But did they offer to install the os too? That is the question. Because if they sold the system maybe with linux and said it was osx compatible then I apple couldn't do anything. Except of course release an update to kill all hackintoshes. Just don't update your systems!
I think that a more open Apple platform would be great. However, I do think in order to avoid the Microsoft problems there needs to be some kind of hardware certification on Apple's end. I mean if they are going to take the time to certify open apps for the iPhone surely they could dedicate a few resources to certifying more hardware as well. This would give all of the "power users" the reassurance that all of the hard work and money they put into customizing their systems is not going to mean they can never do a software update. I like Psystar's thinking, but I wish the first step towards a more open Mac had come from a more reputable source. All of the issues Psystar had in the beginning really made it seem like a shady operation which in my opinion damages the idea of an open Mac instead of promoting it.
Then you end up in a mess again. Think about the Microsoft certification for vista...vista ready, capable, etc. Intel used to have different certification as well but I believe they dropped it. I think consumers would become confused about certification unless it was super controlled and was just a yes/no, and not maybes. Then again if I had the choice between a nice apple made system and an apple clone by gateway, or someone else, I would go apple. Plus you get the cool logo
Then again if I had the choice between a nice apple made system and an apple clone by gateway, or someone else, I would go apple. Plus you get the cool logo
The thing about this statement is that Power Computing gave Apple a run for their money. I had very strong brand loyalty to the fruit logo so I ended up getting a PowerMac 8500/120 but I really wanted a PowerWave (forgive me if i got the name wrong but its been a while).
I don't know if I agree with that. It seems like if you have a stable, well designed OS, that nothing should crash with a bad driver except the hardware in question. Obviously if it's a video card doing the crashing then you're SOL (cause you can't see anything), but mac's already have 3rd party video cards, so that point is moot.
Sadly, I would say that the point is not moot. The problem is the diversity of video cards. For example, many Macs use ATI video cards, and the standard Mac OS X has good support for ATI cards. The problem is that it doesn't support ALL of them. ATI makes a lot of different cards. I'm still trying to get Quartz Extreme working on my Thinkpad T43 with ATI Radeon Mobility.
If Apple would just open source Aqua, this kind of support would come so much easier! ::)
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.