Apple dumping it's own OS for Windows?

[michaelc80]

Interesting think piece from PC Magazine about a Windows/Mac marriage.

Quote from the article

Epstein made four observations. The first was that the Apple Switch ad campaign was over, and nobody switched. The second was that the iPod lost its FireWire connector because the PC world was the new target audience. Also, although the iPod was designed to get people to move to the Mac, this didn't happen. And, of course, that Apple had switched to the Intel microprocessor.

Apple has always said it was a hardware company, not a software company. Now with the cash cow iPod line, it can afford to drop expensive OS development and just make jazzy, high-margin Windows computers to finally get beyond that five-percent market share and compete directly with Dell, HP, and the stodgy Chinese makers.

The only fly in the ointment will be the strategic difficulty of breaking the news to the fanatical users. Most were not initially pleased by the switch to Intel's architecture, and this will make them crazy.

End Quote

PC Magazine Article

 

[GROUCHO MARX]

Beta versions of VCRs.

 

[Jeffrey]

"The only fly in the ointment will be the strategic difficulty of breaking the news to the fanatical users. Most were not initially pleased by the switch to Intel's architecture..."

Most of the fanatical mac users? I'd say this is a myth. MOST mac users are hooked on the OS, and not on a Motorola processor. MOST mac users welcome hardware improvements.

Now, as to the Dvorak/Epstein contention regarding Apple switching to the Windows OS - I do believe this would upset MOST Mac users - not just the "fanatical" ones.

I would wager that easiest step for Apple to increase sales would be to allow dual boot. There are "fanatics" on both sides, but the great majority of users like to have choice. I would love to be able to boot Windows on my wife's Mac Book Pro so that I could play some games. However, when it comes to day-to-day use I greatly prefer the stability and security (yes, even if it does result from obscurity) of Mac OS X.

 

[T-Keith]

I don't see this happening at all. It certainly wouldn't be good for them. Wintel computer making is a tough, cut throat, business, and running Windows would the typical Mac premium even more to swallow.

What would be best is for them to pressure software makers to make MAC versions and possibly add a wine-like utility to run windows programs. Software compatibility is becoming less and less of a problem because of the internet, this doesn't seem like a good move.

 

[GoldenRod]

The reason why I'm a MAC fan@t!c is because of OSX.

 

[JAYCEE]

OSX is based on Unix, not windows. I liked the old Mas OS much better. But the switch to unix really only made good sense.

Windows is trash.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

The entire debate of Apple offering a product with Windows on a machine is flawed, but makes good fodder especially for the likes of Dvorak & Co.

#1: If Apple were to do this, there would be nothing different about Apple, they simply become yet another PC supplier. More than likely, Apple will continue to charge a premium for thier hardware.

#2: Apple sells a high percentage of it's products to educational institutions.

#3: Dell darn near owns the PC side of educational institutions.

#4: Add-up #1 and #3, Apple would have to compete with Dell on Dell's turf. This is market suicide, it's not going to happen.

 

[Mystic]

I think it is very unlikely that Apple will start using the Windows OS, but it is not impossible. I like Mac OS X in many ways but sometimes I think Apple made a mistake going to it and not staying with the Classic OS and just improving it. I still believe they could have improved the old OS. One thing in that article that is kind of thought provoking is that a kind of Mac OS GUI could be put on top of Windows. You would get the Mac look and feel but with Windows underneath you would have compatibility with print drivers and scanner software.

Linux, like mentioned in the article, has serious acceptance problems for some people, such as computer graphical artists and photographers, because it has very limited useability with photo printers and scanners. Linux is great as a server or for office applications where all you need is the ability to connect securely to the internet and use some sort of office software. Try finding compatible printers and scanners. Linux makes Mac OS X look great when it comes to compatibility in comparison. I briefly tried Linux and told myself-not for me. Linux makes a grat server computer, however.

It would be interesting to find out more about what they are talking about concerning Apple filing lawsuits about some guy who was trying to come out with some sort of software. Maybe there is more to this story then meets the eye. In any case, it is likely that Apple will soon come out with computers that may well be able to use both the Mac OS and Windows. You could have the Apple OS on one hard drive and the Windows OS on another. It would be a great mix for security and useability.

 

[ScottB]

If Apple dumped OS X for Windoze, almost every Mac user would dump their Macs - including me.
It's not 100% OS driven, it's the great hardware too, and innovation - a word MS knows nothing about.

Not to worry Mac users, in the best/worst case scenario, they'll make the dual-boot, which is unlikely for so many reasons...

Scott (Mac user since 1985!)

 

[JavaMan]

I've heard they're starting to use ntel cpu's. Why not use Windows? They can still sell their hardware and users can benefit from more applications available for pc's.

 

[Mystic]

I like the Mac OS as much as anybody. And I think it would be great (and much better for everybody) if there were more equal competition among computer OSs.

But here is what I think is the bottom line. I think everybody will agree that for personal computer use Windows is the most compatible. Most printers, scanners, backup hard drives, digital cameras, software, etc., will work with Windows. Mac OS X is not quite as compatible. Linux is a lot worse.

But if the compatibility of Windows can be combined in Windows Vista with the security of say, Mac OS X, then the war is over. The only major problem with Windows today is security. If the compatiblity of Windows XP can be maintained in Windows Vista and if security can equal Mac OS X then it is all over. In that case Windows becomes the best computer operating system. I don't believe in being religious about a computer operating system. I like the Mac but the only real reason for choosing a Mac today over Windows is security. You can do the same things on a Windows computer that you can do on a Mac, such as working on photographs in Photoshop. There are already a lot of computer graphics companies that have switched to Windows. If Windows provided much more compatibility and the same security why would anybody pay more for a Mac? And Macs are more expensive.

Sure, there is something about the Mac GUI that is really great. But the days when Macs seemed to provide much more to offer for computer graphics artists and photographers seems to be in the past. Personally the last time I can remember Macs providing about the same level of compatibility as Windows computers (with scanners, printers, etc.) was back in the days of the Classic Mac OS. Make a Windows computer as secure as a Mac combined with the greater compatibility and useability of a Windows computer and suddenly there is no good reason to use a Mac at all.

Now for server computers and for some offices Linux might be a great alternative to Windows. But for personal computers Windows is the OS of choice.

 

[Jeffrey]

"Most printers, scanners, backup hard drives, digital cameras, software, etc., will work with Windows. Mac OS X is not quite as compatible."

Mystic,

This statement is simply not true. As a matter of fact, the current version of OS X will connect to most printers, back up hard drives, digital cameras, and networks, with ZERO CONFIGURATION.

I would agree that there is more software out there for widows OS.

 

[chas3]

its very likely that new intel-based macintoshes will atleast support some sort of vmware to run windows alongside macos. this is the first step down a slippery slope. why port your application to the "native" mac operating system, if they can already run your application (with practically no speed penalty)?

does apple really care which software runs on the machine? unlikely. software is essentially a "fixed" cost. its written once. money is in units of h/w sold.

could apple make a business out of selling pcs? i dont know. alienware would seem to be more of a competitor than dell for apple in this market. dell doesnt quite target the same market as apple. is an alienware machine "better" than a dell? apparently there is some perceived difference.

 

[ScottB]

Jeez. I hope the info on oil/filters/coolants is better than the computer threads

Macs work infinitely better with most scanners/printers/cameras.
Apple does care about the OS - Apple is not going to support Windows on the Mac - a support nightmare.

If Apple were to put Windows in a Mac, most Mac users would keep their current Macs until the blew up in a puff of smoke - and based on the Macs I have/had, that's a long time.

A dual-boot Mac would be nice for the occasional need, but most people don't need it.

As for there being more Windows software - big deal. How many word processors do you need? How many disk utilities?
The one area lacking is games - and most Mac users I know could care less about that, although the numbers of games are getting better.

Scott

 

[kreigle]

quote:

---

its very likely that new intel-based macintoshes will atleast support some sort of vmware to run windows alongside macos.

---

I should hope so. Current Macs already support PC emulation software for running Windows. The G4 my parents bought on Ebay had PC emulation software on it with a working copy of Windows XP installed... at least up until they re-installed OSX to re-set the previous owners admin password and wiped it all out.

 

[ScottB]

The product is "Virtual PC" which Microsoft now owns. It's only decent on a really fast Mac, and then, not for games or other hardware-intensive tasks.

Certainly, MS will update VPC to run on the Intel Macs too.

Scott

 

[Mystic]

Sorry, I can't agree with the statement that Macs are better with printers, scanners, etc. I have used both Windows computers and Macs for a long time. After Apple came out with Mac OS X it seemed like everytime they upgraded the OS there were problems with photo printers (for example, maybe you now could not do borderless prints), and especially with scanners. In fact, in the literature for my Nikon dedicated film scanner and my Epson flatbed scanner BOTH Nikon and Epson state that their scanner software and scanners are NOT compatible with the Unix file system used in Mac OS X. Recently Nikon has finally upgraded its software and Epson has finally upgraded its software. But according to Nikon there can still be problems in some areas and there is still not full compatibility. Silverfast software would probably allow compatibility with the Nikon, maybe. The Epson flatbed is supposed to be compatible with Mac
OS 10.4 now. And Canon released a software update that is supposed to make my printer compatible with Mac OS 10.4. These updates have taken place fairly recently. In comparison I have not even bothered to update the software for this equipment for my Windows computer. The stuff worked great from the start. With Windows you install the software and plug the printer or scanner into the computer and it just works. People can put down Microsoft all day long if they want but you can't knock the compatibility of Windows.

I know exactly one guy in my area who is still using Apple comnputers. He is a Cambodian-American who studied a lot of photography in college. A very cool, good guy. He is still using the Classic Mac OS and has no plans to ugrade to Mac OS X. I also took a tour of my local newspaper a while back and at that time they were using a bunch of old iMacs running the classic Mac OS. They may have went to Windows since that time. I almost wish I had travelled the same route and simply never upgraded to Mac OS X. But I would be stuck forever with old software.

Like many people from an Apple background I do not play much in the way of games on my computer. About all I ever liked was Myst and free cell and solitaire. Mac people tend to be into productive stuff like using Photoshop to work on photos. But you can use Photoshop in Windows also. And the two most recent books I have bought on Photoshop were written by guys who use Windows computers (one guy owns both a Mac and a Windows computer but uses almost completely Windows illustrations). Those are the two best books I have ever read on Photoshop and they both were written by men who use Windows computers.

A Mac that could run both the Mac OS and Windows would be pretty cool. Or a person could buy a cheap Mac for the internet and take your Windows computer offline and use it just for working on stuff.

People who have never used a Mac do not understand the Mac experience. A Mac feels like an expensive car. It has a feel that has to be experienced to understand.

But bottom line-combine Mac security with Windows compatibility in a Windows computer and it is pointless to use a Mac. If Windows Vista can do that then it is over.

 

[ScottB]

I agree with a lot of what you say, but compatibility is NOT an issue.
I support all the creative folks at the biggest music company in the world, and I can attest to the issues with Windows vs Mac OS.

I'm not sure what Mac OS X you're talking about, but we have no problems whatsoever, and in fact, the Macs always seem to be the ones that have to do those duties when the PCs don't work.

All of our computers - Macs and PCs are within 18 months old - all new/newer stuff.

I don't say PCs are no good, but the "compatibility" and "no software" arguments are simply not true.

Macs aren't bought to run MS Access

Our company, in contrast to your statement, is buying more Macs. Security is awful in the Wintel world, and Mac hardware IS superior (numbers don't lie there)

Scott

 

[simple_gifts]

It won't matter whether Apple dumps OSX, they are running away with the digital lifestyle market, and M$ isn't even a contender.

 

[Mystic]

Fifty years from now ALL of the current computer operating systems will seem quaint. Fifty years from now BOTH Microsoft and Apple may be historial, replaced by other companies.

Let us say that I became a famous photographer. Not likely to happen but let us say it did happen. Fifty years from now people would be looking at the photographs I took, just like people look at photographs made by Ansel Adams. Few people would be concerned about what type of computer operating system I had used. Some would be interested in the cameras I had used. A few computer history types would be interested in the computer operating system or systems I had used.

Some of the most creative people I have ever met were Apple computer people. While many who use Windows computers are anxious for the release of the next game a lot of people who use Apple Computers are busy working on photographs in Photoshop, or doing page layout or computer illustation. Once, I was almost kind of religious when it came to what computer operating system I would use. Without question a Mac is really, really good for computer graphics.

But Windows computers can be just as good and can use much of the same, creative software. The big problem with Windows has been security for the most part. If Windows Vista can solve most of the security issues It seems to me that Windows is a contender. And there are now potentially BIG security issues cropping up for the Mac.

It is now posible for a Mac user to just visit certain web sites and scrips and various malware can be downloaded to the computer they are using. Does this sound kind of like Windows? Dangerous Applescripts, Widgets, and a rootkit have been developed by mean spirited people. These people will attack anyone. They may hate Microsoft the most but it will not disturb them to attack Apple.

What we really need is a proactive legal structure that will seek out and go after the major attackers on the internet. The technolog to do this already exists-they can use honeypots, etc.

I feel at this time it is possible for a person to be creative using either Apple of Windows computers.