toggle

AAPL Stock: 497.67 ( 0 )

MacNN News

Dvorak: Could Apple let OS X run on all PCs?

updated 11:05 am EDT, Tue August 9, 2005

Dvorak on Intel OS X

In his latest opinion piece, columnist John C. Dvorak speculates about a scenario where Apple allows owners of regular PCs to install and run . "A few weeks ago there was some site claiming that Apple was actually going to get a custom x86 chip designed specifically for the Mac OS, to make it impossible for the OS to gravitate toward white boxes [...] There is no question that this would be a boneheaded move, and as I see more and more chitchat about the possibilities, I'm now convinced that this is all a publicity stunt and the Apple community is being used�once again�by the company's marketing department." Dvorak says "this is kind of how Napster went from a few thousand users to a few million users overnight during the crackdown."

by MacNN Staff

(36)

TAGS :

industry

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

ecrelin
Junior Member

Joined: Oct 2000

0

08/09, 11:42am | report spam | close Reply |
he's a pinhead BUT�

I generally dislike Dvorak, he is casually annoying and insultingly brash, regularly a mindless Mac basher but he has always hated those things Apple does that truly deserve it as many of us do. While I won't sing his praises and don't think the situation is either as arcane or simplistic as he makes out I think he's right about what would happen in the market if it were released to the general public, Apple has nowhere to go but up. They certainly would not sell fewer computers than they do now, it cracks open and puts a foot in the door to the pc world that is absolutely closed to them now in 9.6 out of 10 installation.

Warrenpeace
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2001

0

08/09, 11:49am | report spam | close Reply |
Are you kidding?

How does this guy still have a job? It's so simple! If you could install OSX on anything, billions in hardware sales would be at risk. It doesn't take a genius to understand that. Why can't I install the Nokia interface on my Motorola phone 'cause I like it more?

Apple controls everything 'cause it's part of the experience and they want that experience to be great. Running on a cheap PC, with drivers missing for hardware components will not convince anyone to switch.

varcos
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2001

0

08/09, 11:51am | report spam | close Reply |
yep a pinhead, but...

I kinda agree with Dvorak... okay, I feel dirty just typing that. But, I don't think it'll happen the way he says. I believe that Apple will need to first raise their marketshare to the point that they could survive off of just software sales. If they can do that, they'll open the OS to work on all x86 boxes. Then, they'll be able to make the shift from being a hardware company that sells software to a software company that sells hardware.

mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie

Joined: Feb 2000

0

08/09, 11:53am | report spam | close Reply |
Apple...

IMHO, Apple doesn't need to make it impossible to run OS X on any Intel... they will just make it annoying enough that REAL users won't bother trying to hack together their OS to get it to work on their Dell... knowing that any and every upgrade may hose their system or permanently disable OS X.

I also dislike Dvorak, but he makes an interesting point.

rtamesis
Dedicated MacNNer

Joined: Jan 2000

0

08/09, 11:55am | report spam | close Reply |
Dream on

All this talk and speculation about Apple allowing Mac OS X to run on Dull PCs is pure, unadulterated, wishful thinking on the part of PC owners (and pirates used to stealing MS Windows). Apple and Jobs have repeatedly said that only Apple-made Intel Macs will run their crown jewel. I cannot fathom why people continue to insist that Apple doesn't mean it unless they are in complete denial.

zioncity
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2005

0

08/09, 12:00pm | report spam | close Reply |
Serial numbers perhaps

As much as I hate to say it... one way Apple could prevent the upcoming 10.5 from just being installed on any mac and or potentially PC is to have a serial number requirement... I mean I know in the past... I have put Jaguar, Panther and Tiger on a number of my own home macs and laptops from the same Installer Disc/Discs. This would allow each and every sale of a new boxed OS to get a profit and less likely to be duped on many machines, but also... if they allow regular PC installs, this would prevent rabid pirating as each computer, be it mac or pc could be authorized like the iTunes accounts do.

Here is to hoping Apple can open up their OS to any PC... unsupported at first for the most part as their Support Department would not be able to handle the potentially huge increase in users on intel boxen, but also... that it does not hurt their current hardware sales... Folks buy a Mac for design and quality... that is pretty much most of the current mac base market, but if they priced their new Macintels just a little over the intel boxen... to give them a good profit, but yet be competitative in terms of Apple being nicer, better quality and only a little more... then I could see this working.

that is my 2 cents.

zioncity
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2005

0

08/09, 12:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
Also

Anyone notice that at 12:01 EST that Apple's stock is up 89 cents or so... wonder if this has any relation to the buyers feelings on the continued rumors, and or opinions of the next OS X to run on most regular Intel Boxen.

aristotles
Grizzled Veteran

Joined: Jul 2004

0

08/09, 12:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
Stock price

It's probably due to Apple decimating Sony in online music sales in Japan.

chas_m
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

08/09, 12:06pm | report spam | close Reply |
Whew!!

Dvorak's almost-perfect track record of being WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING having to do with Macs assures me that if he says something will go THIS way, there's a better-than-95% chance it will go THAT way. So, no portable OS X for PCs. Whew.

I wish I could take John Dvorak to the track. I'd be rich.

ecrelin
Junior Member

Joined: Oct 2000

0

08/09, 12:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
just a second�

Why is it that everyone seems to think that every future Mac sale would be scuttled to buy a PC? People who are vested in Macs and like them will suddenly go buy the cheapest Dell? What logic is telling you that a huge portion of the 4.5 % they have in the US is buying Macs because they are forced to and they are ready to dump them to buy PCs? Loyal, happy Mac customers will remain just that. People are switching everyday so the marketshare grows, are they buying on price? Do you think that every PC sold is a bargain basement model? Those who are spending $1500 - 2 Gs on a PC would still be potential Apple hardware customers. Apple stuff is cool, people want it, it would cost them little to expose OS X to vast numbers of users who have never even seen a Mac. Maybe the hardware weenies on this board would try to minimize investment and tweak away but many average consumers will buy the name brand, if they know it exists.

SomeToast
Senior User

Joined: Jan 1999

0

08/09, 12:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
Napster

Dvorak says "this is kind of how Napster went from a few thousand users to a few million users overnight during the crackdown."

Yes, and how is Napster doing lately? Last I heard, they were hemorrhaging millions of dollars annually and have a very uncertain future. Not exactly a business model one would care to emulate.

threestain
Grizzled Veteran

Joined: Mar 2003

0

08/09, 12:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
Napster

Besides which, few thousand to a few million?

What a complete load of tosh. When I was using it, years before the crackdown, there was always 250,000+ users much like any p2p nowadays. It did indeed get more popular, but not to such an amazing extent as he's saying, as in 10x not 1000x

SomeToast
Senior User

Joined: Jan 1999

0

08/09, 12:23pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: just a second�

Why is it that everyone seems to think that every future Mac sale would be scuttled to buy a PC? People who are vested in Macs and like them will suddenly go buy the cheapest Dell? What logic is telling you that a huge portion of the 4.5 % they have in the US is buying Macs because they are forced to and they are ready to dump them to buy PCs?

People "seem" to think that because we already went through it once during the Mac clone era. h***, when I worked at an authorized Apple reseller, we had an office full of Umax clones because they were cheaper and offered the Mac experience. Tuck it under your desk and you wouldn't know the difference. Many customers felt the same way and chose them over the Apple offerings nearly every time.

Mac OS X running unfettered on generic PC hardware would kill the company (not before they officially became "Apple Music Company") and then there'll be no OS X for anyone.

abrody
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 1999

0

08/09, 12:31pm | report spam | close Reply |
Dvorak as usual

Is just trying to get publicity. First PC users criticize the Mac for not having enough software. Now they want Mac OS X to run on any PC? Of what benefit would that give PC users who purportedly claim they have more software anyway? Actually there is more software that is Mac compatible if you include emulation. And as someone mentioned in another forum, Apple tried to license its operating system before Steve Jobs returned, and that nearly cost them their business. Apple is a hardware company. And while the iPod is successful today, there is no guarantee it will always be successful. As long as Apple remains diverse in its means of getting profit, it will continue to function well as a company. Apple will not license Mac OS X to PC makers as long as it remains a hardware company. A paradigm shift towards all software sales would have to be made before it did that. And people who own Macs would have to be happy with the quality of PCs enough to want to run Mac OS X on PCs before Apple could do this. Macs despite their periodic hardware failures still are more reliable and better supported than any PCs out there. As long as that is the case, Mac users aren't going to let Apple switch to an all PC hardware. It is the integrated nature of the hardware and software that exists on Macs that makes its environment so strong. You start making custom built-in PCs able to run Mac OS X natively, and you will lose that integration and the stability of the platform. Its very strength which so many people like would be weakened. Until Dvorak realizes this, ignore what he says. He has been criticized more times by http://www.macobserver.com/ than I can count.

Deal
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Apr 2001

0

08/09, 12:37pm | report spam | close Reply |
Does anybody remember....

Mac Clones?

If you thought Mac Clones were the worst possible pieces of junk (like I do), not to mention what it did to the company (set it into a downward spiral which Apple only recovered from because of strong customer loyalty), than imagine it 10 times worse if they allowed OS X to run on any junky PC.

It would be the worst thing Apple could do.

All your advantages of controlling the hardware and matching it with the software (giving a solid running systems and easy integration of new technology)� GONE!

However, if you like crashing and having hardware incompatibility problems, than you may like it.

zioncity
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2005

0

08/09, 12:39pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: just a second�

Hey.... just thought of an answer to a past question of mine. But to start... it does make logical sense that mac users will continue to buy macs.. even if they can get a dell for cheaper... but to my main point..

If Apple opens up OS X to most regular intel pc's... then how is Apple to step up and offer support to those PC's. Most likely they will not offer support, unless on a few specific Dell or HP or Sony Models... but moreso I think this will open up a new job market for OS X techs for non Apple PCs.

Think about it. Apple can have it's cake and eat it at the same time. Logic dictates that with their switch to Intel chips... they will gain market share from having the latest market advertised and new chips, same as Windows. The developer market will be from a little to alot easier to develop or port over their apps to intel OS X. Apple will continue to be the premiere PC like top end PC windows systems costing the same or more, but other companies... even start ups from Apple and or the PC makes can hire Mac OS X on non Apple boxen techs to be their own customer support... Dell can charge for support... and all others..

That and some variant of it will be how a huge increase in OS X installs on non Apple hardware could be supported and maintained.

Overall... apple would get 129 or so a copy for tons of Intel Boxen OS X installs and logically should not lose any Apple hardware sales as they have the best ratings for design and quality.. and they are True Innovators.

nuff said

mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie

Joined: Feb 2000

0

08/09, 12:45pm | report spam | close Reply |
Clone

I don't see Apple offering the OS X for every x86, but I don't think it in their best interest to spend millions trying to keep it off hacked Dell boxes.

As long as it isn't supported, and isn't easy, and it's easily broken by an update... who would do it?

[Also, there are so many driver issues... I can't even start to think about it]

ecrelin
Junior Member

Joined: Oct 2000

0

08/09, 12:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
different circumstances

I won't belabor this but two things. 1. When clones were available it was back in the days of seven Mac II models with intentional incremental handicaps like no ethernet onboard, 4 bit video cards etc. to push users up the line. This was the culmination of what Scully/Spindler/Amelio did as product pushers. Jobs had to kill the clones then because their product line sucked but they've smelled the coffee and now macs are more full featured than the competition (except no sound in on consumer models, what is with that c***?). Do you think the features on a Dell are better than a Mac? I don't and the price difference wouldn't be enough to try to cheap out anyway. 2. That was a licensing deal that was husbanded by Apple to begin with to expand the hardware base because there was no chance that the original OS would ever run on PCs. This is an entirely different scenario. They should not license the system and they can choose to sell and support it to the extent they chose.

voznap
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

08/09, 12:54pm | report spam | close Reply |
Do some reading Dvorak

Intel is not going to have to manufacture a special chip for Apple, considering they already have DRM in the latest chips they have released. Not only that, it has more to do with the chipset on the board than the processor, and considering Apple currently has their own OEM for the boards, they will continue on the same path. I don't believe for a second that Apple is going to use any old MLB in their Macs. They don't do that now. I am looking forward to getting a new Mac for the fact that I will probably be able to dual boot Mac OS and Windows (silly AutoCAD) but I feel Apple may likely produce a better Windows computer than the current companies do now.

Chiznibitz
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2001

0

08/09, 12:58pm | report spam | close Reply |
Then I Saw This...

One thing Dvorak doesn't have is evidence. After reading this thread, I concluded he was wrong and went off to see Apple's new Switch site. I found this:

Only with a Mac do you get a system built by the same people who make the operating system, applications and the computer itself.

I think it's safe to say that Apple views their integration as a strong selling point, and Dvorak is wrong again.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

08/09, 01:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: just a second

Why is it that everyone seems to think that every future Mac sale would be scuttled to buy a PC? People who are vested in Macs and like them will suddenly go buy the cheapest Dell? What logic is telling you that a huge portion of the 4.5 % they have in the US is buying Macs because they are forced to and they are ready to dump them to buy PCs? Loyal, happy Mac customers will remain just that.

I'm a loyal mac user (been using macs since 1984, have a closet filled with old ones), but choose between a $2000 Mac tower or a $1000 Dell tower, which would have more expansion and storage options? You must be kidding me. Most power users would jump at that in a second. Sure, some still will buy on the whole "I need a Mac, not a PC" thing, but when you start talking real money (and in businesses that buy a lot of computers, those piddly $500-1000 price differences magnify alot), they'd be going Dell in a heartbeat.

ecrelin
Junior Member

Joined: Oct 2000

0

08/09, 01:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
$1K Dell tower from who�

Its easy to spit facts like that out your @$$ testudo I'm surprised at you, do your homework. I even had to become a registered Dell user to do this and I chose the cheaper options on the PC like a stupid consumer.

Dual 2.5GHz Apple tower stock with 512 RAM 160 GB hard drive 16x dual layer superdrive 128MB ATi video card keyboard mouse $1999. free shipping 90 days free support $1999.

Dual 3.0GHz Xeon Dell tower with 512RAM 160 GB hard drive 16x single layer CDR/DVDR 128 MB ATi video card speaker keyboard mouse w/shipping one incident support $2166.15

Put your hands on both and I bet you think the Dell is a POS comparitively, sound quality, noise, bus speed etc. I advocate that anyone who thinks that they can get peer level machines for way less go to Dell.com and build yourself a system. And then save yourself $166. and buy the cheaper Mac!

tvalleau
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2005

0

08/09, 02:14pm | report spam | close Reply |
price shopping...

Let's see: I can buy a PC for exactly x dollars, that will run only windows, or I can buy a PC for the same exactly x dollars that will run both windows and OS X.

This is too hard a decision for me... I can't decide. Oh.. help...Obiwan...

Which PC manufacture would you rather be, John? You deep thinker, you.

Kazrog
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2002

0

08/09, 02:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
HAHAHAHA

John C. Dvorak is hilarious. I wonder if he realizes how funny he is. The Rush Limbaugh of the computer world for sure.

gudin
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2000

0

08/09, 02:56pm | report spam | close Reply |
prices

I love these testudo-esque comments. Yeah, that's it, you can get a similar spec dell for half the price. Gimme a break. First, current models compared with the same features are INVARIABLY very similar in price (+/- 10%), but of course you wouldn't bother to look because you've been trolling this site for years and spouting off baseless things like this. Second, the macs will be INTEL BASED. Presumably, that means they will be similar in price to other name-brand pcs (they are now, but they certainly will be then. . . .again +/- 10%). Yes, build your owns will potentially be cheaper (assuming you pirate the OS, just like they are now for windows. . . . if you pirate the OS. Apple doesn't need to support these people. Apple doesn't need to support name brand clones either, unless they are paid for a license and support. I don't know if they'll use hardware to separate macs from wintel, but they can be differentiated in any case. Personally, I hope they use some hardware, because otherwise the joe sixpacks with a friend who built a computer for them may blame apple if the experience isn't up to apple's standard (even if apple isn't supporting it).

I agree that clones did serious damage to the mac market because they were generally cheaper and there was no compelling reason not to buy one. However, this is a different situation. The clones used apple motherboard (logicboards, whatever) designs, not ASUS or whoever. The clones basically took apple's hardware and put it in a different box. Apple's contract with them did not ask enough for licensing fees, on the principle that they'd seek out new markets which they didn't.

Apple could, this time, charge whatever someone was willing to pay, and if they aren't willing to pay enough to make it worth apple's while, not license it. As far as shrink wrapped boxes are concerned, I don't see it, as then apple would be obligated to support every possible hardware configuration, or limit their sales to specific models of PCs. PC companies add new models or discontinue them every 20 minutes, so that would be tough, without a firm commitment.

I think it will be possible, but will be an unsupported hack. Thus, it will not be as mainstream as dvorak suggests. (imagine that)

Saint_Stryfe
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

08/09, 03:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
There's only one way...

I think it could work:

Mac OS X 10.5 for Apple PPC/Intel: 150$

Mac OS X 10.5 for Generic machines: 350$ (hey, thats what Redmond charges for XP Pro)

Let's see if the trumpeting fanboys are so eager now.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

08/09, 03:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
$1K tower from Dell

Dual 3.0GHz Xeon Dell tower with 512RAM 160 GB hard drive 16x single layer CDR/DVDR 128 MB ATi video card speaker keyboard mouse w/shipping one incident support $2166.15

Put your hands on both and I bet you think the Dell is a POS comparitively, sound quality, noise, bus speed etc. I advocate that anyone who thinks that they can get peer level machines for way less go to Dell.com and build yourself a system. And then save yourself $166. and buy the cheaper Mac!

First off, you ignorant mac-loving idiots, I never said I was getting a comparably spec'd machine. Where did I say that? I just said that I could get a $1000 tower from Dell, which had more expansion options then a $2000 Mac (the cheapest Apple tower, in case you didn't notice). In fact, I've got a Dell 4600 sitting under my desk (price

MacnnGregor
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2004

0

08/09, 03:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: just a second....

testudo....first of all if Apple licensed to Dell there wouldn't be a 100% difference in price. Dell will either pay a premium on the OS or Apple will create a system with the same specs, same cpu, same gpu, etc. and charge only 10% more and make the sale and the 28% markup.

The iPod has a distinct hardware advantage over other mp3 players, if we for the moment ignore the major iTMS advantage, and Apple would need to have the same in a clone war. Apple didn't have that in the first clone war and Apple wouldn't start one without that advantage.

I don't know what the advantage could possibly be but if the iPod had some hardware siblings and the Mactel were cheap enough, Apple would do fine in the consumer market.

No you talk about the enterprise market and that is the biggest question mark. Many companies would get the cheaper Dells, but then how big is Apple in those markets now?

The creative market is Apple's biggest asset to lose. They buy big state of the art stuff and tehy might easily move to Dells even if marginally cheaper if they thought Dell had easier upgrades and better service.

I don't think Apple would liscense to Dell b/c neither would make the deal if they weren't sure they could outcompete the other. Dell has the lesser risk of course. So this is the part of the Dvorak article I agree with, Apple has the least risk if it "allows" the secondary market in s/w to evolve - upgrades, etc. - that take pre-existing computers. To s**** Apple then you would have to buy a pc with Windows and then buy the Apple OS at a premium upgrade. That will limit the Dell effect by quite a bit.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

08/09, 03:44pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Dell computer

BTW, I went looking at your Dell workstation you mentioned (not sure why you had to become a registered user to spec out a computer), but a couple of points:

1) The computer I specced out had a 3 year on-site economy plan, not a one-issue support plan (you must've gone into the high-end computer area, where IT people don't call dell, so they don't need support contracts).

2) The memory in the machine is ECC. Apple's isn't.

3) The machine supports (and comes with) PCI-Express video, much better then whatever Apple has these days.

4) You're generally insane to be buying components from Dell (like Apple) from their business departments. I was specing out a server for a friend, and Dell was charging over $100 more for a DVD-ROM drive then what they were charging for in the 'home' section.

5) You didn't add in the cost of at least one USB hub, which you would need for the mac to get the same number of USB ports (8) the PC has. Keep in mind that of the mac's 3, one is for the keyboard, which has an extra port on it to get back to 3, but its not powered. One other port is on the front, so not useful for keeping things always plugged in (like a printer).

6) It supports up to 16GB of memory, the mac only supports 8GB.

7) The thing can easily and cheaply be upgraded to a Dolby 5.1 sound card, which is readily supported in most apps. Not so with the Mac.

8) Six slots compared to the mac's 4.

9) Its a whole lot smaller then the Mac.

Oh, and if you go for a Dell 9100, which has the dual-core Pentiums in them, you can spec out a really decent computer for only $1500, if you still want all that high-end c*** in it. Or you can still go lower and get a cheaper computer. Which you really can't on apple (apple has only two monitor-less computers, the way low-end minis and the way high-end PowerMacs). I guess if you want an all-in-one solution, you could go for iMac, but then you're stuck with what you got. No upgrades or add-ons in that thing.

So basically, if you what you need/want falls specifically within the few models of computers Apple offers, then, yes, they would probably be competitively priced to their PC counterparts and people might actually buy the mac (although even if they are 'comparitively' priced, people might still buy Dell because they start off cheaper, and don't realize the prices come to about the same). But if you want anything outside those 6 configurations, well, you'd be stupid to settle for a mac when you can probably get EXACTLY what you want from Dell, Gateway, or a host of other PC companies.

crovira
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2002

0

08/09, 04:00pm | report spam | close Reply |
Jobs' aleady gone the

software only route. Remember NeXT? iMac saved Apple's hardware business because he also killed off the clones.

OS X, a reborn NeXTStep is becoming tactically useful to Apple and its stability is enabling to make inroads into the office, which is already ruled by Dell, by enabling Apple to take sales away from the commoditized PCs which are stuck on/with Microsoft for their R&D (HA!) and OS.

Dvorak is on drugs if he thinks he's going to be able to run OS X on anything but a Mac. He's just going to be stuck to the same upgrade treadmill that ALL PC owners are.

ecrelin
Junior Member

Joined: Oct 2000

0

08/09, 05:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
yep

You said it so eloquently: "So basically, if you what you need/want falls specifically within the few models of computers Apple offers, then, yes, they would probably be competitively priced to their PC counterparts and people might actually buy the mac"

I'll be fair and say 60% of consumers would be ecstatic with a Mac model. That is exactly who they develop products for. Parents hounded by gaming kids might want more but if anything that's a conservative estimate. Minis or iMacs are outstanding average corporate desktop material. This is the VAST majority of the market, not servers, workstations or a** kicking gaming machines you technology bulletinboard boneheads. SO HOW CAN THIS INDICATE THAT APPLE WILL DIE IF OSX RUNS ON SOME PCs? I maintain that if Apple simply doesn't stop it from being installed by using TPM it will not harm their hardware market, it will only enhance it. We are not talking about licensing here, just whether or not Apple should handicap the OS. I don't think they should license. They don't even have to sell it to them. Let them pirate it, with no support or development that they could rely on it might make them want to buy a Mac. If Apple wanted to sell it they could control supporrt costs by "qualifying" specific models from major vendors and support it on only those machines, it could be a co-marketing incentive and would hold them harmless from whitebox tinkerers and the quagmire of support and driver issues. If it did work on a number of boxes it would be the darling of propellerheads and it would get lots and lots of press. It may jumpstart Darwin Intel driver development and much much more. You said it yourself in a competitive market it won't automatically put a Dell on every desktop. I'm not seein' a downside here and starting down the trusted platform road makes my skin crawl.

gudin
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2000

0

08/09, 05:20pm | report spam | close Reply |
testudo

If you weren't comparing your $1000 pc to the $2000 mac, why did you....er....compare them?

I could make an equally idiotic comment. Why would you get a $3000 pc when you could get an eMac for only $799? Obviously Apple is cheaper.

Yep, that logic sure does make sense, yessiree.

Yawn.

If you want to set up straw men, do it somewhere else.

LouZer
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

08/09, 09:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
Nextstep

software only route. Remember NeXT? iMac saved Apple's hardware business because he also killed off the clones.

Yeah, I remember next. Remember WHY they went the software only route? It was because NO ONE bought their hardware and they went the software way as a last gasp to try to stay alive.

I also remember that very few people used that OS. It certainly didn't take the Intel market by storm (h***, OS/2 was probably a better seller).

I also remember some company buying them up which basically saved their asses from becoming the next Be. Who was that? Oh, right, Apple.

So I would suggest before any of you decide to use the "Next was software only" argument, you kind of look at the history first. Find another company that went software only and succeeded. Palm maybe (oh, wait, maybe not).

LouZer
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

08/09, 09:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: testudo

If you weren't comparing your $1000 pc to the $2000 mac, why did you....er....compare them?

Well, I think if you follow the argument, comparing a $1000 PC and a $1000 mac is not possible, since Apple doesn't sell a $1000 tower. So if you insist on a tower (because, I don't know, you don't want to spend all that money on a screen and a computer where both get outdated together, as opposed to the computer first, the screen much later), then you're stuck at the $2000 price point for the Mac.

Oh, and you all can argue til your blue in the face, but most benchmarks show that single CPU Pentium computers easily keep up with, if not surpass, the dual G5s in most tasks (you know, everything but those Altivec things). So going dual-Xeon just to get the price up to Apple's prices is really just trying to push the "apple's aren't more expensive" agenda.

BYW, Apple has two computers in the sub-$1000 range.

Dell, alone has a good half-dozen, depending on what you're looking for. And you can go elsewhere for a lot more choices. Anyone who thinks people will just buy Apple stuff because Apple makes it are just kidding themselves. If you have choice, you'll get what best fits your needs. Not what looks best under your desk. Its a tool, not some phallic symbol of your virility (say, like a car would be). And if OS X were to become usable on most any hardware (or even a limited set of hardware), you can be sure the thrift minded will be buying non-Apple equipment.

Oh, and if you don't believe me, just go over to Macintouch and look at the discussion on flat panel displays. Many a people thought of getting an Apple monitor, but being able to get one from Dell for hundreds less, has driven many to get monitors from Dell, despite the fact they don't look so snazzy on the desktop.

h***, with the money you can save (even if its money you save just not getting pieces you don't want rather then make a 'comparable' computer), you can put towards buying RAM, which OS X eats for breakfast.

Tanker10a
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2003

0

08/11, 07:55am | report spam | close Reply |
he's a pinhead...

I have never cared for Dvorak since TechTV. But regardless the claim he makes for Apple to run on every PC would be ludicrous. What would be the point for Apple to remain in the computer making business. Michael made a claim that he would take OS-X on his machines...Imagine that!Moreover, apple is not just a software maker. Apple is both! Opening all these retail stores that are grossing high revenues would self-defeating. Dvorak would give anything to his thinking come to life. He can keep dreaming on because it won't happen.

lars264
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

08/11, 04:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
Macinel

Microsoft didn't make millions on hardware sales, maybe Apple should think about that.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/15	Sony completes Ericsson stake buyout...
02/15	Apple upgrades iBookstore with screenshots...
02/15	Congress asks Apple to answer questions...
02/15	FLA head describes Foxconn plants as...
02/15	Apple asks to sue bankrupt Kodak in...

Show All

02/15	Sony completes Ericsson stake buyout...
02/15	Congress asks Apple to answer questions...
02/15	FLA head describes Foxconn plants as...
02/15	Apple asks to sue bankrupt Kodak in...
02/15	Apple voluntarily pulls iPads from...

Show All

02/15	Apple upgrades iBookstore with screenshots...
02/15	Congress asks Apple to answer questions...
02/14	Apple attempting to disrupt Siri hacks...
02/14	Readability iOS app delayed, Android...
02/13	Apple launches 2012 back-to-school...

Show All

02/15	Monster iCarPlay Wireless FM Transmitter...
02/14	Refurb. 16GB iPhone 4, now only $259...
02/13	Refurb. Flip UltraHD Pocket Digital...
02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...

Show All

toggle

Dvorak: Could Apple let OS X run on all PCs?

updated 11:05 am EDT, Tue August 9, 2005

Dvorak on Intel OS X

Related Articles

Recent Articles

he's a pinhead BUT�

Are you kidding?

yep a pinhead, but...

Apple...

Dream on

Serial numbers perhaps

Also

Stock price

Whew!!

just a second�

Napster

Napster

re: just a second�

Dvorak as usual

Does anybody remember....

RE: just a second�

Clone

different circumstances

Do some reading Dvorak

Then I Saw This...

Re: just a second

$1K Dell tower from who�

price shopping...

HAHAHAHA

prices

There's only one way...

$1K tower from Dell

re: just a second....

Re: Dell computer

Jobs' aleady gone the

yep

testudo

Nextstep

Re: testudo

he's a pinhead...

Macinel

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace