or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Forrester: 'It's time to repeal prohibition' on Macs in the enterprise
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Forrester: 'It's time to repeal prohibition' on Macs in the enterprise

post #1 of 124
Thread Starter 
Mac business users have been shown to be more productive than their PC counterparts, prompting Forrester Research to encourage companies to support Apple hardware in the workplace.

Reversing a long-held stance against embracing the Mac in the enterprise, Forrester issued a new report on Thursday encouraging companies to take "decisive action" and support Mac use in the corporate world.

The report, authored by David K. Johnson and provided to AppleInsider, is available for sale from Forrester. Entitled "People are Bringing Macs to Work -- It's Time to Repeal Prohibition," it reveals that Mac use in the enterprise is increasing, even though 41 percent of firms polled said they don't officially allow Mac use.

Forrester spoke with a number of companies who revealed that a "gray market" for Mac users has formed within their ranks. These employees share tips and strategies on how to use a Mac at work and bypass "corporate roadblocks."

Running with the prohibition theme, Johnson argues that Apple's retail Genius Bars are a modern-day speakeasy. Through Apple's support personnel and online forums, users continue to find ways to bypass company restrictions and use their Mac at work.

But because MacBook laptops from Apple tend to be more reliable and require less maintenance than their PC counterparts, Johnson said that Mac users are more productive in the workplace. Using a computer with Apple's high-end, premium components allows a device to perform well for longer, and the Mac OS X operating system is less susceptible to viruses and malware, which means workers waste less time trying to fix their machine.

Included in the report are a number of tips for IT professionals on how to best integrate Macs into an existing corporate network. Defining Mac users as "HEROes," or "highly empowered and resourceful operatives," Johnson believes that Mac users should be enabled rather than hindered.



Despite the evidence that formal corporate support for the Mac platform is not growing, Apple's sales in the enterprise have seen a huge spike in 2011. For example, in May Apple revealed that corporate mac sales grew by 66 percent, representing a significant turnaround for Apple.

The enterprise growth is noteworthy because between 2007 and 2009, Mac sales to businesses were stagnant, even as Mac sales to consumers were taking off. But over the last few years, Apple's figures have shown huge growth for the Mac in the enterprise.

And Apple has also made even greater inroads with its iOS line of devices. The company revealed this month that 93 percent of Fortune 500 companies are deploying or testing the iPhone, while 90 percent are doing the same for the iPad.

Bolstered by the "halo effect" of the iPhone, Mac sales are now bigger than they have ever been for Apple. Earlier this month, the company reported sales of 4.85 million Macs in a single quarter, representing the best three-month span in the company's entire history.
post #2 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Mac business users have been shown to be more productive than their PC counterparts, prompting Forrester Research to encourage companies to support Apple hardware in the workplace.

Is that the real reason, or is it that the maverick CEO who makes businessmen nervous is now gone? In other words they think Apple is entering a "boring" phase.
post #3 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Is that the real reason, or is it that the maverick CEO who makes businessmen nervous is now gone? In other words they think Apple is entering a "boring" phase.

No, that's the reason. And being afraid of the "maverick CEO" who brought a company that was 90 days from bankruptcy to the most valuable company on the planet is the stupidest thing any other company could do.

Maybe–JUST MAYBE–how Steve ran things WASN'T a fluke and other companies could take a page or two out of his book (literally, since he has a biography now) and get their crap together better through his teaching.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #4 of 124
Yep. "Not allowed to connect a Mac to the corporate network." I.e., no network access therefore you cannot be productive, period.
post #5 of 124
When my PC was due for a refresh earlier this year, I asked for a Mac. The purchasing folks laughed. But, I'll bet that 2 years from now when it's time for a new machine, I'll get a Mac.
post #6 of 124
I can only speak from my own experience but, as a former computer teacher and informal IT guy, the Mac's focus on making everyday tasks easier is a godsend to most people. What do most workers complain about?
-I can't get on the Internet
-I can't print
-How do I send this file?
-I don't remember where I saved it.
-How can I get photos onto this?

Meanwhile, the snooty IT guys roll their eyes. What we tech-enthusiasts take for granted are hard things for a lot of otherwise smart folks. If you can make the computer fun and easy to use, it will actually encourage people to learn more about their own system. They say, "Oh, that's kind of neat!" instead of, "Dammit, why won't you just work?!" Getting rid of these low-level stumbling blocks should free up your IT Department to actually solve the hard stuff. And let's be honest, they're sitting around playing on the Internet half the day anyway. They say they're swamped, but that's only cause they're traveling from place to place installing drivers...
post #7 of 124
Anybody ever try explaining to a iPhone-with-Windows user all the things you can do between iOS and Mac OS X.

Me: "Oh yeah, I can sync all my calendars, emails, practically everything to my iPhone with little to no effort. Mail app is like email from the gods. Also, I can do practically anything with a PDF. And the apps you can use with iCal and everything else are so incredibly useful."

iPhone-with-Windows user: "Gee that's cool. What version of Outlook do you need to do that? Have you played that game... Angry Birds. It sure is swell."
post #8 of 124
There is a dramatic shift that needs to take place in messaging before the Mac is really a suitable replacement for Windows. Accounting and time tracking are a close second. But, from a hardware perspective and OS reliability, the Mac is fantastic. You just are stuck with the extra layer of Parallels or Fusion to run a few business-critical applications still.
post #9 of 124
I love reading this.

I had to fight very, very hard to be allowed to use a Mac at work (which I paid for myself). Some people might be surprised by the amount of flat out lies our IT staff told to management in their efforts to stop me (they actually had the gall to argue that Macs were a virus threat -- and that from an IT group that still has its PCs running Windows XP).

There was no single factor that allowed me to win my fight -- it was a combination of things. But one thing that has to have helped is that the CEO and several senior VPs all have Macs at home and come to me for support. I think the anti-Mac trolls in IT are an endangered species.
post #10 of 124
Think about the massive outlay ( $$$ ) of licensing for Windows, Office, and of course, the requisite security package (McAfee, etc) for each machine throughout the Federal Government (from the Executive branch through nearly every department, i.e., DoD, State, Treasury, DHS, Energy, Transportation, etc, etc, etc). It seems like a no-brainer to switch to Mac.

Then again, it seems like a no-brainer that we should have a balanced budget...
dano
if it is to be, it is up to me...
Reply
dano
if it is to be, it is up to me...
Reply
post #11 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

I love reading this.

I had to fight very, very hard to be allowed to use a Mac at work (which I paid for myself). Some people might be surprised by the amount of flat out lies our IT staff told to management in their efforts to stop me (they actually had the gall to argue that Macs were a virus threat -- and that from an IT group that still has its PCs running Windows XP).

There was no single factor that allowed me to win my fight -- it was a combination of things. But one thing that has to have helped is that the CEO and several senior VPs all have Macs at home and come to me for support. I think the anti-Mac trolls in IT are an endangered species.

Amen to your last sentence.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #12 of 124
You mean all the high school graduates who got their MCSE certificates from Sandford-Brown and now claim to be IT "professionals" will have to support Macs? Really? Is that even possible?
post #13 of 124
Our company is convinced that the Mac is the best tool for developers. We are in the process of replacing aging Dell Precision workstations with high-end iMacs and MacBooks. These machines can still run Windows in Boot Camp, but we can also use Mac OS X to develop apps that target the Mac, the iPhone and the iPad. Our company tends to lag behind the rest of the industry, so this must be happening all over by now. I couldn't be more happy!
post #14 of 124
A very interesting story; what comes to my mind is the question of just how much influence does Forester Research have among IT management or corporate COOs? Since IT organizations are top-down organizations, any influence on management could be a significant breakthrough for Apple.

Viewing this from a customer's point-of-view, I hope Apple never becomes entrapped in supporting corporate legacy hardware and software. Keep the innovation alive!

You often read stories of how IT is saying, "Apple must meet our requirements," in order to get their business. I hope Apple avoids that lure.

Nullis in verba -- "on the word of no one"

 

 

 

Reply

Nullis in verba -- "on the word of no one"

 

 

 

Reply
post #15 of 124
There has been a stampede at my office to Macs. In a 300 person division, I'd say Macs account for 30% now, up from nothing 3 years ago. For new computer installs, it's running at 60% share. This trend is happening at my friends' companies as well

Microsoft is so smug still. But I think we are going to hit a tipping point where total Mac share in the US spike to 20-25%. I would not be surprised if Apple share at colleges is over 50%. The odds increase I believe if MS Mobile and Tablets fail

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply

Windows survivor - after a long, epic and painful struggle. Very long AAPL

Reply
post #16 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEAMSWITCHER View Post

Our company is convinced that the Mac is the best tool for developers. We are in the process of replacing aging Dell Precision workstations with high-end iMacs and MacBooks. These machines can still run Windows in Boot Camp, but we can also use Mac OS X to develop apps that target the Mac, the iPhone and the iPad. Our company tends to lag behind the rest of the industry, so this must be happening all over by now. I couldn't be more happy!

Good to hear there's hope, I think we'll be the last ones in the world to switch. Apple phobia's alive and well in my office and is the biggest frustration I have with my job. We won't even consider iPads for the simple reason that it has an apple logo on the back. Wouldn't want to set a precedent that we're actually evolving. As soon as Acer comes out with tablets along side their ghetto-books, you can bet we'll jump on them though. Year after year we spend thousands on junk and spend so much time dealing with rudamentary issues a result, keeping us from being able to offer high end support. What a waste.
post #17 of 124
Macs have lower total cost of ownership. Apple chooses higher-quality components than your average generic PC maker. By spending a tiny bit more on the components, Apple helps Macs last years longer than PCs.

And Macs can also run Windows. If you really must.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #18 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

I love reading this.

I had to fight very, very hard to be allowed to use a Mac at work (which I paid for myself). Some people might be surprised by the amount of flat out lies our IT staff told to management in their efforts to stop me (they actually had the gall to argue that Macs were a virus threat -- and that from an IT group that still has its PCs running Windows XP).

There was no single factor that allowed me to win my fight -- it was a combination of things. But one thing that has to have helped is that the CEO and several senior VPs all have Macs at home and come to me for support. I think the anti-Mac trolls in IT are an endangered species.

There are many in IT that refuse to learn anything new. They often use bullying tactics so they don't need to stay on the cutting edge. Eventually the switch kicking and screaming or they are replaced. It could be switching from Mainframes, Novell, or even from an older version of windows... it is all the same.
post #19 of 124
Sadly this would eliminate thousands of IT jobs if implemented. But that would be an great incentive for any company to transition over to Mac- cut payroll costs.
post #20 of 124
IT Guy here...

The reason we don't like to work with Macs in the enterprise is because Apple doesn't give a sh!t about enterprise compatibility. What I mean is, Apple does not integrate well with the main infrastructure that is already prevelant in all companies. I don't think Mac users will be that productive when they have to wait up to 5min to login (AD Plugin bug that didn't get fixed until 10.6.8) or when they have to wait up to 30 secs for a network folder's files to show up (bug in 10.6, still in 10.7).

Mac's will enter the enterprise when Apple decides to play nice with other company's products. Which is never.

EDIT:
Before I get cast as "anti-Apple", I run a hybrid windows/mac network with an XServe Snow leopard server, 70 macbooks, 56 ipads, 5 imacs, 70 PCs. I have apple certifications and Microsoft certifications.
I also have every iDevice, a MBP, AppleTV and will try anything else that comes out of Apple.
post #21 of 124
My company's IT department just blocked iCloud access for being an "IT Security Risk". I doubt Macs will be making headway here anytime soon.
post #22 of 124
My hope: corporations continue to adopt the iPad, iPhone, etc. Those corporations later want to create their own internal apps & thus are forced to start making exceptions for those development Macs... then the floodgates open due to jealousy. I think even a lot of Mac haters / skeptics would try a Mac, if their work was providing it. That was the case for me, anyway. I mean hell, they are damn sexy machines with top of the line specs, and you *can* install Windows on it (see that tasty worm dangling there?)

My story: as a long time PC user & Mac sceptic, my interest piqued when Macs switched to Intel. Growing bored with Windows XP I decided to try my hand at making a Hackintosh. Flash forward to a year later, and I was hardly ever booting into Windows. Having built 100% of my personal computers up until then (easier for me to afford, upgrade), I started to soften on the price premium for the top-of-the-line hardware, and as soon as I had the money I got a MBP. Now I have only I PC left, which only the kids use to play games on the web. I grew tired of using PCs at work, too, so I started studying iPhone development (I was doing .Net), and made the switch to being an iOS developer. I've been developing iPhone and iPad apps for over 2 years, 1 full time, and I can't see ever going back... I've never enjoyed my work more. (I've always loved what I do, but this is a whole new level.)
post #23 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

The reason we don't like to work with Macs in the enterprise is because Apple doesn't give a sh!t about enterprise compatibility. What I mean is, Apple does not integrate well with the main infrastructure that is already prevelant in all companies.

The idea is to have OS X Server-based infrastructure.

Quote:
Mac's will enter the enterprise when Apple decides to play nice with other company's products. Which is never.

Huh. Apple seems to work perfectly well with billions of USB devices, thousands of FireWire devices, and dozens of Thunderbolt devices. Not to mention virtually all Ethernet hardware on a server end.

Guess you mean "Decides to play nice with Windows/Linux-based server racks".

Which makes a lot of sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesehead Dave View Post

My company's IT department just blocked iCloud access for being an "IT Security Risk". I doubt Macs will be making headway here anytime soon.

Isn't that their fault?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #24 of 124
Better CAC compatibility with OSX, and CAC Card slit into an iPad model will make large-corporations and the gov go on a purchasing frenzy for Apple products. It's the only serious limitation.
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #25 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

I love reading this.

I had to fight very, very hard to be allowed to use a Mac at work (which I paid for myself). Some people might be surprised by the amount of flat out lies our IT staff told to management in their efforts to stop me (they actually had the gall to argue that Macs were a virus threat -- and that from an IT group that still has its PCs running Windows XP).

There was no single factor that allowed me to win my fight -- it was a combination of things. But one thing that has to have helped is that the CEO and several senior VPs all have Macs at home and come to me for support. I think the anti-Mac trolls in IT are an endangered species.

Having worked the pc and mac sides of IT, I can assure you that it takes less staff to support Macs. The arguments IT makes against the Mac is purely a job security issue.
post #26 of 124
the new trend coming is BYOC, bring your own computer

a lot of companies are starting to buy citrix vdi and give you a virtual windows 7 desktop. you bring your own computer to work. Windows or OS X
post #27 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Is that the real reason, or is it that the maverick CEO who makes businessmen nervous is now gone? In other words they think Apple is entering a "boring" phase.

Another way to look at this could be that it took Steve 12 years to undo the damage done to Apple's reputation by the previous three CEO's. And now that work is bearing fruit.
post #28 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The idea is to have OS X Server-based infrastructure.



Huh. Apple seems to work perfectly well with billions of USB devices, thousands of FireWire devices, and dozens of Thunderbolt devices. Not to mention virtually all Ethernet hardware on a server end.

Guess you mean "Decides to play nice with Windows/Linux-based server racks".

Which makes a lot of sense.



Isn't that their fault?

I do have OS X Server based infrastructure. I am running both Open Directory and Active Directory. Some call me crazy, I call it accommodation. But it definately increases the workload dealing with the integration of it all. And there are much more problems for Mac users when in a hybrid environment.

USB, Firewire, Thunderbolt are peripherals/toys - I was referring to infrastructure software such as Exchange and Active Directory, which dominates the corporate IT market.

How about some virtualization of OS X if you want to penetrate the corporate market? Apple discontinued XServe, so if a corporation wants your "OS X Server-based infrastructure" they have to buy a Mac Mini. But if Apple allowed licensing of OS X Server to be virtualized, I bet many IT depts. will at least start tinkering with the idea.

By discontinuing Xserve, Apple is making a clear point that it does not want to go into the corporate infrastructure market. They want the end-user, which is fine, and they do it the best, but they need to play nice. They learned that lesson with iWork/MS Office - why do you think it took till 2011 until Outlook came out for Mac? Because most corporate messaging is done by Exchange.
post #29 of 124
deleted
post #30 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

I love reading this.

I had to fight very, very hard to be allowed to use a Mac at work (which I paid for myself). Some people might be surprised by the amount of flat out lies our IT staff told to management in their efforts to stop me (they actually had the gall to argue that Macs were a virus threat -- and that from an IT group that still has its PCs running Windows XP).

There is a reason for that. I used to live next door to a guy who was CTO for a major bank. He and his wife received several free trips a year (completely free - air fare, hotel, meals, entertainment) all paid for 100% by Microsoft. It was all under the guise of a conference and he did say that he had to spend about an hour out of his 3 day vacation attending a seminar, but with perks like that, it's no wonder they bought the Microsoft line.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #31 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

IT Guy here...

The reason we don't like to work with Macs in the enterprise is because Apple doesn't give a sh!t about enterprise compatibility.

I'm calling BS here. So called "enterprise compatibility" is a moving target created by IT guys who don't know what they are doing.

We recently upgrade from Exchange 2003 to 2010. Snow Leopard and Lion both are out-of-the-box compatible with the Exchange Web Services protocol introduced with 2007. Our IT folks deliberately reconfigured Exchange so as not to work with either Apple Mail or MS Outlook 2011. Then they turn around and blame the Mac for not being compatible.
post #32 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

I do have OS X Server based infrastructure. I am running both Open Directory and Active Directory. Some call me crazy, I call it accommodation. But it definately increases the workload dealing with the integration of it all. And there are much more problems for Mac users when in a hybrid environment.

USB, Firewire, Thunderbolt are peripherals/toys - I was referring to infrastructure software such as Exchange and Active Directory, which dominates the corporate IT market.

How about some virtualization of OS X if you want to penetrate the corporate market? Apple discontinued XServe, so if a corporation wants your "OS X Server-based infrastructure" they have to buy a Mac Mini. But if Apple allowed licensing of OS X Server to be virtualized, I bet many IT depts. will at least start tinkering with the idea.

By discontinuing Xserve, Apple is making a clear point that it does not want to go into the corporate infrastructure market. They want the end-user, which is fine, and they do it the best, but they need to play nice. They learned that lesson with iWork/MS Office - why do you think it took till 2011 until Outlook came out for Mac? Because most corporate messaging is done by Exchange.

will never happen

MS will pull ActiveSync from iphone and ipad making them less attractive in the enterprise

Apple will need to start supporting enterprise customers which means supporting software for 5-10 years

they will need to spend a lot of time re coding OS X for performance in a virtual environment. Windows is already optimized for Hyper-v and Citrix. and works nice on vmware.

Mac's will never have a big place in corporate america until apple stops playing games and allowing older OS's to be installed on new hardware
post #33 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

IT Guy here...

...

Mac's will enter the enterprise when Apple decides to play nice with other company's products. Which is never.

My brother is in charge of IT for a large healthcare provider, and I can say that in most cases, Macs will enter the enterprise whenever the top executives want them to. He has been told to make the iPad work with the company systems, and is also tasked with evaluating the Apple TV for running presentations in meeting rooms via AirPlay, from said executive's iPads. He went kicking and screaming, but he went. (For the record, he now loves his iPad, switched to the iPhone and loves that too.)

My point is, while they have the most influence, IT doesn't have the final say. If you are tasked with making it work, you better be searching for an AD (or other tech) alternative (or more likely, figuring out the problem with your AD implementation), or the guy who says it *can* be done will be taking your job. (For the record, I worked for a large government contractor. They did not use windows servers, but got AD logins working perfectly for Windows, as well as support for Linux and Mac machines. )
post #34 of 124
Software developer here (who has created software for just about every operating system ever made in the last 30 years).

Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

The reason we don't like to work with Macs in the enterprise is because Apple doesn't give a sh!t about enterprise compatibility. What I mean is, Apple does not integrate well with the main infrastructure that is already prevelant in all companies. I don't think Mac users will be that productive when they have to wait up to 5min to login (AD Plugin bug that didn't get fixed until 10.6.8) or when they have to wait up to 30 secs for a network folder's files to show up (bug in 10.6, still in 10.7).

The real issue I find is that, the decision making process for what network infrastructure technology to use at companies seems to get hijacked by people who only know Microsoft. And that's what the real problem is: choosing a technology which doesn't scale well across different types of hardware and operating systems.

What if you want to integrate a Linux or OpenBSD server into your network because it's more economical and/or secure? You can't because Active Directory pretty much forces you into using Microsoft-based products.

There are plenty of standard, open authentication schemes which work just fine across many operating systems. Kerberos, for example, is what my university used for a campus of around 30,000 people. Worked fantastically across the dozen or so operating systems being used in computer labs at the time (including Windows NT).
Quote:
Mac's will enter the enterprise when Apple decides to play nice with other company's products. Which is never.

Macs will enter the enterprise when people stop choosing proprietary, closed, network infrastructure technology which is near impossible for anyone but the company that created it to support well.
 
Reply
 
Reply
post #35 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

I was referring to infrastructure software such as Exchange and Active Directory

Not sure what Active Directory is, but there's Exchange support built into OS X.

Quote:
they have to buy a Mac Mini

That's the idea, yeah. Virtualization breeds terrible experiences.

Also, there's a Mac Pro available.

Quote:
But if Apple allowed licensing of OS X Server to be virtualized,

They have for years Try it.

Quote:
By discontinuing Xserve, Apple is making a clear point that it does not want to go into the corporate infrastructure market.

No, they made a clear point that no one was buying them.

Quote:
They learned that lesson with iWork/MS Office - why do you think it took till 2011 until Outlook came out for Mac?

Shouldn't you ask Microsoft since Apple has nothing to do with that?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #36 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

will never happen

MS will pull ActiveSync from iphone and ipad making them less attractive in the enterprise

Apple will need to start supporting enterprise customers which means supporting software for 5-10 years

they will need to spend a lot of time re coding OS X for performance in a virtual environment. Windows is already optimized for Hyper-v and Citrix. and works nice on vmware.

Mac's will never have a big place in corporate america until apple stops playing games and allowing older OS's to be installed on new hardware

The $29 upgrade fees too much for you? I think Apple cares more about keeping you up-to-date then supporting old software forever. They have an easier time doing that by using hardware as their main revenue stream. 10 years is pretty ridiculous though. The silicon in an Intel processor will fail after that period of time. Most enterprise customers replace hardware after three years.

So you think Microsoft will stop honoring the ActiveSync license, face the wrath of our court system, and push their customers away to third party control for this feature? Are you the sort that needs to make something up if reality doesn't fit your point of view? If not... maybe provide some evidence of this?

Whats wrong with Mac virtualization? I've heard of some NFS related IO bottlenecks, but that isn't something you will run into for most virtualized servers. OS X is pretty lean on memory usage. Citrix is a bit different use case. Apple has no interest in a thin client strategy at this time. That is like complaining about word processing on your PS3. They just don't do it at all.

Sure there are occasional bugs, but most 'bugs' are related to supporting an environment that isn't configured right. I'm talking about things that Microsoft says you shouldn't do. Large flat domains, tons of multicast traffic, portfast off on Cisco equipment, .local domains, disjoint DNS, etc.
post #37 of 124
While I would love to have a iMac on my desk at work rather than the seemingly ancient HP dx5150, part of me hopes it never happens. Why? If business adopts Mac as the primary platform, then guess what the number one target for hackers and virus writers becomes?

Apple.

iPad and iPhones along with iOS ARE making huge grounds in enterprise--my company just released it's first App and just a little less then a year ago you couldn't even use an iPhone with our systems. But iOS can be made to play nice with Windows and Enterprise software, so it's a different story then OSX, at least for now. In the future that will change, as it sure looks like Apple's future PC's sure look like they will run iOS like operating systems.
post #38 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbruni View Post

I'm calling BS here. So called "enterprise compatibility" is a moving target created by IT guys who don't know what they are doing.

We recently upgrade from Exchange 2003 to 2010. Snow Leopard and Lion both are out-of-the-box compatible with the Exchange Web Services protocol introduced with 2007. Our IT folks deliberately reconfigured Exchange so as not to work with either Apple Mail or MS Outlook 2011. Then they turn around and blame the Mac for not being compatible.

You are correct that SL and Lion support Exchange. But that requires IT to enable Basic Authentication on the server-which is fine if you are running SSL.

I have no idea why your IT Guys configured Exchange to not work with Outlook 2011, that is what Outlook 2011 was created for - better exchange support. Probably one of the best things Apple/MS collaboration did for the enterprise.
post #39 of 124
auxio you hit the nail on the head with your post. I completely agree, but the reality is that most IT guys inherit infrastructure. And while Apple was surviving in the 80-90s, Microsoft was raping Novell for network infrastructure dominance and established itself. I do not think Microsoft is the best, but they are so entrenched in corporate america that its a hard sell to make the conversion.
post #40 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post

The $29 upgrade fees too much for you? I think Apple cares more about keeping you up-to-date then supporting old software forever. They have an easier time doing that by using hardware as their main revenue stream. 10 years is pretty ridiculous though. The silicon in an Intel processor will fail after that period of time. Most enterprise customers replace hardware after three years.

So you think Microsoft will stop honoring the ActiveSync license, face the wrath of our court system, and push their customers away to third party control for this feature? Are you the sort that needs to make something up if reality doesn't fit your point of view? If not... maybe provide some evidence of this?

Whats wrong with Mac virtualization? I've heard of some NFS related IO bottlenecks, but that isn't something you will run into for most virtualized servers. OS X is pretty lean on memory usage. Citrix is a bit different use case. Apple has no interest in a thin client strategy at this time. That is like complaining about word processing on your PS3. They just don't do it at all.

Sure there are occasional bugs, but most 'bugs' are related to supporting an environment that isn't configured right. I'm talking about things that Microsoft says you shouldn't do. Large flat domains, tons of multicast traffic, portfast off on Cisco equipment, .local domains, disjoint DNS, etc.

it's not the upgrade fee it's the fact that corporations have software that costs tens of thousands of $$$ that rely on specific versions of other software.

is there even an imaging solution for Mac's? corporate IT has a few master images. no one installs software manually on computers in a large environment
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Forrester: 'It's time to repeal prohibition' on Macs in the enterprise