Opening up MacOS to non-Apple products...

[willowhaven]

I fully believe that OSX SHOULD be released for PCs. My introduction to MacOS was through the hacker community who reconfigured it for PCs. I ran it for about six months on a HP Pavilion laptop and a Dell Inspiron laptop. I fell in love with the fact that MacOS was more stable on a machine it wasn't designed to run on than the software my computer was "supposed" to run (Windows Vista at the time).

For about six months, I used the Hackintosh software as my primary OS, rarely ever booting into Windows. This contact led me to change my direction completely. I purchased a MacBook. It is now my primary laptop. At this point, the only reason I use my Windows-based laptop is to use software proprietary to Windows OS.

Soon after the purchase of the MacBook, we also scrapped our mp3 players for iPods. Our home now has two iPod Nanos, an iPod Touch, two iPhones, and in March we became home to an iPad. All because I was able to test MacOS on my familiar PC. I wonder how many other users would give up their PCs if they knew how intuitive MacOS is. But because they don't want to shell out the dollars for a system they know nothing about, they won't make the switch over.

I know that my experience has led me to the conclusion that I will never again purchase a Windows-PC. How many others would do the same. Because of the continued refusal to allow porting of the software to Windows-based machines, it leaves a huge percentage of computer users without knowledge of the software, which means they don't come over to become full users. Mac is the unknown. Windows is the known. Until they are shown WHY Mac is better, they never will change.

Just my two cents, but I think that Apple is missing the boat by sticking with the same marketing strategy of not selling the software out because they don't make their money off software, they make it off hardware. While that may be true, you aren't going to sell to new users if you don't put the software in their hands. Get their taste buds working. Then reel them in for a system after they fall in love with the software. It can work hand in hand...

 

[kot]

Releasing the software will hurt the sales of the hardware.

 

[willowhaven]

Releasing the software will hurt the sales of the hardware.

Not sure that it will. I had no plans to become a Mac user. Until I used the software. They should at least offer a demo type of the software. Because I was able to test the software a non-user with no intention of purchasing a single item became one who has now spent thousands on their products. How did that hurt them?

 

[NT1440]

Not sure that it will. I had no plans to become a Mac user. Until I used the software. They should at least offer a demo type of the software. Because I was able to test the software a non-user with no intention of purchasing a single item became one who has now spent thousands on their products. How did that hurt them?

...

Go back and look at where apple was when it was licensing out its operating system.

 

[steviem]

I fully believe that OSX SHOULD be released for PCs. My introduction to MacOS was through the hacker community who reconfigured it for PCs. I ran it for about six months on a HP Pavilion laptop and a Dell Inspiron laptop. I fell in love with the fact that MacOS was more stable on a machine it wasn't designed to run on than the software my computer was "supposed" to run (Windows Vista at the time).

For about six months, I used the Hackintosh software as my primary OS, rarely ever booting into Windows. This contact led me to change my direction completely. I purchased a MacBook. It is now my primary laptop. At this point, the only reason I use my Windows-based laptop is to use software proprietary to Windows OS.

Soon after the purchase of the MacBook, we also scrapped our mp3 players for iPods. Our home now has two iPod Nanos, an iPod Touch, two iPhones, and in March we became home to an iPad. All because I was able to test MacOS on my familiar PC. I wonder how many other users would give up their PCs if they knew how intuitive MacOS is. But because they don't want to shell out the dollars for a system they know nothing about, they won't make the switch over.

I know that my experience has led me to the conclusion that I will never again purchase a Windows-PC. How many others would do the same. Because of the continued refusal to allow porting of the software to Windows-based machines, it leaves a huge percentage of computer users without knowledge of the software, which means they don't come over to become full users. Mac is the unknown. Windows is the known. Until they are shown WHY Mac is better, they never will change.

Just my two cents, but I think that Apple is missing the boat by sticking with the same marketing strategy of not selling the software out because they don't make their money off software, they make it off hardware. While that may be true, you aren't going to sell to new users if you don't put the software in their hands. Get their taste buds working. Then reel them in for a system after they fall in love with the software. It can work hand in hand...

It's been the same since Leopard. I don't see Apple doing that officially, although, maybe unofficially they allow the hackintosh movement to exist in order to get a few more sales...

 

[macquariumguy]

Apple doesn't want the headache of having to support its OS on random generic hardware.

 

[AngryGerbil]

Apple doesn't want the headache of having to support its OS on random generic hardware.

And Microsoft does? Good luck getting help if your Asus motherboard and Nvidia video card don't work right. All Apple would need to do is release a hardware compatibility list like MS and just leave the support to the OEM... like MS does. That being said, Apple with never release a stand alone OSX, not because it will impact their hardware sales, because it won't. It's a control issue with Apple, simple as that.

 

[GermanyChris]

It was so effective last time, I think they should do it again!

@OP I'm very glad you are not any where in the apple management.

 

[KnightWRX]

That being said, Apple with never release a stand alone OSX, not because it will impact their hardware sales, because it won't. It's a control issue with Apple, simple as that.

Or it's just the good ol' "Been there, done that, almost killed the company".

One of Steve Jobs' first moves upon coming back to Apple was kill the clone business that was eating away at Apple's profit. Apple is not a software OEM like Microsoft is, people need to stop trying to compare the both of them.

 

[willowhaven]

It was so effective last time, I think they should do it again!

@OP I'm very glad you are not any where in the apple management.

Seriously? Why? Because I don't understand the need to remain an "exclusive club"? Because I understand that most people won't buy things if they don't understand it? Prior to my testing the product, the last time I had used an Apple product was the IIe, which was when I was in elementary school. I had no real knowledge of the product at all, and only tested it because someone recommended it and said I would love it, which I did. Would I have purchased a product with no knowledge of it? Heck no. Especially when Macs are higher priced than most of the PCs I looked at. But having "test driven" the product, I went out and spent thousands on Apple products. Was that bad for Apple? I beg to differ.

I don't understand why you would make a comment such as that. But whatever. Yes, Apple is a hardware company. Yes, they like to control the entire environment, BUT, how can you drive in those who nothing about the brand? You give them something to draw them in. Sorry if I was stupid for suggesting it.

Or it's just the good ol' "Been there, done that, almost killed the company".

One of Steve Jobs' first moves upon coming back to Apple was kill the clone business that was eating away at Apple's profit. Apple is not a software OEM like Microsoft is, people need to stop trying to compare the both of them.

I'm not trying to compare them. They are a hardware company. But they are a hardware company with a completely different OS. Dell is a hardware company. Gateway is a hardware company. BUT, they run an OS everyone is familiar with. How do you get people to purchase your hardware when they don't know about the OS running on the hardware? Why shell out $1200 on a computer (compared to sometimes $500 or less on a PC) when you don't know anything about what is running on it? That is the issue at hand. Most people don't understand it, which limits the potential for increasing users in huge numbers.

 

[ucfgrad93]

Yes, they like to control the entire environment, BUT, how can you drive in those who nothing about the brand? You give them something to draw them in. Sorry if I was stupid for suggesting it.

The iPod, iPhone, and iPad are the "gateway" devices for Apple.

 

[GermanyChris]

Seriously? Why? Because I don't understand the need to remain an "exclusive club"? Because I understand that most people won't buy things if they don't understand it? Prior to my testing the product, the last time I had used an Apple product was the IIe, which was when I was in elementary school. I had no real knowledge of the product at all, and only tested it because someone recommended it and said I would love it, which I did. Would I have purchased a product with no knowledge of it? Heck no. Especially when Macs are higher priced than most of the PCs I looked at. But having "test driven" the product, I went out and spent thousands on Apple products. Was that bad for Apple? I beg to differ.

I don't understand why you would make a comment such as that. But whatever. Yes, Apple is a hardware company. Yes, they like to control the entire environment, BUT, how can you drive in those who nothing about the brand? You give them something to draw them in. Sorry if I was stupid for suggesting it.



I'm not trying to compare them. They are a hardware company. But they are a hardware company with a completely different OS. Dell is a hardware company. Gateway is a hardware company. BUT, they run an OS everyone is familiar with. How do you get people to purchase your hardware when they don't know about the OS running on the hardware? Why shell out $1200 on a computer (compared to sometimes $500 or less on a PC) when you don't know anything about what is running on it? That is the issue at hand. Most people don't understand it, which limits the potential for increasing users in huge numbers.

You probably ought to read a bit of Apple history..

You came to Apple via Hackintosh, I came to Hacintosh via Apple so what does that prove..

Apple is the most successful they've ever been how about they just keep doing what they're doing.

 

[KnightWRX]

I'm not trying to compare them. They are a hardware company. But they are a hardware company with a completely different OS. Dell is a hardware company. Gateway is a hardware company. BUT, they run an OS everyone is familiar with.

Apple is not a hardware OEM either. So what are they ? Not a software OEM, not a hardware OEM ? What else can they be you ask ?

Simple : Apple is a systems vendor. Remember those ? Atari, Commodore or on the workstation side, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Digital Corporation, Silicon Graphics Inc. ?

Apple is the last surviving consumer system vendor. They sell you a vertically integrated solution. The hardware and software are the product as a whole. It's neither about hardware or software. Same as all those old Amiga systems, Atari 8 bit computers, Octane's and O2s running Irix, PA-RISC or Sparc workstations running respectively SunOS/Solaris or HP-UX. Apple sells you a computer running OS X.

So asking them to license out one part of the magic recipe, the OS, is basically a disaster waiting to happen. And it almost did back in the 90s. Again, Apple has "been there, done that".

How do you get people to purchase your hardware when they don't know about the OS running on the hardware? Why shell out $1200 on a computer (compared to sometimes $500 or less on a PC) when you don't know anything about what is running on it? That is the issue at hand. Most people don't understand it, which limits the potential for increasing users in huge numbers.

Except they keep setting records quarter after quarter, beating industry growth in the PC segment, with their "OS no one knows about". So much for your analysis.

 

[willowhaven]

Apple is not a hardware OEM either. So what are they ? Not a software OEM, not a hardware OEM ? What else can they be you ask ?

Simple : Apple is a systems vendor. Remember those ? Atari, Commodore or on the workstation side, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Digital Corporation, Silicon Graphics Inc. ?

Apple is the last surviving consumer system vendor. They sell you a vertically integrated solution. The hardware and software are the product as a whole. It's neither about hardware or software. Same as all those old Amiga systems, Atari 8 bit computers, Octane's and O2s running Irix, PA-RISC or Sparc workstations running respectively SunOS/Solaris or HP-UX. Apple sells you a computer running OS X.

So asking them to license out one part of the magic recipe, the OS, is basically a disaster waiting to happen. And it almost did back in the 90s. Again, Apple has "been there, done that".


Except they keep setting records quarter after quarter, beating industry growth in the PC segment, with their "OS no one knows about". So much for your analysis.

Thanks all for the attacks. You all are right, I am a dumb *** with no clue. Yes, profits are up, but based off of phones and tablets. Share of personal computers in homes? Small. $1200 systems compared to $500 systems so too expensive to purchase based on faith. Whatever. Give me a figure that says that says they are dominating even 25% of the COMPUTER market, not just digital music players, tablet and mobile phones. But whatever. I'm done. I made a simple statement. I apologize for my absolute ignorance.

 

[dejo]

$1200 systems compared to $500 systems.

What would incent most people to pay for the $1200 system when they can run the same OS on their $500 system?

 

[KnightWRX]

Thanks all for the attacks.

There were no attacks in my post.

You all are right, I am a dumb *** with no clue. Yes, profits are up, but based off of phones and tablets. Share of personal computers in homes? Small.

Who cares about Small ? it's both : profitable and growing faster than the industry :

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/07/24Apple-Reports-Third-Quarter-Results.html

The Company sold 4.0 million Macs during the quarter, a two percent unit increase over the year-ago quarter.

2% growth while the industry saw -0.1% growth :

http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=2079015

So again, you're not looking at this with the right mindset. <--- Not an attack, just pointing out you don't understand the game here.

$1200 systems compared to $500 systems. Whatever. Give me a figure that says that says they are dominating even 25% of the COMPUTER market, not just digital music players, tablet and mobile phones. But whatever. I'm done. I made a simple statement. I apologize for my absolute ignorance.

Domination of the PC market is not their goal. It's both a profitable endeavour in its current form and its a growing business for them. As a business, Apple's first goals are profitability and sustainability, not world domination. As such, the Mac is fine as it is : A vertically integrated system.

There is no incentive for them to license out OS X to other OEMs, and again : they've "been there, done that, almost killed the company doing it". Why do you think they would try it again ?

What are you not understanding here ? <--- Not an attack, a serious question.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

It was so effective last time, I think they should do it again!

@OP I'm very glad you are not any where in the apple management.

Just going to point out that it was a very different time for Apple then.

 

[GermanyChris]

Just going to point out that it was a very different time for Apple then.

It was, but the effect will still be the same if not worse now.

Apple is now a common PC with fruit therefore brand dilution is really bad. At that time at least the clones had to use IBM/Moto CPU's. Now any person can build a hackintosh and many "people" do.

 

[snberk103]

And Microsoft does? Good luck getting help if your Asus motherboard and Nvidia video card don't work right...... It's a control issue with Apple, simple as that.

I applaud MS for actually getting Windows to work so well on so many different hardware configurations. But the simple fact is that Windows does have problems with some (weird) configurations. And when those problems occur, the user blames the OS. There is a reason why Apple has the highest consumer satisfaction ratings for tech support. Their techies have a fairly simple script to run through to try to resolve issues.

They have a fairly complete list of "known" issues. If their script doesn't fix a problem, and a reinstall doesn't fix the problem - then it's broken hardware and they fix or replace. MS can't do that since it may or may not be software related.

In this case keeping an iron "control" on the ecosystem enables Apple to provide the best support in the industry - as measured by Consumer Reports and others.

Seriously? Why? Because I don't understand the need to remain an "exclusive club"?

With respect... I don't think you understand the business case.... imho

Because I understand that most people won't buy things if they don't understand it?

Actually, most people have no idea.... they buy things for many factors, few of which have anything to do with understanding a product.

Prior to my testing the product, the last time I had used an Apple product was the IIe, which was when I was in elementary school. I had no real knowledge of the product at all, and only tested it because someone recommended it and said I would love it, which I did. Would I have purchased a product with no knowledge of it? Heck no.

Again, with respect... You are not a "typical" customer. Apple is selling computers as fast as they can make them. Your opinion, as an individual, means as much to them as mine does. Which is zilch. They are selling to masses of people. And their business success seems to indicate that they actually do kinda know what they are doing.

...
I don't understand why you would make a comment such as that. But whatever. Yes, Apple is a hardware company. Yes, they like to control the entire environment, BUT, how can you drive in those who nothing about the brand? You give them something to draw them in. Sorry if I was stupid for suggesting it.

Not 'stupid' .... but perhaps naive? They don't seem to need any help in drawing in business. You said it yourself earlier - someone you know recommended it. That is how Apple is "driving" in business... from people who use their systems and recommend them to other people.

I'm not trying to compare them. They are a hardware company. But they are a hardware company with a completely different OS. Dell is a hardware company. Gateway is a hardware company. BUT, they run an OS everyone is familiar with. How do you get people to purchase your hardware when they don't know about the OS running on the hardware?

Their friends recommend it. Seems to be working... increasing sales in a market that is otherwise declining.

Why shell out $1200 on a computer (compared to sometimes $500 or less on a PC) when you don't know anything about what is running on it? That is the issue at hand. Most people don't understand it, which limits the potential for increasing users in huge numbers.

But they are increasing numbers in a huge way. And... "increasing numbers" is not what they want to do. Apple wants to increase "profits".... which is not the same thing as increasing users. Apple owns the $1000+ computer market. They are in, iirc, the top 3 for profits for computer makers. Simple question to you.... Would you prefer to work 5 hours a week for $100/hr or 60 hours a week for $10/hr? You can make much more money working 60 hours.... but wouldn't you rather work the 5 hours? That's what Apple has chosen to do. Sell fewer computers, but make more per computer.

...Yes, profits are up, but based off of phones and tablets.

Actually, the phenomenal profit increases are tablets and phones, but computers are also selling at record numbers and for record profits. They may be overshadowed by the iDevices... but they are still selling way ahead of the market trends.

Share of personal computers in homes? Small. $1200 systems compared to $500 systems so too expensive to purchase based on faith. Whatever. Give me a figure that says that says they are dominating even 25% of the COMPUTER market

With respect, that's where you show your lack of business experience. Market share does not mean success. Revenue and profits are what matters, and Apple is very successful there.

... I apologize for my absolute ignorance.

You don't have to apologize. We were all there once. Wisdom is something you gain from experience.

 

[KnightWRX]

Just going to point out that it was a very different time for Apple then.

As far as the Mac business goes ? No. The situation is pretty much the same. As far as the overall health of the company and its product portfolio ? Sure, even if they managed to screw up the Mac side of the business, it's not their revenue generator anymore, so it wouldn't "kill them".

But again, why kill the goose when you can have lay golden eggs instead ?

 

[LobsterMan]

$1200 systems compared to $500 systems so too expensive to purchase based on faith. Whatever.

Yes, you can get Pc laptops for $500, but you can't compare them to Macs. If you look at high end PCs with comparible hardware, the price is similar.

As for faith, i guess that's the challange the Apple stores are det up to address.

 

[snberk103]

I don't think the OP liked being disagreed with, and has left the thread....

 

[SkyBell]

The iPod, iPhone, and iPad are the "gateway" devices for Apple.

Probably mostly irrelevant to this thread, but I feel like this is no longer the case. A few years ago it was; sell them a small slice of Apple (iPod, iPhone) get them to take the next step and sell them the whole pie. (Mac) But recently it feels like Apple is no longer really concerned with using iOS devices to garner Mac sales; rather, their main goal is to get as many iOS devices out there as possible, and if they happen to persuade you to buy a Mac, it's just icing on the cake.

Probably a great business model, but sad for us long-time Apple fans.

 

[snberk103]

Probably mostly irrelevant to this thread, but I feel like this is no longer the case. A few years ago it was; sell them a small slice of Apple (iPod, iPhone) get them to take the next step and sell them the whole pie. (Mac) But recently it feels like Apple is no longer really concerned with using iOS devices to garner Mac sales; rather, their main goal is to get as many iOS devices out there as possible, and if they happen to persuade you to buy a Mac, it's just icing on the cake.

Probably a great business model, but sad for us long-time Apple fans.

Actually... I wonder if the iDevices are still a gateway... but not to Macs. Perhaps Apple wants to get as many out there as possible because the real money is in the content they allow Apple to sell? In this scenario, as long as Mac owners account for a good portion of the content sold, then Macs will continue to be available. Just a thought...

 

[Nermal]

Go back and look at where apple was when it was licensing out its operating system.

You mean back when Apple didn't have a "portable" product line, two app stores, and a media store? Even if licensing out the OS did kill off PC sales, Apple would still make a huge amount of money. It won't come close to killing the company like last time.