Scott Lowe has a pretty interesting article outlining a number of possibilities concerning Apple and the virtual front. I have wondered for awhile how can Apple expect Microsoft to allow XP and Vista to run on Boot Camp but they won’t allow their own OS X to run virtual on MS hosts. To me it seems kind of like that person at work who always takes takes takes and never gives anything back. I know this is a corporate model of some, but in the grand scheme of things wouldn’t this allow more people to get used to using OS X and maybe just maybe take out the small loan needed for that new shiny Apple desktop?

In the past, I’ve ran OS X virtually and was disappointed in the performance. Yes it’s because it’s not designed for that or even supported. I like OS X, if i could see how it would integrate into my network at the day job or test migrating to it at home before making the plunge it might just get me motivated to buy an Apple desktop.

Flame all you want about how Apple is a hardware company and the os is just to compliment it. That’s becoming more and more irrelevant. Like Scott pointed out in his article, OS X on the iPhone, OS X rumored to be coming to the iPod. OS X on the Apple TV. It seems to me as they are using the os now to run all this hardware. The os is becoming more and more important to Apple and for it’s devices. Just as MS has their Windows CE and Windows Storage and such, Apple is branching out to provide more then just hardware, it’s designing the software to run on it. Selling OS X by itself for non Apple approved hardware and virtual instances would only help them attract more users into the Apple cult userbase.

Lastly, I know this has been talked about before but I just honestly can’t see how Apple is denying consumers this. But as always, it isn’t about what consumers want and will buy. It’s about what Apple thinks the consumers want. Newton anyone?