5 ms·
I can't see that working very well. Dell computers are profoundly ugly. Mac OS X was a decent operating system but it would have hurt the Mac brand to have it r
by hardwaregeek 5y ago
I can't see that working very well. Dell computers are profoundly ugly. Mac OS X was a decent operating system but it would have hurt the Mac brand to have it running on the dull gray boxes that are Dell computers. Just seems like a last ditch strategy to get some revenue for Apple.
- nekoashide 5y agoYou're looking back with all the knowledge and information today, the NeXT computer was for all it's glory just a black box. At the time Apple did not have anything like what you see now, that didn't come until the 1998 iMac and only because of Ive. Steve Jobs would have literally done anything to save Apple, you only need to watch the 1997 Macworld Expo to see how far he was willing to go. Those people absolutely hated Gates and you can guarantee you would have seen Michael Dell on that stage if it had gone the other way. With that said Mac Clones were a thing, Jobs even tried to keep those deals going but they did not make sense at the time. Apple for all its worth was both a hardware and software company and the clone makers would have been competition anyways.
- throwawayboise 5y agoYes the NeXT was a black box but it was visually striking. Nothing else looked like it. It appeared to be from the future. But you're right at the time Macs were just beige boxes, and pretty dull looking.
- lizknope 5y agoThe NeXT Cube and Slab were some of the prettiest black boxes I have seen.
- hardwaregeek 5y agoI think we're in agreement. I'm saying that this was a last ditch effort to save Apple, but it wouldn't have scaled beyond a few years of runway. Jobs likely understood that a long term OEM deal would have hurt Apple's brand, but would also stop the bleeding short term.
- outworlder 5y agoDull gray? Weren't them still beige during that timeframe?
- toast0 5y agoAt the time, you could buy licensed Mac clones; so this seems like it could have been an attempt to get wider distribution with a bigger computer builder. Macs were not very pretty beige boxes at the time, so other not very pretty beige boxes wouldn't be a big deal. Based on the terms discussed, and that wikipedia says the licensed clones were ended because of unfavorable terms for Apple, I'm getting the impression that Jobs was trying to find a bigger partner and also make the deal work well for Apple, but was more interested in a good deal for Apple than a sustainable partnership for both companies. This deal didn't happen, and the licensed clone program was ended, and Apple returned to being the only maker of machines running Mac OS, which mostly worked out for them.