Which Mac operating system is the best is a topic of numerous debates among Apple fans.
The least-invasive method to fix a roaring fan is to delete junk on your startup drive. You'll be surprised how much space you can free up without deleting any important data. A free edition of CleanMyMac cleaner could be helpful in this case. It removes system junk, outdated cache files, broken downloads. The best Mac OS version is the one that your Mac is eligible to upgrade to. In 2021 it is macOS Big Sur. However, for users that need to run 32-bit apps on Mac, the best macOS is Mojave. Also, older Macs would benefit if upgraded at least to macOS Sierra for which Apple still releases security patches. How to Tell Which macOS You Are Running. Fans exhibiting this issue spin loudly all the time, regardless of how hot or cold your machine is. On a MacBook, it should be obvious to the touch when a Mac isn’t hot enough to warrant loud fan noise. On an iMac or Mac Pro, you can download a free app like smcFanControl or premium app like iStatMenus to monitor the temperature.
Since the mission of this blog is to refute myths and legends around Macs, it’s time for me to provide my 2 cents about the issue on hand. While everything below is just my opinion, as a long-time Mac user and veteran software engineer, I hope my opinion worth something.
The best Mac OS version is the one that your Mac is eligible to upgrade to. In 2021 it is macOS Big Sur. However, for users that need to run 32-bit apps on Mac, the best macOS is Mojave. Also, older Macs would benefit if upgraded at least to macOS Sierra for which Apple still releases security patches.
How to Tell Which macOS You Are Running
To find out which macOS is currently running on your Mac, follow these steps:
- Click on Apple logo in the top left corner of the menubar
- In the dropdown click on the first item: About This Mac
- The first line in the Overview tab is the name of the current OS.
What Version of OS Can My Mac Run?
Not all Macs can be upgraded to the latest OS version. For instance, old Macs powered by PowerPC CPUs cannot run OS intended for Intel-based computers. Also, some versions have hardware limitations.
For instance, Mojave cannot be installed on MacBook Pro earlier than Mid 2012 model.
Check below to know exactly what version of OS your Mac can run.
Which OS is Best for my Mac
Anytime someone asks me which OS is best for them I always suggested going with the latest. Things have changed recently, however.
Should I Upgrade to macOS Catalina or Big Sur?
While personally I like macOS Big Sur and have it installed on my MacBook Pro, it comes with serious breaking changes.
The first issue is compatibility.
Big Sur is a transition OS which is designed to help Apple to move from Intel processors to their own chips on ARM.
After I installed Big Sur on my MacBook Pro mid 2020 (pre-Silicon), most of my apps, including Microsoft Office, were working as expected.
However, my VMWare Fusion 11 does not start anymore, so I have to purchase a new license if I want to keep using it (or roll back to Catalina). Luckily, I took a full backup before the upgrade.
The second breaking issue is the lack of 32-bit app support.
macOS Catalina and Big Sur can only run 64-bit apps.
If you wondering whether you should upgrade to macOS Catalina or Big Sur, first verify that you don’t have any 32-bit apps. But first, take a back up, so you can go back in case something breaks after the upgrade.
For instance, I had to remove uTorrent after upgrade. And I didn’t know that uTorrent is 32-bit!
How to Know If App is 32-bit or 64-bit
To find out whether the app on your Mac is 32-bit or 64-bit follow these steps:
- Click on Apple logo in the top left corner of the Mac screen
- Click on About This Mac option
- Click on System Report button in Overview tab (first one)
- Scroll down to Software -> Applications
- Find the app and check Kind
Which macOS Should I Use
If you have an older Mac which is not eligible to upgrade with some latest software or hardware, I’d suggest upgrading at least to Sierra (or better High Sierra) for the following reasons:
- Sierra is still supported by Apple, and it gets security updates
- APFS file system is available
- It supports Siri
- Significant security improvements
The most important point when choosing the best OS is the ability to get security updates. While Apple generally does not announce the OS end of life dates, it is possible to know when they stop releasing security updates from this page.
For instance, according to the page, the last security update for OS X Yosemite was released on September 12, 2017. The last update for OS X El Capitan was in July 2018, and Carnegie Mellon University confirmed that El Capitan’s end of life date was August 2018.
Snow Leopard Myth
I know that some users on forums believe that the best OS version for Macs was Snow Leopard. But that is a myth. And I know how such myths get created.
Once I worked in the company, which was selling a 20-year old product. And customers were still using and didn’t want to switch to new versions, because the old one was rock solid.
I then talked to the engineer who worked on the project, and he revealed that the product was a total disaster when it was first deployed. Engineers had to work on-site for almost a year in order to fix all bugs.
After five or so years of polishing the product, it becomes virtually bug-free, and nobody now remembers how bad it was when it was first rolled out. A similar thing happened Snow Leopard, and it was recognized as best mac os version after some time.
How to Update to the Latest Version
There are two ways to update to the latest OS version on Mac:
- From the Software Update section in System Preferences
- Use a download link
Using Software Update
This is by far the best option, but it only available if you have Yosemite, or later OS installed already. If you enabled automatic updates, then Mac will inform you that the next macOS is available.
Just open System Preferences, go to Software Update and click on the Upgrade Now button.
This method is also best if wondering how to check if you have the latest version of OS installed on your Mac. Only the version compatible with your hardware will appear here.
For instance, my the latest version for Mac Mini 2012 is Mojave, I can’t install anything newer than that.
If you are having problems with updates or having issues post-upgrade check my post about troubleshooting macOS.
Using download links
For older systems or in case you need to downgrade, you have to download a standalone installer in DMG format. DMG stands for disk image, similar to ISO, just different formats.
After downloading the installer, just double click on it and follow instructions. Again, do not forget to take a backup before the upgrade.
Mac OS Comparisons: Requirements, Features, Compatibility, Download Links
Following is a high-level description of all Mac operating systems as early as Mountain Lion.
You can refer to those descriptions when deciding which operating system is best for your iMac, Mac Pro, Mac mini, or MacBook.
With each OS description, I included a list of Macs supported. However, you can use Mac OS compatibility checker for more detailed information.
macOS 11 Big Sur
macOS v11 (codename Big Sur) is the latest version of the operating system for Apple computers.
Release date: October 13, 2020
Hardware Requirements: RAM requirement 4GB. Big Sur is the first OS to support new Macs using ARM technology (in the future).
Features
- The biggest design refresh since macOS X.
- Support for new ARM processors.
- Safar improved performance and power consumption.
- Time Machine supports backup to APFS volumes.
- One-click translation for 7 languages.
- Redesigned maps
Software Compatibility Issues
Only 64-bit apps are allowed to run on Big Sur.
How to install
There are two ways to install Big Sur: enable automatic updates in System Preferences or download by using the following link.
Or check my post with tips on installing macOS on unsupported devices.
List of Apple computers compatible with macOS Big Sur
- MacBook (2015 and later)
- MacBook Air (2013 and later)
- MacBook Pro (2013 and later)
- Mac mini (2014 and later)
- iMac models (2014 and later)
- iMac Pro (2017 and later)
- Mac Pro (2013 and later)
macOS 10.15 Catalina
Release date: October 7, 2019
Hardware Requirements: RAM requirement increased from 2GB to 4GB.
Features
- Introduced Sidecar, which allows for Macs to use an iPad as an external display.
- iTunes was replaced by separate apps: Music, Podcasts, and TV.
- Find My Mac and Find My Friends have merged into one app.
Software Compatibility Issues
macOS Catalina is the first Mac operating system that does not support 32-bit applications. Only 64-bit apps are allowed to run on Catalina.
How to install
There are two ways to install Catalina: enable automatic updates in System Preferences or download by using the following link.
List of Apple computers compatible with macOS Catalina
- MacBook (Early 2015 or later)
- MacBook Air (Mid 2012 or later)
- MacBook Pro (Mid 2012 or later)
- Mac mini (Late 2012 or later)
- iMac models (Late 2012 or later)
- iMac Pro (All models)
- Mac Pro (Late 2013)
macOS 10.14 Mojave
Release date: September 24, 2018
Hardware Requirements: 2GB RAM and 18.5GB free space on disk
Features
- The main feature of Mojave is “Dark Mode”
- FaceTime adds group feature which allows chatting with up to 32 people
- News, Stocks, Voice Memos, and Home apps were ported from iOS to Mac.
How to install
If your Mac is eligible to update to Mojave, then the easiest way to install it is by enabling automatic updates. Downloading a standalone Mojave installer could be a little tricky.
List of Apple computers compatible with macOS Mojave
- MacBook (Early 2015 or later)
- MacBook Air (Mid 2012 or later)
- MacBook Pro (Mid 2012 or later)
- Mac mini (Late 2012 or later)
- iMac (Late 2012 or later)
- iMac Pro (All models)
- Mac Pro (Late 2013 and 2010-2012 models with upgraded GPU)
macOS 10.13 High Sierra
Release date: September 25, 2017
Hardware Requirements: 2GB RAM and 14.3GB free space on disk
Features
- APFS (Apple File System) becomes the default file system in High Sierra. It’s a significant upgrade from the older HFS+ in terms of speed, size, and security
- iCloud support of Messages which allows sync messages of the account across multiple devices
- Mail app uses 35% less storage space due to optimizations
List of Apple computers compatible with macOS High Sierra
- MacBook (Late 2009 or newer)
- MacBook Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)
- MacBook Air (Late 2010 or newer)
- Mac mini (Mid 2010 or newer)
- iMac (Late 2009 or newer)
- Mac Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)
How to install
Here is a High Sierra download link.
macOS 10.12 Sierra
This is the first macOS version. Previous OS versions for Macs were called OS X (X stands for 10).
Release date: September 20, 2016
Hardware Requirements: 2GB RAM and 8GB free space on disk
Features
- Siri was introduced to Macs
- Optimized storage with iCloud sync
- Auto-lock feature allows unlocking MacBook with paired Apple Watch
- APFS preview available
- Disk Utility can manage RAID sets again
- Significant security improvements
How to install
Here is a Sierra download link.
List of Apple computers compatible with macOS Sierra
- MacBook (Late 2009 or newer)
- MacBook Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)
- MacBook Air (Late 2010 or newer)
- Mac mini (Mid 2010 or newer)
- iMac (Late 2009 or newer)
- Mac Pro (Mid 2010 or newer)
OS X 10.11 El Capitan
Last OS X version.
Release date: September 30, 2015
Hardware Requirements: 2GB RAM and 8GB free space on disk
Features
- System Integrity Protection – a security feature that protects even when the root user executes the process
- Performance improvements: open PDF files four times faster, Mail is twice faster, launching apps 40% faster
- Notes app similar to the app in iOS
Macs compatible with OS X El Capitan
same as OS Mountain Lion.
How to install
Here is El Capitan download link.
OS X 10.10 Yosemite
Release date: October 16, 2014
Hardware Requirements: 2GB RAM and 8GB free space on disk
Macs compatible with OS X Yosemite
Same as OS Mountain Lion.
Features
- Major user design overhaul
- Introduction of Handoff and Continuity features
- Photos app replaced iPhoto and Aperture
How to install
Here is Yosemite download link.
OS X 10.9 Mavericks
First free Mac OS. Previous OS versions vary from $19.99 to $129.
Release date: October 22, 2013
Hardware Requirements: 2GB RAM and 8GB free space on disk
Features
- Compressed Memory feature automatically compresses inactive apps when approaching maximum memory capacity
- Timer coalescing is a feature that reduces CPU usage by up to 72 percent
- App Nap puts apps that are not currently visible to sleep
Macs compatible with OS X Mavericks
Same as OS Mountain Lion.
How to install
OS X Mavericks installer is not available on Apple Site. Follow instructions here to install Mavericks.
OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion
Must be purchased. Fixed many bugs introduced in OS X Lion.
Release date: July 25, 2012
System Requirements: 2GB RAM and 8GB free space on disk
Features
- New apps: Notification Center, Notes, Messages, Game Center
- AirPlay mirroring allowed to mirror Mac screen to Apple TV
- Application updates automatically install from the App Store
List of Apple computers compatible with OS X Mountain Lion
- iMac (Mid-2007 or newer)
- MacBook (Late 2008 Aluminum, or Early 2009 or newer)
- MacBook Air (Late 2008 or newer)
- MacBook Pro (Mid/Late 2007 or newer)
- Mac mini (Early 2009 or newer)
- Mac Pro (Early 2008 or newer)
- Xserve (Early 2009)
How to install
Mountain Lion installer is not available on Apple Site. Follow instructions here to install OS X Mountain Lion.
List of older Mac OS Versions
Following Mac OS versions are still running on older Macs, but Apple does not support them anymore, and there is no point to upgrade (or downgrade) to them:
- OS X 10.7 Lion
- OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard
- Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard
- Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger
- Mac OS X 10.3 Panther
- Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar
- Mac OS X 10.1 Puma
- Mac OS X 10.0 Cheetah
As an IT professional by day, it's a question that has confounded me for some time. I've tossed it around in my technical circles, trying to get a feel for what true reasons exist for Apple's double standard when it comes to not allowing OS X onto other platforms -- but gladly allowing Windows to run natively via Boot Camp.
How come Apple doesn't allow PC users to install and run OS X on the hardware of their choice?
I know very well there are business reasons it doesn't allow it. And I also know that the company has legal restrictions in place to prevent it from happening as well. But that doesn't answer the why of what I'm digging at; financial and legal restraints are merely artificial boundaries for something that is otherwise quite feasible, as I'll prove below.
Apple makes a lot of money on the hardware it sells with each OS X system, and it is a corporation, so 2+2 here makes sense. It has a moral obligation to shareholders to maximize profits for the business. And as such, it has constructed licensing legalese to help keep the kingdom of Apple computers strong.
But I wanted to step back and take a more holistic, almost philosophical approach to this debate. One that takes into account consumer choice, hardware innovation, technical feasibility, and other points of interest that may or may not have been tossed around.
So that I can get it out in the open, I'll fully admit my curiosity on this subject stems from my own personal objections for why I have never purchased an Apple computer. Some would come to the conclusion that this makes me an Apple hater, but that's merely a convenient way for Apple loyalists to paint me as someone who doesn't have any merit to my opinion. How wrong they are.
I'm a tinkerer at heart, and can't stand the closed nature of the hardware around Apple's computers. Likewise, I've never been satisfied with the limited choice Apple affords buyers of its computers. It has always adhered to a Henry Ford-esque mentality when it comes to choice, and it goes against my every grain of consumer free will in gravitating towards more options, not less.
And perhaps my biggest stoic objection to Apple has always been a philosophical one coming from my dislike of the crux of what supports the Apple OS X computer business: a reluctance to allow OS X onto anything other than Apple-branded hardware. I'm a firm believer of keeping my dollar vote strictly aligned with companies that see eye to eye on things like consumer choice, software freedom, and price competition.
When it comes to these areas which I hold dear, Apple has never satisfied. As such, I've chosen to stay away from its products, which is my option as a consumer.
I know I'm not alone in questioning Apple's long held business practices. PCMag has covered the topic in the past, and online forum goers frequently opine on the merits of Apple's ways. Judging by online commentary, a big portion of Linux users stay on that platform because they refuse to allow Apple to control their system of choice.
Others, like Richard Stallman, go much further in outlining the reasons they refuse to buy Apple, covering things from its reliance on proprietary screws on devices to its love of DRM on most items sold in its online media stores.
For me, as an enthusiast and IT professional, I believe that Apple allowing OS X onto PCs would be a big move in showing the goodwill needed to win back lost trust from people like myself.
Would it happen? Could it happen?
Here's my top list of reasons why it definitely should happen.
8. Isn't Apple's Current OS X Stance Hypocritical?
Apple is no stranger to having zero shame for saying one thing and doing just the opposite when it suits its interests. The most recent example of this blatant double standard when it comes to Apple is its introduction of an aptly named 'Move to iOS' app on the Google Play store aimed at -- you guessed it -- converting Android faithful back to Apple land.
Numerous outlets pointed out the hypocrisy of this shameless maneuver, seeing that Apple matter of factly rejects any app submissions into the App Store which merely mention another mobile operating system. Its official App Store submission policy makes no effort to hide this.
It goes without saying that one must ask the obvious: how come Apple has no problem with gladly helping users get Windows to work on its own machines, but refuses to budge in allowing OS X onto PCs? Wouldn't this be the fair, honest approach Apple could take to show its commitment to goodwill and a betterment of the technology world?
Its marketing department has tried to claim as much, in not these exact words, over the last decade or so. In my eyes, this would merely be an extension of its already established corporate mantra.
The Apple faithful see no issue with this, but as someone deeply entrenched in this industry now for a decade already, I've always wondered how no one has the audacity to call Apple out on its arguably biggest double standard.
The fruit logo company has similar opinion disparity when it comes to technology patents. Apple has a history over the last decade of calling out other companies (Samsung, Microsoft, others) in outright copying the 'hard work' its company invested into bringing certain items to market. Yet, when caught on the receiving end of such complaints, Apple insinuates that the patent system is 'broken'.
And on the political front, Tim Cook's outspoken stance on gay rights in the USA pales in contrast to what he has refused to say on the global stage. There's economic convenience in Cook's obsession with gay rights only pertaining to the USA, because a large portion of the global markets Apple sells within have atrocious records on gay rights and women, as Carly Fiorina pointed out. Tim Cook knows full well that causing too much of a stir in many of these Middle Eastern and Asian markets would spell catastrophe for Apple sales there.
It's no secret that Apple is now looking to make inroads even in Iran, where gay people can legally receive the death penalty for their 'crime'. Where's the outcry from Apple's loyalists?
Time and time again, Apple has shown no reluctance to take stances where economic realities uphold the best return on Cupertino's dollar. Even if it means blatant hypocrisy in keeping such positions, whether it be OS X on PCs or gay rights.
7. OS X Already Runs on (Mostly) Standard PC Parts
Apple has been on an upwards trajectory when it comes to using standard PC parts, ever since it announced it was dropping the horrid PowerPC platform in 2006. This wasn't always the case. The 1990s were replete with Apple Macs that had proprietary boards and cards and memory chips. Repairing these machines with proper parts meant you had to always get the Apple variants -- which came with expected price premiums that kept the Apple hardware market pricing artificially inflated.
But those days are long gone. Apple learned its lesson and has been stocking every Mac desktop and laptop with (mostly) standardized components which can be purchased at no premium by any technician. This is great from a repair standpoint, and even better for another reason: it means that there is little technical roadblock to preventing OS X on traditional PCs. Intel x86 on regular PCs is the same as it is on Macs in almost every regard.
This point was proven factually possible in the market by a company called Psystar which sold Mac clones for a fraction of what Apple sells its own systems for. Apple's legal department was able to squash the startup with ease in the courts, but the crux of the discussion on whether OS X can be reliably installed and sold on non-Apple hardware was already shown as viable.
And today, this mentality lives on in various websites that offer easy instructions for running OS X on nearly any PC system -- a method dubbed 'hackintosh' in tech circles online. We won't link to any of these so as to keep Apple's legal team away, but you can do your own searching. It's out there, it works, and proves that the only party standing between OS X on regular PCs is Apple.
6. OS X Could Finally Become a Competitive Desktop Gaming OS
While gaming on OS X is better than it has ever been, that's not saying much. Some popular titles are available on it, but a large portion of hot upcoming or already released games that Windows enjoys have no plans on releasing onto OS X.
Examples include the new Star Wars Battlefront, Metal Gear Solid 5, Battlefield 4, Fallout 4, Rise of the Tomb Raider, and Just Cause 3, to name just a few.
I couldn't find a single example of a title that came out on OS X but not on Windows. Such a case doesn't exist from what I can tell, which explains why PC gaming is Windows territory by and far.
Does it have to stay this way? Absolutely not. Apple could grow OS X into a legit secondary PC gaming platform if it opened up usage on regular PCs. I'm of the belief that there are a few major reasons why the gaming industry doesn't waste its time on porting titles to OS X (on the whole, but not in all cases).
One major obstacle is Apple's arguably low market share, especially on the global market (currently just over 7 percent, according to Net Applications as of Sep 2015). Windows makes up over 80 percent of that space on the desktop/laptop side. It doesn't make fiscal sense to employ the time, energy, and money to make games for OS X with such a small sliver that OS X enjoys. If PC gamers could have the choice to purchase OS X for their PCs, giving Apple the same competitive choice to otherwise new Windows buyers, this may tip the OS X scale on a global level. As such, developers would likely give OS X renewed interest in the platform as a whole.
Another item that stems directly from this low market share perspective is the time and effort that hardware device makers -- namely graphics giants like AMD and nVidia -- have to invest in getting performance on par with where it stands on Windows. The overall mindshare that has been dedicated to this on Windows has been growing for over two decades already. On OS X, comparatively little attention is placed on gaming performance for reasons stated above.
And finally, I think Apple's artificially premium pricing on its own hardware isn't helping matters when it comes to penetration. If educated consumers were given a choice of buying OS X on a plethora of competing systems, many of them would appreciate the choice in cost and quality of their machine. Segments of the market which otherwise can't afford an Apple would now be welcomed into the ecosystem their friends may enjoy, shrinking problem #1 I referenced a few paragraphs earlier.
While the gaming community has never traditionally been one that Apple has cared to cater to, it could easily grow OS X as a gaming competitor to Windows with simply opening OS X up to the PC market.
5. OS X Could Move Into New Avenues
It goes without saying that Apple opening up OS X to the PC market as a whole would have larger ramifications than just placating its critics. There are numerous secondary avenues that some have only dreamed of OS X being usable within, but that nasty licensing roadblock sits in the way. What dividends could reaped from potentially opening up OS X to the masses?
Many, in fact. One major area that my company FireLogic has been involved in implementing for organizations are VDI solutions -- namely Windows RDS backbones running on Hyper-V. I've penned previous deep dives on how fantastic the technology is with Windows Server 2012 R2. But the lowest common denominator in this equation has always been a Windows desktop as the endpoint.
Running OS X in a non-Apple virtual environment has already been proven technically feasible, as shown above as a proof of concept. If Apple tore down the licensing walled garden around OS X, it could turn into a potential VDI endpoint to compete with Windows. Increased competition would mean everyone wins. (Image Source: coolcrew23)
Is it implausible to believe that OS X couldn't be farmed into an RDS-style or Citrix driven environment for hosting end user desktops? If licensing restrictions were taken away, and Apple played nice, this isn't as much of a long stretch as some may believe.
Some offices that have spent countless sums on buying individual Mac desktops for staff could instead opt to keep their familiar work interfaces, but centralize administration and security of the solution on something like Microsoft Hyper-V or VMWare ESXi. Unheard of today, but this could become an easy reality given the will from Apple.
Another current obvious no-go is OEM sales from vendors like Dell, Lenovo, HP, and others. Psystar proved there is a market for non-Apple OS X machines, even if the law wasn't on their side when they went to market. I'd be much less critical of Apple if it allowed others to sell OS X based computers and allow the open free market to set pricing for competing systems.
This would also allow for Apple to move back into being trusted by another big market segment which has soured towards Cupertino over the last decade...
4. The Enterprise May Take Apple Seriously Again
Two years ago, I penned a piece that claimed Apple would never be embraced by the Enterprise ever again. Bold words, and I'm hoping it proves me wrong. It would only benefit the entire industry at large.
But as it stands, Apple has been sealing its fate with the Enterprise market for some years now. It shamelessly discontinued the last vestige of a proper Apple server, the Xserve, and told the community to oddly embrace Mac Minis or Mac Pros as server machines. While some companies have gone to great lengths trying to make sense of how to make this happen -- a select few do succeed with style -- the rest of us are scratching our heads on how the heck Apple intended its style-first systems to ever fit cleanly into network U racks.
It's nice to see that Rubbermaid organizers can double as Mac Mini racks for the office. But it goes to show the shortsighted vision of Apple's intentions for the Enterprise. Opening OS X up to standard x86 PCs would mean businesses could choose to purchase or build proper network closet servers running OS X -- and forego the shenanigans with racking Mac Minis or Mac Pros. (Image Source: Random-Stuff.org)
And while the Enterprise values systems that can be easily repaired with spare parts, Apple places meandering archaic rules around how spare parts can be purchased by IT departments, and even took home the title of having one of the least repairable laptops ever with its 2012 Macbook Pro.
InformationWeek shared results a few years back from its Apple Outlook Survey, providing insight into the Enterprise's feelings on Apple's viability in big business. There were some key figures which I outlined before:
- 47 percent believe Apple's products are too expensive for the value provided.
- Only 11 percent rate Apple's product value as 'excellent'.
- 39 percent say that Apple is making no efforts to improve enterprise support.
- 35 percent dislike the difficulty of integrating Apple gear with existing infrastructure.
Could the Enterprise change it's tune on Apple? It would take much more than just allowing OS X onto PCs, but I'm a firm believer that this would be a catalyst towards moving channel vendors -- the Dells, the VMWares, the Citrixes, and others -- into helping build and sustain a viable OS X presence in the Enterprise beyond just the iOS penetration we see today, which may not have lasting presence.
Desktop computing is going nowhere quick, contrary to what some have been claiming for years now. Slowing tablet sales are already hitting the market. And recent stats show that a whopping 82 percent of IT Pros are replacing existing laptops/desktops for like systems -- NOT with tablets, as many have wrongly claimed. Only a minimal 9 percent of IT Pros are putting tablets out to replace dying desktops/laptops, which is a slim minority given how many years tablets have been out already in force.
By allowing OS X onto PCs, Apple could potentially reverse its course on the losing end of the Enterprise desktop/laptop market, and in turn, help foster the beginning of a supporting ecosystem dedicated to furthering OS X in the corporate world. It's not guaranteed, but it's as good of a shot as any at this point.
3. Overall Market Share Would Easily Rise
While still doing better than Linux or ChromeOS on the whole, Mac OS X has never been able to rise above the ten percent market on any major market share stats charts. In my eyes, Apple is actually its own worst enemy. It's true.
For starters, the high cost of Apple branded systems is a barrier to entry for a large majority of buyers who would otherwise consider an OS X machine. Apple's cheapest first party systems all hover around the $1000 marker (give or take a few bucks) which is out of bounds for not all, but a good majority of people (especially overseas buyers in emerging markets).
Take away the requirement that only Apple-branded hardware can run OS X, with OEM licensing extended to the market at large, and Apple could reverse the struggling woes of OS X on the traditional laptop/desktop side in my opinion. The market playing field would be substantially opened and leveled for OS X hardware, with a potential par for par competitive option for new buyers considering Windows vs OS X.
This would satisfy many enthusiast critics such as myself, who have long criticized Apple for its artificially inflated pricing tactics of now-standard computer hardware. Bringing down the price point of entry level OS X systems could let consumers decide on the OS of their choice based on functional merit and not just whether their pocket book was large enough.
While there are no guarantees there would be large swings in market share benefiting OS X, I see no reason why Apple couldn't eek out a good 20-30 percent by opening up OEM licensing options for OS X. Increased adoption of OS X could therefore lead to Apple positioning its own systems as the counterparts to Microsoft's Surface devices -- the premium experience for those who can afford it and want Apple's vision of computing on their desk.
But the masses would no longer be held at arm's length from being able to choose OS X if they really wanted to, due to artificial pricing floors. Consumers would end up as winners, and Apple would look like a hero of a company. A win win.
2. Increased Competition for Windows = Consumers Win
In the sub $1000 market for computers, Apple has zero presence today. Aside from refurbished systems or Craigslist hand me downs, you can't go to the store and find a Mac at this lower price point. As such, Windows has a stranglehold on what consumers can buy in this territory.
A Huge Fan Mac Os Download
Sure, ChromeOS is an option and Linux has always been there, but I've written before for why Linux is also its own worst enemy when it comes to market share. For all intents and purposes, Windows controls the sub $1000 market space for computers.
Why does this have to be the de-facto standard? From a functional perspective, and from an ecosystem of apps perspective, OS X is by far the most seasoned alternate option to Windows for traditional desktop/laptop users. Most major desktop apps are cross compatible between both OSes, meaning if it weren't for price, more consumers could opt to go OS X if they really wanted to.
And therein lies my argument for this point. Few would disagree that the intense competition of the Windows ecosystem has not only brought down prices for consumers, but likewise, increased overall quality of hardware and software. Competition drives innovation, not stagnation, and this important fact is why Windows has not only survived, but thrived, as a platform.
One can point to the relative lack of advancement on the Mac from a hardware perspective as one example of Apple's negative hold on OS X. Sure, there is no question Apple is using premium processors and other internals when it comes to raw horsepower, but that's not where I am going here. I'm specifically talking about Windows platform innovations which have come to market and offered entirely new usage experiences for consumers.
Touch on laptops and desktops? Apple is nonexistent there. Convertible hybrids? Apple's nowhere to be seen. Stylus support on desktops or laptops? Again, Apple has never had an inclination to allow such functionality. There are undoubtedly plenty of buyers out there that would love to see some of these options available for purchase.
Apple's tight control over the hardware ecosystem for its OS X platform has stifled its own innovation, and with the growing reliance on iOS-devices for its revenue base, Apple has less and less incentive to steer outside of its comfort zones.
Giving the PC market a chance to do what it does best -- test new ideas for hardware combinations that make sense functionally and fiscally -- is perhaps one way OS X could stay relevant for the long term on the desktop.
Give others a chance to go where you refuse to, Apple.
1. Apple Fans Could Finally Have True Device Choice
This final point will probably have people either in complete agreement or vehement disagreement. But while many of the Apple faithful believe that Apple itself is the only one capable of creating OS X devices adhering to the Apple vision, I beg to differ.
While the status quo has tainted the opinion of many loyal buyers, I would ask loyalists to consider this: at any given point in time, the number of new Apple computers you can choose from on the market is somewhere in the range of 4-6 core models. While there are flavors offering more horsepower or battery life, the devices themselves all never stray too far from a common design baseline.
Many enjoy this limited set of choice in hardware. But from talking with others and reading comments online, there are just as many who hate the Henry Ford approach to hardware sales by Apple. Count me as part of this category.
On the Windows side, buyers have countless choices not only between form factors, but device brands and spec points. This plethora of choice has only benefitted in bringing new concepts to market, and giving consumers the ability to find the device that fits their needs best. Why wouldn't OS X fans benefit from similar open hardware choice?
While Apple's argument has always been that this limited set of hardware increases reliability, does this still hold fervently true? My company still offers residential computer repair for local customers and we get more than a fair share of Mac systems in our office each year that suffer from hardware/software incompatibilities, failed hard drives, incessant 'spinning wheels of death', and recently growing with each month, malware infections that some believed were impossible.
If Apple cares about its dedicated fan base as much as it claims to, I would think that giving them the ability to choose the hardware platform that they run OS X on would only be beneficial for building and keeping the trust of its customers. Restricting hardware choice to a limited set of options solely for financial and business reasons may still prove to bring short term success, but I doubt it is viable for the longer term, as computing prices in general continue to fall.
Device choice would not only be limited to traditional form factors for the consumer market as we have come to expect. This could come in the form of OS X servers made by Enterprise giants Dell or Lenovo, just as an example. It could also be POS systems built on OS X for retail. It could even be integration platforms for the auto industry, akin to things like Microsoft and Android Auto already represent.
The penetration of OS X could go beyond the tried and true and open up new markets with more choices for vendors and consumers alike. And while Apple is convinced its fans would be losers in such a scenario, I think that couldn't be further from the truth.
If OS X is to continue to prosper as a platform, let it win in the market based on its own proven merits. It's time for Apple to tear down the moat around OS X and let it be free of its artificial restraints.
Eat your own dogfood, Apple, and consider Thinking Different on this one. You may make new believers out of some of us.
Main Image Credit: McdonnellTech.com
A Huge Fan Mac Os Catalina
Derrick Wlodarz is an IT Specialist who owns Park Ridge, IL (USA) based technology consulting & service company FireLogic, with over eight+ years of IT experience in the private and public sectors. He holds numerous technical credentials from Microsoft, Google, and CompTIA and specializes in consulting customers on growing hot technologies such as Office 365, Google Apps, cloud-hosted VoIP, among others. Derrick is an active member of CompTIA's Subject Matter Expert Technical Advisory Council that shapes the future of CompTIA exams across the world. You can reach him at derrick at wlodarz dot net.