Michael Dell: "I would sell OS X on my machines"

Viro

Registered
This smells a lot like the same claims Dell has made in the past. "If customers ask for AMD, we'll sell AMD". Even with Linux, most Dells come prebundled with Windows. Try buying a laptop or desktop from Dell with Linux, or even without an OS. Not a chance.
 

fjdouse

UNIX - Live Free or Die
mmh, I'm not sure where this is all going, I don't think I like it.
I can't see Apple licensing OS X, they've said they won't allow OS X to run on other hardware. I think the indications are -all arguements aside- Apple are moving into the PC market, maybe with their own brand PC (Mac) compatibles and start to rattle Microsoft's cage. It doesn't make sense. None of this makes sense. If Apple are wanting to challenge Microsoft, I think that will be suicide, OSes and software IS Microsofts domain, they will not take kindly to such a move on Apple's part. What's the point? Topple Microsoft? I don't want that! Apple will be no bloody better than Microsoft is now.

I'm loosing confidence in Apple, they are not doing themselves any favours by keeping silent and nobody really knows what's going on, we all talk here as if we know but we don't know a single thing, we're all guessing, there are lots of HORRID indications which point to everything I'd hate to see, but no facts. It's a mess full of uncertainties, things were quieter with Linux...
 

fryke

Moderator
Staff member
Mod
It's just him saying he'd like that. SURE he would! Of course this has nothing to do with Apple even remotely _thinking_ about it.

To lose "faith in Apple" over such a comment is a litte off, I think. Hey: I'd like to sell no-name PCs with Mac OS X on them, too. I think it'd be fun. But you shouldn't lose faith in Apple coz of it.
 

Viro

Registered
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I find it absolutely hilarious that some speculate that Apple ditched IBM because of the lack of a roadmap. If anyone lacks a roadmap, it's Apple. Honestly, Macs are quite possibly the worst platform to be developing for right now. With Linux, you've got source level stability, and you can see where things are going. With Windows, you've got promises and endless betas of where things are going. With Mac, you've got no idea what Steve is going to do next.

The whole switch to x86 despite Apple denying such rumors for years combines with the total silence about their roadmap really shakes my confidence in this company.
 

fryke

Moderator
Staff member
Mod
Hm? Apple told you that as a developer you'll be devloping for Tiger for the next 1.5 years, for PPC and intel processors with Xcode 2.1 and up. That they'll tell you about Mac OS X 10.5 next WWDC and that the transition to intel will be done by the end of 2007. That's quite a clear roadmap for developers, isn't it?
 

fjdouse

UNIX - Live Free or Die
Viro said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I find it absolutely hilarious that some speculate that Apple ditched IBM because of the lack of a roadmap. If anyone lacks a roadmap, it's Apple. Honestly, Macs are quite possibly the worst platform to be developing for right now. With Linux, you've got source level stability, and you can see where things are going. With Windows, you've got promises and endless betas of where things are going. With Mac, you've got no idea what Steve is going to do next.

The whole switch to x86 despite Apple denying such rumors for years combines with the total silence about their roadmap really shakes my confidence in this company.
Thanks, you've saved me some typing. My confidence is shaken, I would not make products for Apple right now if I owned a software firm. I also cannot, in all conscience, recommend Apple computers right now, a position I NEVER thought I'd be in.
 

kainjow

Registered
Wow, Dell says he would like to distribute OS X, and now we've lost faith in Apple? How'd that come up?? There are already 5 billion threads about this... let's stick to the topic of Dell.
 

Viro

Registered
:eek: Sorry, my bad. I'll stay on topic.
 

fjdouse

UNIX - Live Free or Die
Despite the words of the self-appointed thought police, it is on topic, as we are discussing the implications of such a move. If you want to stick with 'just Dell', then the conversation is pretty much dead, what more is there to say? Dell want to licence OS X, probably won't happen. There we go. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 

nixgeek

Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
What I find interesting is that PC makers such as Dell (whether they mean it or not) seem to recognize that the Mac OS is definitely better tan what is offered by Microsoft at the moment. Of course, the article also reminded me of what happened in the 90s with the cloning of PPC Macs and Mac OS licensing. Everyone said the same thing Dell is saying, and when it was in full effect, every other Mac cloner was eating into Apple's sales. Personally, I think it would be a repeat of the past except with a different CPU.

It seems as though it would be inevitable for this to happen if licensing and cloning were to take place again. Seems like a price to pay to have Mac OS X everywhere. :(
 

Viro

Registered
The big question is if Mac OS X is everywhere, will it still be as good? Part of the reason for OS X's "everything just works" reputation is because Apple controls the hardware and the software. They only need to support a limited set of computer configurations, hence the OS is better tested and there are less bugs. Contrast this with Windows that runs on literally an infinite number of possible hardware combinations.
 

fryke

Moderator
Staff member
Mod
Well, although this news blurb of today certainly shouldn't be met with anything like "Wow, it's going to happen!" kind of panic, let's think a little clearer here. Should Apple _ever_ let Dell sell Mac OS X licenses, it seems clear to me that Dell would actually have to deliver parts that _work_ with OS X. Apple would probably release a list of supported hardware then, and would Dell wish to deliver hardware _not_ on that list, supporting it would be Dell's issue... Not _that_ much of a problem.
 

MisterMe

Registered
fjdouse said:
mmh, I'm not sure where this is all going, I don't think I like it.
I can't see Apple licensing OS X, they've said they won't allow OS X to run on other hardware. I think the indications are -all arguements aside- Apple are moving into the PC market, maybe with their own brand PC (Mac) compatibles and start to rattle Microsoft's cage. It doesn't make sense. None of this makes sense. If Apple are wanting to challenge Microsoft, I think that will be suicide, OSes and software IS Microsofts domain, they will not take kindly to such a move on Apple's part. What's the point? Topple Microsoft? I don't want that! Apple will be no bloody better than Microsoft is now.

I'm loosing faith in Apple, they are not doing themselves any favours by keeping silent and nobody really knows what's going on, we all talk here as if we know but we don't know a single thing, we're all guessing, there are lots of HORRID indications which point to everything I'd hate to see, but no facts. It's a mess full of uncertainties, things were quieter with Linux...
So you are losing your "faith" in Apple because it does not share your fear of Microsoft? Don't get me wrong--I am fully aware of the power that Microsoft wields in the software market. However, I also believe that Apple has been burned too many times in the past because it deferred to Microsoft. My sense is that Steve Jobs has decided that it time to stop. I think that he has also decided that now is the time to do it.

Michael Dell's public comments seem to confirm reports from a month or so ago. Those reports said that several Intel-based OEMs approached Jobs about securing MacOS X licenses. These OEMs were reportedly tired of dealing with the security and stability issues inherent in Microsoft Windows. I am convinced that Jobs is the source of the reports. I am also convinced that the lobbying from those OEMs played a significant role in his decision to switch the Mac to Intel.

Microsoft is powerful, but it is not invincible. For years, the Redmond Monopoly has leveraged a few profitable operations and a majority of money-losing operations into total market domination. Microsoft Office is the goose that lays the golden eggs. Windows is the nest, but it makes much less profit. Currently, Microsoft is spending $1 billions to develop Longhorn. It expects to release Longhorn by 2007, but this is by no means certain. The upshot is that Microsoft is simply not in a position to retaliate against anyone. For example, Office:mac bleeds black whereas the Xbox bleeds red.

It is time to start analyzing Apple's switch to Intel in terms of a business strategy. Too much of what I read here are well-meaning people trying to return the world to what it was on June 5. It is a new day. We either deal with it, or it leaves us behind.
 

nixgeek

Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
fryke said:
Well, although this news blurb of today certainly shouldn't be met with anything like "Wow, it's going to happen!" kind of panic, let's think a little clearer here. Should Apple _ever_ let Dell sell Mac OS X licenses, it seems clear to me that Dell would actually have to deliver parts that _work_ with OS X. Apple would probably release a list of supported hardware then, and would Dell wish to deliver hardware _not_ on that list, supporting it would be Dell's issue... Not _that_ much of a problem.
This is exactly what was mentioned in the article. Apple would probably make Dell and other interested to adhere to the parameters Apple provides for the hardware, othewise they would not be granted a license. Of course, the other side of this would mean that every Mactel-compatible would be just like Apple's hence obscuring the uniqueness of Apple's machines, and giving validity to fjdouse's concerns (using fjdouse as an example in reference to his posts).
 

fryke

Moderator
Staff member
Mod
Well: It's just Michael saying something. I still don't think that should be reason to even discuss it. We know Apple said "no" to licensing. In the past. And presently.
 

scruffy

Notorious Olive Counter
I'd certainly buy a Dell server with OS X on it. Their desktops are pretty uninspiring - but when it comes to servers, you want precisely the Soviet-style construction that Dell is all about.

That, and their servers actually have dual power supplies. Why the XServes don't, I doubt I'll ever know...
 

Cat

Registered
I think Mr. Dell just said it to jump in on the buzz surrounding the Intel transition at Apple. He just wants to be in the news by acting as a parassite on hot stories. Dell doesn't generate anywhere near the exitement surrounding Apple announcements and Keynotes, and they do not produce anything new, never ever. They just incorporate the most recent parts, no drastic changes, hence no news. Apple jumps all over the place and everybody pays attention. So Dell chimes in just to say "me too!".
Nothing's gonna happen.
 

pjeski

Registered User
Michael Dell simply answered the question that David Kirkpatrick asked:
"So I emailed Michael Dell, now the company's chairman, and asked if he'd be interested in the Mac OS, assuming that Apple CEO Steve Jobs ever decides to license it to PC companies. (For now, Jobs says he won't.)"

So how does that mean he wants to "jump in on the buzz", how is that "acting as a parassite"?
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
hey scruffy what do you mean by "soviet style" ;) (I love the term - I might steal ot from you :p)


As for clones, we've been there, done that. However never say never because you see what happened with Rhapsody's intel version? We all thought it was dead...but no! Next year will see the dawn of intel macs.

If clones are to be made, I think that apple will either license the apple logo to go on the clones (that way the OS installation stays withing their EULA), they get some money, and they might provide some proprietary part to the clones to make some more $$$.

Personally I would still buy my macs from apple. I have not had good experiences with dell.
 
Top