The release of Boot Camp has ignited a flurry of comment both from within and without the Mac web, and Robert X Cringely has gone as far as to dredge up that old hypothesis about Apple allowing Mac OS X to run on commodity Dell or […]

The release of Boot Camp has ignited a flurry of comment both from within and without the Mac web, and Robert X Cringely has gone as far as to dredge up that old hypothesis about Apple allowing Mac OS X to run on commodity Dell or HP boxen. The (non-)story made it to Slashdot, with a rebuttal whose featuring in the summary amounted to little more than a shameless plug for the author’s blog.

This rebuttal, by one Frank Boosman, centres its argument on drivers, a perennial favourite of those who seek to explain why Mac OS X-on-a-Dell will never happen.

The argument runs that Mac OS X is better because Apple control both the hardware and software, and that Microsoft have such a hard time with Windows because they have to support such a dizzying array of differing hardware configurations. Were Microsoft to control the hardware as well, the Windows experience would be as blissful as is Mac OS X. Boosman sums it up with this glorious line:

…were Apple to ship OS X for any old PC, its ease of use would drop dramatically…

This makes no sense. No sense at all.

Microsoft write very few drivers. That task is, of course, the responsibility of the companies who design and manufacture the hardware itself – ATI, Creative, nVIDIA, Intel, etc. In the Windows driver arena, Microsoft’s task is to act as something vaguely resembling a mediator, making sure that all these bits get along. I’ll grant that that is not easy, but it is something at which they have got a lot better with Windows 2000 and XP. Both operating systems’ kernels are, truth be told, now pretty stable.

Instead, the real issues with Windows lie elsewhere – its pisspoor attitude to security and the total absence of any thought with regard to user-friendly interfaces (the Windows XP Start menu, the right mouse button, dizzying numbers of toolbars, multi-row tabs, poor keyboard shortcut support – witness the lack of a shortcut key for something as elementary as creating a folder in Explorer, etc.) spring immediately to mind, but there are other vectors of attack if one wanted to mount a thorough critique. But make no mistake – these days, drivers have very little, if anything, to do with it.

No, were Apple to make Mac OS X available to Dell, HP, Sony et al – and it is presumably something that no OEM would scoff at, given its evident superiority – hardware manufacturers would soon be making Mac OS X drivers for their hardware. It would be in their interests, after all. The drivers obstacle could be and would be quickly overcome. And were it being bundled, responsibility for support would rest with the OEMs.

Of course, none of this is to suggest that Apple will be making a release of Mac OS X available for PCs anytime soon. To do so would probably have at least some negative effect on their hardware sales (if not quite the cannibalisation that many predict), and the company is not yet in a position to really take on Microsoft in a war for operating system dominance.

And some of us are quite happy with the diminutive size of the Mac-using coterie. I hope it stays that way for at least a little while. :)

You’re subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

  1. “At least some”? There would no longer be any motivation for most people to buy an actual Mac – yeah, the Macbooks look nice and have Front Row and iSight, but hey, that Dell thing is a thousand bucks cheaper. Which one is Joe Consumer going to go for? Guess.

  2. “Microsoft write very few drivers. That task is, of course, the responsibility of the companies who design and manufacture the hardware itself – ATI, Creative, nVIDIA, Intel, etc.”

    You don’t think that is one of the main’s why Windows is soo poor? Quality control is terrible and the coders of said drivers from theird parties don’t have the access to the code base thatthe coders from Microsoft would have.

    The quote aboce makes fairly good sense to me. The problems with the Windows OS are largely due to the fact that it is trying to ensure 30 years of backwards compatability and a million different possible Hardware configurations. Do you think
    having to support AMD and Intel chips makes a difference? It sure does. They are completely different archietectures and Windows has to support both.

  3. Gareth Potter Sunday, April 9, 2006


    The Mac has never been about the average man on the street. It probably never will be. It should be obvious from a cursory glance around a consumer electronics shop that there different classes of product, so to speak – cheap ones for the budget conscious (Alba in the UK), midrange/decent ones for those willing to spend a bit (say, Panasonic), and top of the line ones (i.e. Bang & Olufsen, Linn, etc). The computing world is no different, with Dell, Sony and Apple respectively filling those roles.

    So people will pay for design. Even if Mac OS X were available for Dell boxen, there would still be those who would pay for Apple hardware. Especially the laptops, which are extremely highly regarded. It is probably not hyperbole to say that the PowerBook is the most popular laptop in existence.

    Your “Joe Consumer” doesn’t really matter in all this. He wasn’t going to buy an Apple anyway, so, in fact, Apple would end up getting more money from him (through an operating system licence) than they would have otherwise.


  4. About a day or to ago I would have disagreed with you. That is before I had to manually install drivers on my Thinkpad. Finding the correct drivers for my new serial ata hardware was a bit of an adventure.

    You’re right, Windows comes with very few drivers. Mac OSX comes with even less. Isn’t this why linux has such a hard time supporting hardware? Apple is smart to standardize their hardware and I can’t see them moving away from that now.

  5. That guy “Frank” maybe don’t know what is in the core of OS X, FreeBSD! I believe that “if” the hardware companies were releasing drivers for Linux, many people would have switched to Linux (did happen to friends of mine). There are “compatible” drivers and this is what Linux user’s actually install to get things working. The same “compatible” drivers shoud work on OS X, the only thing is that “Apple (Steve Jobs) will never sell OS X that could be installed on any PC. Jobs know this when he turn NeXt into a software company and switch to x86, NeXt was dead.

  6. Gareth Potter Sunday, April 9, 2006


    There are bad drivers, granted. Really bad drivers. Generally from dodgy Taiwanese or Chinese manufacturers, where it seems as though the people who wrote the drivers also had a stab at writing the manuals.

    But certainly not from the likes of nVIDIA and ATI, Intel and AMD. In my experience, their drivers are pretty good. And there is a quality control setup – the Windows Hardware Quality Labs thingummy whatsit and driver signing. If Microsoft grant WHQL status to those not deserving of it, then it’s their fault that they suck, because they shouldn’t be lowering the bar.

    I stand my my point about the quote making no sense. Even if one did accept the idea that drivers are a/the cause of Windows’ issues, they certainly aren’t the cause of its usability/ease-of-use deficiencies. No, those are, as I alluded to above, simply the result of shoddy design.

    And I have to confess I haven’t got the slightest clue what you are on about when you say that Intel and AMD are different architectures. They aren’t by anyone else’s definition of “architecture”…


  7. The driver issue is dumb to say the least. all of the problems it seems like people have with driver issues exist on OSX too. People always complain about driver issues and Windows when they add NEW HARDWARE. Not hardware that came with the computer. Hell nowadays you can add the same hardware to a desktop mac as you can a Dell. Apple has no control what I put in the PCI slot. If there are problems with drivers on PREINSTALLED hardware on a Windows box, it is neither MS fault or the Hardware manufacturer’s fault, it’s the fault of the company that put it together in teh first place.

  8. Gareth Potter Sunday, April 9, 2006


    Don’t confuse Mac OS X, FreeBSD and Linux. They are all very different beasts. It almost goes without saying that Linux’s driver architecture and FreeBSD’s are totally different and therefore incompatible, but the mistaken belief that Mac OS X could just borrow “drivers” from FreeBSD is more complicated, because it contains a thread of truth.

    The fact is that whilst there are bits of FreeBSD in Mac OS X, these are only bits. The kernel is Mach, and the driver interface is known as IOKit, something totally exclusive to Mac OS X.

    So no, the same “compatible” drivers won’t work on OS X.


  9. drivers are one big reason why windows is so crap and why it’s impossible to do a perfect integration between hardware and software

    you _CANNOT_ expect every manufacturers to do good drivers and it’s one of the problem of windows

    with the macintosh, apple is doing mostly all common device to remove the pain.

    in macinotsh, many phones are not managed
    many web camera are not compatible

    you don’t have to forget the important issue drivers and control of hardware is

    why mac os X is able to do sleep and wake in a mere seconds ? because of hardware

    you will losse many things you seem to believe normal with os x on common PC and apple will not be able to do something

    you seem to believe people will simply buy good pc with good support and understand it’s not the fault of os X. I will simply say : no, people will only see os X is not better than windows and will simply reject it.

    OS X IS NOT why people buy Macintosh, Macintosh hardware is NOT why people buy Mac
    People buy Macintosh for BOTH os X and the apple’s controlled hardware : they buy the Experience. they buy the synergy , they buy the combinaison. they buy both, even if they don’t know, it’s both osx and apple’s hardware together which gives that “macintosh feeling” and why apple is known for.

    forget linux or bsd, you cannot simply take and use their drivers in os X. Else; it would be years some device will be available on os X or than linux on powerpc will use os X nvidia drivers

    freebsd , linux and os x are _TRULY_ different beasts.

    Noone here says it’s the fault of the computer’s manufacturers is someone use a crappy drivers of neither it’s the fault of apple if os X is put on a crappy PC
    but, people buying os X will simply see os X is not what they expect

    os X with bad drivers will simply sucks, as windows, maybe worse (you cannot write a good os x drivers simply because you know how to write good windows drivers, you need to learn, it’s time consuming).

    please, don’t forget, IT’s A WORK. it’s TECHNICAL, it needs money, it needs commitment, it’s NOT EASY.

    and simply, I don’t fathom that as possible.

    one last thing :
    the industry doesn’t need os X on pc. there are already linux if windows is too bad for you. there are _no_ market for os X on PC. even if os X is blue and nice.

  10. Michel makes a good point here.

    It’s a solid combination of both the hardware and the software that make Apple’s ‘experience’ what it is to so many people. It holds true for me at least.

    The touch and feel of the powerbook trackpad as opposed to the dell version I’m using right now at the office. The solid and beautiful display that isn’t exactly flexible, like the dell I’m on now. I could go on and on.

    I’ve used a PC longer than I’ve been using a mac – and I’m so much more efficient and comfortable on my mac – and it’s truly because of the hardware and OS TOGETHER.

Comments have been disabled for this post