NO OS X on intel petition
- Thread starter AdmiralAK
- Start date
Not that I'm going to sit here and advocate Apple porting OS X to a PC box, but I don't understand why it would be suicide?
The point of OS X was to create a "the" most modern operating system around. One that appealed to a wide range of people and attracted new customers to the Apple way of life. Would not a port to Intel mean a larger prospective built in audience? Wouldn't it also mean giving Windows users access to a superior OS, without them needing to switch hardware?
Also, if the OS ran on Intel hardware and became accepted as a true alternative to sticking with Microsoft, would not software developers become more apt to write programs directly for the OS, or in the very least, port there current Apps over more readily? Especially game makers...
I'm not sure if any of this makes too much sense, it's just my initial impression and i haven't given it too much serious thought. I'd be interested to hear what others think.
The point of OS X was to create a "the" most modern operating system around. One that appealed to a wide range of people and attracted new customers to the Apple way of life. Would not a port to Intel mean a larger prospective built in audience? Wouldn't it also mean giving Windows users access to a superior OS, without them needing to switch hardware?
Also, if the OS ran on Intel hardware and became accepted as a true alternative to sticking with Microsoft, would not software developers become more apt to write programs directly for the OS, or in the very least, port there current Apps over more readily? Especially game makers...
I'm not sure if any of this makes too much sense, it's just my initial impression and i haven't given it too much serious thought. I'd be interested to hear what others think.
AdmiralAK
Simply Daemonic
This is why there is a petit need for "No OS X on intel"
We know apple aint gonna do it (or at least I pray to god they wont) but there are people out there
that have an opposing point of view, and the "OS X on intel" has had more that 27000 people signed on. I just think that there IS need to have a counter web site and a counter petition for people to sign and tell their reason WHY they dont want OS X on intel asside form the fact that it is suicide for apple
(we definatelly dont want apple going the way of NeXT and Be )
Admiral
We know apple aint gonna do it (or at least I pray to god they wont) but there are people out there
that have an opposing point of view, and the "OS X on intel" has had more that 27000 people signed on. I just think that there IS need to have a counter web site and a counter petition for people to sign and tell their reason WHY they dont want OS X on intel asside form the fact that it is suicide for apple
(we definatelly dont want apple going the way of NeXT and Be )
Admiral
marmoset
Official Volunteer
Hee hee. Was anyone else out there a BeOS fan
circa 1997 or so? It was this cool little OS that
was making heaps of progress between releases,
until (dum dum dum) they released an Intel
version, and subsequently their engineers
were stretched impossibly trying to support
umpteen billion mutually incompatible hardware
configurations, all the while being mercilessly
stomped upon by a mammoth competitor with
infinite resources which would stop at nothing
to preserve its market monopoly.
From the moment Be released their Intel version,
support for the PPC version went immediately
into the crapper. Intel users got all the new features,
and the vibe from the company made it clear
that the PPC platform was an afterthought.
Just say no...
strobe
Puny Member
OPENSTEP was for the PC and you didn't see everybody rush out and buy that!
The point of OS X is to sell Apple hardware.
Also petitions are foolish. How about pooling money and making Apple an offer they couldn't refuse? Well nobody is going to do that because nobody will pony up the cash. If they could it would be a viable business strategy.
I mean look at how many people complained that OS X was $130.
Waaa, I want OS X to cost less than Photoshop and be a stand-alone product available on all platforms, waaa.
The point of OS X is to sell Apple hardware.
Also petitions are foolish. How about pooling money and making Apple an offer they couldn't refuse? Well nobody is going to do that because nobody will pony up the cash. If they could it would be a viable business strategy.
I mean look at how many people complained that OS X was $130.
Waaa, I want OS X to cost less than Photoshop and be a stand-alone product available on all platforms, waaa.
Since I write programs on both (Intel and PPC) some notes about OS X on PC...
Mac: Standard Hardware provided by Apple. Easy one solution for all Mac problems. Easy GUI. Fast. . Userprofile: I don't want to know anything Hardware Os or Apps as long it runs (fast).(now I'm talking about OS9)
PC: I can mount the Hardware I want (Mainboard, CPUs, Graphiccards and a hell off other thingies. I can choose from 10 Micro$... OS, a Hundred Linux dist ao. Since there are a Billion Hardware conf. a PC Os must can handle those. (General : for every HardwareUpdate a OS and App Update and viceversa.) $$$$$(big Bucks)
Since Im coming from Wintel, I liked the simple "onesizefitsall" approach from Mac. (Much less developing and testing).
Now why take UNIX/LINUX, crippling it to fit Apple$ need (I.e. get rid of all the PC crap, adding a new GUI), reimport all the PC stuff, so it will run on PCs?
I don't think so...
But at lest App£e has learned from Micro$oft:
- Making slow OS will $ell Hardware.
- Let the Community be betatester and let them pay for it (at least Twice).
Some things that App£e did not learn from Micro$ofts faults:
- Don't sell an OS without Software that's working native. (Adobe, Quark, Macromedia will surely be very thankful to App£e, that OS X was released at the same Time with the latest releases from those Companies FOR MAC OS 9. At least there are fast Ports from Linux to fit the holes (I think of MACGIMP or XAMBA, hehe).
Last but not least:
- I always noticed that my WINTEL Box "feels" faster to me than my MAC G4 Box, since OS X its proven.
- Since OS X, I finally invest hours for searching Updates and Drivers for incompatible Mac Devices, too.
- Since native OS X apps can be ported back to linux: It might be faster to run them on a full feature linux with an Aqua GUI, instead of a crippled App£e/UNIX with a hell of a powerconsuming AQUA.
So finally: I don't think OS X will be ever ported to PC...unless App£e should be completely been take over by Bill (financially or mentally)
LoL
Mac: Standard Hardware provided by Apple. Easy one solution for all Mac problems. Easy GUI. Fast. . Userprofile: I don't want to know anything Hardware Os or Apps as long it runs (fast).(now I'm talking about OS9)
PC: I can mount the Hardware I want (Mainboard, CPUs, Graphiccards and a hell off other thingies. I can choose from 10 Micro$... OS, a Hundred Linux dist ao. Since there are a Billion Hardware conf. a PC Os must can handle those. (General : for every HardwareUpdate a OS and App Update and viceversa.) $$$$$(big Bucks)
Since Im coming from Wintel, I liked the simple "onesizefitsall" approach from Mac. (Much less developing and testing).
Now why take UNIX/LINUX, crippling it to fit Apple$ need (I.e. get rid of all the PC crap, adding a new GUI), reimport all the PC stuff, so it will run on PCs?
I don't think so...
But at lest App£e has learned from Micro$oft:
- Making slow OS will $ell Hardware.
- Let the Community be betatester and let them pay for it (at least Twice).
Some things that App£e did not learn from Micro$ofts faults:
- Don't sell an OS without Software that's working native. (Adobe, Quark, Macromedia will surely be very thankful to App£e, that OS X was released at the same Time with the latest releases from those Companies FOR MAC OS 9. At least there are fast Ports from Linux to fit the holes (I think of MACGIMP or XAMBA, hehe).
Last but not least:
- I always noticed that my WINTEL Box "feels" faster to me than my MAC G4 Box, since OS X its proven.
- Since OS X, I finally invest hours for searching Updates and Drivers for incompatible Mac Devices, too.
- Since native OS X apps can be ported back to linux: It might be faster to run them on a full feature linux with an Aqua GUI, instead of a crippled App£e/UNIX with a hell of a powerconsuming AQUA.
So finally: I don't think OS X will be ever ported to PC...unless App£e should be completely been take over by Bill (financially or mentally)
LoL
PoweMACuser
Registered
I don't buy Mac if it ports to intel platform.
one reason can rebut you.
All software including games must be compiled in OS X environment. The problem is not the HARDWARE, not the COMPILER, it is WHETHER THEY SUPPORT OS X. If they support OS X, they will port it to OS X. NO WHETHER OS X IS IN INTEL HAREWARE OR APPLE HARDWARE, THEY HAVE TO DO THE SAME JOB--REWRITING CODE. Rewriting code is the main job. compiling the software is only a simple job. All developer should no how to compile its software. PORTING TO INTEL HARDWARE DOESN'T MEAN IT IS MORE EASY TO REWRITE THE CODE.
one reason can rebut you.
All software including games must be compiled in OS X environment. The problem is not the HARDWARE, not the COMPILER, it is WHETHER THEY SUPPORT OS X. If they support OS X, they will port it to OS X. NO WHETHER OS X IS IN INTEL HAREWARE OR APPLE HARDWARE, THEY HAVE TO DO THE SAME JOB--REWRITING CODE. Rewriting code is the main job. compiling the software is only a simple job. All developer should no how to compile its software. PORTING TO INTEL HARDWARE DOESN'T MEAN IT IS MORE EASY TO REWRITE THE CODE.