MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Hell has frozen over

Sure Mr. Dell would welcome selling OS X. He still sells PCs one way or another. The OS and software costs him nothing in R&D;, only in a licensing fee.

I'm sure he'd love it - folks are already putting of purchasing a Mac and waiting for x86-ready OS X so they can put it in their own PC (mistaken or not). Apple loses the HW sale as a result.

Anyone care for a DELLicious APPLE.

Sorry, could'nt resist!

Dell should rot with their pimp, Microsoft.

"Apple loses the HW sale as a result."

How much hardware does Microsoft sell? MS Market cap is $273B and Apple at $31B. Control the operating system and you control the market. Steve's brush with death may have moved Apple from a niche company to a market force.

Of course Dell would love to sell OSX. As we've discussed several times recently the real war will be between Apple and Dell not Apple and Microsoft.

Buy a Mac and you get superior hardware, software, the best OS and the ability to boot into Windows..

OR.

Buy a Dell and be stuck with Windows only.

Michael Dell has got to be feeling the heat!

Apple won't licence OS X in a hurry. But it sets up an interesting problem for Microsoft.

What if Apple watch and see how OS X on Intel sells and then decide to licence to Dell and HP? When should MS play their trump - i.e. pulling MS Office for Mac? If they do it too early Apple and others will cry foul to DOJ. If they wait too long, Apple will have unstoppable momentum.

We live in interesting times

Wahey, a cheap machine to run OSX on
(Cheap is relative, of course. I build them cheaper than Dell.)

But then how does Apple keep unlimited release of OS X to the PC platform from being Attack of the Clones, Part II, without even a license to cover them this time?

Cloning nearly killed Applle by cannibalizing hardware sales before (I know, because I was buying PowerComputing instead of Apple).

The only way I see Apple doing this is through relying on the Trusted Platform Module on each licensed machine. But they would still be cannibalizing their low-end sales.

yes, I'm posting it again...

didn't Apple explicitly say that they would NOT offer a stand-alone version of the OS to run on generic PC's? I still don't understand why there is so much discussion/speculation about this. It seems to me that the only real difference will be that the G6 will use an Intel processor instead of an IBM, and that otherwise it will be business as usual for Apple--you want Apple software, you buy Apple hardware.

Cost, Steve, COST!

Unless a Macintel costs the same as a Dull, forget about market penetration.

A thought to ponder....

Is Windows a Virus?

No, Windows is not a virus. Here's what viruses do:

1.They replicate quickly - okay, Windows does that.

2.Viruses use up valuable system resources, slowing down the system
as they do so - okay, Windows does that.

3.Viruses will, from time to time, trash your hard disk - okay, Windows does that too.

4.Viruses are usually carried, unknown to the user, along with< valuable programs and systems. Sigh... Windows does that, too.

5.Viruses will occasionally make the user suspect their system is too slow (see 2) and the user will buy new hardware. Yup,
Windows does that, too.

Until now it seems Windows is a virus but there are fundamental differences: Viruses are well supported by their authors, are running on most systems, their program code is fast, compact and efficient and they tend to become more sophisticated as they mature.

So Windows is not a virus.

It's a bug.

It's so good to think different!

"I predict... Apple... announcing a deal at its conference in January - licensing hardware to Dell." (Twenty Benson MDN June 14)

Having a Dell running OS X would be like putting a Ferrari engine inside a Vauxhall Corsa!

I just hope Apple doesn't allow it to happen.

Dell has made a non-statement.

Dell sells hardware so they don't care what OS you want with it. Of course they'd be happy to offer it. He doesn't mention enthusiasm. He doesn't mention that he'd promote Mac OS. He doesn't offer a willingness to modify his hardware to optimize it for the OS.

There is absolutely no information here, and Fortune and MDN are both being silly to read into it.

NO! Not back to the clone strategy ... ever again.

Apple is not stupid enough to make the same mistake twice.

IT'S OFFICIAL: READ ALL ABOUT IT: DELL BECOMES THE NEW NAPSTER!

reiscup,

True, MS makes more money, has a higher market cap, and produces mostly software - but that's changing. Microsoft is clearly headed in adding hardware.

Apple IS a market force. It is a larger market force than most any other computer company. M$ shamelessly copies them!

Now if you mean market force as in ubiquitous, then I'd rather not see it. Dell is a diluted, dull, brand. Nobody ever accused Dell of producing desirable things (other than by price). Apples products carry a cache that Dell only wishes he had. Apple has to protect this.

But review some history and compare the origins of Microsoft and Apple and tell me if the market conditions from then are remotely close to now and whether either company should progress in remotely similar paths now as they did then. One was a software tools company, the other a PC company.

Tell me, what percentage of Apple's revenue is hardware? Would they miss it? How much licensing would Apple need to do to replace the loast hardware revenue? If I want OS X and it happens to run on a Dell, why bother buying a Mac? I just burn a copy of OSX for myself an install on my PC. Apple makes little or nothing now. If OS X must run on a Mac, then Apple makes money.

Be careful what you wish for.

Personally I think Apple will now have a bargaining chip answer to MS. "What was that? You are threatening to drop Office, again? Ok, do that, and we will release the next version of OS X for any PC as a public beta.... free. We'll survive off the iPod sales until we gain a significant marketshare."

"Cloning nearly killed Applle by cannibalizing hardware sales before (I know, because I was buying PowerComputing instead of Apple"

The difference being that the market will be much much larger for OSX and Apple would reap way more sales off the OS. Also, keep in mind that Apple wasn't nearly the software company that it is now.

They already have a prodcut line set in place.

MW "living" as in Microsoft is living on borrowed time

PS Oh and we also have this version of Apple Office running...check it out....this will be part of the free public beta. Like it?

Every one keeps saying Hell has frozen over. Well, it may have frozen and Apple rules it.

Remember that "stevenote" where they had the large target over michael dell and steve said "we're coming for you, baby"?

Remember that microsoft isn't the target...Dell is. That keynote moment is beginning to make more sense now.

AppleOffice? - YES PLEASE. Bring her on...

There was a time when Michael Dull sold iPods... but it only lasted for a short while...

For him to actually want to sell machines running OSX is such a bizarre thought !

MW= about ... as in .. "It's all about the Benjamins"

Microsoft won't pull Office from the Mac. Remember, before there was Windows, there was Office (or at least what would become Office).

Bill Gates is probably well aware that the dominant position Microsoft has enjoyed over the past 10 years can't last forever. Apple will never "destroy" Microsoft, if that's what people are hoping, but they may begin to erode that dominance. In the end, Microsoft will need its other ventures (Office, Xbox) as its core Windows market begins to decline.

And whether you love them or hate them, love Apple or hate Apple, the reality is that Windows has nowhere to go but down. Microsoft will never capture that last 8%, and it would probably be even worse for them if they did.

Meh. I seriously doubt Apple would let Dell build Mac clones. More like HP or Sony. Don't fire up the space heaters yet, mcloki.

"Personally I think Apple will now have a bargaining chip answer to MS. "What was that? You are threatening to drop Office, again? Ok, do that, and we will release the next version of OS X for any PC as a public beta.... free. We'll survive off the iPod sales until we gain a significant marketshare."

Then why don't Apple do that, regardless of the Office thing? If it would be that easy to get a fat chunk of the market, one would expect them to, well, simply go ahead and do exactly that?

I'm all for it, mind you

Steve and Mikey sitting on a tree....

There's is a fundamental difference between 1996/97 and 2006: the hardware Apple sells nowadays is cost-competitive and extremely well-designed while the Performas of 1996 sucked and the PowerMacs were drab. Licensing a MacOS-X version, or rather allowing people to install MacOS X on Intel-based computers, will bring MacOS to the corporate world. They readily switch to Linux already because it is hardware-compatible. A huge after market will develop where people will develop compatibility packages to run MacOS on various hardware configurations. This be done by the open source community at no costs for Apple. MacOS X is open source, and they will love to port the system to any given hardware setup.
Once people get hooked on MacOS at work, the cool factor of the Macintosh will kick in. Apple has the fastest growing brand right now and is in a unique position to first penetrate the installed base with the MacOS and then reap the rewards of hardware sales based on their superior design and functionality.
Producing the operating system will not cost a dime more than it does already, but hardware sales could be in the double digit range right where HP and other premium PC brands are. Besides, the corporate world would purchase MacOS licences to protect themselves against litigation.
The iPod has shown that Apple can thrive in a market where it is not protected simply by offering superior hardware-software combinations. S.J. is probably convinced that Apple can sell computers even if the MacOS runs on other hardware, too.
This is why the developer kits have been seeded: to get people to adapt OS-X to the installed Intel base without paying for it.
The whole thing will kill Linux, though, because a great number of open source developers will flock towards the MacOS once hardware compatibility is given.

Does Dell even compete in the same market as Apple? I mean, are there actually people that are torn between buying a Dell or a Mac? The way I see it, Dell's target market is always going to be different than Apple's target market. If Dell suddenly started selling OS X, the people that have always bought Macs are still going to buy Macs because they want the entire package, so Apple's hardware sales are not going to go down. Most of the people that buy Dell probably don't even consider buying a Mac and probably never will. So this would just to Apple's overall market.

If anything, Macs will still sell, OS X will increase marketshare, Apple will gain more revenue, and OS X on Dell could even lead to more Mac sales.

In fact, even though I'd rather see OS X on a Sony or HP, OS X on Dell may be better for Apple since Sony or HP could actually compete with Mac sales, whereas Dell consumers are a completely different market.

"dude, you're getting a macintel."

i had to post but lame.

"Then why don't Apple do that, regardless of the Office thing? If it would be that easy to get a fat chunk of the market, one would expect them to, well, simply go ahead and do exactly that?"

I just think it works more as a threat then what they'd prefer to do. Like the move to Intel. It was something they threatened IBM with for a while I am sure and eventually had to pull the trigger. Apple and Steve Jobs in particular, loves hardware, especially in regard to hardware design. To Jobs the design element isn't just the shape of the box, or the GUI, but both in tandem. I think Steve Jobs is unwilling to give up the hardware.

Except, he may be learning that Apple is about the software, even if they make beautiful hardware, and most of their money from it. Pixar probably taught him that. NextSTEP too. He recently admitted that the soul of the Mac is the OS.

I think this is a multi-stage process, and who knows what the endgame really is. Moving to Intel brings Apple a huge step closer to licensing out it's OS. Remember that he mentioned in an article late last year I think that 3 PC companies have been courting him asking him to license the Mac OS. One step at a time though.

The "Hot News" section of Apple's website features a Mossberg article about the Intel switch, including a Q&A;about the new processor. In answer to a question about running OSX on non-Apple machines, Walt says OSX will be:

"...designed so that they cannot run on non-Apple hardware, and Apple has no plans to license OS X to other PC makers."

Posting this article so prominently may tantamount answering the licensing question...

should read "may be tantamount to answering the..."

^%&*^$ Windows work machine

I haven't had time to read all the posts, but a Dell branded Mac would be a wonderful thing - as long as Apple made it. A contract along the lines of the HP iPod deal would be perfect. The Apple logo is replaced by a Dell logo and it's good to go. I might even buy one. What I will not buy is a Dell box running OSX. Dell has not proven itself to me as a maker of high quality machines.

Microsoft is having to compete fairly these days. If Mac sales dropped to only 500k units a year, they would probably cancel Office:Mac, but the chances of that happening ended with the bondi blue iMac. MS are still in a strong bargaining position, but if Dell wanted to sell OSX and Apple wanted them to, they couldn't really stop it happening.

Every Windows->Mac switch is a potential Windows->Linux switch averted. The last think MS need is for Linux to get serious traction. Imagine if people stopped using Office because the formats weren't fully OpenOffice compatible. Where would the money to fund the XBox come from then?

OH HELL NO, F@#K YOU bitch ass mike. So now you welcome Apple in to your court. F@#K YOU. We don't need you and the world of PC too. The reason Apple is switching to intel cause IBM can't keep up with the supply of chips. Apple is growing and who need to license to the sorry PC world.F@#K them. Remember they laugh at us when apple was was nothing to them before the Ipod. They (PC World ) dam near cry for Apple to open the Ipod to them and Steve did. They still crying for Apple to open Ipod software too. (napster). And I'm gald Steve did't. If the people will wake up and see what Apple all of about they will said F@#K YOU Dell and suck my D@#K you punk ass BITCH. And stop copying other people stuff and make your own junk. OH sorry you don't know how. I forgot Dell is not a real computer company. You just rip off other people ideas sell it with your name on it. Real sad for a ass.

How to licence the clones:
One way for Apple to license to PCs is to force-link the running of a non-Macintel to a .Mac account. If the user keeps subscribing and linked to the internet, you can keep running the one non-Macintel, otherwise it stops running after a period of grace.

It forces the non-Macintels to register to be able to run the Mac OS, keeps the revenue coming in, advertises Apple produces via email, stops pirating (can't link more than one non-Macintel to a single ,Mac account at one time), and gives them a real service for registering (more than MS registration does!).

Would it work?

no, hell will have frozen over once steve says ok to michael...

this news of dell wanting OSX is old-maybe i didnt read it here but there was an article somewhere stating that dell was wanting to offer their customers an alt. to XP.

Holy Mackerel:

Now that's an interesting idea. Be interesting to see if that could work; it would allow people to try it (or maybe a limited version) on a beige box without giving the story away. Stop subscribing, and the OS stops.
It's basically the mp3 subscription service DRM. Hmm. Just realized that this sounds a lot like what Bill Gates wanted a couple of years ago when they started the .Net thing; get everyone to use web-based apps and then subscribe to .Net to keep everything current—no OS actually on the local computer.

M$ upset all the PeeCee makers, plus Intel, when it announced the new XBox360, which is just a personal computer in the disguise of a game console.
M$ has now entered into direct competition with the PC makers it provides its OS to.
Dell and others would be smart to try and convince Steve to license OSX. I don´t know how it work or if it would seriously damage Apple in the long run...but it is all a giant chessgame being played out where everyone knows that M$ is the enemy.

But then...what is the difference between M$ or Apple selling both the OS and hardware in competition with the PC makers they would provide their OS´s to????

"PS Oh and we also have this version of Apple Office running...check it out....this will be part of the free public beta. Like it?"

Anyone remember the release of iWork? I predict that soon it will have more than just a word processor and a presentation package. Maybe it will be the next serious competitor to Office. Maybe Jobs knew all of this when he announced it.

MW forward, as in MS has nothing to look forward to while Apple has owning the computing world to look forward to.

There, I used it twice in one sentence.

how much could apple make by licensing mac osx? this year 200 million pcs will be sold. lets say apple can achive a marketshare of 50% by licencing mac osx to dell/hp/acer etc. and gets 100 dollar (probably less) per licence. that makes 10 billion in revenue. their hardware will be tiny at this moment. (why buy apple hardware when you can get an mac osx pc far cheaper?). that is almost the same they make now with their hardware business. why change that business-model? it doesnt make much sense to risk it.

"Personally I think Apple will now have a bargaining chip answer to MS. "What was that? You are threatening to drop Office, again? Ok, do that,"

Apple has had this bargaining chip all along
MS kills office. Apple dies, but before their dying breath releases OSX for x86 as open source.

It's like Wrath of Khan all over again, except this time the Enterprise doesn't get away.

Putting OSX on a Dell would be like putting a custom metalflake paint job with 15 coats of clear on a BUFFALO TURD!!!!! You heard me, A FREAKING BUFFALO TURD!!!! Ok, I feel better now. <vbg>

A buffalo turd:
http://prairieweather.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/bisonturdnatconok.JPG

It's been said before but should be repeated here.

Putting OS X on a Dell is like putting lipstick on a filthy pig.

This is the very same person who insulted Steve Jobs when Jobs returned to Apple. He made a sarcastic remark that Apple should close its door and return all the shares to the share owners. What gives? He should make a public apology to Steve before he ever try to contemplate doing business with Apple. I don’t trust Michael Dull and either shall Steve.