"They tried this in the '90s. Remember PowerComputing? Or UMAX? Apple is ultimately, a hardware company. The fact they put a lot of effort into crafting OS' fo

"They tried this in the '90s. Remember PowerComputing? Or UMAX? Apple is ultimately, a hardware company. The fact they put a lot of effort into crafting OS' for their hardware that give the average user a very seamless and excellent (imo) user experience is precisely to sell that hardware." You missed my point entirely. I'm suggesting that Apple should broaden its lineup, not license its OS for other hardware. However, given that it offers nothing of interest to the typical "enthusiast" power user, it's missing the boat. I think Apple should add the "xMac", meaning a range from mini to full size tower machines with plenty of drive bays, dual x16 PCI slots, large RAM expansion, and high-end i5s and i7s. They should be typical Apple design, quality and pricing. This would GREATLY broaden the Mac's popularity. I also think they should do a "Mac Pro+", meaning a box that either rack-mounts with an adapter (4U), or can freestand on the floor. It should also sport multiple drive bays, dual x16 PCI slots, massive ECC RAM capability, and high-end Xeon processor(s). The killer feature of these would be to gang them together with Thunderbolt into desk side (or server room) supercomputers for scientific programming, engineering, simulation, and 3D rendering. In short, it should provide the most compute capability of any workstation available, and scale as needed. Apple needs to broaden its horizons, and start leading the computer industry.