Submit your breaking news stories and original articles to us by contacting us
First this article isn’t a “How to Save Apple” article since I don’t think they need saving. It’s simply some thoughts on what could happen if Apple made Mac OS X totally open source.
Apple runs Mac OS X based on a kernel that any developer can work on. However, the innovations they have made with the interface and Aqua are solely their own. I wonder what could happen if Apple were to release all of this out to the Open Source world. I think great things can happen and in the long term benefit Apple immensely.
Obviously a ton of developers would be all over this. It is no surprise that many geeks around the world consider OSX the superior operating system in existence today. Does Apple need more developers? Probably not, however what would be the harm in getting free development? Free patches? Maintaining the code fixes/updates might prove to be a headache, but the speed of development could also increase.
Users flock to the OS that has the most applications. Apple has done a great job of providing a number of applications for its platform however, the numbers still pale in comparison to Windows. I am not saying an Open Sourced OS X would draw more application developers to the platform, but there is a good chance it would.
An open sourced OS X means that a port to x86 wouldn’t be that far to follow (ignoring speculation that their is already a x86 version running internally by Apple). Bad news since then no one would have a reason to switch to Macs and therefore less computers will be sold. Well you have to figure that people who aren’t thinking about switching probably never will anyways. However, if you get them to start using OS X then you are taking away from Microsoft. You already have Office and Photoshop for OS X (of course Mac Office development might stop immediately) so the hesistancy for many users to switch is erased.
However, there is something greater that Apple can achieve with the proliferation of their OS across platforms. Apple is taking a charge into the Digital Media realm and seem to want to expand their product offerings in that front. Well if you have your OS all over the place then the integration that Microsoft has so easily achieved becomes even easier for Apple. BeOS wanted to be the “Media OS”, but failed. Well now Apple has that chance. Just look how quickly Linux gets ported to new devices.
If someone wishes to make a tablet PC with OSX they will have the go ahead to do so. Add it to TiVo? Now you have the option to do so. A TiVo box that downloads music from the iTunes Store, sends it wirelessly to your stereo through the new Aiport Express and can be uploaded to your iPod or computer running OS X or maybe even your car.
Another great advantage is now you can use AMD. Apple enjoys having a 64-bit processor in their machines and IBM gives them manufacturing troubles. Switch. Heck maybe offer both G5 and AMD64/Opteron solutions. Apple makes x86 hardware and if it looks nice it will sell. Not widely at their current pricepoints, but then again you wouldn’t have to charge those prices if you are selling at greater volumes.
Apple could still sell their software and generate software revenue.
They could take the MySQL approach and offer dual licensing.
Looking at this strategy in the short term it is hard to see how Apple could benefit from it or even consider it. However, I believe the biggest advantage would be the damage done to Microsoft. In every field of the computer industry, sooner or later, Microsoft becomes the top competitor. We all know the damage that Linux has done to both the marketshare (non-desktop) and mindshare of Microsoft. Apple can do the same.
I am sure to get blasted on many points in this article, but thought I would toss the idea out there to see what people think.
Category: Uncategorized
8 Responses for "Open Sourcing OS X"
June 21st, 2004 at 8:38 am
1OS X open soure
Open Sourcing OS X…
June 21st, 2004 at 10:12 am
2The only people that would benefit from this are people who *aren’t* Apple customers. This would in turn, be to the detriment of those who are.
As a software developer, I’d *love* to have more seats in the total customer base, but I think the best way to do that is for apple to figure out how to make a (different) $500 computer.
Note this, however. In the past, every time Apple has produced something on the low end, they get stuck with it…only the eMac of late seems to have bucked that trend.
Perhaps Apple has noticed this :)
June 21st, 2004 at 11:39 am
3Everybody that usually writes a ‘OS X Open Source Completely’ article, usually concentrates on the benefits that everybody will reap from such a move and ignores the only loser in such a situation. Talks about damage to microsoft and gains of the open source community and completely ignores that apple is a company that must make profits. If everybody can use their system without having to pay them anything or having to buy anything from them, then how on earth are they going to make money.
Yeah, everybody says ‘Apple should figure out a different way to make money or find something different to sell’. But when asked the next logical question ‘Why should they?’ the answer is usually ‘Well, it’s better for everybody.’
Well, not for Apple, so it won’t happen any time soon.
June 21st, 2004 at 1:08 pm
4This is certainly not a “How to save Apple” article, I give you that. This is a “How to destroy Apple” article. Really.
Most people who want Apple to open source OS X or port it to x86 are people who wants to buy cheap $399 hardware and yet reap all the benefit and ease of use that OS X offers. What incentives do people have to buy computers from Apple? Also, having OS X open sourced, Apple is no longer the sole distributor for a packaged OS. Anyone can take OS X, add a few features and sell the OS. Not only does Apple have to compete with Windows et al., now Apple has to compete with its own creation. Great idea.
Now, you say, Apple can compete in the high end market. But, open sourcing OS X also force Apple to open source the boot sequence. Then, anyone can enter the Mac market and produce cheaper clone that totally works with OS X without paying royalties to Apple. It’s getting better, isn’t it?… for anybody but Apple.
But, but, Apple can create digital life softwares. Okay, how much money can Apple make? We know that iLife is to drive the sales of OS X (in a way, it’s subsidized by OS X). Without OS X, Apple has to sell them at higher price. Suddenly, it’s not as attractive anymore when people can find cheaper solution. Great, now Apple is out of OS market, hardware market and software market. But hey, Apple still has iPod!!
June 22nd, 2004 at 12:22 am
5“I wonder what could happen if Apple were to release all of this out to the Open Source world. I think great things can happen and in the long term benefit Apple immensely.”
There’s no arguing that the open source community has a bunch of talented programmers, but UI designers they are not. While they might help improve the underlying portions of the OS if the code were released to them, I’m afraid we’d end up with some ghoulish looking facsimile of the Windows UI as a result. No thanks!
June 22nd, 2004 at 12:44 am
6The great paradox of proposals like this is:
If the open source model is so efficient and talented that they could make open-source OS X a great success, then what the heck do they need Apple for? If they are going to be sooo good then why do they need OS X as a starting point at all? Just apply that alleged brilliance to make something better than OS X, and give it away for free.
Oh wait, that’s what open source keeps claiming to be working on, Unix on the desktop, yet, after all these years, it still isn’t making a dent, while Apple suddenly races to the top of the charts in terms of Unix consumer desktops (not servers) installed, totally blowing by all of those desktop-Unix efforts.
Part of this is because open source hardly has any sense of what consumers want, only what their creators want, and their creators are programmers and wannabees. That’s not a recipe for mass market success. Mass market success means grandma, Main Street University, Joe Small Businessman, and people like that. Open source continues to fail at reaching them. Apple knows how to craft an OS to reach them.
June 22nd, 2004 at 1:54 am
7“Open Sourcing OS X”
I just came across an article at ForeverGeek that detailed why the author (scrivs) thinks Apple should open the source to the entire MacOS X operating system. I think this is a load of bollocks…
WARNING!: Very long post ahead.
The author’s fir…
June 28th, 2004 at 1:07 am
8Damage done to Microsoft isn’t to Apple’s advantage, since they wouldn’t be profiting from the converted customers. Linux can fight that war, and can win it, because Linux is a project driven by common good, developer recognition, and the value of expertise. Also, I don’t really see the good in porting OSX to everything else. OSX is a finely tuned desktop operating system, and one that loves to play just with Apple (and Apple-approved) equipment. If you want something for servers, or something to run on a wristwatch, use Linux and drop the interface fluff. Also, to claim that Apple could still sell applications for additional revenue would destroy the one thing that’s really going for Apple - integration. They would need to remove the proprietary bits from the OS or release them to the public, allowing incompatibility and other troubles.
Of course, I admire you guys for posting the topic. It’s definitely something to think about. I personally don’t see why Apple hasn’t made the installation of Linux applications a lot easier on OSX… considering that some independent projects have done such a great job. That would certainly give users a little more flexibility.
RSS feed for comments on this post
Leave a reply