QOTD: What Would You Suggest Apple Do?

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]DXrick[/nom]Apple cannot enable OSX to run on PCs. No one would buy a Mac. Can you imagine what would happen if Dell started selling PCs that run OSX? It would kill Apple. [/citation]

i dont understand your logic, if dell and others start selling osx and it takes off it will not kill apple it will greatly increase their market share, sure they would not be selling hardware, but software. it would go head to head against microsoft, money should pour in from likes of ibm who would also be selling them. apple hardware is fairly generic demonstrated by how easy it is to setup your own hackintosh. they should not force people to pay through the nose for basically what i can only describe as over priced, mediocre hardware just to get the os. it's limiting their market share. didn't you hear about the recent significant drop in market share against their competitors.
 
Specs on "my" macpro

the "famous" OSX
One 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
6GB (3x2GB)
640GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
One 18x SuperDrive
Apple Mighty Mouse
Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (English) and User's Guide

Price: $2,849.00

That's why i won't buy apple computers. stay in the mp3 and phone business.
 
Nik_I hit the nail on the head. No way to I buy a Mac just for Mac OS.

Now if Apple lets me put Mac OS on my own hardware... I'm sold!
 
re: DXrick

Apple fails then, because game developers always target the latest hardware and Apple never offers the latest hardware except in their $2000 beast called the Mac Pro. However even the Mac Pro lags PCs as far as game hardware goes. No SLI or Crossfire support in ANY Mac at this time.

Until Apple can address of those issues Macs are going to get stuck with dumbed down popular games or skipped altogether.
 
Let's get real about ways for Apple to grow its business, instead of just griping.

1) OS/X can easily run on other hardware if Apple wants it too. It's based on BSD and could easily be switched to Linux if it was a driver issue.
2) DirectX instead of OpenGL reflects short-sightedness on the part of game developers. DirectX is a proprietary technology that is limited to Windows. OpenGL runs on anything. Of course, the gamers insist on putting out flaky products that can't even run within DirectX's limitations. I can't understand a gamer's willingness to put up with software that you have jump through hoops to make work. Must be a Windows thing...
3) OS/X looks nice but then you can set up Linux to look that way too. Apple's appeal isn't just the desktop and BSD's stability and freedom from viruses but also the very cool hardware it produces. Yes you can get better specs from cheaper generic hardware, but not if you insist on the build quality that Apple delivers. Ask anyone whose had to have a notebook repaired because the power connector broke about just how great an idea Apple's magnetic conector is.

Apple's market share goes up and down over time. People have been counting them out for decades but they are still here. They won't beat Windows or Linux for desktop dominance but they'll always have a niche among people who want quality products that work.
 
[citation][nom]Niva[/nom]If we're going to talk about OSX in terms of hardware why don't you tell me the uniqueness of the hardware that it runs on that Apple created, please? [/citation]

It's all about packaging. They make a pretty machine that sets trends, and they put a slick easy to use OS on it that noone else has. They are a hardware company because they make their money on harware, not software sales.
 
Its hard to make suggestions for Apple since there are many things I don't know about, after all its not my company.

Maybe what I would like as a consumer would be a better idea. I'd buy OS X and put it on a system if for no other reason than just for fun. My parents and a few friends would probably use OS X on commodity hardware simply to avoid Windows viruses and adware. I've got no interest in Apple's hardware. Just the ability to purchase OS X and install it legally on commodity hardware.

I say legally even though Apple's EULA practices are probably not legal anyway. Better way to put it would be with Apple's support. Then again if that doesn't happen I'll just continue to use Ubuntu or Windows, and so will my family and friends.
 
I would suggest they don't change a thing. I like being able to harp on them for their overpriced equipment, snobby customers, and fascist tactics. If they were to change all that than what recourse would I have when the Apple zealots blindly attack Microsoft. Oh, I suppose I could suggest to put their laptops in more Hollywood movies, we don't see enough of that (sarcasm). Funny how 90%+ of the world uses PC but 90% of the movies use Mac.
 
I agree that opening OSX would make Apple more competitive but you guys are all missing the point. Apple is profitable. They make money with their current business practice, they are more concerned with innovation than being huge. I don't think Apple cares if they gain or lose market share, as much as doing things right. Their IPhone is still unbeatable and their IPod still sells rediculously because of their CURRENT business model. Apple is not going to change until Coorporate leadership changes, steve dies, and stupid decisions start creeping in from the "I am the boss do what I say" attitude that seems to strike every company eventually.
 
Most importantly, ditch the elitist mentality. It may even be an indirect factor in their advertising, but evertime I see an Apple commercial I think to myself...."That guy is a complete tool." Apple is one of those companies that its easy to hate just because of the way they present themselves. Egomeniacal.

They need to open their technology and branding to other companies for licencing. A PC is choice because the user can pretty much do whatever they want and there are many companies that make a massive range of parts (many choices for the consumer) where a Mac is just a Mac. Competiton and choice lower prices and produce sales. Companies won't "invest" in Apple if they can't make a decent profit.

Need to upgrade? But a part or 2 for the PC....whereas with a Mac you have to buy a whole new system. Apple has to let people open up that box and let users upgrade. But not only that, Mac performance just isn't up to par with a PC of equal value. The only thing a Mac has over that PC is the "ohhh thats shiney" factor....Something any custom built PC can do with some inexpensive mods.

Personally, I've never hated Apple / Macs because of the product itself, but the image and attitude it portrays.
 
Im betting the reason they wont release OSX on a PC is because all the hardware that goes into an Apple is specifically built for that platform. They start releasing OSX on a PC and then they start adding more hardware compatibility which in the long run causes more instability and more bugs. OSX would probly be just as buggy as a windows platform and then lose alot of its "crash free/virus free(bogues I know)" appeal.

What they need to do is open up their designs to other manufacturers and sublet out parts manufacturing to them. Kind of like a car lets say. You can get high performance parts, or low performance parts at a cheap price. This should offset the "high" price of apples. Yes, it would turn it into more of a PC. But this is the reason why PC is king and will always be. Availability of cheap affordable parts, while have high performance parts for enthusiasts. Infact, they've already started to do this with the Duo Core Intels. They need to expand on this idea. Yes, this contradicts my first point lol.
 
I wouldnt tell Apple to change a thing. They are good at what they do and that is selling an image. I will never purchase anything Apple makes for that very reason but it darn sure wouldnt be a good business move to veer from that path.
 
You guys keep talking about making the OS available for everyone. yes, Apples are very overpriced, but you aren't paying for the hardware, you are paying for the OS. The OS is built to work with the hardware that you purchase, and this gives it great stability. If you make something that will work with everything, it will work for everything, but not do any one thing particularly well. This is Windows.

Apple really isnt trying to get more market share than Windows or individual PC makers. They make massive profits from their (albeit) overpriced devices. As long as they stay at 5% or higher market share AND their iPod division keeps putting right along, Apple will ALWAYS be profitable, which is the stated goal for every company, last I checked.
 
Two things mainly. One other thing would be nice.

1) License OS X as many others have mentioned.

2) Make a mid level desktop that does not require me to re-purchase a monitor over and over (iMac). The Mac Mini doesn't do what I need and the Mac Pro is more than what I need. The iMac has the right stuff, but I just want to purchase the 24" screen one time and upgrade just the tower.

3) This isn't as important, but it would nice if the upgrades from the Apple store were remotely reasonable. I know I can still just get from outside, but it would be nice to just get a decent price for RAM and HD's straight from the Apple site.
 
[citation][nom]garydale[/nom]Let's get real about ways for Apple to grow its business, instead of just griping.1) OS/X can easily run on other hardware if Apple wants it too. It's based on BSD and could easily be switched to Linux if it was a driver issue.2) DirectX instead of OpenGL reflects short-sightedness on the part of game developers. DirectX is a proprietary technology that is limited to Windows. OpenGL runs on anything. Of course, the gamers insist on putting out flaky products that can't even run within DirectX's limitations. I can't understand a gamer's willingness to put up with software that you have jump through hoops to make work. Must be a Windows thing...3) OS/X looks nice but then you can set up Linux to look that way too. Apple's appeal isn't just the desktop and BSD's stability and freedom from viruses but also the very cool hardware it produces. Yes you can get better specs from cheaper generic hardware, but not if you insist on the build quality that Apple delivers. Ask anyone whose had to have a notebook repaired because the power connector broke about just how great an idea Apple's magnetic conector is.Apple's market share goes up and down over time. People have been counting them out for decades but they are still here. They won't beat Windows or Linux for desktop dominance but they'll always have a niche among people who want quality products that work.[/citation]

I see you say that i can get better specs with cheaper, generic hardware? Exactly which generic hardware are you referring to? I am going to build a system for less than $1400 (half the cost of macpro that would have a lot less performance) and every component going into that system is high quality and name brand. And do you know that they use quality hardware? I mean when you buy a mac do they tell you who the hard drive/cd drive or psu is made by? I see you gave an example of a broken power connection, but i have had hp computers all of my life (i have had a laptop for a year now) and i have never had any hardware failure. Maybe i am just lucky.

as for my opinion on what apple should do, i have changed my mind and i think they function great the way they are. Apple and macs are great for some people, just not me. But any improvement i could list would only make them more like a pc. so i say let them be different and appeal to a different group of people. It's not like having another competitor in the pc market would do me much good, unless it dropped prices on other pc's, but i don't think having one more competitor in a very large competition will drive prices that much lower.
 
[citation][nom]darkside_babylon[/nom]Most importantly, ditch the elitist mentality. [/citation]

amen brother, i worked out there with a bunch of developers from apple and they are the worse. beyond description just how stuck-up, into themselves they all were. i guess when you are full of yourself, living in a cacoon where everyone thinks they are the greatest, others are like shit, not worth studying. i cant describe just how difficult it was to like work with them. they were very pigheaded, the worse. they are like close minded. you know not invented here syndrome.
 
[citation][nom]njalterio[/nom]Dumbass. Maybe if all you do is check your AOL e-mail account and look at pictures of LOLcats then a laptop works fine.However if you need a decent quad core processor and/or graphics card, laptops are definitely not the way to go.[/citation]

Nice use of the expletive!

At one time notebooks didn't have dual core processors and accelerated graphics, what makes you think they wont have quad core processors and better graphics? Next year, maybe later this year? I'm sorry, but I know of many engineers that do very sophisticated projects on notebook computers. Unless you are a hard core gamer or do lots (and I mean lots) of rendering, notebooks are fine. Apple notebooks are the finest! The 17" MacBook Pro is truly awesome! That's the real spark that set off Microsoft and the rest of the PC fan boy. It wasn't the Mac vs. PC commercials. Mac notebooks kick ass, PC notebooks look like ass.
 
Very simple: lower the cost. One of (if not THE biggest) concerns that most people have with buying a Mac is that they cost about 25% more.

I took the lease expensive Apple computer, a Mac Mini, and with no options selected the total was $599. Selecting comparative components on newegg to build a Windows machine (CPU, mobo, case, RAM, video card, case, and OS) came out to $463.93. Note that both systems do not include keyboard, mouse, or monitor. Also, I was unable to find equivalent parts in some instaces because I could not find a 120GB hdd on newegg, and the slowest Core2Duo they had was a 2.8GHZ rather than the 2.0GHZ Apple set up. I didn't choose the cheapest components either.

Plain and simple: give us (consumers) a couple of configurations between $600 and $850, and then I would CONSIDER switching.
 
[citation][nom]TEAMSWITCHER[/nom]Nice use of the expletive!At one time notebooks didn't have dual core processors and accelerated graphics, what makes you think they wont have quad core processors and better graphics? Next year, maybe later this year? I'm sorry, but I know of many engineers that do very sophisticated projects on notebook computers. Unless you are a hard core gamer or do lots (and I mean lots) of rendering, notebooks are fine. Apple notebooks are the finest! The 17" MacBook Pro is truly awesome! That's the real spark that set off Microsoft and the rest of the PC fan boy. It wasn't the Mac vs. PC commercials. Mac notebooks kick ass, PC notebooks look like ass.[/citation]

The looks of notebook are simply an opinion. I find that a lot more girls here are attracted to the looks of a mac, but if it's what you like then that is your opinion. However, i find my notebook very cool looking (hp dv7t). That is my opinion.

And by the way, tell me what a macbook pro can do that my dv7t can't do or do better. Just because some pc users choose not to buy high performance pc notebooks (they save a lot of money) doesn't mean there aren't pc users out there that buy high performance notebooks that perform better than macbook pro (and we still save a lot of money).

On a last note, I would rather be a pc fanboy that can get an awesome looking/performing notebook for less money, than a mac fanboy with his little white notebook that had to spend all of his money on the name apple instead of performance. I guess how you spend your money is your business though.
 
My first encounter with Itunes on my Windows box was torture. I had Itunes convert my WMAs to another folder. If something happened during the conversion, I had to start over. After I was done, I noticed many duplicates and no easy way to get rid of them. I had to go get additional software to remove duplicates. After I deleted the files, Itunes did not automatically update the library, nor did it add files I put in the folders I told it to monitor. So it was back to the internet for another piece of software to add files Itunes missed. I guess I'm spoiled by WMP and WinAmp maintaining their own databases.

For starters they could make software more usable for other systems. During my whole Itunes ordeal, I felt like I went from real lego's(WMP) to duplo's(Itunes). It was horrible.

Get rid of the flash if you can't make your software user friendly. I don't mind a simple interface, but I want the more advanced controls to do other things.
 
Apple notebook PCs:

I will never purchase an apple PC, for the same reason i don't use linux. I will buy the device with the gratest software compatibility. And than there's the price / performance issue... I don't care how pretty it is, i won't spend twice the money on half the hardware.


Apple desktop PC's:

I allways build my own PC's from scratch. I like being able to chose what components go into my PC, not having someone chose for me. Plus, i can upgrade a PC. For an apple it's more complicated and expensive.

I recommend apple PCs to people that are new to computers. Macs are easy to use and less complicated. But that same advantage limits them.
 
really simple answer:

Sell Mac OS separately to any user.

As Windows made Bill Gates the richest man in the world, It can give much more money to Apple than selling the OS attached to obsolete hardware.
There even is the possibility that Apple defeat Microsoft.

What if Apple don't like the results of selling Mac OS to anybody?

Then just need to go back to the present state with the next OS version.

The experiment is most probable to increase Apple revenues than to damage it, and even if later decides go back to Closed OS, then his base consumers will be much bigger.

Even if pirates make millions of copies of the OS, sales can only grow, and pirated copies will make a giant number of users experiencing Apple OS.
If those users really are convinced that Apple OS is better, then they will want to use the next OS... and if NOT. Then all that propaganda about Apple being better, is a lie, and will be ovbious.

I think that Apple fears to be discovered by smart PC users.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom