The x86 OS X Success Strategy
Send this Article
Print this Article Related Stories

Contributed by Kelly McNeill
osOpinion.com
April 10, 2002

If one were to ask the computing masses how Microsoft achieved its operating system success, they likely would answer, 'By providing a superior product.'

For those of you who have been wishing for a copy of Apple's Mac OS X to run on your x86 PC, your wish may soon be granted if recent reports regarding graphics accelerator companies ATI and Nvidia are to be believed.

According to the reports, the two companies apparently have set up teams to investigate porting OS X to an x86 CPU.

It has been rumored that an x86 version of OS X exists somewhere deep within the confines of Apple Computer's (Nasdaq: AAPL) software laboratories, although none of us mere mortals living outside the company's Cupertino campus truly know for sure.

Unless, of course, you consider Darwin -- the underlying open source core of OS X -- which has had an x86 version for several months.

Because ATI and Nvidia are investing research resources in an x86 version of the OS, this suggests that Apple has given these companies an OS X x86 pre-introduction in hopes that they will have a product ready when Apple unveils its OS to the PC-using public.

Assuming the report isn't merely hearsay and Apple is indeed planning on releasing such a product, the timing couldn't have been better.


A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Misappropriated Success

If one were to ask the computing masses how Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) achieved its operating system success, they likely would answer, "By providing a superior product." They would add that the reason no competing OS ever caught on was because "their product was apparently inadequate."

Nothing could be further from the truth. Several companies developed operating systems that would have been great successes if only they were given a chance.

As discovered during the MS/DOJ antitrust trial, Microsoft bullied PC OEMs so that bundling of alternative operating systems would result in cancellation of the license that allows them to include Windows on their machines.

While it is plausible that Microsoft would have generated a reasonable following with Windows in any event, there is no reason to believe that the company would enjoy the market share it holds today without these OEM contracts.

As a matter of fact, sales of boxed versions of Windows have been selling poorly, reinforcing the notion that Microsoft's success is tied specifically to the OEM contracts.

Boxed Success

Although Apple includes Mac OS with its own hardware, sales of boxed copies of the OS have far outpaced boxed Windows sales on the PC side, reinforcing the notion that Apple's OS success is not solely tied to hardware bundling.

Now, with the courts keeping a watchful eye on Microsoft with regard to restrictive licensing contracts, Apple is free to arrange deals with PC OEMs so that it, too, can leverage the high-volume distribution that the OEMs can bring.

Misguided Meaning

It has long been argued that an x86 version of OS X would eat into Apple's margins, which are heavily dependent on Apple hardware sales.

Only if Apple were to release hardware that was dramatically more powerful than an x86 PC (while also being perceived as such) would hardware sales not be cannibalized.

People looking for the best solutions to meet their computing needs would buy Apple-branded equipment, and those merely wanting to experiment could do so without going all the way.

The upcoming IBM-Motorola G5 will be able to provide such a performance edge.

Software Success Story

By making an x86 version of OS X to coincide with the release of the G5, Apple could save face by showing in the inevitable side-by-side processor comparison that its computer is the performance leader. At the same time, it could appease PC users' demands that it be more open with its computing solutions.

Not only would the speed leader be obvious and indisputable, but Apple's mind-share would increase a thousand times over.

Suddenly, those OS companies that support only one processor family would acquire the unfriendly aura that hung over Apple's head for so many years.