Here's a thought about Apple desktops/laptops...

[cgdrummer]

...just get out of the hardware business. I know they were playing with the idea of licensing OS X like Windows does, but Steve Jobs decided against it...

maybe it's time for just releasing MacOS full scale for anyone to buy and install on whatever hardware configuration of their choosing.

Inter-connectivity between devices? How well do Android devices communicate with Windows desktops/laptops? It seems that the way ipads. iphones, and macs communicate like they do means nothing to most of the users on this forum, from what I see. They just want fast and newest, and all for "cheap" ( I realize that most will pay a fair price for all of the new stuff they want, but...what's the definition of fair, is the next question you'd ask).

So...license MacOS. Let the user swim the shark infested waters. And customer support? What customer support? When I used Windows, I never thought of contacting them in any way with an issue that may have even been warranted. All bets are off. If you install MacOS on hardware that can't run it properly, it's your fault. Accountability, right? Free market, right?

Even Microsoft is now increasingly becoming a hardware company. Maybe it's time for pendulum to swing the other way?

Another viewpoint would be: I don't want them to not make hardware, I just want them to make it so I can upgrade it as needed. That's all well and good, but put the shoe on the other foot for a second: If I make a product that "I" see as perfect as it is, why would I give you the option to change something in it, have it mess up, and you return it to me and blame me, it's my fault because I gave you the ability to upgrade and you f**ked it up? Do you see now why soldering everything in place is a shrewd business decision and that if one item fails, then it's on the company, but if one user upgraded item fails it's still the company's fault??

I'll stop before I get too far off topic, but you see what I mean (I hope).

1. Release MacOS to the public to install on any configuration they see fit.
2. ????
3. Profit

thanks for reading.

 

[Huntn]

It was the Mac business model that almost sunk them, but then skyrocketed them to the heights, although they are back closer to Earth now. Everyone sees the value of controlling your hardware, especially Microsoft and Google. Now the question is, and my speculation is if Apple ever licenses it's OS most likely it will kill their computer hardware business at least at current prices. Would that destroy them or because of the IOS end of their business, would they care? Something vague tells me they would.

 

[Tomorrow]

One facet of Apple's model that appeals to so many users is the whole "it just works" thing. Maybe not as well as it once did, but it's still worlds ahead of the Windows/build your own hardware route.

For so many years, Windows had to support a whole slew of hardware, since there was absolutely no way to guess what hardware a user would want, or upgrade to. The Windows software had to support it natively, or it had to support the third-party drivers that would. With Apple controlling both the hardware and software, they're able to circumvent that - build a rock-solid OS and applications that work reliably on a limited number of hardware configurations, then sell the hardware in those configurations and keep end users from monkeying with it. That's how "it just works."

I'll freely admit it's not for everyone, but they gained a good amount of market share with that model. It still works for a lot of people.

 

[cgdrummer]

thanks for moving this to the right area, mods...

It is how Apple operates, no doubt. But there are many (on this forum anyway, so it may not be many) who want their choice of hardware. I don't know, I'm done scrolling through page after page of "why AMD graphics" and "why only 16GB RAM max" among other complaints. The Mac Pro is due for upgrading, to be sure, but even when it was released people here were poo-pooing that they can't stick a hard drive or their own GPU in it.

My question is: does Apple wash its hands of all of those complainers by focusing less on hardware and strengthening the infrastructure of MacOS making it more robust across different hardware configurations?

 

[phrehdd]

Apple long ago allowed 3rd party makers of computers that handled Apple's OS or should I say made Mac computers. Some of these 3rd party computers made a better Mac than Apple (see NEC). The difference today is that back then, Mac's were not on an Intel chip and the 3rd party makers had to be also very careful to make sure all would work with Apple's operating system. Today, 3rd parties would introduce a vast amount of devices within the computer (PCI cards, Video card etc.) where trying to control software facets would be near impossible. I would much prefer to see Apple license the operating system with agreed upon specifications to insure a fully working stable system with all parts that match the OS. The right partner would possibly help Apple (if they were inclined) get back into business and pro environments (see HP and Dell as example). Then again, it seems that MacOS is starting to show signs of bloat, issues and poor integration of new features where, as I like to say, "this is fun and also useful" is no longer the case with Apple.

 

[AidenShaw]

One facet of Apple's model that appeals to so many users is the whole "it just works" thing. Maybe not as well as it once did, but it's still worlds ahead of the Windows/build your own hardware route.

For so many years, Windows had to support a whole slew of hardware, since there was absolutely no way to guess what hardware a user would want, or upgrade to. The Windows software had to support it natively, or it had to support the third-party drivers that would. With Apple controlling both the hardware and software, they're able to circumvent that - build a rock-solid OS and applications that work reliably on a limited number of hardware configurations, then sell the hardware in those configurations and keep end users from monkeying with it. That's how "it just works."

I'll freely admit it's not for everyone, but they gained a good amount of market share with that model. It still works for a lot of people.

Is this post a time warp from the mid '90s?

It's a bunch of crap knocking pre-XP and pre-Win7 systems.

Windows has a great driver architecture, with "mini-port" and "class driver" APIs so that what you disparage as "third party drivers" are given a simplified interface with the built-in OS drivers doing most of the work. A storage driver has to support two main functions:

• read X bytes from LBA Y to virtual memory at Z
• write X bytes from VM address Y to disk starting at LBA Z

The "third party driver" doesn't have to deal with DMA address mapping and virtual to physical mapping or other issues - it's given a very simple request and Microsoft does the heavy lifting behind the scenes.

And, in case you haven't noticed, Apple's "it just works" slogan died years before Jobs. Somehow, they can't even get graphics drivers working for their current systems.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Is this post a time warp from the mid '90s?

It's a bunch of crap knocking pre-XP and pre-Win7 systems.

.......
And, in case you haven't noticed, Apple's "it just works" slogan died years before Jobs. Somehow, they can't even get graphics drivers working for their current systems.

I 'switched' as the parlance has it in 2008 (not the mid 1990s) because, - among other reasons (Apple's excellent customer service and honouring of warranties was another reason) - because Apple 'just worked', and have used Apple ever since.

When I work abroad, the international - or supranational bodies - I work with (and for) do not tend to use the most up to date computers, and are a part of the Windows system, and - frankly - intermittently - they are brutally awful to use.

Windows 8 was a horror.

 

[Tomorrow]

Is this post a time warp from the mid '90s?

It's a bunch of crap knocking pre-XP and pre-Win7 systems.

Windows has a great driver architecture, with "mini-port" and "class driver" APIs so that what you disparage as "third party drivers" are given a simplified interface with the built-in OS drivers doing most of the work. A storage driver has to support two main functions:

• read X bytes from LBA Y to virtual memory at Z
• write X bytes from VM address Y to disk starting at LBA Z

The "third party driver" doesn't have to deal with DMA address mapping and virtual to physical mapping or other issues - it's given a very simple request and Microsoft does the heavy lifting behind the scenes.

And, in case you haven't noticed, Apple's "it just works" slogan died years before Jobs. Somehow, they can't even get graphics drivers working for their current systems.

Calm down, now, I didn't knock or disparage anything. I simply stated that Windows architecture is more open to different hardware configurations and Apple's software architecture isn't. I clearly (perhaps not to you) said that one system might not be for everyone.

 

[Tech198]

so Apple would not a have a walled garden anymore...? The hedge would finally be cut ?

I guess from the pure perspective of someone owning the hardware AND the software,, one could finally be in the same ball-park as Windows users..

Buying a Mac and installing older OS software if they like... I always hated that about Apple.