I have always said that it made absolutely no sense that Apple backed off from the prospect of cloned systems. For a brief period, during the PowerPC days of the mid 90’s, companies such as Power Computing produced clones—many of which were considered even superior machines to the equivalent Macs at the time for the money—until Steve Jobs put the kibosh on that deal when he replaced Gil Amelio as CEO in 1997 and the Power Computing assets were purchased.
Yes, and Motorola and Umax also produced clones (they were generally cheaper than Apple's offerings, but less expandable). And what distinguishes that period of Apple's history? Yup, that's right—the company nearly went bankrupt.
I wrote about this, in detail, back in February 2007 and nothing has changed in the intervening time (apart from the fact that the share price is at $160 instead of $92).
Where the fuck do they get these people? Seriously. You would expect a tech writer to understand the relevant companies business models as well as how to fit a new RAM chip.
However, some people still don't seem to get it, so I'll spell it out again...
Apple makes its money from selling hardware, not software: therefore, it makes fuck all financial sense to license the Mac OS. It's not as though they haven't tried it before: they did and it was a very bad idea.