Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Laurens
Apple controls both the hardware and the software and - perhaps most importantly - does not sell its OS to third parties. (I'm sure they could release an x86 version of OS X if they wanted to, but then no-one would buy a Mac.) PalmSource OTOH is completely dependent on its licensees.
|
Actually, Apple's hardware comes from IBM, directly. Who do you think makes the PowerPC processor used in present-day Macintosh boxes? IBM, not Apple. Apple doesn't make hardware (well, not at the chip and motherboard level anyway; they make cases and other enclosure designs for the IBM-supplied chips).
What OS you think IBM is pushing
VERY hard to promote that processor? Here's one guess... it isn't OSX. Its Linux. Why? Because Linux is the perfect fit for that processor. IBM is committed to delivering this vision successfully to its partners and customers. They're 100% behind driving a successful Linux deployment on every single piece of their hardware, from the mainframe, mini, desktop, and mobile computing groups.
I know this, because I've personally been on three successful interviews for a position doing exactly that, promoting Linux-on-Power, within IBM (fingers crossed for the fourth interview).
Apple did the very same thing, when they decided to move their kernel and underlying OS base to a pseudo-FreeBSD core subsystem. They still maintain it all in-house, and I don't suspect Palmsource has the manpower to do this, but it is working out well for Apple. Granted, Apple has many more internal developers than Palmsource, but these things may change as Palmsource gets closer to a working product on the Linux platform.
Porting OSX to run on top of Linux, running on the PowerPC processor and hardware, provided by IBM, makes a natural transition for them.
Or maybe not. Maybe the pseudo-FreeBSD works well-enough for them for their current and future plans. Only time will tell.