Apple is pissed
- Started
- Last post
- 50 Responses
- version30
i thought jobs was having liver problems, why is he drinking?
- ********0
price is the big issue. speeds are comparable but the huge price difference and lack of third party software sucks
- designbot0
fiesta, Mac doesn't make hardware. Open a Mac computer and you will find parts from well a plethora (yes I just used that word) of well known manufacturers...none of them from Mac. Even the iphone isn't actually manufactured by Mac.
OSX should be open to all platforms, no question. Once Mac made the switch from those crappy Motorola chips to using Intel, the hardware divide (architecture) that once existed was gone. There's no reason other than Apple wanting to tightly control their market and make more money off keeping things proprietary.
- ernexbcn0
designbot they are in the business of selling hardware, and most of OS X success is because they control which computers is going to run their software, getting OS X to run on every piece of X86 would require a massive effort by Apple and third parties (drivers).
I for one would love that Apple continues to design and sell great hardware and continue to improve OS X.
- raf0
Not sure about today, but a few years ago there were only four companies making laptops for all the vendors out there: dell, acer, foxconn (they make macbooks) and possibly hp - not sure.
- eating_tv0
The whole Apple selling Apple only business is why I go for a Windows PC.
Yup. Winblows.
Why? Because if it's botched I can yell at Gates and fix it myself. That way it's cheaper, if you don't add the heart attacks.
- raf0
They sell products marketed as "premium" segment - there is no reason for them to leave that shelf. They have tens of billions of dollars in the bank - which other company can say that during the "recession"? They must be doing something right.
However, recent surge in sales (following a brief slump) due to price cuts and rebadging aluminum MacBook to MacBook Pro show that lowering prices was a good step.Apple once licensed their OS to other vendors in mid 90's. It almost collapsed then. They will never try this again, not under Jobs.
- designbot0
@ernexbcn
They may be in the business of selling hardware, but my point was (commenting on fiesta's) they don't actually manufacturer any of it."getting OS X to run on every piece of X86 would require a massive effort by Apple and third parties (drivers)"
You sort of hit the nail on the head with the obstacles that Microsoft has to go through when creating a new version of Windows. In a weird sort of way I think they deserve props on that. They have to make the OS run on a large array of systems/hardware. I'll agree this may be a large part of why OSX is a great operating system, as in a sense it's a bit like a console gaming system...in other words the operating system is specifically written to work with only a small set of pre-configured hardware setups.
- ernexbcn0
@designbot some people are even suggesting MS to do a really brave move: to ditch support for hardware and software from some years ago going back, that'll make a better Windows.
Problem is, they have so many government contracts and a lot shit that still needs to be able to run on their new OS it's going to be a really hard decision to make.
- The easiest way they could make a better Windows is to licence OSX :-)comicsans
- ernexbcn0
Apple has gone thru 2 huge transitions mainly because of their small market share, from Mac OS 9 to OS X (that was huge) and from PPC to Intel.
The PPC to Intel was way more smooth than the OS 9 to OS X, and Apple is still alive for two reasons: Steve Jobs coming back and bringing the NextStep guys to make OS X, OS 9 was getting so behind that Windows 95 was way better than it.
Anyone remember in OS 9 and before when a task took control of the whole computer? that fucking sucked.
- raf0
@ernexbcn Microsoft has a lot of corporate users that run their entire infrastructure in Microsoft environment. You'll find a lot of places running Windows 2000 or even NT for security reasons.
Ditching them would be a suicide for M$.
- designbot0
Yeah, I think I missed your point initially. Windows is totally held back by having to support all that really old crappy legacy hardware and software. It's no wonder Vista chugs along unless you have a fast machine.
I have always had this idea about a customized OS install menu...basically a Linux-like approach where it would survey your machine pre-install and install the OS in a barebones style approach. It may ask a series of question etc, before doing so. Windows needs to do something about this, that's for sure. Having said that I wish I had the choice to use OSX on my custom built machine if I wanted to :)
- ernexbcn0
They were also fucking smart in keeping a parallel OS X development running on Intel since the first version of OS X, they kinda knew IBM would fuck it later being incapable of improving the PowerPC processors. IBM kinda focused on keeping their console makers happy (Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony).
The processor on the Xbox 360 although not being a general use processor it's still a PowerPC of 3 cores running at 3,2 ghz and that thing came out in 2005.
- Point50
are they really mad? or are they just doing business as usual? Apple flushed out all the clones back in the late 90s if I remember, so why would they relax now?
- comicsans0
@designbot, it could easily be done (even by Microsoft), trouble is that virtually all Windows installs are done by OEMs who just want to clone a disk partition. Imagine Dell having to install Windows uniquely onto each machine they supplied because users could specify different h/w.
Mass customization costs hugely. Standardization cuts costs. In Apple's case they standardise the h/w environment. IN MS's they standardise the s/w environment (relying on *suppliers* to get their h/w working under Windows, MS do not in general write drivers.)
- Oh and MS *really* don't like giving you an install disc.comicsans
- Yeah, I hear ya. It would make alot of sense for the home user I think. Ahh well I can dream :)designbot
- yeah, the drivers is where it's at, also good drivers development is fucking hard!ernexbcn
- yeah, I remember the Nvidia/Vista ordeal....goes to show you Microsoft is often at the mercy of good driver development from other co's.designbot
- developers from other co's.designbot
- designbot0
^ It's a smart business move, it's just annoying because they are obviously fearful how this would impact the niche market they seem to be exploiting. If given the choice, most people would not pay hundreds more for a nice shiny looking Mac computer. They would buy a cheaper computer or build one, and install OSX on it. There is nothing particularly special about the guts of any Mac, it's the whole package that you're paying for.
- ********0
This just an example of Apple trying to stamp out consumer freedom. If their product (OSX) has a price, and can be bought independently of their hardware - then the customer should be able to install it on whatever they like. If taking this stance destroys Apple's revenue stream, then so be it; they'll have to fcking well adapt.
- It's really simple, they're a business, if you don't like what they sell or the terms on which they sell it, buy something else.comicsans
- No, it's far simpler -> no business should be able to dictate how you use their product. Once you've bought it - you own it.********
- you own it.********
- "If you don't like the terms on which they sell it buy something else". Perfectly clear.comicsans
- Do you work for apple?********
- Point50
how can they be stamping out consumer freedom? The consumer has choice of of OS (Tiger or Leopard or Windows or what's that other one, LINUX, and soon Chrome) and choice of hardware (Apple, Dell, Sony, etc) and hell even choice of portable music devices (Zune, iPod, Creative, etc)... I'm not sure I see this as a monopoly of any sort really. They're protecting the revenue stream that they've created. It's one thing to bully and dominate a service, it's another to be a watchdog and direct your product.
- ********0
^ They sell a software product, with the proviso that you will only install it on their own hardware.
The reason for this requirement, is purely because they want you to pay for their own hardware; the product will work equally well on other cheaper hardware.
I think this smells a little -> and I find it crazy that people give Apple such an easy ride.
- They're not forcing you to do anything. If you don't like their terms of business don't do business with them.comicsans
- I'm sorry, but I live in a world where I value logic more than the opinion of corporate law.********
- corporate law protects you though, regardless of you being an employee, owner or sole proprietor.Point5