux against the evil red empire, I just see LUNIX as an allie in the fight against you know who.



    For alot of people, the Mac is the ultimate mobile Unix workstation. Cop a whack at 17 inch Powerbook or the 12 incher. Which would you turn up to a developer's conference with? A Dell brick or the 'so ahead it aint funny' Mac laptop?



    Apple took alot of flack for pre-Jaguar 'Ten'. It's unix apparently wasn't upto much. But since?



    X-serve has been tweaked. Due speed bumps in light of the 'power'Mac release. And X-serve aint been around long. It's starting to turn heads with its 'value for money' and decent licensing. It's easy to maintain. I can see alot of people choosing that as Apple's reputation grows. X-serve looks like Apple's killer ace. And X-raid aint here yet...



    Jaguar's BSD is reportedly better (I'm not a techie, so I can't vouch...but hey, Jag' is faster, right?)



    X11 beta is the jewel in the Apple unix crown (well, along with 'X' of course...). Plus Unix gets the way more decent Aqua interface accelerated via Quartz. The developers should port in droves. And then how long before people start looking at Cocoa more closely? All those people fed up of wrestling with Linux? I'm sure plenty more will find a home with Apple's Ten.



    Sure, IBM will sell Linux and 970s..? Yeah. They're gonna sell loads.



    But Apple's kit with 970s? Gorgeous no brainer. Ha-row!? X-serve's with 970s? I don't see Apple in the red for the next few years...



    I see Apple poised for growth. They're rapidly becoming THE cross platform platform.



    Unix 11. Unix 'X'. Classic Mac. Cocoa. Windows (well, via Virtual PC...)



    Lemon Bon Bon



    And surely Apple now has some of the best development tools out there now?



    [ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]



    [ 01-28-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.