[Dark Helmet]

"Were Apple to once again start licensing its operating system to third-party 'Mac clone' hardware makers, it could reignite the OS wars. Yet whether Apple will go this route - and whether doing so would be smart - remains to been, says Seb Janacek."

http://www.silicon.com/silicon/softw...9153944,00.htm

I strongly disagree. Many people think that it is the solution for Apple to take over Microsoft. Not so judging from past experiences. The last clone experiment was a disaster. It only brought in less than 1% of new Mac users and most were Mac users already that bought clones instead of Macs.

Also, the clones also hurt Apple financially because Apple spent all the money on R&D for the logic boards, licensed them to a clone manufacturer for as low as $25 then the cloners speed bumped it and shoved in more RAM and hard drive. In the end the Macs looked nicer but the clones were faster.

Heck even the HP iPod was a disaster.

[nath]

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet

"Were Apple to once again start licensing its operating system to third-party 'Mac clone' hardware makers, it could reignite the OS wars. Yet whether Apple will go this route - and whether doing so would be smart - remains to been, says Seb Janacek."

http://www.silicon.com/silicon/softw...9153944,00.htm

I strongly disagree. Many people think that it is the solution for Apple to take over Microsoft. Not so judging from past experiences. The last clone experiment was a disaster. It only brought in less than 1% of new Mac users and most were Mac users already that bought clones instead of Macs.

Also, the clones also hurt Apple financially because Apple spent all the money on R&D for the logic boards, licensed them to a clone manufacturer for as low as $25 then the cloners speed bumped it and shoved in more RAM and hard drive. In the end the Macs looked nicer but the clones were faster.

Heck even the HP iPod was a disaster.

I mostly agree with this, apart from the bit about the logic boards. Surely Apple's Mac R&D will drop through the floor after the Intel switch. For the first time all of the components will be generic, just as you would get in any beige box.

Therefore Apple should be able to complete (on both performance and price) on a level playing field with anyone licensing the OS, providing they didn't license to someone with insane volume like Dell. They're still what, the 6th biggest single PC manufacturer in the US?

Plus Apple now have their own budget box in the shape of the Mini - weren't Macs insanely expensive during the previous cloning effort?

Wouldn't buy one myself since I love Apple's industrial design. Which is pretty much the business they'll be in once the Intel switch is complete. The only distinguishing feature will be the case - and of course the world's best consumer OS.

p.s. - the HP iPod was certainly a disaster for HP. I don't know if it did Apple any damage. The question might be one of whether licensing the OS would even be attractive to an OEM unless they could undercut Apple's own hardware prices.

[nath]

dp...

[SuvsareRetarded]

What does 'remains to been' mean?

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by SuvsareRetarded

What does 'remains to been' mean?

Ha, dork.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by nath

I mostly agree with this, apart from the bit about the logic boards. Surely Apple's Mac R&D will drop through the floor after the Intel switch. For the first time all of the components will be generic, just as you would get in any beige box.

Substantiate, please.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by nath

I mostly agree with this, apart from the bit about the logic boards. Surely Apple's Mac R&D will drop through the floor after the Intel switch. For the first time all of the components will be generic, just as you would get in any beige box.

That's not a given, it's a huge "if". It's very likely Apple will run highly customized hardware.

tooki

[nath]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Substantiate, please.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM_alliance

Now Intel will be responsible for architecture development. Seems to me that will be cheaper for Apple than being the sole consumer shop for Power PC based systems. You disagree?

[nath]

Originally Posted by tooki

That's not a given, it's a huge "if". It's very likely Apple will run highly customized hardware.

tooki

Sure it's an 'if'. But why is it likely that Apple will run highly customized hardware? Is there any evidence for this?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by nath

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM_alliance

Now Intel will be responsible for architecture development. Seems to me that will be cheaper for Apple than being the sole consumer shop for Power PC based systems. You disagree?

That applies only to the PowerPC processor. Are you saying the CPU architecture is the only significant component in a computer? And Apple hasn't even been strongly involved in the development of the PowerPC since early on — they've left it mostly up to Motorola and IBM, whose failures to make big advances with the platform are the apparent reason Apple decided to go to Intel.

[rozwado1]

You guys are dorks.

[Chuckit]

I dorked your mom last night.

[rozwado1]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I dorked your mom last night.

Not bad: Extra points for quickness. You've redeemed your non-dork status.

[Albert Pujols]

http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech...hives/716.html