[analogika]

Originally Posted by RonnieoftheRose

Another benefit of licensing OS X and getting it out there to the masses is that the Pro apps would see an increase in sales too. There's a greater profit margin to be made there than hardware sales.

Not at $1000 a pop for the top-end software package.

Remember that back when Logic, for example, had to be profitable (back before Apple bought Emagic), the Platinum version, including all the plug-ins now thrown in for free, used to cost more like $4000.

And Emagic was going under.

As was Steinberg, before they got bought by digidesign/AVID (who later sold Steinberg to Yamaha).

No: The pro apps are NOT profitable for Apple. They might just recoup costs due to the incentive to upgrade to Apple's own intermediate/pro software from the free versions included with every Apple machine.

But in the end, I'm certain that the pro apps are mostly incentive to buy Apple hardware.

-s*

[PubGuy]

I'm getting real tired of people recanting this 3% or 4% market share business. Check out this information from here:
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...ruses_malware/

Wednesday, June 15, 2005 - 08:05 PM EST

In a press release on Friday, June 3, 2005, Wizzard Software explained why they believe the Macintosh market is important as they prepare to release AT&T Natural Voices for Apple's Mac OS X:

According to a statement released earlier this year, Apple Computer reported their 2005 first quarterly revenue and net income as the highest in the history of their company, with 74% revenue growth. Apple shipped 1,046,000 Macintosh units during this quarter, representing a 26% increase in CPU units over the year-ago quarter. According to US News and World Report, Macintosh owners buy 30% more software than their Windows counterparts. Further, Macintosh software comprises over 18% of all software sold, according to the Software and Information Industry Association. In addition, the Software Publishers Association (SPA) estimates that 16 percent of computer users are on Macs.

Also, on Thursday, June 2, 2005, Winn Schwartau, one of the country's leading experts on information security, infrastructure protection and electronic privacy, summed up his first month's experiences in his conversion from Windows to Mac:

In the WinTel world, could you do this? Or maybe you should ask, 'Do I really want all of that paranoia to go away? Do I really want to spend more time enjoying whatever the hell I do on my 'puter, or maybe I should continue wasting hours every week on security crap that shouldn't be a problem in the first place? Hey. It's just a question.

Matthew G. Solovey, writing for The Hershey Chronicle on Thursday, June 2, 2005, explained:

As Windows users continue to run their adware, spyware, and virus removal programs, Macintosh enthusiasts have enjoyed - literally - zero viruses. Adware and spyware are nonexistant as Mac users surf the Web without issue. OS X's UNIX shell is a secure system that keeps your computer safe, and Apple has built in a firewall for added security. In addition, it's stable. OS X users report months without rebooting their computers.

Macintosh software comprises over 18% of all software sold and the SPA estimates that 16 percent of computer users are on Macs. So PLEEEAAASSSSEEEE, stop with the 3%, 4% stuff, that stuff is over 10 years old.

[Anubis IV]

It said 16% of software, not 16% of users. There's a large difference.

Now then, last I heard, they were more around the 3% mark, even by their own admission, and that was an increase over the last two years.

[Drakino]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

1. It is the OS that is more secure, stable, and user-friendly than alternatives, not the hardware.

The hardware is also user friendly in many small ways a PC is not. For example:

Powerbook/iBook power supplies come with an integrated cord wrap.

The batteries all have power meters that are viewable even with the machine is off. My old Armada had such a battery indicator as well, but it was placed so it was not visible when in the laptop.

Lack of tons of lights. "Whats the blue light mean? What about the third one from the left that flashes?"

Backlit keyboard on the Powerbook. You and I might type well, but not everyone does.

Ability to swap batteries when the machine is asleep. Apple needs to do this on all machines, but the ones they do it on is nice.

Target disk mode allowing things like OS X to migrate your data when you get a new machine.

Ease of use of popping one side cover and inserting a memory dimm to upgrade. Most PCs, the DIMMs are under a cable mess.


So while the software offers many advantages, the hardware design does too. If Apple gets out of the hardware side of things, I will still buy OS X, but miss the small buy great touches they add to any computer design.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Drakino

Ability to swap batteries when the machine is asleep. Apple needs to do this on all machines, but the ones they do it on is nice.

Don't most PC laptops do this too? I admit that I don't see people in that situation often, but I thought it was possible.

[Kerrigan]

i would like to see bonzai buddy ported to OS X, it is one of the best applications there is on windows.

[loki74]

Originally Posted by Rainy Day

Now it's entirely possible (likely even) that laser printers were around for mainframes before Apple brought it to the desktop. But Apple made it affordable for real people like us. Same probably holds for scanners.

Yeah I think they were. I was talking w/ my dad recently--he says that Apple got it from Canon (not surprising.) I would expect him to know; he actaully had to program drivers or something so he could use a printer in college, as opposed to a typewriter. (Now this is like, pre-DOS sh!t were talking about here!)

But Im fairly certain about the PDA... that was the Newton, right? I really wish they would make a PDA. like an iPalm or something... that would be tite.

[Graymalkin]

Originally Posted by loki74

Yeah I think they were. I was talking w/ my dad recently--he says that Apple got it from Canon (not surprising.) I would expect him to know; he actaully had to program drivers or something so he could use a printer in college, as opposed to a typewriter. (Now this is like, pre-DOS sh!t were talking about here!)

But Im fairly certain about the PDA... that was the Newton, right? I really wish they would make a PDA. like an iPalm or something... that would be tite.

The LaserWriters were pretty awesome machines when they were introduced considering they were the fastest machines in Apple's line-up for a while. However the LaserWriter introduced a number of technologies to the printing world that later became de facto standards like ethernet connectivity and PostScript interpreters. What made the LaserWriters special was they could be shared on a LocalTalk network with other machines. Instead of having to sneakernet documents all over the place to print them you could just print directly to the printer connected over the network.

As for the PDA, Apple wasn't the first with that either. The Newton however was years beyond what anyone before them had managed to build and it was even below the expectations of its original design. The Newton could send and receive e-mails, faxes, and even place phone calls. They could even print to PostScript printers (pretty much all LaserWriters made). This was all in addition to keeping a calendar and address book. What made the Newt really powerful was its Assist function. You could write out a memo and at the end write "mail Mike" and tap Assist and the Newt would look up Mike's e-mail address in your contacts then dial-up to the net if needed and send out the memo.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Anubis IV

It said 16% of software, not 16% of users. There's a large difference.

Now then, last I heard, they were more around the 3% mark, even by their own admission, and that was an increase over the last two years.

No, it said 18% of software sales, AND 16% of installed user base.

In addition, the Software Publishers Association (SPA) estimates that 16 percent of computer users are on Macs.

Market share (around 3% for Macs) only counts what is sold, new, out-of-the-box. Considering that Macs have a much longer average life-span than PC-compatibles, the installed-user-base figure is a much more accurate way of estimating how many potential software customers are out there.

[brainiac_7]

Apple is historically regarded as having made a huge blunder in not licensing their OS to cloners. Many acknowledge that Microsoft is hamstrung trying to get it's OS to work on as many clones as possible, so your local Chinese restaurant doesn't have to upgrade to a P4 just to run its little DOS program from 1990.

Why would Apple want to compound their so called blunder by volunteering to enter the same morass as Microsoft? Would it be good for the bottom line in the short run? Yes. Would OS X slowly become buggy as hell the result of trying to be all things to all PCs? Exhibit A: WIndows.

[analogika]

bingo.

[JKT]

The reason why Dell would like to sell OS X boxen is because the shift to Intel by Apple potentially means the death of Dell in the Education market - why buy a Dell that can only run Windows/Linux when you can buy a Mac for a not too dissimilar price that not only can run Windows/Linux but can also run MacOS X?

This has the potential to be massive for Apple assuming they don't price themselves out in a way that they have tended to do in the past. It might not increase the number of Mac OS users overall, but it will increase their profits enormously through increased hardware sales.

My tuppence worth.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Rainy Day

1. Did you know Apple came out with the first digital camera? The QuickTake.

2. Apple came out with the first laser printer too, and even though they had a long and initially very profitable run with their LaserPrinters, they are now completely out of the printer business. At one time, printers accounted for over half of Apple's revenue.

3. Apple also came out with the first CD-ROM,

4. flatbed scanner

5. and PDA.

1. Correct, in that it was the first natively-digital camera. Before that, "still video" cameras existed that served roughly the same purpose.

2. Incorrect. IBM made the first commercial laser printer in 1979 (a 100ppm monster), and HP made the first desktop laser printer, the original LaserJet, one year before Apple released the LaserWriter.

3. Not sure about this one. Apple never made CD-ROM drives, they bought them from optical drive manufacturers (e.g. Toshiba and Sony) and put them in housings with interfaces.

4. Same thing. Apple was not the OEM. I believe Apple's scanners were based on Canon mechanisms.

5. Not true, Sharp and others released them before Apple did, and many companies sold non-graphical electronic organizers for years (going back all the way to the 70s). The Newton isn't even a PDA by modern standards, it's too big. (Don't get me wrong, I love the Newton, but it never was a practical PDA like, say, the Palm was.)

Not trying to burst the Apple bubble, but Apple was seldom the absolute pioneer. Apple often just sold the first practical one, or the first one the average user could figure out.

tooki

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by JKT

This has the potential to be massive for Apple assuming they don't price themselves out in a way that they have tended to do in the past.

Isn't that kind of like assuming aliens will come from the sky and blast away Microsoft HQ?

[Anubis IV]

Originally Posted by analogika

No, it said 18% of software sales, AND 16% of installed user base.

I stand corrected. Guess I needed to have read that better. My apologies.

[el chupacabra]

Dell just wants to minimize the the market share that apple can now potentially take from them now that apple has joined the PC business and can possibly run 2 OS es along side each other. If Apple could somehow sell hardware as cheap as dell with 2 OS they will gain a lot of business.

[Kerrigan]

Why would schools want to buy a bunch of Macs that can run Windows if Windows would be unsupported? Seems like an unnecessary hassle. Just get a complete Dell package for $300 and that will do the job better.

[Chuckit]

But Microsoft would support Windows, wouldn't they? You wouldn't need Dell to do it.

I still don't think that would ever really be a viable option, though. Apple will not bring the cost of a Mac down into Dell's range, and if you add to that the cost of buying a Windows license retail, it doesn't seem like it'll be particularly more likely than now.

[Kerrigan]

I suppose Microsoft would support Windows, however in my experience, whenever I have called Microsoft for help, they have always told me to call my computer's manufacturer. not the best customer service, if you ask me.

[Hash]

It's just a negotiating method for Dell to get lower Windows OEM price (is it about 20 dollars?) from MS.

[Gunner1954]

Originally Posted by RonnieoftheRose

Only companies that have the "Designed by Apple" moto can license OS X.

If Apple does go the " Designed by Apple for..." route, they should also have a third party peripheral plan similar to the software "Designed for X" stamp of approval. That is, a peripheral card must actually work with Apple hardware and OS X to display a logo stating "Works with MacTel"; much as we've seen for PPC, Mac OS, and other logos.

Also, Apple could require any third-party vendor (Dell, Sony, etc.) to provide their own hardware and OS support for those machines produced by the third party. Else, Apple could provide the logic board and (a list of) approved internals for the third parties to be slapped into cases manufactured by the third party. In this second scenario, Apple could use specialized Intel boards with built-in DRM or some other technology that would allow Mac OS X to operate with that board (the old Mac hardware ROM?) thus certifying the board as Mac OS X compatible. This flash-ROM could also have a database of compatible internals (updated through firmware updates and the Software Update Control Pane) -- thus only certain video cards, graphic cards, etcetera, once tested and approved, would work on the logic board. All of this so that Apple can keep control of the hardware-software integration while allowing more 'boxes' on the market, or they could also sell the logic board straight up, or allow Dell or Sony or HP to test cards and update the firmware for their specific machines.

Just another few thoughts to toss about.

[romeosc]

Originally Posted by d0ubled0wn

I think licensing OS X to Dell and HP could work for Apple now that they have a good software base. The pro apps and iApps could become a very good cash cow by reaching a much wider audience. Apple needs as Office alternative though, and they are only one good spreadsheet.app away from having one. If people want to run OS X on their craptacular Dells and Gateways, fine let them. I personally know several people who'd love to run OS X on cheap hardware. There's a lot of potential here.

Apple would have to have a protection scheme to have "OS call home" or otherwise no use selling 1 copy to get a million users.

I fear this is what is coming. Apple will ship a "Dongle" or other device with every OS copy.... without which OS X won't run. Then they can benefit from the software sales. Of course all MacTell systems will have this chip on board.... Others would have to purchase to be able to use!