OS X and the x86 Whitebox
July 26, 2005 1 Comment
This article gave me a thought (why the article made /. today when it was published two weeks ago, I have no idea). I don't think Apple will (or should for that matter) just release OSX for generic x86. They have a lot of benefits as it is now to controlling both the hardware and the OS. The can optimize to their exact setup and they don't have to worry about buggy third party drivers (which is one of Windows biggest stability problems) or supporting a billion random devices. Also important to Apple is that they can control the design of all OS X products. Apple surely doesn't want to be in the OS business and releasing OS X for any x86 would put them in that business. BUT, what if say 12 months or so after they work the bugs out of the Intel switch, they let a very select OEM or two produce a pre-approved and vetted non-Apple Mac. It would have to be a high end company that understands quality and design. Names like Dell don't strike me as plausible, as they'd lose their sweet Windows licensing deal. Maybe someone like AlienWare would be ideal though. I've not heard any specific rumors on this front, but wouldn't it be interesting? Apple would get to chip away at the Windows market share, make some additional money on OS X and broaden their reach while still getting to maintain a good amount of control on the quality and aesthetics of the hardware the OS X runs on.
–jeremy
Apple, Intel
hey tried licensing to OEM's years ago. Umax was eating their lunch because they made a shaky Apple clone at a low price.
Wisely, (I think) they pulled the plug on that idea.
I'd go a slightly different direction and license their server product on generic x86 server hardware sans their desktop. (use KDE/Gnome/whatever)
Good, high-margin revenue and BSD security. I don't know why they wouldn't.