Skip to Content

Apple Gearing up for OS War?

by Damien Barrett Nov 9th 2005 at 1:30PM

Remember four years ago? I do. Most Mac users were still dawdling along in Mac OS 9, the iPod had just been unleashed upon the world, I was still administering AppleShareIP servers (shudder), and the technical community was unwrapping their shiny Fisher-Price present from Microsoft.

However, nothing happens in a vacuum. Significant changes and decisions aren't made overnight and often require years of development, planning, and execution. For instance, Apple has been working on Aperture for 3.5 years; it's not just software that Apple decided six months ago to write. And I'm convinced the announced switch to Intel processors wasn't a decision made recently. Jobs said as much in his keynote that Apple's been compiling versions of Mac OS X on Intel boxes since its first version.

So what's Apple up to? Why the switch to Intel processors? It's not just for faster speed and a better roadmap. It's not just because IBM and Motorola couldn't deliver the speeds they had promised.  I'm convinced that Apple's long been planning nothing less than an audacious plan to grow their marketshare. And here's how they'll do it.

First, understand that the average consumer doesn't care what processor is in their computer, nor do they understand the differences between families of processors. They barely understand megahertz speeds. The jargon we're all familiar with (by necessity) is lost to them: CD-ROM, CD-RW, DVD-R, DVD+R, megahert, gigahertz, kilobyte, megabyte, gigabyte, DPI, TWAIN...we may as well be speaking a foriegn language. And the manufacturers haven't made it much easier with every season introducing new trademarked words like Itanium, Celeron, Pentium, G4, G5, Inspiron...ad nauseam. But here's what the general public does understand about computers: that software I picked on the shelf there won't run on this here computer? The consumer is either not going to buy the software or not going to buy the computer, and with Apple's smaller marketshare (and accompanying smaller software library), it's Apple that loses out. So, how can Apple gain marketshare?

Four years ago, I wrote this little journal entry about Apple purchasing Connectix's Virtual PC and integrating it into Mac OS X 10.5 so that no matter what software a consumer purchased, it would run on a Mac computer. And after Apple's Intel switch announcement last summer, I wrote a longer piece focusing on the use of Intel's Vanderpool virtualization technology. The gist of this is that I'm convinced Apple's move to Intel is not just about faster processors, but about being able to offer a Mac that will run natively both Macintosh and Windows software (and by extension, both Mac OS X and Windows OS's). People familiar with the excellent but prohibitively expensive VMWare know how great it is to be able to run, for instance, five iterations of Windows 2000 server on a single box. Wouldn't it be great if you could own a Mac that runs not only Apple's great software offerings (such as iLife) but also all those PC games and financial software! Software emulation of Windows is too slow, but with virtulization technology at the hardware level, the speed hit becomes a non-issue and the software market for Mac users opens up exponentially.

The ironic thing in this scenario is that Microsoft wouldn't actually lose out. If Apple produces a computer that can run both Mac OS X and Windows simultaneously (not dual-booting), there would still need to be some kind of Windows license and payment involved. The losers would be Apple's actual competitors: Dell and the other computer manufacturers. Perhaps there's more than we thought to Michael Dell's suggestion to Apple that they allow Mac OS X to run on his company's computers.

Macsimum news discovered a new patent filed by Apple that seems to support this idea of running multiple OS's on a single Macintosh computer using virtualization technology. Architosh picked up the story and expanded on it and other people have begun offering their own commentary on the idea. Even the Inquirer has begun stirring the rumor pot.

Of course, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Apple hasn't looked at the consumer market and figured out a way to offer an attractive computer,  easy-to-use sofware, and a secure environment that can run virtually any software on the shelf. Maybe the switch to Intel is only about faster processor speeds. And maybe monkeys can fly out of my butt.

View Tags

Related Stories

Categories

Analysis / Opinion Rumors Apple

Remember four years ago? I do. Most Mac users were still dawdling along in Mac OS 9, the iPod had just been unleashed upon the world, I was...
 

Add a Comment

Sign in »
*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

41 Comments

Filter by:
William Hartman

I think we're missing the point, Apple's not switching to Intel for Windows apps their switching for *NIX apps that are usually developed and tweaked for Intel hardware and ported to PowerPC. Now they can use all that open-source software without having to do the port.

November 21 2005 at 1:14 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Flanagan

Perhaps I should restate my point in another way: If Apple adds Windows compatibility into its OS, developers will stop developing for the Mac because nearly 100% of users will be able to run the same (Windows) version of a program. Why would they bother rewriting all their code in XCode when their program already works on the Mac as a Windows-native app? It would be adding additional labor for the same result. Do you really think companies like Adobe (whose client base is nearly split 50/50 as to their OS use) will make two versions of everything they make when one version runs on nearly everything?

November 10 2005 at 3:19 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Bud Landry

There may be a way to run WIndows like Classic from within OS X to allow Mac OS to be a safe sandbox of sorts... only running email or web apps from windows when absolutely necessary (or not at all) would keep many of the PC viruses at bay. But to keep Microsoft playing ball, playing nice, and developing for the Mac, you would probably still have to buy Windows and install it. The problem is keeping developers from lazily just developing for Windows APIs, and to use Cocoa to get an extra ten percent of the market. The problem is, most expensive apps, even the most up to date versions, have code somewhat dependant on older architectures.

November 10 2005 at 11:28 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
jomy

If Apple added a Windows compatibility layer that allowed Macs to run Windows apps it would help grow Apple's market share. This would not have a detrimental effect on Mac software development because more developers are going to be buying Macs. Imagine being a developer and being able to run OS X, Linux & Windows on a sexy dual-core PowerBook! Once these developers experience the joy of writing Mac software with XCode, you'll have to drag them kicking and screaming back to the dark side. For every lazy developers out there that says "Use our windows version" there will be a new developer ready to write a native Cocoa app to fill the gap.

November 10 2005 at 10:43 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Marc Chadwick

I'm not as concerned with software authors writing code only for Windows. I think that one of the things holding authors back from writing OS X software is the lower market share. By expanding the market share and making OS X the primary platform, with the ability to purchase a Windows license and add it on top, OS X will become more desireable to code for. My greater concern would be interaction between Windows and OS X apps, people who want to use one platform's Mail app and another's Browser primarily, then have links in one interact with the other. I guess it's a question of whether we're seeing the Windows applications run truly natively or if we're going to see a wrapper application, even if it's transparent, like the current X11. I think these things have the ability to make a big difference.

November 10 2005 at 10:06 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
henrrrik

Why would I want to run Windows software on my mac?

November 10 2005 at 10:00 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Johnny Appleseed

Apple won't stop its tech-savvy users from dual-booting, but it won't promote the capability to the average Joe. It's in its best interests to keep the platform closed and keep developers developing for it.

November 10 2005 at 9:13 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Goobimama

Excellent write-up. Excellent stuff.

November 10 2005 at 8:02 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
David

Mac OS X and iLife apps are real killers. I can't wait to get home to use them after a day at work on Windows, NetWare and Linux. BUT ... I haven't bought a Mac game in several years. I can't find any decent ones in the gaming shops, and can't be bothered ordering online. They're always behind the Windows versions anyway (like Heroes of Might and Magic IV). AND ... I refuse to buy Windows games for home (I have a work laptop and several older PCs lying around). SO ... Running my Mac with OS X and using iLife, and then being able to buy and run readily available Windows games on the same hardware would be really cool. Let's face it, games interfaces are typically unique and don't follow the underlying OS UI guidelines anyway. Does this make sense?

November 10 2005 at 5:00 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Roger

A project that can be interesting to look at is the Xen project. It's an opensource virtualization software that can run multiple OS on Linux. The 3.0 version will make use of Vanderpool to allow the boot Windows into Linux. It also offer an interesting approach for open guest os: for this OS, the virtualization is done with a special version of the guest OS. It then gives way better performance that other methods like VMWare or VirtualPC. It's an opensource efficient solution. Future version of the Linux kernel will includes support for Xen out of the box. It could be a good start for Apple to implement virtualization on a future version of OS X for Intel. http://www.xensource.org/

November 10 2005 at 5:00 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Buy an ad here

Hot Apps on TUAW

Tweets

© 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.