Should Apple Port OS X to Intel?

The Macintosh was behind for a number of years when it came to the operating system. While the Mac OS felt solid, was fast, easy to use, and very compatible with a wide range of Macs and hardware peripherals, it fell behind in several ways.

First of all, the Mac OS was not designed to be a multitasking OS. Early versions ran one program at a time. It was only with System 4.2 that MultiFinder showed up; it gave the Mac OS the ability to have more than one program loaded and running at a time.

That's all the Mac OS could do - until Mac OS 8, when multithreading was introduced. Multithreading lets the Mac do more than one thing at a time (for example, you could be copying a file to a disk and still open and close Finder windows).

The other problem with the Classic Mac OS was extensions. The original version of the Mac OS did not have extensions, but in later versions they had to be added in order to give the OS new features. By Mac OS 9, many people had as many as 80 extensions installed in order to give them extra capabilities and options. Most of these were installed by default by the Mac OS Install program. Those 80 extensions were also 80 potential problems and reasons for the machine to crash.

Now that Mac OS X is out, we have true multitasking, and since the OS is based on Unix, it's not very likely to crash. There has been some talk that since Mac OS X is Unix-based; Apple should port it to Intel.

Why does idea keep coming up?

Think of it this way: Apple has a 5% market share (depending who you ask). The rest are PCs. Apple hopes to increase their market share with Mac OS X and the programs available for it. Apple recently announced that there are over 1,500 programs for OS X. That's a lot of programs for a six-month-old OS.

If Apple were to port Mac OS X to Intel, think of all of the people who would be able to use it. Those $899 Dell and Compaq machines could be running OS X! It seems like Apple would increase their OS market share.

Why is this not a good idea?

As I recently explained in my previous article, there are also a lot of programs for OS 9. And since OS 9 was not ever made to run on Intel hardware, those people using PCs running OS X would most likely not be able to run in "classic" mode to use older Mac OS 9 apps.

How many people would actually use OS X on a PC? I have a feeling that most people would stay with Windows, partially because that is what they are used to, partially because of Windows' better support for PC hardware items (video cards, sound cards, network cards, etc.), and partially because the word "Mac" is still associated by many with those who are beginners or graphics professionals.

Would Apple increase their market share by selling an OS to people who already have the non-Apple computers? Maybe in OS terms, but in terms of actual Macintosh computers being used, no. Why should anyone buy a Mac if they already have a PC that runs the same software? And since Macs do cost more than PCs when you buy them initially (and Macs usually have a higher resale value and last longer), people wanting to run the Mac OS wouldn't necessarily buy a Mac. I would probably look toward an IBM ThinkPad.

To understand what would happen, you have to look back to what happened with the Mac clones in the mid-90s. Apple thought they could increase their OS market share by selling the Mac ROMs and licensing the Mac OS to other companies and letting them make their own Macintosh compatible computers. What happened was companies like Power Computing, Motorola, and Umax took over a good deal of the Mac market and almost pushed Apple out of their own territory.

These other companies could make "Macs" cheaper and more powerful than Apple. Of course people bought them and ignored Apple's expensive and comparatively slow offerings. This may be why there are so few 9500s, 8600s, and 9600s on the used market today.

Just imagine what would have happened if Apple let this continue. Apple would probably have been reduced to a software-only company, providing the OS for other companies that sold the hardware.

If Apple ported Mac OS X to Intel, the same thing would happen. Apple's OS might gain market share, but it would be a very big risk. If it failed to sell, Apple could lose even more market share.

If it succeeded, Mac OS X would gain market share, but there would be fewer and fewer Apple computers in use, possibly resulting in an end to Apple hardware.

Porting Mac OS X to Intel would be a big mistake.