Psystar has shown that Apple should license Mac OS X
Last weekend, a small, defiant company called Psystar
unleashed an opening salvo as it announced (and started selling) the Open
Computer - its own desktop running Mac OS X Leopard.
Wow. Is it just me or is Psystar becoming the first small company to have some guts and stand up to a major computer manufacturer? Sure, there's always the OSx86 project, but that barely compares to what's going on here.
If nothing else, Psystar's impending martyrdom will blaze the path for countless other companies that believe they can stand up to Apple. And who can blame them? Steve Jobs' closed-off policy is draconian at best and as Mac OS X continues to gain popularity, even more companies will crop up trying to do the same thing as Psystar.
So what should Steve and his cronies do? Besides hiring a new stylist, they should relinquish their stranglehold on Mac OS X and allow any and all computer manufacturers to sell the company's operating system on their own computers.
Sure, you may have heard this argument set forth before, but each of those times, the person espousing that opinion had pie-in-the-sky ideas about what could happen if Apple finally woke up and realized that it's clinging to a policy that worked a decade ago. Today, the game is much different and for the first time, we have a real reason why Apple should do it.
There's no debating the fact that as Apple continues to gain popularity and as Mac OS X slowly but surely takes some of the operating system market for itself, companies much like Psystar will find creative ways to offer the operating system on their own computers. After all, if you're starting a small company in the commoditized PC market, how can you survive unless you differentiate and provide something that no one else does?
With that in mind, Apple will be forced to engage in a countless number of frivolous lawsuits just to stop people from violating the Mac OS X EULA when it can be turning a huge profit by licensing it to those same companies.
For years, Dell, HP, Acer and others have been chomping at the bit to offer Mac OS X on their hardware and so far, Apple has said that its operating system is the only thing standing between its computers and its competitors' offerings.
But who cares?
Apple is doing well without its computer business and I simply don't see why licensing Mac OS X would really have that big of an impact on its sales. After all, don't most people love Apple designs more than anything else? Sure, the operating system is nice, but once that advantage is gone, Apple still can cling on to the beauty of its products.
And if Apple is actually smart about it, they may find that they can turn an even greater profit licensing Mac OS X and gain a larger portion of the OS market much sooner than it could with its current strategy.
Dell, HP and the others know that Vista is pure garbage and would gladly offer their customers something that is far better. And I think customers would be happy to change operating systems.
Steve needs to get his head out of the sand and read the writing that's already on the wall. If he doesn't, he'll be dealing with these nagging companies every week.
Just don't say I didn't warn him.
ITworld.com
Build your tech library with our book giveaways.
Windows PowerShell 2.0 Unleashed
By Tyson Kopczynski, Pete Handley, Marco Shaw; Published by Sams
Windows PowerShell Unleashed will not only give you deep mastery over PowerShell but also a greater understanding of the features being introduced in PowerShell 2.0–and show you how to use it to solve your challenges in your production environment. Enter now!
Ubuntu Server Administration
By Michael Jang; Published by McGraw-Hill Osborne Media
Realize a dynamic, stable, and secure Ubuntu Server environment with expert guidance, tips, and techniques from a Linux professional. Ubuntu Server Administration covers every facet of system management -- from users and file systems to performance tuning and troubleshooting. Enter now!
To license or not to license... this is the question.
Steve has most certainly toyed with the idea, but its easier said than done. First of all, its not clear that Apple would make more money licensing OS X on third party hardware than by making the whole widget. Second, OS X would likely become just as crappy as Windows if it had to run on a wide range of hardware. Bundling the hardware and software together is not just a philosophical issue, its also practical in the sense that it reduces the probability of error.My two cents.