Do you want OS X with that PC?
Good morning, Steve.
I know you don’t listen to us, you’ve got a team of experts who display more expertise in a day than I will in a lifetime, but I’ve got the keyboard so I’m writing anyway. I’ve got the idea, you get your experts to find the solution. My idea, my dream, is OS X on an affordable but highly customizable computer.
It’s not a new idea by any means. In fact, if you sniff around the dark and gloomy nether regions of the internet, you can find out how to do this already. But I, and many others, don’t want to do that.
My dilemma is I envy PC users. No, not all their viruses and spyware, although that is pretty neat getting all those free programs that install themselves—that’s what I call user friendly…
No what I envy is that PC users can configure their PCs to their hearts delight. Whereas us Mac users, unless we hand over our life savings for a PowerMac/Mac Pro, then we are considerably limited in just how much we can customize our Macs.
The reality is, I want to be able to buy the computer I want with the OS I want. The problem of course is that that requires a box with a lot more air in it than Mac minis or iMacs have.
All things considered, and given this is an Apple friendly site, OS X is currently the best of the big three desktop operating systems. So that’s the OS I want. But the other two run on any computer. (I won’t go into the complexity of getting Linux working though...). They offer broad and compelling choice. I want OS X to have broad and compelling choice too, but on any budget.
Let’s have a poll
I’m going to poll the faithful and we’ll see if they agree. Sounds kind of uncomfortable, and yes it could get messy as the blow torches come out.
Now polls are statistics and not very scientific ones at that. Statistics can be interpreted any way you like (kinda like the Bible). It just depends who’s doing the interpreting. However, polls can still be a loose guide. If there’s a flood of votes in one direction, and given most voters here would be Mac faithful, then it would indicate there is some desire in the Mac community for a more option.
The poll consists of three options:
Option 1: Just keep things the way they are. No change at all. Maintain the status quo.
Option 2: Introduce a low-end Mac in a tower or desktop case, fully customizable either pre or post purchase with whatever you want.
Option 3: Roll over, lay down, give up the fight to keep OS X off PCs.
Options 2 and 3 would mean users could install whatever they want, such as graphics cards of choice, drives, additional cards such as tuners, memory card readers and so on. Of course it also would mean greater support and conflict issues. A tightrope to be walked, one that Apple has never shown much for enthusiasm for. It all depends how it’s managed though.
And so to the poll:
Have a vote and then discuss here what you voted for and why. Hopefully, we really can send a message to Steve. Hopefully, also it will be the message I want sent!
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
The reason of price is really only an indirect reason for not doing this. It has much more to do with the branding of Apple than anything else.
Apple is seen as a higher end computer company. They do not want to dilute that branding at all. Sure, they could create a lower price PC if they wanted like they did with the Mac mini, but with a tower configuration. But then they would start to lose what sets them apart and what makes their branding unique.
Also, as others have said, the fact that Apple controls the components is what makes the OS work so well. We would start to see longer and longer waits for OS updates if Apple had to make sure the OS was compatible with every single HD, sound card, video card, memory, etc manufacturer.
You know, I would love to be able to spend $15000 and get the experience of driving a BMW or Porsche and buy my fully costomized Mac for $800. That’s not what any of these companies is about. It’s about a superior user experience and, not surprisingly, you have to pay more for higher quality.
We are here, presumably, because we love and admire Apple the company and the products they make.
All those who asked for OS/X on a PC should recast their answer, explaining how this is going to support and encourage Apple to continue to do what we currently enjoy.
I know it is fashionable, but it is actually immature, selfish and unhelpful to demand things for yourself without considering the impact of this on all others involved, including, in this case, all those who work at Apple and all those who currently use, and will use, their products.
I am OPPOSED to anything which would weaken Apple as a company right now. And I am satisfied that the people at Apple know better than anyone else how best to develop Apple’s product line and market share.
A cheap MAC essentially means putting some of the money which would have gone into Apple’s pocket into the hands of the person buying the cheap Mac. Is that a good thing? Overall, I think, probably not. Apple are making lots of money, which we imagine they will spend on developing new and exciting products with the Apple magic which will enrich our lives.
Perhaps, in reality, we should all be paying a little extra with every Apple purchase. A wealthier Apple might bring us new products faster. And who among us would not be happier with a little more Apple panache in our lives?
Also, as others have said, the fact that Apple controls the components is what makes the OS work so well.
Why is everyone under the impression that this would no longer be the case? It is entirely possible, and likely, that Apple would continue to make high-end hardware while still licensing the OS to other hardware manufactureres.
Those who chose to would continue to shell out dough entirely to Apple for a nuts-to-bolts desktop solution.
But others, particularly those who have refrained from Apple due largely to price as well as lack of hardware choices, would have an option to finally join the Apple ‘verse.
Because, frankly, I think the selling point of Apple is the OS more than the hardware, even though the hardware is way more high-end compared to other firms than OS X is to XP. After all, if people bought Macs because of the hardware, they would do so just to run XP as often or more often than they would to run OS X. But people who buy the hardware do so to run OS X.
Again, why Mac users have the reputation for thinking creatively, when they are more or less crippled by whatever Apple tells them to think, is beyond me. Unless of course one believes that said reputation is just another Apple press release talking point.
You know, I would love to be able to spend $15000 and get the experience of driving a BMW or Porsche and buy my fully costomized Mac for $800.
If every computer maker was a top-to-bottom solution, making everything from the OS to the hardware, then you’d have a point. But the computing world doesn’t really work like that (for better or worse). The user is accustomed to having lots and lots and lots of choices of devices that still all run the same software.
And honestly, I’d LOVE it if I could customize a car as easily as a computer, or if a manufacturer could create a low cost car from a variety of parts instead of being responsible for the entire package.
Ditto cell phone networks, which thanks to the telcomms and those like you who advocate a single maker controlling everything, it’s a much more expensive world to enter than it has to be.
A cheap MAC essentially means putting some of the money which would have gone into Apple’s pocket into the hands of the person buying the cheap Mac. Is that a good thing? Overall, I think, probably not.
Perhaps, in reality, we should all be paying a little extra with every Apple purchase.
At this point, I can’t tell if you’re supposed to be a parody of the typical labotomized Mac-bot or not. It’s so hard to tell these days and I’d hate to miss out on the joke.
Aurora77,
You can’t compare licensing the OS now to back in the 90’s. Why? Because in the 90’s, there weren’t that many people interested in Apple’s OS. So the only people buying the Mac compatible computers were current Mac users. Its different now. There are a lot of Windows and Linux users who would be willing to pay $129 for a copy of OS X if they could run it on their current machine. Do you know how much Apple makes off a PowerMac or iMac? I’d guess around $500. Thats four copies of OS X.
I, for one, do not think many Mac buyers would switch to another hardware vendor if OS X were available for PC’s. I think most Mac owners know their hardware just works better. But I also believe that Apple would get more people using OS X if they could run it on their PC’s. Which in the long run may get some of them to switch to Apple hardware.
I have been a mac user for the better part of 17 years, although when apple got slow with the G4 i switched to the PC, i still use a mac (i use my mac for internet and nothing more- i do my real work on pc’s).With the advent of the intel macs i went out and bought a mac mini, brought it home and set it up. Not a bad machine but with weak sound and graphics. I then realized the error of my ways- i took the mac mini back to the shop(here in aus with keyboard and mouse it cost me $1471), and got my money back and went and bought a 64 bit AMD turion compaq laptop for 1378$-why did i do this?? I figured that if people buy macs then apple will never bring OS X out for PC’s, which is what i really want- as the mini was too slow and lame. I got a much better deal with the compaq machine(the macbook cost $1800 which is apples closest laptop)-the compaq machine has A 64 BIT PROCESSOR AT 1.8GHZ,128M X200 ATI GRAPHICS,DUAL LAYER DVD BURNER+LIGHTSCRIBE,SAME CAPACITY HDD,WIFI,6 IN 1 CARD READER,VGA+S-VIDEO VIDEO OUTPUT, EXCELLENT BUILT IN ALTEC LANSING SPEAKERS-overall this laptop is four times better than the macbook and six times better than the mini-MUCH better value for money-and boy it sounds soo much better. I really think apple hardware is still way too overpriced/underpowered and i’m not interested in spending on their custom machines-just look at my example-apple don’t EVEN HAVE A 64 BIT LAPTOP, let alone one in the price range with such good graphics. I figured my old G4 would last a few more years and hopefully apple will by then have brought out OS X for pc’s, if not then they are not worth buying. so yes steve please BRING OUT OS X FOR PC’S or else i may just forget about apple and keep using LINUX/WINDOWS. I am hoping that the use of the new macs will drop off as people find out that they are overpriced(when the original imac came out apple use in australia jumped to 4% but a year and a half later dropped off to 2.2%), hopefully mac use drops off and steve will bring out OS X for ‘vanilla’ pc’s. In the meantime i will watch apple and see what they do but in order to try and force their hands i will NOT buy any apple product(ipod included), until OS X is released for PC’s. I am also an avid hater of intel and it was hard to buy a machine with an intel processor(apples pentium 4 on the snails back campaign really got me looking into the quality of processors and even an apple shop employee told me how bad pentium 4’s and intels chips are compared to AMD-apple were just too good at convincing me that INTEL IS RUBBISH, i could not now unknow what i know and buy INTEL like the other double standard mac users). SO PLEASE STEVE LET ME BUY A PC WITH AN AMD PROCESSOR AND RUN OS X ON IT-I WILL NOT BUY ANY INTEL GARBAGE YOU BRING OUT AND WILL NOT BUY ANYTHING APPLE UNTIL YOU BRING OUT OS X ON STANDARD PC’S. Thanks steve i know you understand.
I also went for option 1 because of concerns with hardware compatibility and quality. I have been in software support for 25 years and other than user error the vast majority of issues come from incompatible peripherals, networks, external drives, printers etc., etc. There’s no way I want to import that uncertainty INSIDE my computer!
Of course a greater choice of build options would be nice and the ability (already there) to replace some very standard pieces of the PC if you really want to (eg. hard drives). But overall I’m happier with the status quo than chaos.
Options 2’s interesting - iMac, Mac Mini, Mac Pro, and “Mac” ? (How’s that for original?)
Option 3 is not doable on the broad scale of “any PC” - but it may be worthwhile making it available on Compaq or Dell (even a subset of their range of computers). That won’t provide the cheap experience many people are after, though.
Another option is selling OSX with Parallels. Basically - install OSX on any Windows or Linux system that can run parallels. It by-passes any hardware issues and lets the buyer continue to use their old software… not sure if it’s doable though!
You are missing the option that made the most sense of all. One I have been asking Apple to do for over 15 years, design and market an Apple brand ATX compatible motherboard. If Apple would only market their own ATX motherboard they would still make money on the hardware and most likely the software as well, and we would be able to use the ATX cases, cards, CPUs, and hard drives of our choice, as long as they worked with OS X. Unfortunately, the time to do this was when Apple controlled all of their motherboards. Now that Intel is involved, there just may not be as much money in it. I still think its a good idea though.
Ditto cell phone networks, which thanks to the telcomms and those like you who advocate a single maker controlling everything, it’s a much more expensive world to enter than it has to be. -Bbx
This statement really says something about you Bbx, a very immature knowledge of technology or anything for that matter. All you know is bit&* at things that doesn’t suit your atheist ways, eh? Well, Robo is here to correct that.
I have worked at “tellcoms” that truly changed the world that you, for God’s sake, take for granted - the cell phone. From your very statement, you obviously have no memory of when you had to purchase the phone, 100 minutes allowance before whacking your wallet with over $2/min!
Now, tell me your cell phone contract is even close to what we used to pay in the early 90’s. With what you get now allows the unthinkable happen- toss out your landline phone.
And last, “tellcoms” do not control every aspect of the service to hardware. No one does. Hardware makers stay as hardware makers. Service providers, ditto! And due to fierce competition you get to have a FREE phone for just paying the service, Bbx. Before you open your mouth, think! The Robo is here to make sure the facts are laid out correctly.
The user is accustomed to having lots and lots and lots of choices of devices that still all run the same software. -Bbx
OK I agree that more choices is better than none. But when was the last time you ever had no choice in a Mac solution? The last time I went to the brick-and-mortar Apple Store I was inundated by, oh my God, CHOICES! Ditto for the online Apple Store. So, where exactly is this choice crisis with Apple?
Alas, more solution does not actually translate to heavenly experience, either. More solution such as more harware selection for the PC is actually a poison (ask M$ why Vista testing period takes so fu#$%ng long) and not what you think it is.
People say one thing and do another. Case in point, people buy the biggest tower cases with 10 bays for expansion justifying that purchase price with an envisioned path to upgrade heaven. Three years and obsolescense come knocking and little or none of the original intent was ever done.
This does not mean you did not upgrade that memory. Oh no, that’s for sissies. Of course, you did! Oh how ‘bout that hard drive? Sure, no problem. A pair of screwdrivers is all it takes. The mobo? No sweat!
But wait. Is this all you really need from Apple? Then you have to help yourself to buy that awesome Mac Pro next month ok? You see, Apple places form before function, and it better not be the other way around. If they did, then the iPod, the iMac, or the Mac minis, would have been unimaginable.
There is a good reason they are literally sealed (although can be upgraded). They just work right out of the box and will (when configured correctly when ordered) work past the PC obsolescense mean rate of 2-3 years.
If you cater to PCs, yes you are a weekend tweek and modder because PCs need this constant nursing T.L.C. Windows is so damn good at attracting malware that needs flushing out on almost weekly basis. Windows is a genius at gobbling up my 1 GB main memory. Windows is such a storage porker that my 250GB used to be an ocean waiting to be explored.
My Mac friends, this is the true reasons why PC cynics complain of the Mac’s “closed” architecture. They carry their PC habits to the Mac when there are no such problems or crisis. They assume every PC problem I stated above exists in the Mac universe.
If you really want to have it both ways my PC friends, then go forth and try OSX on garden-variety PCs. I’m sure you can weave your way through the “warez” boulevard and enjoy all the wonderful things giveth by yours truly OSX. Go on. Have a wonderful time.
apple don’t EVEN HAVE A 64 BIT LAPTOP -vortex
Vortex, you have no idea what 64 bits mean. Of course, Macs have been 64 bits since PPC 601. 32/64 bits to be exact. I can illustrate what that means but I don’t have the time. Go to Freescale’s white papers for the truth on Power PC architectures.
As for as your Turion having 64 bits, are you really using those extra 32 bits? Unless you are using a 64-bit version of XP or Server 2003 or Linux then you are not even warming up them bits. Just having the bragging rights of owning those extra bits pales in comparison to having the pure wholesomeness of the MacBooks.
I agree that the GPU is a bit under-spec’ed but should satisfy over 90% of its target audience - mobile professionals, creative artists, students, and aspiring web authors, like myself. I do not plan to ever play Quake or Half-Life on my MB. I can use the power of my PMG5 for that.
Anyways, nice set of inputs. Just an advice, please write concisely next time. It is hard to understand one huge train-of-thought like the above. Thanks.
When it comes to operative systems, customers that get custom PCs dont always have too many choices, usually is either windows or any linux flavour. It’d be great to have OSX for PC users.
A good idea could be after the releasing of leopard, you can get a copy of Tiger for PCs, and still, if you want to get the latest version, you’d have to get a mac, problem solved, mac sellings wouldnt drop.
Secondly, for rahrens who says: -Sorry, but I want to keep it like it is. I do tech support for PCs for a living, and don’t want that mess to transfer to the Mac world. I like it like it is: simple, easy, it just works., there will always be Windows users, releasing a PC version of MacOSX doesn’t mean that all the Windows users will switch, let me say that only the smart ones will do, and those who switch doesnt always need tech support, and obviously, there will only be programs only for windows like AutoCAD and such, let’s face it, Windows is the most selling and used OS at home enviorments.
In the end, it’d just be a matter of choice, and taking my particular case, I would install OS X on my PC.
All i want is Apple to badge a set of hardware and let me decide what i want to build. I’m not asking them to support everything like Windows tries to do, just let me build an AMD based system that runs OSX! PLEASE! Or hell, build one yourselves, and do like the man above says and make it open so we can add a ton of ram, more than 2 HDDs, a 2nd processor if we feel like it, new grpahics cards (both big players now have unified drivers, so you can plug just about any nvidia or ATI card in and OSX will recognize it...) They can still build their beautiful computers and keep innovating, nobody is going to stop them from that. And seeing OSX for PCs doesn’t mean Dell will be shipping it next week.