Will Apple ever let us legitimately build our own Macs?

[Civilstrife]

Now that Apple has achieved many of their initial goals for Mac with ios (usable by anyone, dominant place in the market) what are the chances that they would ever open OSX up to the general computing public? Meaning, is there any chance Apple would ever let us build our own Macs legitimately?

Probably a super dumb question with a very obvious answer, but given what we know about Apple's direction, what's the over/under of them ever going that route?

 

[robbieduncan]

Apple are a hardware company. So no.

 

[thewitt]

Not a chance.

 

[Paradoxally]

Absolutely not.

You have Linux if you want an Unix core and if you do not want to deal with Windows.

 

[interrobang]

No. If Apple ever gets to the point where it no longer wants to sell Macs, it will just stop development on OS X. It can't make money on OS X without charging premium prices for Mac hardware.

 

[old-wiz]

They might do it after AT&T unlocks ann iPhones for a $ 10 fee as soon as the contract is over, or when the Pope gets married, or after they finally completely eliminate all illegal file sharing of any kind, or when a herd of cows sings the national anthem.

 

[NicoleRichie]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)

No

 

[S.B.G]

Nope, not likely ever to happen. As stated, Apple is still mainly a hardware company and will likely not relinquish control of their OS or hardware choices to other manufacturers.

 

[jackrv]

Apple once licensed out the ability for 3rd parties to make Macintosh-compatible computers. That was one of the first things Steve nixed when he returned to the company. I doubt that it will change any time soon if ever.

 

[jackhdev]

No. Unfortunate for the server business (no rack mountable Mac servers), but there are no other Apple-approved options.

 

[wikus]

Apple are a hardware company. So no.

Nope, not likely ever to happen. As stated, Apple is still mainly a hardware company and will likely not relinquish control of their OS or hardware choices to other manufacturers.

A typical Macintosh has;

Processor: Intel
Motherboard: Intel
Hard Drive: Toshiba
Optical Drive: Sony
RAM: Samsung
Video Card: ATI/Nvidia
Monitor: Samsung

Clearly Apple is *not* a hardware company. Not even their assembly line is their own, theyve got Foxconn doing some of their work.

 

[pdjudd]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B176 Safari/7534.48.3)

They sell hardware just like dell or HP does. They are a hardware company.

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

...but there are no other Apple-approved options.

Try VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop!

 

[pdjudd]

Try VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop!

I don't think that the OP was looking for an option that allrerady requires a Mac to run. Fusion and Parallels are both Mac OSX products - the only way they run OSX in a VM is on top of an existing legal OSX install.

 

[r0k]

Now that Apple has achieved many of their initial goals for Mac with ios (usable by anyone, dominant place in the market) what are the chances that they would ever open OSX up to the general computing public? Meaning, is there any chance Apple would ever let us build our own Macs legitimately?

Probably a super dumb question with a very obvious answer, but given what we know about Apple's direction, what's the over/under of them ever going that route?

I have a friend who built a hackintosh following explicit instructions over at insanely mac or one of the other OSX 86 sites. The thing didn't boot and he wound up throwing in the towel and loading Windows on it.

Why are you trying to build your own hardware? Are you trying to save money? Apple has some money saving options. I just picked up a refurb Mac mini for $469. It's a 2010 model with an optical drive but somewhat slower than current models. I wanted the optical drive and lower cost but I could have elected to get the current generation for just over $500. Yes I know you can get some low end case, low end mobo, etc, etc, etc for $150 out the door but part of what we expect from our Macs is that they "just work".

Perhaps a better alternative for you is to build your own box and load Linux on it. To me this is a more legit option than OS X 86. It's not as easy to use as OS X but as OS X is really Unix based, Linux is not a bad way to go as a "poor man's OSX". I was using Linux for many years before I got my first Mac and while I like OS X a lot better than Linux, I would pick Linux as my second choice OS if I had no other choice. Of course I avoid Windows like the plague but that's merely a personal choice on my part.

 

[thekev]

A typical Macintosh has;

Processor: Intel
Motherboard: Intel
Hard Drive: Toshiba
Optical Drive: Sony
RAM: Samsung
Video Card: ATI/Nvidia
Monitor: Samsung

Clearly Apple is *not* a hardware company. Not even their assembly line is their own, theyve got Foxconn doing some of their work.

Apple is typically regarded as an oem similar to HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc. They've backed a lot of the cost off the OS upgrades. They make money retailing hardware systems. Their direct gains from software are much smaller. Software and OSX are there to encourage hardware sales. Fair enough ?

 

[Macman45]

I have a friend who built a hackintosh following explicit instructions over at insanely mac or one of the other OSX 86 sites. The thing didn't boot and he wound up throwing in the towel and loading Windows on it.

Why are you trying to build your own hardware? Are you trying to save money? Apple has some money saving options. I just picked up a refurb Mac mini for $469. It's a 2010 model with an optical drive but somewhat slower than current models. I wanted the optical drive and lower cost but I could have elected to get the current generation for just over $500. Yes I know you can get some low end case, low end mobo, etc, etc, etc for $150 out the door but part of what we expect from our Macs is that they "just work".

Perhaps a better alternative for you is to build your own box and load Linux on it. To me this is a more legit option than OS X 86. It's not as easy to use as OS X but as OS X is really Unix based, Linux is not a bad way to go as a "poor man's OSX". I was using Linux for many years before I got my first Mac and while I like OS X a lot better than Linux, I would pick Linux as my second choice OS if I had no other choice. Of course I avoid Windows like the plague but that's merely a personal choice on my part.

Been looking into this for a buddy who wants to run OSX before deciding to buy. Nothing around that leads me to think he would only end up in a world of pain. No chance will Apple allow this.

 

[r0k]

Been looking into this for a buddy who wants to run OSX before deciding to buy. Nothing around that leads me to think he would only end up in a world of pain. No chance will Apple allow this.

Tell him to load Linux or even boot from one of the many distro "Live CDs." Here is my recipe for faux Apple soup:

1 Start with one part Ubuntu Linux
2 Add Macbuntu

If you like the taste...

Bearing in mind that real OS X is even better...

3 get a Mac
4 enjoy!

 

[Macman45]

Tell him to load Linux or even boot from one of the many distro "Live CDs." Here is my recipe for faux Apple soup:

1 Start with one part Ubuntu Linux
2 add Macbuntu
[img="http://www.howtogeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Final-preview.png"]
If you like the taste...

Bearing in mind that real OS X is even better...

3 get a Mac
4 enjoy!

Ye[, the get a Mac part rings true...He's already tried Linux, I have various images of it...He's just holding on to Windows....He comes in here and plays with my stuff, then boots up and waits, waits, and waits...He will come around.

 

[CyBeRino]

A typical Macintosh has;

Processor: Intel
Motherboard: Intel
Hard Drive: Toshiba
Optical Drive: Sony
RAM: Samsung
Video Card: ATI/Nvidia
Monitor: Samsung

Clearly Apple is *not* a hardware company. Not even their assembly line is their own, theyve got Foxconn doing some of their work.

So does almost every other manufacturer of computer hardware out there, if that manufacturer isn't already chinese itself.

American (and European, I might add) labour is just too costly.

Also, you are very much mistaken if you think Intel design's Apple's motherboards. Those are all 100% Apple-designed. Their RAM is mostly Hynix, LCD panels are quite often sourced from LG-Philips and optical drives have for the most part been from Matsushita (also known as Panasonic) since forever.

 

[Beachguy]

They might do it after AT&T unlocks ann iPhones for a $ 10 fee as soon as the contract is over, or when the Pope gets married, or after they finally completely eliminate all illegal file sharing of any kind, or when a herd of cows sings the national anthem.

Ummmm....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxNOUGCSfLw

 

[chrono1081]

Although its been said, here it is to clear up any confusion:

To answer your question: No.

Apple makes money off of hardware sales. They use their OS to sell the hardware. (Ever notice how cheap Apple software is compared to Microsoft software?).

The reason Microsoft does this is because they don't make hardware, they are a software company who makes money from selling software to consumers, and places like Dell, HP, etc who will then put Windows on their hardware.

 

[throAU]

Will not happen.

Apple being a hardware vs software company is missing the point.


Apple provide an end-to-end "Experience". From purchase, to un-boxing, to use, to after-sales support.

Giving up control of the hardware gives up their ability to ensure the fulfillment of the apple experience to the standard originally intended.

Apple don't want to be in the business of supporting their software stack on other commodity hardware that may or may not be built to their standard.

Apple gets economies of scale (read: lower build cost and higher profit margins) by stamping out MANY copies of a limited number of hardware options. Allowing/farming out hardware options to other OEMs will reduce the scale of their own hardware business, reducing hardware profits (for all involved) in addition to increasing support costs.

 

[pdjudd]

Apple being a hardware vs software company is missing the point..

Not really. When you are a hardware company the last thing you want to do is give a customer the option of not buying your product - Apple's profits are not through OSX upgrades (especially at 30 bucks a pop) but in purchasing hardware at a markup. If Apple looses that option (by offering support for cheaper hardware) they loose money - something that Apple doesn't want to do.

As many have pointed out - there is a reason that Windows is so expensive, MS can't subsidize the costs through hardware sales because that's their entire business model.

 

[throAU]

Not really. When you are a hardware company the last thing you want to do is give a customer the option of not buying your product - Apple's profits are not through OSX upgrades (especially at 30 bucks a pop) but in purchasing hardware at a markup. If Apple looses that option (by offering support for cheaper hardware) they loose money - something that Apple doesn't want to do.

As many have pointed out - there is a reason that Windows is so expensive, MS can't subsidize the costs through hardware sales because that's their entire business model.

I don't disagree with the fact thats where they make their money.

I'm merely saying that the decisions apple are making are not based on any real desire with regards to hardware vs software at THAT level.

They want to control the entire experience, and to do that they NEED to do the hardware. One follows the other - they don't make hardware simply because they "want" to be a hardware company. It's merely a means to an end.

Hypothetically, if some "perfect" hardware was developed then apple might consider doing software only for it. But that hasn't happened (and likely never will) .