Why does apple think its ok to run windows on their hardware but not vice versa?

Since someone locked a previously mentioned thread, which i think the user was trying to ask this...not how "DO" i run os x on a PC, but why doesnt apple allow this?

Simply because they make most of their money in hardware? Or they don't want to battle the open component driver model of the PC?

I for one would definately show them the money to buy the OS to try to run it on my PC even if it was known to be buggier than windows...but alternatively i'm skeptical to pay the extra $700-1000 for nearly identical hardware to get mac. I've been reading about boot camp, but i'm not sure its really as native as people say...meaning that if you ran the identical machines hardware with a normal BIOS and PC "framework if you will" that the benchmarks/issues would be the same. If i'm wrong then i'd love to see the posts/reviews that prove it because i've looked and didnt find any..because i've looked in to buying a macbook but being a windows developer (and part time gamer) i need a well operating windows machine too...but i also do a lot of audio recording and video editing and would love to have the real "best of both worlds".

 

Microsoft don't mind letting people install windows on macs as they are a software company and get cash if people install windows. Apple is a hardware/software company and make most of their cash with hardware. The ability to install windows on a mac gives apple more computer sales. Therefore they both win. If apple let people install osx on a normal pc, they wouldnt be making good cash profits as no one would buy their marked up hardware.

 

That is a question for Apple. My best guess would be the closed system approach they have taken. It allows them to give the best experience in their opinion.

Also, Boot Camp performance is the same and in some cases better than comparable PCs. Look up PC Mags article a while back where the called the MacBook Pro the fastest Windows machine.

I will allow this thread. However, if there are any mentions of how to run OS X on a PC, it will be closed immediately.

 

Yeah as cashmonee said the MBP was the fastest Vista machine. http://digg.com/apple/PC_World_Macbook_Pro_is_the_Fastest_Windows_Vista_Laptop_of_2007

 

Its much easier, and efficient to make, maintain, and troubleshoot an operating system that runs with a known hardware configuration. If apple opened up osx, thats a whole new set of problems theyd have, mainly with tech support/drivers.

Sure it can be done, but apple does pretty well as is, so why change a formula thats working.

And yea apple makes money through hardware, and pretty good and trendsetting hardware at that. Look at all of the phones that now have touch screens, and similar gui's after the iphone came out.

 

Thanks for the link i'll check it out.

 

in a nutshell. they can do whatever they want legally with their software.

theyd loose tons of money if you could run OSX on a non-mac.

 

they wouldn't lose any money what so ever, they would probably make a huge amount actually, as Microsoft has shown the world.

but they WOULD completely lose what they have going for them right now, which is an extremely smart closed system. that still works with and utilizes many things open source.

 

Microsoft licenses their software out so it can be used on anything. If OS X was built to be able to scale like that, it would not be as fast, because OS X is built around hardware that are available for Macs. Also Apple has always been anal about licensing their OS. They wouldn't be able to charge us so much for their hardware either, lol.

 

Anandtech did a review/article on the MacPro and said that Apple's price was pretty fair and reasonable for what you got, and that if you home-built the machine to similar specs you would only save less than $100. If you configured a Dell with the same specs, it'd cost more than the Apple.

The article also went into detail about upgrading the processors, and whatnot, but that was besides the point

On their pro machines, you get a lot of bang for your buck. Even their low end stuff is reasonably priced compared to PC makers. It's the extras that cost you though (Memory, drives, monitors...).

Aside from that, Apple's primary target is to sell more hardware. They would stand to lose way too much if they sold an OS only.

 

i completely disagree. go configure a MBP with a 2.6ghz C2D and then configure the same XPS 1530 with a 2.6ghz C2D. The XPS comes stock with 3g ram and a 320gb HD whereas the MBP comes stock with 2g ram and a 160g hd. The MBP is $1000 more and comes with less ram and HD space.
Hell, you could upgrade to a blue ray player in the XPS and still come ahead.

With all that said, the MBP is a great peice of hardware, and has many great design features that are just genius ( backlit keyboard, magnetic power clip ) As a student I cannot justify dropping more than $1600 on a laptop that has very little real world performance difference than one that cost under $1600. Ill probably end up getting one after I graduate in a few years but ill just stick to my dell which can run everything I need (from both OS's)

 

Apple would claim a huge amount of market if they opened it to anyone, like Microsoft did. They'd get tons of money, they'd get tons of market share. But they'd also get some of the issues that having a large market share comes from.

By locking down OS X to Apple hardware, Apple knows exactly what hardware is running OS X, and what future hardware they will be using. They can write drivers for everything they need, and nothing they don't. With Microsoft, even a year after launch there are still driver issues.

Also, of course, with the much smaller market share, Apple right now doesn't have to worry about security as much.

 

Note that I did not say "book". They have always had expensive laptops. The MacPro and Mini though, for the money are pretty comparable to PC hardware.

They have nice laptops, but just like you I can't use them for what I need (Durability/ruggedness), so I've got an 8 year old panasonic that was abused in police service... but you get what you pay for with any laptop, because I could sell this one as is for over $1200, and it's only a PIII 800MHz book. Just like Apple products, toughbooks can fetch a premium and people will pay it.

 

I'm liking the keeping OS X closed to Apple hardware (legitimately, for now) thing. There's simply less issues with drivers and making the OS have to conform to a large amount of hardware configurations. Hey, I have plenty of issues to complain about with my MBP (which I do adore, nonetheless), but this is definitely not one of them.

 

one of the whole reasons Mac OS works so well is that they only have to write a couple of drivers and worry about a limited amount of software so becuase of this they can make these drivers better than anything else out there.....
AND the reason Apple thinks its OK to run Windows but not vice versa is MONEY .....
they needed new customers who had MONEY .....