OS X on PCs - Pros and Cons

i tried OS X tiger & leopard on my pc and i would like to buy it just to say thanks for a job well done .
so i will be happy if there is OS X legal version for PC .

Hello,

I honestly think your cons are slightly off. If you have noticed, the OSX86 community has been using a number of different hardware (AMD, ATI, Intel, Nvidia, etc.), with success. If they are smart, they would just have a verison of OSX for PC, but allowing the OSX86 community run it. Use this verison of OSX like Linux distributions do; a free open community of users who will actually use the os and figure out the problems amoungst themselves, not really having it for the open market, regular user. To be honest most users have a hard enough time turning on the computer. Apple only has to have a link on their site to this OSX for PC.

In addition, if they really wanted to distribute OSX for PC on other hardware like HP, IBM, Dell, etc; they only have to have a version of that model pc with the specific apple hardware recommendations. That way there is a option for a person to buy the what ever vendor they want, with OSX on it. It is really simple, but you are correct to think, it can become complicated.

I personally love the OSX86 community and a downloadable version of OSX with limited apple support (just like Linux distributions) would be a very wise idea even if I have to pay for it.

I am not a big advocate for licensing OSX on to PC hardware, but I do remember the heady days of Mac clones and the increase in interest and emergence that it created in the entire field. It was like a little reflection of the early days of the computer frontier that is so lacking today.

But I do not see how most of the problems that drivers and multiple h/w configs that everyone keeps worrying about would really have to be a problem. Apple would just need to create a “MacReady” designation for h/w as they were tested before giving out the licenses and that would be that. Let the hackers deal with the headaches - they live for that anyway.

The only real issue to me is whether there are OEM’s or smaller shops that could produce products that Apple doesn’t plan on making itself in the future. I have always wondered (though I kind of know the answer) why Apple doesn’t license the OS to tablet manufacturers, set a high price on the license fee and let the 1,000 or so people who want one, buy one with Apple’s blessing? This supports an ecosystem that Apple holds the key to.

There is surely the eventual lack of control over user experience that might occur down the road, but even if there were a simpler OSX version that ran on Vaio’s for example, then they could at least prime the switchers pump a little and see what happens. After Macs reach 15% of the market, something will have to change anyway.

As it's been said many times, Apple is a hardware company. They don't make money on software.

If they licenced Mac OS X at a price that isn't subsidised by hardware, it'd be high enough that people won't buy it. Considering the piracy claims that Microsoft recently made, Apple couldn't afford to sell Mac OS X for non-Apple computers, as it's likely too many people would pirate the software. (Support is more of the cost than putting a DVD and a box together and shipping it.)

To be comparatively honest, Microsoft is a battle tested company that has seen some of the most innovative yet dastardly attacks on their systems. Despite that Microsoft has always created updates in record time to thwart these security attacks.

This is probably the biggest problem with Mac, it isn't as battle tested as windows. From the moment it were to become an all hardware OS, and the attractiveness of it increases to malware developers, the Macintosh experience will be shown for what it really is and you may begin to see that when put under similar circumstances, the Macintosh OS will begin to suffer the same problems as it proprietary brethren Windows.

With these controls in place, Apple has created a computer similar to the VCR, Stereo or DVD player that is simple and practical and requires very little technical knowledge on the part of the user, the same as with the other aforementioned electronic consumer devices.

As such, to create an all hardware OS, would be like Apple committing suicide as the main reason they tout for purchasing an apple machine gets thrown down the drain.

i think apple must allow to install osx on a pc for a short period of time or by monthly charge scheme. this way, people who don't have a mac will have their hands on their os capabilities. and this will surely lure alot of non-mac users to BUY the REAL thing. also, this will enable mac to have more creative people in their backs. about the virus, well steve and his team are excellent in avoiding these. thanx to apple and steve jobs for an excellent product!

OsX must be realeased for PC users, as competition spurs a higher pace in development, lowers price tags and increases user friendliness. Linux is definitely not a big name as common users are scared of trying this OS due to its reputation of being more technical and its user must be more code-line savy. On the other hand OsX is "what yoy get is what you see"... everything is stable and for now threats are at a minimum. If you consider an increase in malware proportional to the increase in market share, that's a risk worth taking. I am a user of a so called hackintosh machine and i am very pleased about it!

Apple was burnt by the clone experiment. It cannablised their userbase, with Mac users buying cheaper clones rather than Apple macs.

In the early 90s the so-called "Star Trek" project ported OS7 to i486 PCs.

It ran very well but was canned for all sorts of reasons, not the least of which was PC manufacturers' contracts with Microsoft meant that to load MacOS on a PC still required them to pay for a Windows licence.

I would love to be able to load OSX on my PCs but the chances of doing that legally are a snow leopard's chance in hell.

Oh, this would be pretty cool. However Apple will hit a wall with the problems that Microsoft has already endured, not that they can't either, but it just wouldn't be convenient at this point in time. I think when OS 11 comes, that would be a good time to try this.

If anything, why don't 3rd party companies just start supporting linux distros. The only thing keeping me from switching to linux is Adobe not putting their Creative Suite software on this amazingly fast and flexible platform.

Windows drivers are build from hardware designers and WHQL certified from Microsoft.

Apple can do the same thing and market share will rise up for 20% in one day.

Its not perfection that counts it's the cash.

I consider pretty much all "User Agreements" proposed by private companies to be a bunch of baloney. They are dictating the terms, they should call them ultimatums, not agreements. An agreement is a two-way affair.

If apple allowed it to where their os can be installed on pc's I would buy it in a heart beat. Vista is tiring and annoying software. It's display is unappealing and it always has consistant crashes and lagging issues. With the mac os's the display is extremely pleasent and the amount of possibilities with mac software is always a fun.

Ur right to think that if Mac made it to other hardware manufacturers it would eat up quite a bit of Microsoft's market share. But; the only reason that Macs are virus free is because the hackers have no reason to hack them. The US military is running XP, and most other businesses and companies are running some version of Microsoft's Windows.

The moment Macs became a viable target, Macs would fall in terms of market share very quickly as people realize just how easily they are prone to hacks. Apple has never had to deal with the kind of attacks that Microsoft has over the years. Microsoft as it were is a battle hardened veteran while Apple has been at the sidelines doing its own little thing in its own little world.

On average Macs have fewer holes patched per year than Windows systems, not because they have fewer holes, but because there are far fewer hackers out there looking for holes in Macs. Also in 2007 i believer it was reported that although Macs had fewer exploits than Windows, the exploits labeled critical were far greater on the Mac side then the Windows side.

In terms of hardware, if Mac was available on other hardware, the driver debacle we saw when Vista was first released would repeat itself for Mac..... unless apple were planning on writing the drivers for every piece of hardware on the market in house.... or had a team testing every hardware configuration available.

Windows OS runs much better on Macs than on PC's.This fact shows how powerful macs hardware is.
i do not believe that Mac OS would be capable to run smoothly on the PC's.Plus windows negative marketing skills,i do not believe that Mac would stand a chance to gain popularity

I think OS X, or possibly a subsequent release of the Mac OS, should be ported out to PC's for many reasons but here are my top 2. First let me discuss the virus "threat" before I give my reasons.

OS X, as a Unix based system, is fundamentally more secure than Windows, A DOS, micro-server based system. The main reason why there are fewer viruses for Unix based systems, is because the engineering principals of Unix are built to be much more stable and solid from the ground up. It is not entirely because of small market share. Linux servers hold nearly half the market share, and are so much more secure than their Windows counterparts, that it is ridiculous. Solid engineering and design principals, go a long way towards thwarting viruses.

Ok, now that conversation is over. My first reason for licensing out OS X, is merely a philosophical reason. Agreeing to use OS X on Apple's terms, is agreeing to be a moron of sorts. It is like buying a particular brand of toaster and agreeing that if you are to use your new toaster, you must only toast bagels and not bread, as per the EULA agreement. Ridiculous.

Apple could really prosper if they were not so keen on dominating computer users like Microsoft has done for years. Holding their OS captive, forces Apple into a niche market, just like in the 90's. If they wish to keep the prosperity train rolling and meet demand, which they could not do in the 90's (hence the clones), Apple must use their software to gain market share in order to fund their R&D. Vista failed...Apple must step on Microsoft's throat and apply pressure by licensing out OS X. If they are worried about the user experience, then establish terms with Dell, HP, etc..... to keep a certain hardware criteria until driver support can catch up. For those that want to use it on custom builds....you do so at your own risk, so no whining when your lack of homework causes your home-made Mac to crash.

My second reason why OS X should be licensed out, is so that Apple can sell more hardware. It may sound counter intuitive. Many think that releasing OS X on cheaper hardware will kill Mac sales, but I think it will do the opposite. Here is why. Psystar has somewhat proven, that some generic PC hardware can run OS X better than any Apple hardware options, though much of the refinement and polish is lacking. The polish will come, and Mac will be selling inferior machines for more money and everyone will know it. Goodbye Mac sales!!! But if Mac licenses out OS X, hardware manufacturers will take on some of the fiscal weight of driver and feature development, which will save Apple some money, thus increasing profits, and will result in better hardware support. Then Apple could take advantage of the newly developed hardware configurations that outperform what they currently sell, which is very expensive and behind the current standard performance curve.

The end result.... Apple can offer high performance Macs, with more software selection, since more apps will be ported out to the more ubiquitous OS X. The "outsourcing" of hardware development to other companies will give Apple an opportunity to compete performance wise with their PC competitors. And since Apple has always prided themselves on being a cutting edge engineering and design company, they will still grab sales because they build beautiful, well made machines, with the latest, innovative features. People will still pony up to the Mac price tag because Apple builds quality stuff. If everyone were about buying cheap all the time, Vaio PC's would be extinct, but they are not, and in fact Vaio's sell very well.

Apple could beat Microsoft at their own game. They could also get rid of that EULA agreement which makes them look like a bigger deuce-bag than Microsoft. I want to see Apple do well, so come on Mr. Jobs....strike while the iron is hot!!!!!

This guy knows his stuff. Listen up Steve jobs.

Yes! Of course they should make their OS available for use on a PC. This is the only reason Apple has got such a "small" share of the market. You can weigh the pros & cons. But, in the end, this is why they are not as big. People want choice and flexability. Microsoft is taking that slowly away with each version of Windows that comes out and people are reacting to that. But, to just go out and buy an Apple does not make sense. With all of Windows faults, it is still better to have the most choices possible. That is why there are still more Windows users than Apple users.