If apple made a Intel version of OSX

Hum, I might at work, but for compatibility tests only. Not for personal use.

I'd buy it, and run it alongside Windows.

No.

Also Wic!

Probably buy it and install on a stand alone machine. Then again, I have WinXP, Win2000, Win98, BeOS, two diff linux machines, and a Cobalt Raq unit here in the house. All in use mind you, and all on seperate equipment. Oh, then the next 'slabs' in the back room.

OSX is actually rather nice to use. The recent patches and upgrades have helped the stability alot. There is a pretty decent learning curve to switch from Windows to OSX. Yes, I have used it and gotten used to ir somewhat given the limited exposure, but color me impressed.

uf! i think if that happend, we will have to go to the microsoft funeral...
That could be the microsoft die, definitively.

yea, i'd buy it.

If quality of OS mattered, we'd be using OS/2 today.

I'd definitely be giving it a try, but what it would really come down to is application compatibility. If the apps I use for work and the handful of games I play were available for Linux, I'd be running that in the blink of an eye.

Just out of curiosity, where did you hear this rumour? It seems highly improbable to me, even though it could be the move that really makes things happen for Apple, one of their main selling points is that they produce everything themselves...if you could run Mac stuff on a PC all of a sudden, I imagine they'd see a dramatic decrease in their hardware sales (that may well be outweighed by the increase in their software sales). It's an intriguing thought anyway.

please... dont compare os/2 with osx

and yea!, that could be posible.
because there is a x86 version of Darwin...
oh oh

OS/2 in 1992 was lightyears ahead of MacOS or Windows. Not even a close call.

But quality didn't matter, distribution and marketing did and today we're stuck with Windows.

Sure, OSX is impressive, 9 years later.

Atari was impressive...
Windows was impresive...
Nintendo was impresive...
PlayStation was impresive...

I wouldn't buy it because I already use it on a Power Mac G4 all day long.

I've never been impressed with any version of Windows - NT4 and W2k were quite usable, however. OS/2 pretty much ran circles around Windows where flexibility and usability were concerned. There's still so many little touches that OS/2 just *got right* that I still don't see on the Windows platform.

OTOH, for my own personal tastes and way of working NeXT/OPENSTEP beat them all hands down...and since OS X is the closest I'm ever going to get to that type of usable system today, that's where I'm spending most of my time. In fact, the only reason I even log in to my Windows machine these days is for customer support and to fiddle with a few skinnable apps.

OPENSTEP has been impressive for well over 10 years and OS X just builds on that beautifully, IMO.

I also tend to think that Apple will not release an x86 version of the OS X client. They ARE a hardware company after all, and it just doesn't make good business sense... OTOH, I could see them creating a special release of OS X Server that ran on a very specific type of x86 hardware. This might help them make inroads into markets that would soften to the idea of Mac hardware clients later.

I'd install it as double boot (triple actually) and fiddle with it.

OSX on the Intel platform would not even make a dent on Microsoft's sales. Like Frogboy said, alledged OS superiority has very little to do with success. The Mac OS was always far better than Windows 3.1, but the Windows plaform conquered 90% of the market.

Oh and by the way, OS sales weight little in Microsoft's wallet; 75% of their sales come from Microsoft Office (Mac and Windows).

Paxx - the only reason it's so little is because practically no one outside the manufacturers actually buy the OS!

Lancer (I'm almost regretting this already) - Atari was impressive. Yep. The Jaguar was by far the most advanced game system available. (IMO, it blows the doors off of PSX and N64 as well as giving PS2 a run for it's money!) The company's failure? Marketing! For the Jag they devoted a whopping $1 million dollers towards marketing. This was at a time when Nintendo was throwing tens of millions of dollars into advertising! There was NO way Atari could compete. The cash was depleted.

I agree, OSX is impressive in the same sense that Atari is impressive. It's a great toy.

I think I would install it just for an hour, remove it and then I'll find me an OS/X customization site and babble like LancerKMT

...I imagine they'd see a dramatic decrease in their hardware sales (that may well be outweighed by the increase in their software sales). It's an intriguing thought anyway.
by Mr AJCrowley

And miss out on all those clever ideas like building the monitor into the computer or not having a floppy drive when they were still commonly used.

They do some really clever things to hardware such as a laptop with a carring handle, but there have been too many times when they did things that were plain stupid.

@ Froggie! Funny words from someone's who's company builds skinning tools for the worlds largest Solitaire emulator. (wink)

Oh yea?

ObjectBar + WindowFX + ObjectDock + WindowBlinds + Treeview in action:

https://www.stardock.com/temp/winaquanew.jpg

And I get 100X more software to choose from (like Photoshop).

Brad, will you quit torturing us with that dock already?

Nice shot... Should turn off the Apple menu icons and move the systray to the left of the clock for a little more accuracy. List view arrows are a flat charcoal, as well.

I've been fiddling with an Aqua Graphite theme for ObjectBar myself, just for personal use but I wasn't sure about releasing it though as the OB section already seems over flowing with Aqua and XP themes. ;-/ maybe I'll finish my NeXT/EUI theme for OB instead.

ObjectDock looks pretty darn NICE (other than the nasty icon quality), I tried to build one in OB and that was not possible. Know of anything that will do a proper column view like the OS X Finder?? Exploror doesn't cut it, I'm not fond of List/Tree view and I've been using WinBrowser under Win... it's not bad but not exactly *right* either.

...and I don't care about 100X more software, I only care about finding what I need and the quality of it. (Photoshop for OS X actually looks pretty nice but I'm not fond of PS really...I've been using Painter 7... or loading Photo-Paint for the real quickie stuff. I was surprised about PP after I first tried it, I always thought it was more beefy than it actually is...)

There is no PHotoshop for OS X yet was my understanding.

As a former NeXTSTep user, OS X is the closest thing to it. But I just don't like the Apple culture.