# Apple to re-license mac os in 2005



## mi5moav (Apr 15, 2004)

As stated before there is a great chance HP could be the next/first to license mac os. As Rob Jones, stated "HP, and Apple's ipod partnership may be the start of next big thing for both pc manufacturers"    

This would be great. However, the only way I see this happening is if Apple were to give HP a 2 to 3 year free license window or reduced license fee. This would at first benefit HP monetarily by adding another product matrix to it's line. Psychologically, would be a godsend for Apple. Within 5 years we could definitely have 5% plus market share. I read somewhere that if every pc manufacture where to sell mac os only computer for the next 5 years Apple's market share would still only be about 30%.


----------



## bobw (Apr 15, 2004)

HP, making and selling computers running Mac OS X. I think this would kill Apple.


----------



## jackdahi (Apr 15, 2004)

I agree with bobw!


----------



## mi5moav (Apr 15, 2004)

Your right, only one computer company should be allowed to run/sell mac os on it's computers.


----------



## evildan (Apr 15, 2004)

Apple has tried this before, it was a flop then, I don't see it happening any differently now.


----------



## ylon (Apr 15, 2004)

Well, I really understand what you're all saying, however it would not kill Apple if they were to build a more strong foundation with their software and music business.  They are in a real position right now to start making their money with software rather than hardware if they can pick up the sales.  Apple has some great software a very reasonable prices and much of their pro line is industry standard.  If they can capitalize on this, their OS package and the music line (they've already let the hardware go to a degree as was noted on first post above) I think that they will have a strong case.

It would be interesting to see Apple stores becoming a multi-pronged initiative where they also present the HP products along side of their own (ie, first starting with music players, but then perhaps expanding?).

Don't shoot down the hardware idea entirely without fully exploring its possibilities and pros for Apple.  Perhaps they can outweigh the cons?


----------



## mi5moav (Apr 15, 2004)

So, I guess they might as well throw in the towel and give up and live with it. I really don't think every person on earth is going to buy and Apple manufactured computer, however, there is a good chance that they may buy an HP, IBM, Sony computer with mac os. As a shareholder I would prefer Apple having 30% market share of the OSes out there and not selling a single piece of hardware then having a 5% market share and selling 100% of the Mac Os capable computers out there.  

They failed since they licensed it to the wrong companies. Apple licensed it's OS to the john doe of the computer makers back then  Umaxen, PowerComputing?!!?  No, one had ever heard of powercomputing and umaxen made scanners. Motorola came in late and even today I wouldn't have bought a Motorola computer. If we had HP, Sony, IBM and the license agreement would have been tweaked a bit we wouldn't be having this conversation today. So, I guess everyones motto is history always repeats itself, and if you fail never try again. We'll see next year... I think HP really has Apple pushing for level 3 assurance, when and if they are a go with the gov, I think HP will be good to go.


----------



## chevy (Apr 15, 2004)

I don't see why HP would sell Macs.

They may use Mac OS X technologies for some special devices (to be defined) but the Mac market is so narrow that I don't see how HP could live with only part of it.


----------



## ylon (Apr 15, 2004)

HP has actually always had a division that has pushed towards 3D and high end workstations.  That would be an ideal area to being pushing into with the G5 and with IBM "opening up" its processor technology, HP might be able to take real advantage of this.  Apple shines in this area as usually these areas are a little more highly educated in terms of technology and software and thus want the top rung in terms of quality software.  Especially would be interesting with Autodesk's apparent inner workings toward an Autocad for Mac OS X and other engineering, 3D, graphics and video applications from various companies than seem to make their rumor rounds.


----------



## Randman (Apr 15, 2004)

Let's see how the iPod/HP deal works first before people start making wild guesses about potential partnerships.


----------



## mi5moav (Apr 15, 2004)

Let's just move every rumor thread to the open letters forum, to close down any open and intelligent conversation to stimulate our brains... real smart.


----------



## Giaguara (Apr 15, 2004)

Opinions in the opinions, rumors in the rumors .. not everything that has an opinion is a rumor. A rumor = be more specific, provide info on where you gathered your 'rumor' - e.g. a link to a website stating when thisandthat new apple product will be released. General discussion such as hp could licence mac os is not a rumor, it is an opinion. 

I don't see hp having a lot of interest in macs.


----------



## ylon (Apr 15, 2004)

Well, there is a difference between wild and educated.  I don't claim that any of that would happen, however its fun to contemplate and discuss.  This is a rumor and fairly thought provoking forum, so I thought that mind bending and conjecture was welcome here.  It seems that this HP iPod deal might be a proving ground to offer some probationary period for something to possibly flourish.


----------



## Vard (Apr 15, 2004)

Easy mi5moav....take a deep breath....

You're entitled to your opinion...and so is everyone else dude.  You posted something for conversation and a conversation happened...Great!  Don't make it personal when others opinions outway yours...

Being able to discuss it is half the fun...just be happy your topics generate conversation.  I've posted some threads you'd swear caused leporsy they way people avoided them.

Only 1 tip here:  Posting things like the following, "So, I guess everyones motto is history always repeats itself, and if you fail never try again." is not a very well planned argument...Don't put words in other peoples mouths.  It only makes your argument LESS effective, rather than more.

OK, go ahead and release that breath now buddy....it's all good!

Later,
Eddie


----------



## Randman (Apr 15, 2004)

It would help a thread be Apple news, rumor or discussion, if a story was mentioned, or a link given.
  That said, I just use show new posts, regardless of what section it is. Don't others? A good thread is a good thread, be it in Apple News, Opinions or the Cafe.


----------



## Jason (Apr 15, 2004)

IMHO

this COULD be a good thing for Apple if done correctly. HP is also a fairly cheap manufacturer. I think if HP can figure out a way to make cheaper computers, and let Apple still produce the higher perfoming/higher cost/better designed computers it would still work out. You would satisfy both the switchers who need a cheaper computer, and the higher performance users who require more horsepower

but if they start to cross over too much, it would mean trouble for apples hardware sales. (but if they make enough off of liscensing with strong enough agreements with HP etc, that combined music and ipod endeveurs, it might not matter)


----------



## RacerX (Apr 15, 2004)

We seem to be missing the point of the problem here, any company making an OS which tries to go up against Microsoft is going to fail. Companies which make their own hardware and software at least have a fighting chance.



			
				mi5moav said:
			
		

> So, I guess they might as well throw in the towel and give up and live with it. I really don't think every person on earth is going to buy and Apple manufactured computer, however, there is a good chance that they may buy an HP, IBM, Sony computer with mac os.



Where did anyone get the idea that Apple should have 100% market share? Or 50%? Or 25%?

I would start worrying over 10% (which is about what Apple holds in installed user base of total computer usage in the US). At that point Worms and viruses start to look feasible on the Mac OS.



> As a shareholder I would prefer Apple having 30% market share of the OSes out there and not selling a single piece of hardware then having a 5% market share and selling 100% of the Mac Os capable computers out there.



Only if you don't care about your shares. Apple is a hardware maker. They make no money, NO MONEY, on software. All profits come from hardware sales. Apple makes software to sell hardware. 

Let me rephrase that...

They make software to sell their own hardware.



> They failed since they licensed it to the wrong companies. Apple licensed it's OS to the john doe of the computer makers back then  Umaxen, PowerComputing?!!?



They failed because it didn't generate any new market share. People were buying these other systems and not Apple's. So Apple was selling an OS which they were not making money on to sell hardware which they were not making money on.

That is a failed business strategy.



> If we had HP, Sony, IBM and the license agreement would have been tweaked a bit we wouldn't be having this conversation today. So, I guess everyones motto is history always repeats itself, and if you fail never try again. We'll see next year... I think HP really has Apple pushing for level 3 assurance, when and if they are a go with the gov, I think HP will be good to go.



NeXT gave up on hardware and went totally software. They were about to get out of the OS market (having given Sun pretty much everything special about OPENSTEP) when Apple bought them.

In 1995 IBM had between 5-10% of the PC market. And yet they couldn't fight Microsoft with that amount of installation and a better product.

Be was giving away the BeOS in the end, and Microsoft went out of their way to kill off that company.

Apple does Apple computers. They aren't much of a threat to Microsoft and they make Microsoft look like it is playing fair by making a version of Office for Macs.

And, just to drive the point home, when Apple had a version of the Mac OS for Intel (Rhapsody), developers ignored it in favor of the PowerPC version. These weren't just any developers, these were developers who had been developing for OPENSTEP on Intel hardware for years and they switch to Mac hardware.

Apple is not going to give HP the Mac OS. Nothing would be worse for Apple than that. They may as well start giving away computers for free at that point.


----------



## dracolich (Apr 16, 2004)

I agree with RacerX. 

And if HP and IBM really wanted to sell an 80%-Mac OS X compatible PC, thay just could build a Darwin-powered G5.

I wonder anyway what would happen to the OS market if Apple started selling an x86 packaged version of Darwin 8 (aligned with 10.4 and BSD 5.5, Linux compatible).


----------



## Lycander (Apr 19, 2004)

dracolich said:
			
		

> I wonder anyway what would happen to the OS market if Apple started selling an x86 packaged version of Darwin 8 (aligned with 10.4 and BSD 5.5, Linux compatible).


Why would anyone buy a computer preloaded with Darwin? Darwin is free, look around and you'll find an x86 ISO image.

EDIT: what I mean is, Apple hasn't and won't do that because, like I said, anyone x86 user can do that right now for free. I'd die laughing at the irony of running Darwin on a Dell box


----------



## Lycander (Apr 19, 2004)

mi5moav said:
			
		

> Your right, only one computer company should be allowed to run/sell mac os on it's computers.


Tell that to:

www.macmall.com
www.smalldog.com
www.powermax.com

and a plethora of other vendors including CompUSA.


----------



## mi5moav (Apr 19, 2004)

First that was sarcasm, secondly it doesn't have to do with resellers, but box manufactures. Hell, I wish every computer company would have mac os running on their systems. But, everyone else is just so pleased with Apple doing it all themselves, I guess they don't believe they can pull it off... that they are meant to fail, oh well.


----------

