[X4U] Apple's move to Intel chips

[Judi Sohn]

On 6/8/05, T.L. Miller <tlmiller at mac.com> wrote:
> On 6/8/05, at 3:57 PM, Oskar Lissheim-Boethius, <avocade at gmail.com> said:
> 
> >Yes, but notice the word _allow_. Does this mean that there are no
> >special, secret components that will _prohibit_ you to run OS X on your
> >beige-box, and that Apple simply won't _license_ OS X to PC-
> >manufacturers? Crackers rejoice... :(
> 
> A primary reason Apple's OSes have been so stable is that they only run
> on their hardware. Install on various and sundry Dells, eMachines, HPs,
> etc. and that stability would be history.
>

Another point: this is how Apple has been able to crank out major
updates every 18 months (or less) and Microsoft is still chugging on
Windows XP with the hope of releasing Longhorn in a few years. With
Apple having total control over the hardware *and* the software it's
an entirely different game for them where they write the rules and
there are no hardware surprises that they can be blamed for. Even so,
look at all the "why they didn't they catch that in the first place"
bugs that Apple has to fix after every OS update. All those 3rd party
upgrade cards, memory and components that don't work and are reported
in Macfixit.com? Can you imagine what would happen if they had to
anticipate and write for as many different hardware setups as
Microsoft does?

That's why I cringe everytime someone compares the OS X timeline to
XP/Longhorn. Not nearly fair.

-- 
Judi Sohn, judi at momathome.com
Mom at Home Design, http://www.momathome.com
AIM: JudiS217