Stan Beer
Tuesday, 15 April 2008 06:19
Opinion and Analysis
Page 2 of 3
The argument that Mac clone builders won’t be able to
supply their customers with regular Mac OS X security updates will not
prove to be a deterrent for many would be purchasers who can’t afford a
real Mac. Many of these would be Mac users have been living with
unsecured pirated Windows computers for years.
The fact is that the Mac range is in the premium
end of the market and too expensive for a large section of the global
user community. Yes the Mac mini is a relatively cheap Mac solution but
it is underpowered at the base entry level, has limited configuration
options and if you want to configure it to the max it is once again an
expensive box.
What can Apple do? It could place even tighter restrictions on the
distribution of Mac OS X. However, if pirates can manage to copy and
distribute movie DVDs often before they’re even released to theatres,
what hope has Apple got in stemming the tide?
In my view, Apple’s best course of action is to go with the flow. The
demand for Mac clones is obviously there – witness the stir Psystar has
caused.
What does going with the flow mean for Apple? It means accepting the
fact that there is a huge untapped market of computer users that don’t
want to or simply can’t spend the money to buy a real Mac. However,
many if not most of them, would jump at the chance of running Mac OS X
on inexpensive but adequately configured hardware.
The argument that Apple tried to go the Mac clone route once before and
failed is specious at best. The early 1990s was a very different time
to now. Macs were very different to PCs and they weren’t using
“industry standard” Intel architecture. Now the main difference between
a PC and a Mac, aside from the elegant styling of the Mac hardware, is
the operating system.
CONTINUED page 3
