Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 3rd Jul 2009 11:27 UTC
Whenever we talk about Mac clone makers such as Psystar, we all more or less accept as a fact that Apple is selling copies of its Mac OS X operating system at a price lower than it would have been if Apple did not have a hardware business. Even though we treat this statement as fact - recently, I've been wondering: where is the proof?
Thread beginning with comment 371579
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: It's just common sense.
by Vanders on Fri 3rd Jul 2009 15:32
in reply to "RE[4]: It's just common sense."
Member since:2005-07-06
I'd say that Dell did the least amount humanly possible.
While that may well be true on Dells part, they do at least ensure that the OS works with the hardware. There's no reason why, in my hypothetical universe, Apple could not contractually enforce more control over the hardware than Conanical have done.
RE[6]: It's just common sense.
by kaiwai on Fri 3rd Jul 2009 16:23
in reply to "RE[5]: It's just common sense."
Member since:2005-07-06
While that may well be true on Dells part, they do at least ensure that the OS works with the hardware. There's no reason why, in my hypothetical universe, Apple could not contractually enforce more control over the hardware than Conanical have done.
I know that it is hypothetically possible but Dell might end up turning around and saying, "well, hang on, who is running this company?" and just flag it.
Don't get me wrong though, my vision of Apple is as a purely software company - and this vision would be based upon the idea of Apple purchasing Adobe, focusing on expanding their middleware, then possibly gradually rolling back their hardware division with the focus is on strictly controlled contractual arrangements with big name vendors that allow them enough room to differentiate but not too much as to cause incompatibilities (for example, a standard motherboard with the differentiating factor is a bigger hard disk, faster processor, more memory or a better graphics card).
I too would love to be able to walk into a shop, purchase a Lenovo Thinkpad, run Mac OS X and have it fully supported by Lenovo but I don't see it happening anytime soon - thats the sad reality unfortunately.
Member since:
2005-07-06
What have they done for Ubuntu? there are still the same incompatibilities; they still are choosing to ship BroadCom even though their drivers are shonky, they continue to provide ATI GPU's with Linux laptop seven though the drivers are more or less a joke. Then there is the firmware itself - where as a nice, clean and efficient UEFI would do, they hobble it with a buggy BIOS.
I'd say that Dell did the least amount humanly possible.
It was a general comment; the feeling I get from some people here is if they can't get something - they'd sooner see Apple get destroyed. Its akin to saying, "I really want a Ferrari, but because they don't provide a cheap one or allow cheap clones - I want the to go bust instead". Call it the extension of the, "I want now" syndrome.