03-28-2006, 04:34 AM

When i saw a few months ago that Apple was planning to ditch the OSX in favour of Windows I had to laugh. I had to laugh for several reasons most notable that the situation was very much the reverse of this in the real world.

Now I cannot really give any details on this other than to say "trust me"....which i know in cyber space is well an impossible thing to ask...
I had arranged via our IS supplier to give us a Vista demo and i talk about this in a pervious thread....It was cringe worthy...

About two weeks ago my close friend who works for MS over in the US ( we met at uni in the UK ) gave me some very interesting information. He had handed his notice in and was sending me one of his usual sounding-off on-a-friday-emails. I cant be too specific as i would hate for anything to be traced back for him.

Apparently when the deal was struck with MS to continue to supply the office package for an additional 5 years to Apple there was a contra part to the deal. MS has known now for the past 18 months that Vista is in serious trouble. Ignore the fact it is being pushed back because this is more about finally dev checks and the fact MS now use 3rd parties to check for errors in coding etc...... It will if my source's is right be pushed back again to May.

When the Mac unit, which is well known in MS as being one of the better focused units, was preparing for the office dev kits to replace the current 04 release they ended up with a series of emails from top brass, these were backed up with some observers from the a god like payscales.

It appears that communication was passed from MS to Apple talking about the licence of platform related OSX specifics. In short as a contingency plan MS wanted to licence from Apple a version of OSX which they would support with the writing of drivers, and develop with a modified gui for which they would give further support to the office This was to be run as a shadow operation in a similar way that OSX development for the Intel platform was maintained after the purchase of the current base systems from Next. The OSX licence would offer Apple significant shares as part of a special reissue, MS as well would grant access to some of MS other propriety technological units and sign a mutual understanding statement between Apple and MS. Now the deal was set MS could get their hands on OSX, translate it for for general PC architecture ( at the time no one knew about how far ahead Apple were with the Intel based Apple machines )

This was setup purely as a viable business option but apparently Apple was very open to this. MS had watched the whole Copland saga and big Bill had grown increasingly concerned about the need to cut losses. Vista is reported to have now cost 16 Billion in total development and setup costs since its inception.

People over at MS have been leaving the firm hand over fist as the MS ship dates seems to continue to falter...Vista is going to be a car with square wheels to sell- who wants it?. Lenova (IBM's old hardware wing) and Acer for example has signed a supply deal to continue licencing XP well into 2008. Vista is bloated and without the key setup to allow for further effective development.

Incidentially my friend has given his notice after working at MS for 4 years and has a job working for Sun lined up. Really this could be a real fantastic time for Apple....this coming Xmas period could see a massive ramp up in users switching, add into this mix a new version of OSX leopard possibly and i think the first wave of change will begin.

03-28-2006, 05:14 AM

OS X licensed to MS? We've got a lack of compition in the OS market now....what would we be left with when the only choice is between OS X and Linux? (meaning only OS X for most people).

03-28-2006, 05:24 AM

I was just telling you what i have heard....in essence this deal could bear fruit in the next 5 years time when Vista will probably be on its way out. That is obviously assuming that it is released in 2007. As for a lack of OS's out there MS only have themselves to blame because of their monopolicous ( does this word exist ? ) activity in wiping everyone else out....

03-28-2006, 06:57 AM

Seems far fetched, but then again I thought there was no chance of an Intel Mac.

03-28-2006, 09:06 AM

While my logic say's "no it impossible", I have learnt to never say that. I have been surprised by the computer industry too many times to count. Anything is possible just wait and see.

But the question is why would Apple license their OS just to keep MS Office? Seams like to good a deal from MS but not so good for Apple.

03-28-2006, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by Jabjabs

While my logic say's "no it impossible", I have learnt to never say that. I have been surprised by the computer industry too many times to count. Anything is possible just wait and see.

But the question is why would Apple license their OS just to keep MS Office? Seams like to good a deal from MS but not so good for Apple.

I was thinking that same thing myself. And besides that apple has been gaining steam over the past couple years and have been selling more and more pcs...seems like a bad time to compromise with Microsoft and lisense their OS

03-28-2006, 10:40 AM

I tihnk your missing out on the point of stock option. If Apple were to licence an older version of OSX for MS to then adapt, think of the sort of stock option that Apple might take. In effect Apple could become stakeholders of MS, in effect then Apple could increase this share and there would be nothing to stock an eventual take over. Now I know that scenario is unlikely and I am using artistic licence taking it to a conclusion but if anyone knows the pain of developing an expensive OS only to drop it, then it would be Apple. Copland was 90% complete and it is still believed that it could of been brought to market yet it was the quality of the system that meant the cord needed to be cut.

If vista becomes a copland scenario, MS would need to take several decisions. The first has to be bring the turd out, now i remember Windows Me so we know they have no problem with doing this. The next is to terminate the project and start again, which would mean XP would be required to be patched extensively for another 6 years or option 3 is to go and buy something as a foundation. Now since MS has effectivley killed off competition in the OS arena that sort of leaves the candidate list very limited......OSX is the prime candidate.

To add some further weight to my original post please look at the this blog from a MS engineer it pretty much retells much of what i have said.

http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2006/03...rship-now.html

03-28-2006, 11:28 AM

If Apple was smart, and wanted to gain market share, they would sell an open platform type OS that would work on non-apple hardware. Only then will you see the masses start to switch. As long as Apple says "you have to buy our computer to use our OS" then they will stay at their measly 8% (correct me if that is wrong) market share. I would have switched long ago had it not been for Apple's stance on hardware.

03-28-2006, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by techster82

If Apple was smart, and wanted to gain market share, they would sell an open platform type OS that would work on non-apple hardware. Only then will you see the masses start to switch. As long as Apple says "you have to buy our computer to use our OS" then they will stay at their measly 8% (correct me if that is wrong) market share. I would have switched long ago had it not been for Apple's stance on hardware.

Apple is smart for not allowing OSX on other computers. it is a hardware company, not a software company like microsoft. if they want to get more switchers they need to allow windows to run on their computers, which i think will happen eventually.

Allowing windows to run on Apple computers would be good for both microsoft and Apple because people would buy Apple computers for the look then put windows on it. microsoft doesnt make computers so what do they care if you buy the computer from Apple or Dell or HP, all they care is that you use their os.

i dont think apple would mind having windows on their computers either because they wont be out any more money than if you just used OSX (with the execption of things like iLife, final cut pro and other Apple software that would only run on OSX), and even then you still have OSX on the computer, you just wouldnt have to use it

03-28-2006, 11:58 AM

Ah, but picture what would happen this Christmas-- with Vista not shipping and if Apple came out with 10.5 and licensed it for used with the big OEMs. How many people would buy a computer with the new OS that actually shipped instead of buying an XP machine and have their OS displaced within a few months? It'd be a bold move on Apple's part.

As it is, I'm sure they'll want to get 10.5 out along with some new machines of their own by November.

03-28-2006, 12:04 PM

Steve being Steve, I could see him waiting until just the right moment, when he had MS over a barrel, and pulling the plug on the whole thing leaving them high and dry.....

03-28-2006, 12:26 PM

Steve Jobs knows exactly what he is doing...I am sure he is biding his time until the time is right.

03-28-2006, 12:26 PM

I do agree that Apple would be smart to allow windows to be supported on their machines as well. I would not have a problem with this at all. If they are truly a hardware company they should have done this long ago. The problem is they are a software and hardware company, which has cost them. It's the old saying you can't have your cake and eat it too. And even if Leopard was released at christmas, you still wouldn't see the masses switch. The bottom line is that the majority of people only know windows, and will stick with what they know because they are scared to try something different. Learning mac causes alot of people to have to venture out of their safety zone.

03-28-2006, 12:49 PM

I don't find it surprising MS would hedge their bets by having an option regarding OS X.

After all - one of the stated objectives of Vista was to make it more OS X like.

It also wouldn't surprise all that much if there have some tentative conversations or feelers regarding including some OS X "coding" in Vista.

Business is business - and in general one isn't successful wthout keeping options open.

bfx

03-28-2006, 01:03 PM

Very interesting read smartz.

One thing I don't understand though. Even if all of this is true with vista, I think it would be something like "corporate suicide" for MS to replace vista with an OS based on some kind of OSX. I mean imagine how stupid MS will look compared to apple in the eyes of the public, the OS they've been working on for so long (vista) isn't realeased and instead MS have to turn to apple for help basing thier new OS on OSX? or am I misunderstanding something?

Also, if MS did get their hands on a copy of a base OSX to work with, won't this mean that none of windows software will work with this new OS, just like it won't work for apples OS (one of the major things people ask when you try and get them to switch). Ofcourse there's all this buzz going on about virtulisation, so maybe MS could take some kind of base version of OSX, put a MS look on it and then use some virtualisation software to run windows stuff...

I'm sure I must be getting something wrong here, I can't see MS doing this. I think MS will just release vista late and then start work on another OS to quickly replace it, maybe after they have sorted out their management problems or whatever it was.

Good times for apple in anycase