Apple releases official WinXP on Mac solution (BootCamp)

[Nowhere]

This looks even better:

New EFI update from Apple adds old-school BIOS support, so you can boot into Windows directly, without using BootCamp (I haven't checked this one yet )

Hmm...do I have right impression that Macs are now on par with PCs to every business imaginable? (at least among those who run on PCs) BootCamp wasn't, I think, good enough for them - no way to do automated installations (I suppose). But with this...
And when people will have machines that can run both Windows and MacOS...perhaps some of them will switch.

[cjolley]

...
What I mean is that the idea that MS is sitting around and writing drivers for every HW (they dont even write for all their own) is wrong, and subsequently the idea that Apple would have to write thousands of drivers for every PC HW is equally wrong

OK, thousands may be an exageration.
But, MS does a LOT more coding for different hardware and different hardware combinations than Apple does.

And, you are leaving out the fact that most hardware vendors are not going to write drivers for a totally different operating system that only accounts for 5% if the market.

That leaves Apple to provide generic drivers, with all their problems, and support to the piles of HW vendors that will need help to do the drivers that do get written.

They just aren't going to spend the money, or give up vertical control.
Unless they decide to become Dell Jr.

[Technoid]

OK, thousands may be an exageration.
But, MS does a LOT more coding for different hardware and different hardware combinations than Apple does.

And, you are leaving out the fact that most hardware vendors are not going to write drivers for a totally different operating system that only accounts for 5% if the market.

That leaves Apple to provide generic drivers, with all their problems, and support to the piles of HW vendors that will need help to do the drivers that do get written.

They just aren't going to spend the money, or give up vertical control.
Unless they decide to become Dell Jr.

You are still refusing to understand...

The "Apple would have to write drivers for all HW" is not and has never been one of the reasons Apple don't release OSX for Generic PC.

“Steve said NO!” is one of the reasons Apple don’t release OSX for PC

Besides OSX is BSD based, they could probably use BSD drivers, which are plenty.

[cjolley]

...
The "Apple would have to write drivers for all HW" is not and has never been one of the reasons Apple don't release OSX for Generic PC.

“Steve said NO!” is one of the reasons Apple don’t release OSX for PC

Besides OSX is BSD based, they could probably use BSD drivers, which are plenty.

These are all part of the same thing.
They have a closed, vertically controled platform.
They want to have a closed vertically controled platform.
They are not going to try to coordinate and support an open platform.

MS has to do WAY, WAY, WAY more writing, testing, advising, and cat juggling of hardware related code than Apple does.

Even though MS does not write most of the drivers that run on Windows PCs they still spend an inordinate amount of resources on HW coding and support.
And Apple would have to do even more (percentage wize) driver writing than MS because their market share is too low to convince many HW cos to write for their product.

So, no, they would not have to write a bunch of drivers.
If they didn't mind not being Apple anymore.

[Jessterw]

Yeah erm, like BSD has a plethora of modern drivers to choose from. It's certainly more viable as an option with the move to x86, but BSD has always lagged in terms of mass driver support. It's only gotten worse with the attention having shifted to Linux.

Note, not arguing the whole base-level hardware driver issue.

[cjolley]

[Elie]

I believe it is in Apples best interest to make OSX available for PC's, why you ask?

Thinks of all the applications they can sell to potentially millions running PC's like Final Cut Pro, and all Apple only software, that many peopl prefer over Adobe's etc.

My 2 cents worth.

[The PIT]

Well at one time they couldn't sell the OS for a pc since MS bailed them out. If thats true. However if thats a fact they must be a deal which allows MS on Macs and OS X on a pc.

[Jessterw]

Well MS bailed them out for one very important reason... to show that there was indeed still a viable competitor in the 'PC' marketplace. Or rather an alternative to the then Wintel monopoly. The deal was largely only for a duration of three years, though I'm failing at remembering any of the specifics.

Keep in mind though that Jobs had just returned to Apple. In fact, the MS deal occured in August (1997) and Jobs didn't formally take control until September (Gil Amelio resigned in July). So for Apple it was a golden opportunity for a nice injection of funds, and for MS, well, it's doubtful they could or would have foreseen how much that would give Apple time enough to put into motion the plans Jobs had for the company. Then again, who did.

So basically there likely wouldn't have been any specifics covering Mac OS (versions 7 and 8 at the time) on Wintel boxes at the time, as MS wouldn't have seen it as a threat.