OS war in 2006?

[Dr Mordrid]

http://www.maximumpc.com/2005/07/apples_x86_inva.html

Hmmmm......

Dr. Mordrid

[UtwigMU]

Alternative OSes have been arround for quite awhile and some in some areas better than Windows. Yet despite 9x instability people stuck with it. There were even MS alternatives NT4.0 workstation and Win2k which were compatible and people didn't bother to switch to those, despite process being straightforward.

I think same thing will be with OS-X, not manny will switch. If Apple makes OS-X available for non-Apple x86 hardware, it will only mean their customers will buy cheaper hardware to run OS-X, thus making their desktop business dwindle.

Everyone will talk how cool it is and how he wants to run alternative to MS, some will even install it and occasionally boot to it, but in reality everyone will still use Windows.

What compelling benefits does OS-X have over Windows:
- security, spyware protection etc... are quite decent on XP SP2, they will improve with least privileged user on Vista
- it's not cheaper (a single version maybe, but compare TCO across 5 years, also with Apple you need to upgrade to run lattest browser and other software, unlike in Windows land, where almost all of stuff works on 2k and majority on NT4.0 and 9x)
- there is less freeware, shareware and first tier software avilable for OS-X
- performance on same hardware as Windows will be worse (see Doom3 benchmarks on dual G5 2.5 with R9800)

[DGhost]

I don't believe there will be a war until at least 2k7, simply because of timing on the markets.

that being said, I also don't believe apple is going to open their platform. it would kill them. they make their money off of selling the closed box, and would loose far too much by opening it.

[Sasq]

Not having read the article, but I think it's fair to clear up some of Utwig's misconceptions.

OSX is a unix based system, we have had priviledged user for 30+ years. they got the idea working well by now. welcome to my virus free world.
point 2 - yes, and i notice that 2k doesn't have the latest IE security patches, your argument there is null and void. OSX is cheaper, in particular check out the family pack - 5 licences for $199USD.
point 3 - actually I find more 'freeware' for linux and osx then I do for windows, fink is wonderful - research young man.
point 4 - erm, don't get what your saying there, one, no linky, 2, those benchmarks are NOT on the same hardware.

that said, I agree with DGhost, I can't see apple releasing an official ver of osx for generic intel boxes, apple is an experience company.

[UtwigMU]

I mean, my point is simply that however flashy Linux, OS-X might be considered by average users, switching is not happening for various reasons. I also think this won't be the case after OS-X for X86 comes out, I mean sure there will be reviews comparing OS-X and WinVista but Vista's primary competitor will be older Windows versions.

Also don't expect Apple opening up OS-X, there might be hacked versions for non-Apple hardware floating arround but beyond geeks no one will use them.

[DGhost]

speaking of which, OS X for the x86 currently relies on Trusted Computing features, and it has been confirmed that their is hardware to enforce it on their dev kit motherboards.

Edit: how long until the normal Distortion Field effect comes into play and Mac addicts start defending it as an excellent feature that will help make all the difference, yadda yadda...

[[GDI]Raptor]

Yes, Mac OS use a chip currently pressent on the motherboards in developers kits. If the chip isn't present you can't install OSX.

I guess it won't take to long to find a way around this!

[Kurt]

Apple won't open up OS X to the whitebox PC's because they can't afford to support it. A closed architecture means it is much cheaper for them. They'll stick to that. OS X WILL be cracked to run on other hardware and ppl will have the equivalent of orgasms running it on unsupported hardware with unsupported drivers. Linux might lose a bit more marketshare, but Windows won't as it's much simpler to run for customer lambda (that doesn't WANT all the hassle).

Anyway, you don't have to be the BIGGEST to be the most profitable. Apple has some nice cards on the table to rack in huge profits. The fact that they consistently failed to rack said huge profits plays against them but there's no reason why they wouldn't succeed, eventually.

[DGhost]

Yes, Mac OS use a chip currently pressent on the motherboards in developers kits. If the chip isn't present you can't install OSX.

I guess it won't take to long to find a way around this!

it's capable of a bit more than that...

[Nowhere]

One question popped in my mind...I wonder if CPU upgrades using standard CPUs will be possible...

One can dream, huh?

[Kurt]

unless they're soldered, and if the BIOS supports the chip...

[Damien]

I mean, my point is simply that however flashy Linux, OS-X might be considered by average users, switching is not happening for various reasons. .

Apple Computer Inc., based in Cupertino, Calif., said sales of Macintosh computers rose 35 percent to $1.2 million compared with the third quarter of 2004

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1836774,00.asp

Somebody is buying them.
I personally know several people who have made the complete move to OSx. I think it might be happening more that you think.

[Kurt]

Given that they were at such a low figure, numbers can only go up...or bye bye Apple.

[Jessterw]

If anyone is paying attention, Jobs is making sure that Apple is diversified enough that it can take some hits along one or more of the various product lines.

As far as the topic goes in relation to the article... it's entirely possible Apple will open-up OS X to the x86 platform as a whole, but only after a significant market share has been seized from Microsoft and Windows. While I doubt they will gain a leading or even equal share of said market, I do believe Apple will gain enough to make them more viable than at any previous time.

Apple has made ties with a number of companies inside and out of the technology industry; many of which have strong inroads into the homes of many consumers.

It's going to be a wait and see game for the next few years. Regardless of whether you like Apple or not, their becoming a more dominant force is a good thing just on the basis of giving MS more competition in areas where Linux couldn't possible imagine having an advantageous foothold.