Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
MS sell their OS separately, and pretty much have a huge company based just off software, yet Apple tie the software to a single PC manufacturer and on top of that have iPhones,iPods,iTune n the money of iLife/iWorks n OSX upgrades yet are still nowhere near as big as MS. So maybe if they want a bit more muchos they might wanna you know sell OSX on its own?
07/02/09
The fact there are hackintoshes proves there is a market. Psystar is attempting to take advantage of that market and I don't understand why there is such a backlash outside of fanatical fanboyism.
The reason Apple doesn't license their OS is three fold. One, OSX provides for differentiation among their offering of computers and they can market this as advantage over the competition. Two, Steve has often thrown out the quote that people who care about software make their own hardware and Apple wants the Mac experience to be the same regardless of which Mac you are using. If they allow Dell or HP to install OSX, they lose some control over that and it opens them up to criticism. And three, they likely subsidize their software development with hardware sales and would not create the same kind of revenue selling just the software.
Keep in mind as a hardware manufacturer, Apple's real competition is Dell, HP, etc. Microsoft is just a common component of their competitors that they can easily attack in the ads. So they'd be helping out the competition by letting them use OSX.
07/02/09
Having more clients for the sake of having more clients doesn't mean jack if they don't really represent more money in the long run.
I don't think apple wants to enter a market that is wanting to spend 130 bucks every 2 years, who doesn't want to buy their other products and a market that will represent them a lot more money spent into R&D to support thousands of hardware configurations.
Apple sells as a premium brand that gives you the "whole experience" and a brand that already has an incredibly profitable business, wich is still growing and has a lot of loyal customers. I'm sure that if this business model ever stops growing, they'll try something else, until then...
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
07/02/09
Don't hire lazy, uninspired dregs from other companies to design your product.
Oh, and certainly don't hire uninspired, greedy, obtuse executives to point your company in a positive direction.
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
02/04/09
I thought they gave up the ghost years ago, shorty after that whole CherryOS trying to rip them off fiasco...
02/04/09
I remember that. But are they the same? That was PearPC (which was an open source PPC emulator), not PearC.
02/04/09
I guess, unlike public swimming pools, they left out the 'P' to distinguish themselves from those other guys...
02/04/09
You following me here cameraman?
02/04/09
12/12/08
12/11/08
People will realize that and Mac will quickly become objects of mockery, just like a Vuarnet or Tommy Hillfiger sweat shirt.
12/11/08
12/10/08
Their interest has never been selling computers, it's selling a legal theory.
I wouldn't be surprised if their business plan is not to prevail in court and sell computers, but to reach a settlement that will ensure profit from their investment (in legal not technological R&D), and then pack up their money bags and go out of business.
12/10/08
12/10/08
Exactly.
So... we've got Apple wanting to continue to sell their own machines to make all their profit on hardware and protect their IP and brand. (which they've done for the last 30 years)
And Microsoft not wanting Apple OSX to appear on their bread-n-butter HPs and Dells instead of Windows.
I'm sure HP and Dell don't wanna support all of the possible configurations of their machines... even if they could sell an OSX machine. Apple doesn't want to tailor the drivers and configurations of 13 different HP laptops or 8 Dell laptop models either.
So... why do people expect OSX to appear on clones?
IF, by some unlikely chance Psystar wins, and Apple is forced to open up its OS for use on all machines... couldn't Apple just raise the price of an OSX licence to $500, or refuse to wholesale it to Dell and HP? It's their product... no one can FORCE them to sell it to Dell.
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/05/08
12/05/08
12/05/08
You can get a Dell/Windows machine and a Dell/Linux machine and it's pretty easy to get support for either. Why would a Dell/OSX machine be any different.