All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software

The Problem with Apple

(1/4) > >>

neo_x500:
The topic I am talking about is obvious. Many people would just love to see some decent programs for Macs, but it's not going to happen any time soon. In order for apple computers & OS's to become popular, they need to licsense their software to other Computer companies like Dell. They have a great OS, but they don't do business all to well. Think about it, All Mac OS systems can only be used on apple computers, which can only be purchased from apple. When the first PC was released, they used the first version of DOS on it, and IBM made the biggest mistake of their lives- they didn't fully license the use of MS-DOS on their PC's, letting MS sell it to as many computer companies as they wanted. This is what helped create the monster known as microsoft. It gained popularity not because of it's ease to use, but because of it's ability to be used on any type of computer. That's what Apple needs to succeed, the ability to put it on something besides a Mac. They actually sold the rights to a few companies, but then they hired back steve Jobs and he rudely cancelled all deals-that was apple's mistake. Sorry for the essay I jsut wrote, hadn't intended for it to be that long-and for the bad spelling.

psyjax:
Hmmm....

You make some good points. Alot of Apple users wish that Apple would licence it's OS. And I am sure there would be a pretty good market for them. In fact I wouldent be surprised if that very suggestion is in the works in some form or another.

I know of at least one grupe of UNIX hackers who are trying to tweek the x86 version of Darwin so that OSX can be installed on it. And in fact, I belive Apple was expecting such projects when they released Darwin free and Open sourced.

I think the above is the major point. Apple has made the core part of OS X available and free over the net to other platforms, most notably the PC. If such project's take off, no doubt some market share would be recaptured at no expense to Apple it'self. Sound's far fetched? Not really, Apple knows very well what Open Source means and the power that it has (M$ can't stand the idea).

Furthermore, Open Source means community. Windows has no true "community" as do Mac followers, or UNIX/Linux heads. If people actually participate in the development of the OS and contribute their efforts to it (as has been going on since the release of OS X! I myself am amazed at how many people are making cool FREE stuff for it) there is a bond that developes. Ask an Amiga person or a Mac person, they know this well     Windows people, just HAVE to use their OS.

Apple also works on the age old axiom of "The Costomer is Allways right" and what better way to express this than letting the costomer have full controll over what he buys? Bill Gates 's MO is more like "The Costomer comes in and never get's out of the store till his wallet is empty and we own the deed to his house".

But I digress...

My point is, that Darwin has been ported. There are comunities of programmers already working on making things cross platform and the like. And things can only get better from here on out    

The Clones you spoke of, were not a good thing. Jobs axed them cuz they were leeching what was left of the economically batterd Apple. Like it or not, the reason Apple still survives is because the Clones are gone.

Most of Apple's money comes from it's hardware sales. Not it's software. One of the ways they keep people buying their hardware is by making their (EXCELENT!) OS available on it.

Hopefully the growing OS X comunity will expand cross platform boundrys and perhapse even up the playing field for the future of computer industry.

Alot of people wonder why Linux has not done this? Well, there is a pretty influential company behind a similar effort now. Apple may not be number one, but they are not to be underestimated.

In my opinion Apple actually WANTS to make things better. Not just suck up moeney and digital relestate.

OS X ROCKS!


P.s. Oh ya, one last thing. Carefull with talk like: "no decent programms for the mac". I know you probably are refering to the quantaty of programs as well as perhapse games. But it could be misconstrude (at least i hope you don't belive this) that  you are saying there are no good programms for the Mac which is indeed absolute crap. I'm sure you can post something like that in the MAC OS forum and get liberaly flamed by everyone including me  

[ February 17, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax ]

voidmain:

quote:Originally posted by psyjax:

Alot of people wonder why Linux has not done this? Well, there is a pretty influential company behind a similar effort now. Apple may not be number one, but they are not to be underestimated.

--- End quote ---


I agree with most of your post and am looking forward to actually running OSX one day.  And I believe that switching to a solid "open source" underbelly is the smartest move Apple has made in a long time. I am, for the first time, excited about Apple.

I don't understand what you mean by the above quote though. You may be right, I just don't understand what you mean by it.  Do you mean to say that Linux isn't cross platform?  And do you mean that because of IBM getting into the mix that it is now becoming cross platform?  If that is what you mean then I have to disagree. I do however like the fact that IBM has embraced it and is taking it to the next level on their platforms.  I use or have used a wide range of their platforms from Mainframe to AS/400 to RS/6000 down to PCs.  But before IBM Linux already ran on more platforms than any other OS that I know of.

On the other hand, if you mean taking a single binary executable and running it on all of those platforms without recompiling then you would be somewhat correct, however in Linux that isn't an issue since you have the source code to every application and can easily build the binary for whatever the platform.  With apple you don't have a choice because you don't have the source to the GUI so you have to find some other way of running the native object code on a different platform. To me that comes too close to "emulation" and there can't help but be performance issues, but hopefully very small performance issues.

Calum:
Of course, OSX may not run so well on a PC due to the PC's erratic and sometimes inadequate physical architecture (each machine being different from each other machine). This in its turn, may make some people think that OSX is buggy and unreliable, which is something Apple have worked hard to avoid a reputation for.
And i think that point about a big company putting itsmoney where its mouth is, or whatever it was, is about Apple being a company that is punting a decent open source OS, using advertising. This isn't something that widely happens with Linux. Isn't this what you were saying?

psyjax:
ya basically. Apple is not only open-sourcing it, it is advertining, promoting it and supporting it. This prevent's the Million distor problem and sets a standard for developers.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page