[cromka]

> What do you mean by needed? A lock-in is more profitable so is needed to maximise profits.

You can't lock-in Linux users because vast majority of them won't switch to macOS and ecosystem at large. This is simply a currently untapped market they could easily almost entirely own if they wanted to. With growing Linux popularity, extra 3-4% of the laptop market share is nothing they can ignore in front of shareholders.

[graemep]

I am not convinced they would "entirely own" the market - they have a small range of hardware. Even less so in the long term. That extra few percentage points would be a lot less profitable as they would only have the margin on extra hardware sales so would not add much to profits - not enough for shareholders to care about.

It also risks existing users switching to Linux which could be a huge loss. Apple has a very loyal user base how do not try anything else and the last thing they want to do is risk encouraging them to try alternatives. Losses could be quite significant: if an existing user switches to Linux not only might you lose software and services sales, but you also risk losing future hardware sales (longer replacement cycle, and no barrier to switching to other hardware).

[cromka]

> I am not convinced they would "entirely own" the market - they have a small range of hardware. Even less so in the long term. That extra few percentage points would be a lot less profitable as they would only have the margin on extra hardware sales so would not add much to profits - not enough for shareholders to care about.

I am aware of that, but there's another factor here: accelerating Windows users switching to Linux on Apple hardware. Those Linux MacBooks would be killer devices that nothing in Windows world can compete against! I mean we can all agree the tech social media would go bonkers over that, wouldn't it? If a couple of YouTubers were able to bump those Linux numbers significantly and spearhead gamers questioning their choices, imagine the dent Apple would make. I am absolutely certain Apple would gain couple extra percentage points with Apple on Linux devices within first year and make Microsoft shit their pants in the process.

> It also risks existing users switching to Linux which could be a huge loss. Apple has a very loyal user base how do not try anything else and the last thing they want to do is risk encouraging them to try alternatives.

Aren't you contradicting yourself here a bit? If they're very loyal, there isn't much risk of them switching, is there?

But yeah, Product Cannibalization is always a risk, though it doesn't mean they couldn't actually embrace Linux and offer ecosystem integration there. iCloud integration? Sure, why not? iPhone integration? Why not? Apple TV app? Again, especially to attract those Windows users making a switch, who are much more used to paying for services and software?

Heck, they could even port AppStore over and improve Swift's cross-platform compatibility, especially considering Swift is fairly cross-platform already. I doubt many software products wold get ported, though. Besides, macOS AppStore is not a huge earner for Apple, considering the platform is open, unlike iOS, so macOS users switching to Linux don't have to imply a significant loss of income from ecosystem spending. Also, many loyal macOS users would likely dual-boot and be happy to continue to buy and use macOS-exclusive software as needed.

This isn't unrealistic, I seriously think it's a matter of time when those numbers start making sense for Apple. Also, if US administration changes, both US and EU regulation bodies will be back on Big Tech asses and for Apple to open to Linux to say "hey, we're pretty open" is another win.

[graemep]

> Aren't you contradicting yourself here a bit? If they're very loyal, there isn't much risk of them switching, is there?

That needs clarification. They are loyal because they do not try anything else and often make assumptions that other OSes are worse than they actually are. They often assume a lot of features (e.g. shared clipboards across devices) are Apple only. They will not take the risk of buying non-Apple hardware to try another OS.

> Product Cannibalization is always a risk, though it doesn't mean they couldn't actually embrace Linux and offer ecosystem integration there. iCloud integration?

It reduces the lock-in the have with existing customers. Having that lockin over the whole stack is what keeps them in the ecosystem.

> Also, if US administration changes, both US and EU regulation bodies will be back on Big Tech asses and for Apple to open to Linux to say "hey, we're pretty open" is another win.

I have less faith in the regulators than that. The push to open has never been that strong. No-one has challenged things like limiting software installation to the app-store, and Google is confident enough that no-one will to be switching to the same with Android in a few months time.

> Besides, macOS AppStore is not a huge earner for Apple, considering the platform is open, unlike iOS, so macOS users switching to Linux don't have to imply a significant loss of income from ecosystem spending

Not yet. They have the option of gradually making "side loading" harder (for our own security, of course) and increasing that profit.

[cromka]

Well, agreed on all points. I guess the conclusion is time will tell, but I am sure Apple is legitimately looking into this on some level, especially since Steam is doing so well and keeps expanding Linux user-base.

[graemep]

I would be great if they did do it so i hope you are right.