To Go Where No PC Has Gone Before

hugheba

Registered
Yeah, I thought it was really strange that Apple would use the term pc, which made think they weren't referring to an Apple computer but to a Intel/AMD machine.

I've also noticed a lot of automatic support for PC branded devices I try on my apple with OSX. They usually work no problem, drivers are bundled right into OSX....

Does this mean there's been parallel development for the release of OSX onto the Intel/AMD processors?

And no matter how much we love Apple and think the hardware and OS make an Apple an Apple, will the release of OSX onto the "other platform" really hurt Apple, Inc.? Or will the upgrade from 98/ME not be to XP but to X? (for half the price, about the same if upgrading...)

Discuss amongst yourselves...
 

ulrik

Registered
Oh my god...imagine Steve Jobs, standing there after presenting the new iMac, the PDA and a preview to 10.2...

"Oh...one more thing! We will release 10.2 for the PC market as well..."

THAN you can see violent Mac users! "Buh" will be the nicest thing he will hear on that day! They should put him behind a bulletproof glass if they really plan on doing this.


I don't think it will happen....
 

hugheba

Registered
Maybe apple is referring to computers in general as PC's, Apple & Intel/AMD.

"Where no PC has gone before..."

And with a PDA, you can take to more places than a PC, more easily. Maybe it's a play on the portability of a PDA... even more portable than a laptop.

Just another one of my stabs in the dark.
 

themacko

Barking at the moon.
Apple will never in a million years release OSX for x86 hardware. Why? Because Apple doesn't make it's money with it's OS, it makes the huge majority of it's profit by selling the hardware (computers). If they release OSX for Intel based machines, no one (minus the hardcores) would buy an Apple computer.

Why would they when you can get [basically] the same thing for less money? IE; Some lamo can build a PC from scratch for like $600 (with no money going to Apple) or he could by a similar Power Mac for $1600 (with lotsa money going to Apple). It would just be financial suicide.

Besides that, I don't think Steve-O would want OSX to be run on crappy hardware that Apple would in turn have to offer support for.
 

wdw_

Rockee
[joke]
Ha Ha Ha! You fools!

The answer is simple. Obviously it is a Star Trek reference and The Joy Of Tech web site got it exactly right!

278.gif

[/joke]
 

edX

mac shaman
i, for one, would appreciate the built in coffee maker. set it to brew for a certain time and both my javas are ready by the time i am:p
 

AlanCE

Registered
Originally posted by themacko
Apple will never in a million years release OSX for x86 hardware. Why? Because Apple doesn't make it's money with it's OS, it makes the huge majority of it's profit by selling the hardware (computers).

They can still make the same money on hardware. If they make their Intel/AMD based systems proprietary (i.e. ROMs and such which are required to make the system work) then they are still the sole supplier of hardware. The CPUs would be cheaper though so the X86 macs would be cheaper than today's crop of PPC macs.
 

simX

Unofficial Mac Genius
PLEASE don't post a link to an MP3 player if it doesn't have a FireWire connection. ;) All of those MP3 players that only use USB are totally worthless, and I wouldn't get one for the life of me. The one reason that tipped me to the iPod instead of any other one is FireWire.
 

edX

mac shaman
true apple doesn't make their money with software. but M$ does and look how succesful they are. If apple could capture even 25% of their market, that would be big bucks and apple would then be making more money all the way around. the current anti trust issues with M$ might be setting the stage for this to have possibility for success whereas before M$ controled all the major pc manufacturers. this idea is not so silly or absurd.

one guy's thought for the day:)
 

chevy

Marvelous Da Vinci
Staff member
Mod
X on PC ? And how will Apple make money ?

They tried to open the HW and started to loose a lot of money. The first thing that Steve made when he came back on board was to cancel all these deals and come back to single source hardware. And they came back to profitability.

No, there must be something else... that we don't know yet. Unless this is just crap to have us listening to Steve Gods on Monday... we'll now pretty soon.
 

edX

mac shaman
math is one of my weak points but lets just say $100 a pop for the os times, oh lets be conservative and say 1 million people buying it in first 6 months = 100 million dollars revenue. do you think it would have cost more than that to develop?

my guess is steve could get a helicopter too after that.:p
 

chevy

Marvelous Da Vinci
Staff member
Mod
Apple shares total value is currently $8.3G. Making $100M with that is nothing !

They currently sell for $1.4G per quarter with a COGS of $1G, this make $400M of margin. They will not kill it to make only $100M.

But having XP on Apple HW would boost sales, and margin !
 

allengoodman

info@allengoodman.com
Ed, if you were curious MS makes very little money off the consumer market.

So the idea to think that they would make a lot of profit from the sale of OS X on X86 is just plain silly. And if they even attempted to ask Dell, IBM or another manufacturer they would be turned down on the spot.
 

edX

mac shaman
ok, so i'm not a fiinancial whiz either. sosumi.

i personally can't imagine that every little 100m, and again i think i was being conservative, wouldn't help. but you guys are probably a lot more financially in the know so i'll shut up about something i admit i really don't know enough about.

:)
 
Top