Forrester: 'It's time to repeal prohibition' on Macs in the enterprise - Page 2

Active Directory is how Microsoft took over the corporate market. Its basically the gatekeeper that authenticates users and provides resources.



Virtualization is the way corporate server farms are going


That's true, but try fitting it into a rack.




Really, Please tell me where I can get a copy of SL Server to load into my VMware box and test on my HP server and violate OS X EULA?




Yep...people do vote with their wallets.



Microsoft couldn't do it without apple's help. See "EntouRAGE"

@al_bundy

Yes, OS X Server comes with Netboot/NetInstall that allows imaging. However I find that DeployStudio can be a bit more fine tuned.

Your comment made me laugh, been there, done that! You have my sympathies.

I work for one of the largest corporations in the world. Surprisingly, they don't do anything to block access to network services, but they don't necessarily encourage other platforms either.

I work on a team of 23 people. The company provides Dell or HP laptops running XP or Vista (Windows 7 is still being 'evaluated'). These laptops would cost a normal human about $600, but for some reason my company leases them instead. We pay about $150/month (if memory serves) over the course of a two-year lease term. You do the math...

Four years ago I paid about $700 for a Mac Mini. I run Office 2011 (and previously ran 2008 and 2004) for Exchange Server connectivity. I occasionally use Word and Excel, but generally prefer Pages and Numbers. For presentations I exclusively use Keynote (PowerPoint is a festering pile of poop). I am a systems admin who supports applications running on both Unix and Windows 2008 Server machines. For Unix I use iTerm and X11, and for Windows 2008 remote server administration I use the RDP client that comes with Office.

My computer currently has a monthly ownership cost of (700/48) about $15. One-tenth that of my laptop. In the past four years I've had exactly zero minutes of unplanned downtime, while every single one of my 22 peers have had their machines out for days at a time for reimaging due to OS corruption, most of them more than once.

The downside is that the $150/month in lease charges covers hardware service. Still, since over four years the cost of ownership is $7200 vs $700, the company could replace my Mini six times over four years and still save money, not taking into account the money saved from productivity.

Executives who don't consider using Macs are simply bad at math.

Virtualization of Mac OS X Server has been available for years. Starting with Lion, you can now virtualize Mac OS Client. The thing is, you can only virtualize it on Mac hardware.

Let's not forget -the most valuable company in the world is almost exclusively a Mac shop.

I completely understand (re: inheriting infrastructure).

My point is that IT people blame Apple for not working with Active Directory well, when I'm fairly certain that most of the problems come from the fact that Microsoft doesn't make it easy for others to work well with it (it's not in their best interest). That's why it's incumbent on those who choose network infrastructure to evaluate all of the options so that they don't get locked into a solution which doesn't scale well in the ever-changing world of technology.

Also note that Kerberos isn't just for Macs -- it's been around for ages. It came out of the MIT Project Athena in the late 1980s and has been used on a number of UNIX systems. Support for it is also included in Microsoft products. Active Directory actually uses Kerberos as well, but adds it's own proprietary extensions (making it incompatible with standard Kerberos implementations).

I'd just like to state that English isn't my native language, so if there's something unclear, let me know I'll clarify what I mean.

I am an IT too and I do have both, Mac and PCs on the network I work on.

We're running on a Windows domain environnement that use active directory. Each year since 2007, we've been testing the new Mac OS X Server version, because my boss is a total Mac fanboy. Each time, Apple FAILS. There's so much problem with their server OS, Lion isn't better. It goes from DNS issue to stupid thing like "no GUI for this option", then you have to fucking learn the UNIX commands and search on google. VPN server is also a mess.

Anyways, Server speaking, Apple is light years from Windows Server, and this is a very good point why it doesn't take more place in the enterprise market. Also, by killing it's Xserve brand, Apple clearly showed that they were a consumer compagny rather than seeking the enterprise market.

What about iOS ? Geesh, 80% of the employees here own a freaking iPhone(their personal iPhone), and they're always coming to me for help. MobileMe doesn't sync, an App is frozen, MobileMe overwrited the 5000 contacts, the calendars duplicated by MobileMe, the Wifi is dropping, bluetooth is failing, etc etc... There's so much problem with an iOS device, and it is though for a consumer level.

I've recently had to fucking configure 150 iPads for a customer of my workplace. Either you go for ThirdParty to configure your stuff, or, you use the iPhone Configuration Utility. This utility is useless, there's so much stuff that isn't in there that an IT needs. Just a basic example, you can prevent Apps installation, BUT YOU CAN'T PREVENT UNINSTALLATION. So freaking stupid.

And each single iPad had to be plugued into a fucking USB plug of a computer with iTunes, just to activate. Now as I understand, iOS5 finally resolved this last stupidity, but I'm certain I'll have new troubles with iOS 5 in the near future.. Unfortunately for me, iOS5 wasn't out when I had to configure 150 iPads...

All the Macs we have here used to be connected to the Active Directory domain (except laptops). I can't beleive how much logon issue I've seen with that setup. Sometimes the user account wouldn't even show up on the welcome screen. Performance had also taken a HUGE hit, the computers were so freaking slow. Just by removing them from the domain, everything went clean and good.

Also, Apple is not even able to make a good RAID hardware. 800$ for a PCI-Express hardware raid card, with LOTS of troubles. And since Snow Leopard, Apple doesn't licence any internet RAID card toher than theirs... it justs crap.

Here's another thing. Final Cut Pro X. Piece of shit, useless, a lot of functions are missing. Sure they added 64 bit support, GPU processing and a lot of cool stuff, but they striped the whole professional tool. Final Cut went from a Profesional grade product to a newbie product.

Same thing with Quick Time X... QuickTime 7 Pro is so much more than that piece of junk.

And lastly, Lion.... what can I say about that piece of shit. There's so much problem with that OS, it's a fucking Vista made by Apple. Never I could have though that Apple could release something like thing. Lots of problems, I mean LOTS! Samba shares don't unmount properly or won't mount, suspend mode doesn't work well, sometimes it doesn't wake the monitor, it uses more RAM, you can feel it on older laptops that still meet the recommanded requierements from Apple. Wifi issue, DHCP issue, and other basic stuff.

Another stupid thing about Lion, they set as default the new scrolling. They don't even give you a pop-up so you might say, no I prefer to use the methoed i've been using for scrolling for the past 20 years. No, they fucking overwrite it, and you have to go to uncheck a poorly spoken option that makes you beleive, that if it is checked, you use the old method. And just to make sure this wasn't just a bad French translation in the OS, I've looked in English, and it is exactly the same crap. This isn't an enterpriseissue, but it is definately a stupid issue that enrage people.

Here's another stupid thing. Each time you reboot, it ask if you wish to relaunch all active application at reboot. You need to fucking uncheck it EACH time. It doesn't remember it and set the option to default. When Lion crash, and it does happen a lot... There's fucking 10 to 15 applications launching at reboot AT THE SAME TIME. The hard drives goes to hell and the user end up waiting 10 minutes after his computer for everythign opens up.

Oh yeah, here's another thing (yet again), iMacs do not have a matte screen option since 2007. They want to push this Mac in the enterprise market, they want secretary and receptionist, or shcool to buy them, but they don't offer an anti-glare screen. I don't know about you guys, but to my knowledge, 100% of shools have luminous tube and lots of windows, and most business are the same. How can an employee really enjoy working on his/her job computer if they have to constatly to move the screen angle. At least they can brush their teeth in front of their computers..

Got the same complaint about the MacBook "Pro" 13-inches.



Anyways, out of 20 Macs, we've downgraded back to Snow Leopard 18 of them! The last two machines running Lion are laptops, and we still have problem as usual with them.

Snow Leopard is a GREAT OS, the best Apple as even made. But Lion is completly the opposite.

Just so you know, I am a Mac fan. I own 3 Mac, I've always loved OS X, but Lion is a no go for me. Apple is just dissapointing me and the enterprise market. My boss is also very frustrated by Apple, he's the real fanboy who usually will buy anything shiny Apple sells. Without even thinking if he needs it or not.

So if you're still wondering why Apple isn't gaining market shares in the enterprise market, it's simply because Apple DOESN'T take the enterprise market seriously. And frankly, lately they've been releasing butched products to their consumers.

This would be easier if Apple offered a mid range machine that was headless.

I agree with this. Apple is probably a textbook example of how an innovative technology corporation should be ran. I don't think its a model that will work at a lot of large institutions like HP for example because it would take getting rid of the dead weight. A lot of corporate dead weight is at the executive level. Sorry exec folks this is true. Its the fat cats that hold up innovation and change. They are hard to get rid of and enjoy the status quo. Look at Wall Street and Financial sector, big payout and gold umbrellas for the worst management you can find, a lot of these are Ivy League MBA grads too.

Agree, initial cost of hardware are small costs compared to training and productivity. Those are ongoing.

Unfortunately, the company I work out will probably never move to Apple hardware simply because of the hardware sticker price. Computers and IT are viewed only as a necessary evil of doing business. It doesn't matter if the TCO on the Mac is 1/10th of the PC. If the Mac costs $1000 and the PC costs $800 to purchase up front, the $5000 TCO savings over 2 or 3 years is meaningless to our executives. Their response is that $1000 is more than $800 so buy the $800 system and go away.

These are the same people who will pay $500 to repair an out of warranty laptop because it's cheaper than buying a new laptop for $800 that would include a 2 or 3 year warranty. OK, that may be an exaggeration, but it sure doesn't seem far off the mark. This place buys the cheapest crap they can find and ride it till it dies. Very frustrating.

Not true. Apple uses technology as they see fit so Solaris, Red Hat and in the past Windows and AIX were used.

The other cool thing about Mac in corporate is that the Windows IT guys don't want to touch them hence they are not locked down like the Win machines. You add software updates and print drivers, poke around on the network and no one stops you. The Windows people are always way behind on the patches because they are waiting for IT where as on the Mac you can do it yourself.

That's funny... I am in IT and I can't tell you how many times I advocate Apple products to the users here and so many of them are stuck loving Windows for reason. Although, I have helped a few get their firs Macs and they love them and the ones I helped get a new PC after advocating for a Mac instead a couple of them have come back to me with PC issues and finally admitted they should have spent on a Mac instead.

It's like an old bad habit and people just don't like change.... Even my other IT counter-parts in other areas are full force Windows guys but a few them love their iPads. hehehe

Off subject, our company is now getting a bunch of people onto iPads now, I should be receiving one for doing testing and training support on. Not sure what I'll do with my personal iPad.

Indeed. Only time will tell whether the next hardware update will alleviate that.


Uh, anywhere that still sells them? It's part of the Server EULA. It's completely allowed by Apple. JUST for Server, though. Not client.

How do you figure they release so much Windows software like iTunes. Safari, Exchange service for iOS, as well as create seamless compatibility with iWork and Office? All without a Windows machine. I think it would be safe to say the server farm is running some flavor of UNIX as well.

If you just need it for testing you can become an Apple Mac developer and download it from the dev site. All the previous OS versions are available there.

Macs run Windows too...

And um Mac OS X *is* UNIX under the hood -so I agree -their server farms *are* indeed probably using UNIX.

Anyway -I certainly didn't say they are exclusively Mac -they will have to have real Windows machines to develop iTunes etc. But the percentage of Macs vs anything else is going to be through the roof high.

What about:
"Apple doesn't care about enterprise"
"Apple doesn't need enterprise"
"Apple should avoid enterprise"

And all the Apple defenders who agree with those statements?

Why then, should those same Apple defenders criticize IT departments for trying to keep Macs out of their companies? Shouldn't those IT departments be commended for following Apple's vision and helping to keep Macs out of the enterprise?

Are there any tablets that support it?


There's the expression, penny wise, pound foolish. One can almost excuse a consumer behaving that way, but if you're trying to outfit a business, going the lowest dollar is just going to cause problems.

Apple should publish its own case study detailing how their own corporate IT infrastructure is set up. They should provide details including:

How many sites does Apple support?

How many end user systems does Apple support in their offices?

How many IT staff does Apple have in their offices?

Does Apple implement access controls on people's work computers, or are employees able to do whatever they want on work computers?

How much of Apple's IT infrastructure actually runs on Apple servers?

What server hardware and server operating systems are used, and for what purpose.

What directory service do they use (Active Directory, Open Directory or something else) for user authentication, contact info, etc.

Does this directory service span all of Apple's offices worldwide, or is each site operated independently?

For their corporate email, what email server do they use? Exchange Server or something else?

What server platform does Apple use for corporate file servers?

Does Apple provide VPN access to their employees, and what VPN server do they use?

Are Apple's web servers running Mac OS or LInux?

What does Apple use for their ERP and CRM systems, and what operating systems do they use for running them?

Unfortunately, as svnipp alluded to in an earlier post, I seriously doubt this would make any difference. Corporations (particularly public corporations) are so fixated on short-term profit that they won't invest more money today to save money tomorrow.

I find it funny how the blame is on Apple for not playing well with Active Directory. The blame should be on Microsoft for proprietary software formats.

With my personal experiences working with small businesses and hosted exchange. Exchange on OS X on the native iCal, Address Book and Mail is not good enough. The field inputs screw up, ActiveSync goes out of wack losing contacts and calender data. Outlook 2011 is horrible for those with bad eye site, entering data in the contact fields is a joke. And then switching from OWA, to Outlook 2011 and or the native Mail, Address Book, iCal client just confuses the end user. This is not good enough for those who have used Windows Outlook and OWA. As much as I hate Outlook and dealing with corrupted .ost and .pst files, when it works, it just works.

Also I wish Apple would create a terminal server on the OS X Server platform, this would be a great feature for those out of the office can VPN with a Remote Desktop Client and access information in the office.

These 2 things are my biggest pet peeves working with Apple in a Microsoft environment.

I agree - I've tried to use iCal and Mail.app but ended up going back to Outlook 2011. iCal and Mail are decent (and much cheaper), but just not quite there (I don't believe you can even set an out-of-office using Mail).


Okay, I haven't experienced any of these issues. In fact I find Outlook 2011 fairly capable, although I do miss the Project Center that was part of Entourage.


And therein lies one of my biggest complaints about Outlook 2011 - it still doesn't use a file format compatible with Outlook for the PC. Maybe that's not a bad thing since the PST format sucks and corrupts easily, but it would be nice if there was an easy way to share data between the two platforms.


They do. VNC server support is built-in to OSX. It's like RDP, only less proprietary...

Can this run multiple sessions within the server on a remote desktop profile?. On Windows Server 2003/2008 I can easily create profiles and have remote users run in the RDC "thin client" on the VPN server. Simple and easy to access and affordable.

Oh snap! I guess you can't ignore the obvious forever...

And? I can access it natively from Mac OSX too: http://www.microsoft.com/mac/remote-desktop-client

In fact, the two applications I rely on that are Windows only work best in a remote desktop session!

The iPad is blazing the trail - and the wagons are circling. It would be hilarious if it wasn't pathetically predictable

Entitlements and the wars overseas are eating our lunch. The entire combined budgets of the executive branches are less than 1/3 of the budget. While I agree that huge amounts of money are feeding a purposely inefficient industry, you aren't going to balance the budget by beating up on the overhead of the executive branch.

Not that I think we should tolerate inefficiency either - just pointing out there is no "quick fix"


Until you get all the various hands out of the cookie jar, we are never going to have a balanced budget. Heck, try to dramatically cut spending on IT and the howls from industry about how you are affecting jobs would be defining. The intrinsic attributes of government do not reward, nor encourage, efficiency (which is why I am always amused at proponents of big government or that government has the solutions).

And that's how my current setup is to access the Windows only applications on Mac notebooks/desktops in the office or outside the office.

Actually, companies have found with large, massive systems that the Unix or Windows hype about TCO was just that - hype. Often networked systems end up costing more, with less reliability. There are reasons massive systems such as social security, the IRS, the SABRE airline reservations systems, the vast majority of financial systems, etc. are still on mainframes.

Novell was and still is a technically superior system for directory services - Active Directory still has a fraction of the functionality of NDS - and 15 years have passed! I remember well in the mid '90s when it was rumored that Novell was going to release NDS for NT that didn't require Netware. Then literally two days before it was to be launched at Comdex, Novell balked - and that made my decision on taking the CNE 4 exams easy - no need to bother. Microsoft was going to win by default. No guts, no glory (yes HP, I'm still looking at you with the touchpad!). Even if they had released NDS for NT without reliance on Netware, there is no guarantee it would have survived - but Active Directory would certainly have to be a much better product than the unstable feature-incomplete pile of crap it is today. Sigh....

As for older versions of Windows - if it still works, why replace it? MS has a real dilemma with Windows XP - its good enough for the vast majority of users - even today. Yes, if forced to use Windows I vastly prefer Windows 7 - but is it absolutely necessary? Nope. MS has threatened to end support a few times already - it will be interested to see if they are finally able to do so with their current EOL date.

Not exactly, but to be fair this wasn't really what you were asking. Pre-Lion, VNC allowed a single connection to remotely control the Mac's screen (using its current session). With Lion you can now have multiple concurrent connections, each with its own session. No, there are no profiles, per-se, but again your question was, basically, "can I remotely connect to my Mac and access its information..." Yes, you can.

They started down that path and I challenged them back about thumb drives, dropbox and even Windows Live.

The days of trying to draw moats around things to protect are over - it's the data, stupid! Wherever it is, it should be protected. Attitudes are changing. Much faster, now that the iPad has arrived - and arrived in force! It's not an option for most IT shops - users and management are demanding it. There is a real paradigm shift underway right now, whether the traditional IT guys like it or not...

I changed the whole office over to Macs, including the server 3 years ago. I rarely have to troubleshoot anything anymore. No viruses, no DLL hell, no Windows pricing bullsh|t.

Meh - we dropped internal smart card readers as a requirement on our Windows machines due to a little revelation known as bluetooth. One Bluetooth card holder will support a users desktop, laptop, iPad, iPhone, Blackberry, Android phone, etc.... much smarter way to go. And even with the improved smart card facilities in Windows 7, it all still works better with a third party client - which also work just fine for Mac OSX, iPad, iPhone, Blackberry, Android, etc. too.

CAC/Smart Cards are hardly the brick wall they once were - nor the clear guarantee that Windows will be the only choice.

Sigh. This tired meme - again.

News flash - doom has been impending since Apple was at the 2% marketshare level, and they are approaching 20%.

20% of the top % of all $$$ spent.

So either all the virus writers are really, really stupid, really really lazy or - gasp - it's not as easy to spread malware on Mac OSX as it is on Windows.

Hmmm - tough choice!

I'm not claiming macs are invulnerable or will be problem free forever - but on the other hand I'm still waiting for a reason to run AV software on my Mac. When that day comes, your concern might have some merit - but until then, it's just meaningless hand wringing. I'll risk it for increased productivity at work!


OSX plays just fine in the enterprise. No worse than different versions of Microsoft's OS's.


Er, no it doesn't since iOS is Mac OSX at the core. The difference are in the upper level user interfaces and UI APIs. The reasons for those differences that existed at the dawn of the iPhone and iPad are the same today as they will be in the future. What Mac OSX is, and will pick up, is unification in general look and feel as well as concepts. That's entirely different than making crazy statements that the Mac is going to "devolve" into an iPad or other such over-sensationalized nonsense.

Yeah, and because of those byzantine interdependencies application virtualization is taking off. Which means those apps can be accessed by Mac's just as easily as Windows machines.


What kind of an inane question is that? Just call the Mac a toy and get it over with already

I really expect Apple to eventually officially support virtualization of Mac OSX server under either VMware or HyperV eventually. I'm a little disappointed with the demise of the Xserve that it hasn't happened already since it is the logical solution. Oh well - here's to hoping that one gaping hole will get plugged.

I am genuinely curious here, so I have an honest question.

I understood that Mac OS and iOS actually implemented things like Exchange Server really well. I was under the impression that general access therefore wasn't an issue. Secondly, Apple has contributed to open networking standards, such as CUPS/Bonjour type stuff. Therefore, where Apple does in fact make an effort -- where they license something quite common, or where they adhere very well to open standards -- they do indeed "play very nicely" (if not superlatively).

So, my question is this:
How much of the issues that you outline are really a case of Apple "not playing nice", rather than the other companies involved not playing nice?

In other words, could it be a case in many situations of the type that you outline, that the Corporation has got layer upon layer of cruft and baggage built up over years and years, that really has at its root a lot of proprietary crap (like apps that only work through IE6, for goodness sake!; or apps built in .net or something). Are you not laying some of this stuff at Apple's door unfairly?