intel based and OSX
- Thread starter trotos
- Start date
Apple has made a version of OS X for Intel, but they are being reluctant to release it because Micro$oft is threatening to stop making Office for Mac if they do. But, the DOJ is still on MS's case, and they might not let them stop making it. If you want Apple to release the Intel version, sign the petition at http://www.osxonintel.com . Tell everyone else you know who wants OS X to be more popular to sign it too.
Oh BS! This is a very old subject.
1: Apple is a HW company, plain and simple. The only way Apple would release an Intel version of OSX is if it only ran on an Apple Intel box.. Apple would never undermind their HW profits just to sell an OS..
2: If somebody only bases their decsion to buy a mac on the availibilty of MS Office, they don't need a Mac. They should go ahead and buy a windows box..
There should be a petition NOT to have OSX ported to Intel. You want OSX? Buy a Mac, otherwise you can just sit back and drooooollllllll...
1: Apple is a HW company, plain and simple. The only way Apple would release an Intel version of OSX is if it only ran on an Apple Intel box.. Apple would never undermind their HW profits just to sell an OS..
2: If somebody only bases their decsion to buy a mac on the availibilty of MS Office, they don't need a Mac. They should go ahead and buy a windows box..
There should be a petition NOT to have OSX ported to Intel. You want OSX? Buy a Mac, otherwise you can just sit back and drooooollllllll...
AdmiralAK
Simply Daemonic
I really do nt believe that OS X for intel exists.
There is a petition to bring it to intel but DO NOT SIGN IT! If you think that apple will do so
you are deluding yourself. Furthermore if you think that MOtorola PPC processors are slowing down you are mistaken and as jobs said "you dont know what you are talking about". Motorola is still going stroing and will be going strong for a great time into the future.
Admiral
There is a petition to bring it to intel but DO NOT SIGN IT! If you think that apple will do so
you are deluding yourself. Furthermore if you think that MOtorola PPC processors are slowing down you are mistaken and as jobs said "you dont know what you are talking about". Motorola is still going stroing and will be going strong for a great time into the future.
Admiral
Sorry about that OS X on Intel thing. I just think that maybe it would be a good idea because then more people who have less money to spend would buy it and see how good it is. I, personally, would still use a PowerPC chip, and so would all of the other Mac fans, and so would all the high-end users. I actually think that it would help Apple's hardware sales. Anyone else is entitled to their own opinion, but I still think that more people would buy PowerPC computers because of it.
AdmiralAK
Simply Daemonic
Us old-guard Mac users would continue to use PPC architecture but "newer" generation users would move over to intel because of the "cheapness" of the intel hardware (a myth since you can get a powermac cube for about 900 ).
Historically it has been shown that people who focus on OS software and support 2 platforms (or more) and do it for profit, the motorola chips often give and people buy the intel stuff...
Great examples of this are NeXT's cube, it was a motorola based (68xxx chips) hardware, and since NeXT offerent NeXTSTEP for intel as well NeXT lost in the hardware front and just solf it's OS and software to the intel (and sparc) crowds.
Another example is BeOS. Initially BeOS had hardware to go allong with it called the BeBox. Its sales were very bad so Be just decided to go with the software end (supporting both intel & PPC since back then apple had opened up the hardware for clone makers)
Admiral
Historically it has been shown that people who focus on OS software and support 2 platforms (or more) and do it for profit, the motorola chips often give and people buy the intel stuff...
Great examples of this are NeXT's cube, it was a motorola based (68xxx chips) hardware, and since NeXT offerent NeXTSTEP for intel as well NeXT lost in the hardware front and just solf it's OS and software to the intel (and sparc) crowds.
Another example is BeOS. Initially BeOS had hardware to go allong with it called the BeBox. Its sales were very bad so Be just decided to go with the software end (supporting both intel & PPC since back then apple had opened up the hardware for clone makers)
Admiral
Personally I think that Apple should compile Darwin for the x86 (come on. Don't us I*tel, AMD will kick their ass anyday) because then developers will be able to compile their software on a variety of platforms and be able to test them before releasing them to the public. They could inclused the FreeBSD driver packages and with minimal tweaking hand it over to the public to fix up.
On another note, does anyone know where I can get a real cheap G4 setup. Under $750. I don;t need RAM, Hard Drive, Vid Card, Monitor. Basically jus tthe Mobo, case, and processor. I will add the rest myself. really need a mac for school. Help would be appreciated.
On another note, does anyone know where I can get a real cheap G4 setup. Under $750. I don;t need RAM, Hard Drive, Vid Card, Monitor. Basically jus tthe Mobo, case, and processor. I will add the rest myself. really need a mac for school. Help would be appreciated.
Apple has no reason to realease OS X for x86 anytime soon,
unless it wants to put itself out of buisness. I can see it
doing so in 2 to 4 years after OS X has become a serious
competitor, which I see happening.
As far as apple hardware not being more expensive than
pc hardware, that's complete crap. Sure you can buy a cube
for $900 but who would want one. Personally I don't want
any computer that I have to us USB speakers.
I just helped build a PC system for a friend and he built
a complete system with a 1ghz cpu and 1gb of ram for about
$1300.
My biggest problem with apple is that you pay premium for
hardware and you can't build your own system, but my next
computer will be a mac running os x. I'm willing to pay
those premiums to have a great os and to get away from m$.
The best book on programming for the layman is "Alice in Wonderland"; but that's because it's the best book on anything for the layman.
unless it wants to put itself out of buisness. I can see it
doing so in 2 to 4 years after OS X has become a serious
competitor, which I see happening.
As far as apple hardware not being more expensive than
pc hardware, that's complete crap. Sure you can buy a cube
for $900 but who would want one. Personally I don't want
any computer that I have to us USB speakers.
I just helped build a PC system for a friend and he built
a complete system with a 1ghz cpu and 1gb of ram for about
$1300.
My biggest problem with apple is that you pay premium for
hardware and you can't build your own system, but my next
computer will be a mac running os x. I'm willing to pay
those premiums to have a great os and to get away from m$.
The best book on programming for the layman is "Alice in Wonderland"; but that's because it's the best book on anything for the layman.
Here's my take on it:
Apple has Darwin if not OS-X running on x86 hardware.
They are using it as a hammer over Motorola's head, as a real threat to get their act together.
They will not release it if Motorola does get its act together.
They will release it if they don't - building their own proprietary boxes with Intel/AMD chips instead of PPCs.
Its an insurance policy. It makes sense to pay a dozen or two engineers to work on it, as both a threat and as cheap insurance should Motorola not deliver.
Apple has Darwin if not OS-X running on x86 hardware.
They are using it as a hammer over Motorola's head, as a real threat to get their act together.
They will not release it if Motorola does get its act together.
They will release it if they don't - building their own proprietary boxes with Intel/AMD chips instead of PPCs.
Its an insurance policy. It makes sense to pay a dozen or two engineers to work on it, as both a threat and as cheap insurance should Motorola not deliver.
(Recycling a rumor here)
Let's not forget the remote display capabilities of OS X. Apple can make their own x86 thin-clients to sell,
under $1,000 each to the education market.... a nice beefy OS X server cluster, gigabit network... thin
clients running OS X86 but nobody has to know that, they're using netboot and doing their own screen
processing, but that's it. It's perfect for administrators... I believe the thin-client market never took off
simply because they weren't running an OS people were used to, they included hard drives which upp'ed
the cost... whatever, my point is Apple can use OS X on x86 without hurting their hardware sales.
-Don.
Let's not forget the remote display capabilities of OS X. Apple can make their own x86 thin-clients to sell,
under $1,000 each to the education market.... a nice beefy OS X server cluster, gigabit network... thin
clients running OS X86 but nobody has to know that, they're using netboot and doing their own screen
processing, but that's it. It's perfect for administrators... I believe the thin-client market never took off
simply because they weren't running an OS people were used to, they included hard drives which upp'ed
the cost... whatever, my point is Apple can use OS X on x86 without hurting their hardware sales.
-Don.