Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 25th Oct 2009 12:51 UTC
Editorial A couple of years ago, a professor at my university had a very interesting thought exchange with the class I was in. We were a small group, and I knew most of them, they were my friends. Anyway, we had a talk about language purism - not an unimportant subject if you study English in The Netherlands.
Thread beginning with comment 390956
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I donât get it and never have
by Gone fishing on Sun 25th Oct 2009 14:59 UTC
Gone fishing
Member since:
2006-02-22

I don’t get it and never have, why is Apple fighting Psystar in fact why didn’t they license OSX to Dell, Acer, Lenovo etc, etc soon after they changed platform? They missed an opportunity to be the dominant OS and I think MS has shown that a company can be viable if it concentrates on software and OSes.

Well if you had the choice to by a PC with the horror of an OS that is Vista or OSX, which would you, choose? Only a madman would have chosen Vista. Would this damage Apple hardware sales – yes probably but this would have been offset 50 fold by OS sales. This is not even a certainty some folk maybe more would feel thy get the genuine Apple experience if they had both the hardware and software.

I suspect this opportunity is fading Windows 7 isn’t a horror (not absolutely confident about this as I haven’t used it much, the hype makes me skeptical) and Ubuntu gets better on every release.

Reply Score: 2

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

I don’t get it and never have, why is Apple fighting Psystar in fact why didn’t they license OSX to Dell, Acer, Lenovo etc, etc soon after they changed platform? They missed an opportunity to be the dominant OS and I think MS has shown that a company can be viable if it concentrates on software and OSes.


Agreed. I don't hold out any hope that Apple will ever license OS X in the same "free-for-all" fashion as Windows - but I think that (very) selective OEM licensing would be consistent with their business model. In other words, allow third-party OEMs to offer OS X as a BTO option - but only on specific, Apple-approved models (that must meet specific minimum standards/requirements).

Reply Parent Score: 2

wirespot Member since:
2006-06-21

Agreed. I don't hold out any hope that Apple will ever license OS X in the same "free-for-all" fashion as Windows - but I think that (very) selective OEM licensing would be consistent with their business model.


How? What would be their incentive? Apple is already making more money than any other OEM. It has market capitalization bigger than Dell and HP put together:
http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/07/29/apple-dell-h...

Apple sells to a percentage of personal computer owners, but it skims the cream off the top. Those small percentages in buyers translate to a lot more money than all the rest are spending together. The same applies to other types of hardware, such as smartphones vs the iPhone.

So what would drive Apple to license OS X to other OEMs? It's not gonna be money. I don't see what else. OS X is an advantage they have built for themselves (anybody could have taken a *BSD or Linux flavor and done the same). Why would they give it up for scraps?

Reply Parent Score: 3

twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

I don’t get it and never have, why is Apple fighting Psystar in fact why didn’t they license OSX to Dell, Acer, Lenovo etc, etc soon after they changed platform? They missed an opportunity to be the dominant OS and I think MS has shown that a company can be viable if it concentrates on software and OSes.


First: They can't stand a chance gainst Microsoft.

Second: They make thair money from hardware, not from software. You also can ask: if Apple is so good, why users, companies and top 500 fortune companies don't buy Apple harware to use with their Windows, Linux, BSD, AIX and HPUX oses? Why nobody uses the so called os x server version? That's because they can buy much better hardware for the same money. or they can buy
the same hardware for a much smaller amount of money.

Third: It will never be dominant. If for no other reason, you can't run the software you need on it. (besides emulators like cider-wine or vm's like vmware).

Reply Parent Score: 1