Kind of moot, isn't it? People are already claiming to have gotten OSX to run on generic PCs and hackers will certainly put together a kit version to make it easier and work better. People that install from pirated versions aren't expecting to get support and that's the price they already pay (or don't pay).

OS X is already running in generic pcs and very flawless, and im ready to say, it runs better on AMD cpus than intel. :)

This is exactly why I made the switch from running a leaked verion of OS X on a Gateway computer to a nice, shiny PowerBook...

It bears mentioning, though, that I could not have justified the expense of a new laptop to management (especially an "alien" one - this was our first Mac) without making sure it would provide a measureable boost to my productivity.

During testing I bought the development apps I knew I'd need (mainly TextMate and a few small utilities since we mainly use open source tools) at a substantially lower cost than if I'd had to budget for even a low end Mac. In the end the time I spent with OS X and the Mac-only tools proved fruitful enough to justify the switch.

This absolutely would not have happened had I not had access to the ADP release...

The problem with this is that it Limits Apple to the niche market it has withered into.

A Pity...

OS X and its Stable of comercial applications are the ONLY competition for Linux, but not when Tied to

Apples overpriced hardware.

This is the most convoluted reasoning I have ever heard of. Do the maths, professor. Calculate given the saturation of personal computers on the planet, the number of OS upgrades per year - and compare tht with selling iPod perihperal hardware.

Michael Dell may sell a lot of computers, but Bill Gates is the big billionaire. Get out of your fanboy doldrums. OS X available anywhere is a boon to the industry.

It means for the first time that developers and software houses can invest time in it. Wondering why Adobe lag behind with PEFs? Really? Why should they do more given Apple's pathetic demographic?

And who wouldn't choose OS X over Windows if given half a chance? Michael Dell wants to sell it and last you checked he was the biggest OEM in the world, wasn't he?

The OS X software market is a kiddie pool. Actually it's Apple and a kiddie pool. Of raw amateurs. Actually Apple are - it is increasingly obvious - raw amateurs at it too. Especially as Woz himself says some of the worst software he tests comes from Cupertino.

Gates once told the self-absorbed know it all Jobs that he had to license his OS. If he did, he would rule the world. If he remained his stubborn self, he would be 'doomed to the margins'.

Gates might be reprehensible, but he knows business: look where Jobs is today.

The situation with OS X is getting more and more ridiculous by the day.

> As it stands, the Mac, among its other uses,
> is a dongle for OS X and Mac applications
> created by Apple and Mac developers.

YES! That's it!
It's the most effective way to stop ugly people BUYING it!

Compare:
Scenario A:
No Mac OS for "any" PC --> No sales, no money for Apple.

Scenario B:
Mac OS offerded to everyone - via licensed resellers like Dell et al, which have to provide the additional drivers needed by themselves (!)
--> A lot of sales for Apple, at (nearly) no additional efforts for software engineering and distribution. *Some* money for Apple.

Which scenario seems to be more effective - in monetary terms?
No sales at all - or just a few sales, to the ones *NOT* willing to "steal" the stuff...?

Only one of the comments here was from someone who actually ended up running a legal OS. The others are all "look how I ripped off the software company and ran it myself"

oldman is saying that the stable of COMMERCIAL applications is the only threat to linux, yet the likelihood of him purchasing these applications legally is already determined based on the fact that he is more than willing to pirate the OS, for hardware that is MARGINALLY more expensive (a report out yesterday shows that equivalent Macintosh hardware is MAYBE as much as 10% more for equivalent functionality, and does not take into account iLife, etc.)

Bottom line is we need better education in the world as to the value of intellectual property. The "I deserve it and should have it free" as typified by the French teen who claims that he should have music even though he can't afford it and is a CONSULTANT TO THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT just shows how far we have to go.

Damn I wish the argument that Macs cost more would die down. At least claim you want to run Mac OS X on your own configured machine, rather than claiming that you want to do it because it is cheaper - bottom line is, that 10% delta pays for the support of the OS on the hardware it was intended for, the smooth operation, and iLife. Shut up people and just admit you are pirates, clear and simple.

I am a software developer. I am also a tape of live music of BANDS THAT ALLOW IT. I purchase every CD the bands I like put out. I do not pirate. I purchase DVDs. If we had better morality and honesty out there, what I purchase would not have to be encumbered with such despicable DRM and anti-piracy measures.

Our world has a LONG way to go...

A shiny new Mac mini costs $599. Hardly expensive.

Apple overpriced hardware? Where have you been the last few years? Feature for Feature, Macs are equal or cheaper than the equivilent hardware from other vendors. No, Apple doesn't sell cheapo, feature stripped hardware. There is no margin in it (look at Dell's numbers lately). They sell a nice feature set and throw in the OS, iLife and many other things you would have to purchase on a PC. Don't bring up Linux either. No matter what you say, it's not ready for the general public. The public is looking for a toaster-no config and little maintenance. That is NOT Linux, nor Windows for that matter considering viruses, spyware and registry corruption.

There will always be a market for Macs and it will be a healthy and growing one as always.
Computers will always be computers never will be anything like an appliance, and thus there will be varying quality levels. Macs will always be the best. As people realize the value of better computers they buy Macs rather than the terrible Windows OSes.
Apple must and will protect their property. I would expect Leopard will have a kernel rewrite which will negate the value of the open sourcing the kernel. Hackers must be kept out. Thus proprietary moves go into place. Thats the price we pay.

OSX on a PC could olso mean revenew, alot of people out there are looking for a non windows solution that is easy for them.

the only reason, that Apple don't release the OSX for pc's due to microsot ouwning 50% of apple stock, and scared of loosing the number one position in the OS market, plus Bill Gates will never alow his Windows to go down and Steve Jobs's OSX goes up.

Personally, as a relatively late switcher to Macs and OSX (two years and counting now), I would say that the price premium for a Mac is worth it. The hardware is so much superior to 99% of the PCs out there and, more importantly, it works out of the box. I certainly would never go back although I do keep a PC around to run the few items of software that won't run under OS X (Visio being a prime example).

he only reason, that Apple don't release the OSX for pc's due to microsot ouwning 50% of apple stock, and scared of loosing the number one position in the OS market, plus Bill Gates will never alow his Windows to go down and Steve Jobs's OSX goes up.

Posted by: Quintin at May 18, 2006 06:16 AM

No. Microsoft DID buy $150,000,000 worth of apple stock in 1997, however, this was all non-voting stock and has now been sold on. microsoft DO still own some apple company stock but this only amounts to half of a hundredth of a percent of apple as a whole. Nowhere near 50%!!!

If Apple is intent on selling hardware with software (or vice-versa) as a single product, then more power to them in keeping that match. That said, IBM learned 14 Billion lessons worth about a buck a piece from Bill Gates. License the OS, sell the OS, make it a product, too, and the diversity and viability of the entire portfolio gains.

Of course there will be pirates out there...some will do it for the challenge of cracking the thing. There will also be a large number of people who learn the value of OS X. More, still, there will be people who learn the value of buying hardware that's 10% more expensive but guaranteed and certified to work reliably on OS X.

I personally use Windows because it's the OS most of my applications require. That said, I purchase more expensive PC hardware that is fully certified for Windows XP. That practice always has me wondering why so many people bag XP stability...I've never had a single problem using the hardware I pay my premium for.

OS X looks great, and given an opportunity I think it could really give Vista a run for its money...but not if the only "certified" hardware....or even uncertified hardware, it one look, one feel, one configuration, etc. I hope Apple opens their channels to a larger market, because they really have a good set of products to sell.

Running windows on a Mac is valuable for a few of the higher end products that are image related and cheaper in windows. Apart from that Macs are top class machines and OSX is outstanding. Ease of use is the key and Mac hardware coupled with it's software bundles is a better deal than any of the PC makers out there offer it's customers. Don't want to sound like a prud but I've had to work with both windows and Mac. Give me a Mac anyday!