folia

Why doesn’t Apple want its operating system, Mac OS X, to be installed on non-Apple hardware ie. on the majority of Personal Computers in the world?

Marketing (long term)

This article was written in response to Massimo Mantelli’s exhilarating post – I HAVE A MUTE HACKINTOSH

The text in italics serves only to contextualize the post, also in a temporal sense.

In January 2006, the transition from IBM PowerPC processors to Intel x86 began for Apple Computers. This occurred simultaneously with the presentation of Bootcamp, software that allows you to natively install Microsoft Windows XP and Vista operating systems on all Apple computers with Intel processors. In January this year, Apple Computers Inc. changed its name to Apple Inc., thus declaring that its core business (ie. the key activities that contribute the most to the company’s production and turnover) is no longer “only” the design, production and sale of computers and relevant operating systems, but also software, music, telephony and entertainment.

Currently, in September 2008, Microsoft Windows can be installed on the two main hardware platforms, PC and Mac, and the success of virtualization software allows nearly all operating systems to be run on nearly all hardware platforms. The lack of interaction between Mac OS X and PC hardware is therefore increasin

gly felt. Computing history shows us that when there is an obstacle to overcome, there is always someone who is willing to undertake pioneering research to try to solve the problem. Often the solutions either become standards, consolidated and adopted universally by whoever needs them, or the high walls set up by this or that company, seeking to limit the use of its products, crumble over time.

In my opinion, the most striking example of this is Unix and Linux. But that’s another long story.

In the story of Mac OS X, the pioneers are OSx86 project wiki, EFI-X, Psystar wiki – businesses, foundations, organizations, and individuals who believe that a path to overcome this obstacle, which has been created solely by Apple, exists, and are ready to pursue it.

If I were to declare today: “In the future, Mac OS X will run natively on PC platforms”, this would not be controversial because technically, the distance between the two worlds is now minimal.

However, I would like to try to go beyond the information in the public domain and undertake a personal analysis of why Apple does not currently want its operating system to be able to run natively on all the world’s computers.

I will analyze Apple’s two most recent great successes.

The iPod: this product achieved success initially because it was not an item for the masses; it was very expensive; it was owned by “cool” people; it made news. Then it became a “mature” item and, from its expansion, the iPod generated another great success: the “iTunes Music Store” (now known simply as iTunes Store).

The iPhone has had a similar history: an item for a select few, expensive, very cool, able to generate media hype, and from its expansion, the AppStore.

There are many features common to Mac OS X and Apple’s other commercial successes:

- Few people have these products and most people who do are professionals;

- The products are very expensive – not intrinsically but indirectly, because Apple hardware, while certainly of above-average quality, is more costly for the same performance;

- The highest distribution of products is found among people involved in activities that are currently considered very “cool“, such as design, advertising, music and video production.

Now, what does Mac OS X need in order to be like the other Apple commercial successes?

Lately, Mac OS X is beginning to receive increasing attention globally due to its links to the brand Apple/iPod, and due to the positive reviews it has received both in technical and non-technical publications.

Analyzing all its features in detail, some things still need to be improved before Mac OS X can be presented to the wider public, such as Finder (the equivalent of Windows Explorer) and the way the installation and uninstallation of applications is managed.

What could Apple’s plans be?

Apple is enjoying free advertising and an increased interest in its operating system, which has been generated thanks to those who are trying to get around its limitations. Just think of all the news about Psystar and the legal battle that is about to begin, or about the news that has been published on specialized sites since Efi-X was announced.

Meanwhile, Mac OS X will become more widespread and, with the increased number of users, the number of software developers for the platform will also increase.

Companies will begin to consider using Mac OS X both for workstations and servers.

Mac OS X will be seen as a real alternative because it can do everything that Windows can and, over time, everyone will be able to see it in action, thanks to their geeky friends and to Mac converts.

Those who have the economic capacity will consider buying a Mac. Others will install Mac OS X on the machines they already have, exploiting more or less legal techniques that have been developed.

Then one day when expectations have peaked, Steve Jobs (or someone speaking for him) will stand on a stage in the ‘Moscone Centre’ of the day, and will give the happy news to Mac Users: “From today, Mac OS X is compatible with every computer in the world!” – thus marking yet another milestone in the history of the company and of computing.

At that point, the news will sweep the world in a matter of seconds.

Followers of the Mac-religion will have different reactions: for half of them, their chests will swell with pride, while the other half will balk at the thought that another bridge has been built towards the PC world, which is so snubbed by Apple fundamentalists.

From that day, beginning with the geeks, then continuing with professionals and students, more and more users will have their nice dual-boot configuration; then after a few years, there will be a return to two major groups, PC and Mac – but by then, Mac OS X will inevitably have obtained a huge slice of the market. And if Apple can replicate iTunes Store or AppStore for its operating system, its success will be inevitable.

Today, QuickTime, iTunes and Safari have their versions for Microsoft Windows, and this is an important sign. Apple is apparently committed to defending its walls but probably, it is just waiting for the right moment to open the doors and let itself be invaded by a ‘horde of “barbarian” customers’ with pockets full of money, tired of the lack of foresight of the Microsoft monopoly.

Congratulations, folia.