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 391018
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: What an absurd conclusion.
by SReilly on Sun 25th Oct 2009 21:24 UTC in reply to "What an absurd conclusion."
SReilly
Member since:
2006-12-28

Apple cannot afford to sell Mac OSX at the upgrade price of $129. If it were to sell to PC owners it would need to charge around $500 and this would reduce the desire for conversion.

I'm not disagreeing with you but some references for that point would be nice. I've seen other people make that statement but have never found any proof for it. If you could provide a link, I'd be very grateful.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Abstract Member since:
2009-10-24

"Apple cannot afford to sell Mac OSX at the upgrade price of $129. If it were to sell to PC owners it would need to charge around $500 and this would reduce the desire for conversion.

I'm not disagreeing with you but some references for that point would be nice. I've seen other people make that statement but have never found any proof for it. If you could provide a link, I'd be very grateful.
"

You won't find one, cause Apple does not release that information, it is also why Apple is not going after Psystar for damages, cause it does not want to release that information.

When you buy a Mac, you are buying the complete package, both hardware and software, its not 2 separate products. Yes Apple does sell a License of Mac OSX as a stand alone product to be used on their hardware.

Whats with all the animosity towards Apple anyways? Cause they make a better product? Shouldn't direct the anger, frustration, dislike, or whatever you (as in anyone that is upset that Apple doesn't allow Mac OSX to be installed on non-Apple hardware) feel towards Apple, direct it towards Microsoft, or Linux or any other OS you do not use cause it can not compare or surpass Mac OSX in functionality/features.

I am not some Mac Fanboi that blindly defends Apple. I owned a Power Computing when they were an authorized OEM, they had better hardware, especially graphic cards.

I don't think Apple has no confidence in Mac OSX which results in Apple not allowing Mac OSX to be installed on non-Apple hardware.
I think Apple has a solid business model that works, and allows them to innovate without to much compromise since they control the hardware platform in which their OS runs on.
I think it is everyone else that lacks confidence and are insecure in their own OS.
Again, why is cost an issue? Lets say for arguments sake that Apple allows for other computer manufacturers to pre-install Mac OSX on their hardware. Wouldn't building your own PC from parts and installing a no-cost / free (not counting time) OS like Linux, FreeBSD, etc.. still be more inexpensive then even purchasing a pre-built / configured computer with Mac OSX?
Why even stress MacOSX to begin with? Are there no other alternative OSes? Is Mac OSX the only OS that will allow you to surf the web, read your email, etc.. So is the truth of the matter, not that Apple lacks confidence in its software, but rather everyone lacks confidence in the alternatives to Apple's software?

Reply Parent Score: 1

bfr99 Member since:
2007-03-15

There is no animosity towards Apple here. Its just that there are some people who who apparently would like to run the Apple OS on non Apple hardware. This may or may not be wise or cost effective but the legal issue is simply does Apple have the legal right to prevent this, presumably via licensing restrictions.

The relative merits of Apple OS and hardware versus other software and hardware is course totally irrelevant to the legal issues. You can surely appreciate the fact that different individuals will rate various software and hardware systems differently.

Reply Parent Score: 3

r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

I think it is everyone else that lacks confidence and are insecure in their own OS.

You do have a good point there. Apple and its circle of fans have always looked down on us simple IBM-PEECEE users. Apple is hip, cool and better and beige box users are the dull working drones better forgotten. It's just that the price Apple charges, for us dull drones to find out if we really need to be insecure, is too steep.

The desire for the easy hackintosh is to see OS X in action. You only buy magic beans over regular ones if you are pretty sure they work.

And that is the crux of the matter. If we could be sure that if we bought a Mac we would never look back, we'd all probably pony up the money. The risk of being fleeced is too great though.

One can click around on a Mac in the Mac store and one can play with a Mac from a friend for a few hours, but to truly know if it is any good, you need to work the system for a few months.

We'd like to believe, but the risk of just buying an overpriced x86 machine with an OS that wasn't the second coming is too big. After all, if OS X rubs you the wrong way, you just spent way too much money on a machine that will be running Windows (or BSD / Linux) anyways. Mac innards are common x86 components, so if OS X falls short of it's magic expectations, you just blew too much money on what will basically be a lowly beige box.

Reply Parent Score: 2