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 - Page 3

post #81 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTac View Post

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

Why? Especially in business - the iMac with the power cable and ethernet cable, or the new Mac notebooks teamed with the thunderbolt displays are awesome, clutter free workstations.

Why would you want to perpetuate the morass of cables and ignored towers under desks that collect dust, dirt and much worse?

I wanted a IIci class min-tower for a long time to provide flexibility in GPU cards - but with thunderbolt, there is really no reason to not just settle on an iMac, or a portable with the thunderbolt display.

I just recently got a 15" MacBook Air with the Thunderbolt display for my docking station and the combo is simply amazing. And it will easily last twice as long as the PC/Docking station/Monitor combination it's replacing, which makes it 1/3 cheaper over it's life time.

And it looks and works a heck of a lot better too
post #82 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

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.

Only if virtualized on Apple hardware - which is pretty superfluous since Apple doesn't sell server class hardware any more

That's his (very valid) point.
post #83 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

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.

Agreed. Besides, I had viruses on my old Mac IIci running System 7. Back when the Mac had far less marketshare (and when there were less people versed in the 'art' of writing malware). If there were hundreds of virus strains back when the platform had about 4% penetration, how come there are zero now that it's got much higher penetration?

Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen View Post

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.

Connectivity to Exchange seems to be fine. However it's the end-user tools that just don't have the functionality. Yes I can send and receive email, receive (and respond to and create) shared calendar events, but besides those basics, there's plenty of functionality that's missing.

So yes, without buying Outlook I can participate in an Exchange-server environment, but it won't be the best experience.

Quote:
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).

The problem is that so many IT environments have bought into the Microsoft realm where standards do not exist. Microsoft will take cross-platform standards and 'embellish' them to the point where they no longer work outside of the Microsoft ecosystem (anyone remember what they did to Java before Sun successfully sued them?).
post #84 of 124
Quote:
Anyway -I certainly didn't say they are exclusively Mac -they will have to have real Windows machines to develop iTunes etc.

Quoting you earlier in your same post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystigo View Post

Macs run Windows too...

If you were including Mac's as a "real Windows machine" then my critique is withdrawn...
post #85 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Only if virtualized on Apple hardware

OH, really?


Quote:
which is pretty superfluous since Apple doesn't sell server class hardware any more

Mac Pro Server?

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 #86 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

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?

And?

Quote:
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?

Because many of the reasons IT departments have traditionally demanded control are evaporating with cloud-based and mult-OS networks?

The days of trying to draw "moats" around resources to be protected are fast ending. The strategies of old make little sense these days between application OS independence and virtualization (of OS's or individual applications).
post #87 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Mac Pro Server?

Unfortunately that's not 'server-class' hardware. It's a desktop machine running a server operating system. For it to be server-class it would have to have redundant power supplies and network ports, and lights-out administration capabilities.
post #88 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

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?

Because, duh, many of these same Apple defenders are employees of companies with these idiot IT departments. They are subjected to bass-ackwards Windows all day long, AND the inanities of the IT departments and their medieval policies.

No, Apple doesn't need enterprise. But enterprise companies would do well to consider how they need happy, productive employees. How they need to look beyond today's bottom line and think about TCO, or think strategically about such things as how they can disrupt competitors who don't move forward strategically in IT areas. Every day new, small companies begin to run circles around the big old incumbents in various industries, because they are not enslaved by some of these navel-gazing IT policies.

What about: this IT policy/excuse:
"We need quotes from 3 different companies; Apple is "proprietary", so we can't consider Apple purchases."

Why then, should those same IT purchasers dictate MS Windows and Office time after time? Compaq, HP, Dell, Acer, Sony, who cares... they all run the same crap software from the one same company. How is that a choice?

No, what these Apple defenders are after is a choice. They are willing to purchase and use their own hardware and software, they are willing to take care of their own support.... why? to be more productive in the workplace.

To deny that, or to deny that there is any win-win to be gained here, well, that's just stupid and short-sighted. If IT can't work out a way to make it happen, they should be fired.
post #89 of 124
I'm the only one in my office of ~35 with a Mac. A 27" i7 iMac to be exact. Everybody is jealous.

But still, my biggest pet peeve before iCloud and now afterwards is email syncing. My email at work on my iMac, and at home on my iMac, mini, and MacBook air all sync fine. My iPad and iPhone sync fine. They do NOT sync with each other. It is maddening while trying to search for a sent email on a different device. If I had a .me account, great. I don't. And businesses have their own email addresses- so until they can sync something as easy as email... Who cares about a "business ecosystem".

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #90 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio View Post

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.

Since the Apple ecosystem is a walled garden, I'd guess that using Macs in enterprise works best when the whole company goes Apple. The "it just works" idea works as long as it's all under Apple control.

But it's probably quite a headache to integrate Macs in an unfriendly corporate IT environment, hence IT's reluctance. From Apple's perspective, it's like integrating your beautiful walled garden with the unruly jungle next door.
post #91 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

I'm the only one in my office of ~35 with a Mac. A 27" i7 iMac to be exact. Everybody is jealous.

But still, my biggest pet peeve before iCloud and now afterwards is email syncing. My email at work on my iMac, and at home on my iMac, mini, and MacBook air all sync fine. My iPad and iPhone sync fine. They do NOT sync with each other. It is maddening while trying to search for a sent email on a different device. If I had a .me account, great. I don't. And businesses have their own email addresses- so until they can sync something as easy as email... Who cares about a "business ecosystem".

Oh, I just double-checked my mail accounts on my devices -- I am vaguely aware that I once had an issue like yours (sent mail was only showing on the device or Mac that that particular message was actually sent from).

Works fine. I can see Sent messages sent on other devices and Macs. Have you checked your preferences for the IMAP mail account? -- under the "Mailbox Behaviours" tab, check that the checkbox for Sent is check marked to "Store sent messages on the server."
post #92 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by am8449 View Post

Since the Apple ecosystem is a walled garden, I'd guess that using Macs in enterprise works best when the whole company goes Apple. The "it just works" idea works as long as it's all under Apple control.

But it's probably quite a headache to integrate Macs in an unfriendly corporate IT environment, hence IT's reluctance. From Apple's perspective, it's like integrating your beautiful walled garden with the unruly jungle next door.

Well, yes it's a headache...
It's a headache for the Mac user precisely because IT is unfriendly, nay, downright hostile.

It's a headache for the IT support personnel, because they know that, once a tipping point has been reached, they will be out of jobs.

But, as for getting the job done, no, no worse a headache than normal. Despite the headaches arising from the hostile environment and IT police harassment, there is plenty of sunshine in job satisfaction, productivity level, and things that just work, that you will want to sing anyway.

Jungle or zen garden, Mac users can adapt; they are a guerrilla workforce at heart. It's the jungle inhabitants that will fail to adapt to a changing world and die. They need to climb down out of their trees.

Quote:
Originally Posted by am8449 View Post

The "it just works" idea works as long as it's all under Apple control.

Not really. I have co-workers who mail me Word docs and ask me to "do some magic" on them. I don't have Office. I open them in Pages (20-dollars), export it to Word and send it to the other co-worker that needed it in the first place... but they couldn't open it because they had conflicting versions of Office or Windows, or whatever the inevitable, life-sucking issue is this week (yawn).
post #93 of 124
It has been blindingly obvious since the Mac was released in 1985 that IT departments have been pro-Microsoft and anti-Apple just to protect their budgets, head counts and skill base. CEO's have been conned by these technological dinosaurs who still believe that 'users' are ignorant fools who can't do anything without one of their support staff standing over their shoulders and keeping their PCs working and malware free. It is nothing short of a scandal which has allowed Microsoft and cyber criminals to prosper, while driving many PC users to distraction with cheap and substandard hardware and software.

It is high time that employees in all companies insist that they be allowed to use Macs at work if they wish, and that IT departments are instructed to instal Mac-compatible infrastructure and train their staff to support them in the rare occasions that they are needed. The result will not only be cost savings and better security for the business, but reduced employee frustration with crappy business tools.
post #94 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

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



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

Also, there's a Mac Pro available.



They have for years Try it.



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



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

Dude- there are IT guys discussing business aspects. Everything is different and it's apparent you don't deal with large scale business- you don't even know what Active directory is. I know you think you know everything about everything, but guess what- you don't. So please stop talking just to try to prove a point that didn't exist. It's annoying.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #95 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

I know you think you know everything about everything

I'd love to know why you're so upset about someone trying to learn about server infrastructure and the needs of the market, but I don't really care that much.

Quote:
So please stop talking just to try to prove a point that didn't exist.

You can virtualize OS X Server. He didn't know that. Boom, it helped a little.

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 #96 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen View Post

Oh, I just double-checked my mail accounts on my devices -- I am vaguely aware that I once had an issue like yours (sent mail was only showing on the device or Mac that that particular message was actually sent from).

Works fine. I can see Sent messages sent on other devices and Macs. Have you checked your preferences for the IMAP mail account? -- under the "Mailbox Behaviours" tab, check that the checkbox for Sent is check marked to "Store sent messages on the server."

Brilliant! I just need to be smarter.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #97 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I'd love to know why you're so upset about someone trying to learn about server infrastructure and the needs of the market, but I don't really care that much.



You can virtualize OS X Server. He didn't know that. Boom, it helped a little.

Not that I should respond to this, but I will. Your philosophy- if it isn't apple, it's wrong. If it is apple, it's the only way.

Please tell me where I'm wrong.

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #98 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

@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.


What about clients?

You buy 1000 mbp's and have image them for users in a corporate setting with software, etc. and get rid of garage band and other software. How do you do it?
post #99 of 124
Took my pc to IT in July for yet another repair. Used my research grant funded MBP to access corporate system via Citrix. More than 3 months later and I never have been back to pick up the pc.
post #100 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Your philosophy- if it isn't apple, it's wrong. If it is apple, it's the only way.

Please tell me where I'm wrong.

On a fundamental level. I'd ask you to just go back and try to explain where you're getting that nonsense, but I don't really care, and I'm not sure you'd do a very good job of it.

Apple is not infallible. Not by a long shot.

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 #101 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by emoeric87 View Post

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."


Windows user: why would I want to sync with my desktop when corporate sync through the microsoft exchange server; with little to no effort.
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #102 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.

I do call you crazy. Why both, exactly? Have some Windows NT4 machines still kicking around or something?

Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

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

Both software packages Apple MacOSX supports fluently. I use Exchange with Apple Mail and it works perfectly - my dad has a C2D 24" iMac and his work does not allow external email clients to connect (web and local ethernet clients only) and Exchange web mail works flawlessly in Safari. Active Directory has been in the Mac for quite a while.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

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.

Macmini and MacPro. Big Xeon towers, I think a lot of people would be happy with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thevaf View Post

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.

They got rid of Xserve because it wasn't selling, not because the fruit said "screw the business users". Entourage was used before Outlook on the Mac, and before Entourage it was Outlook.
MS just changed the name for some strange reason.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #103 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

Windows user: why would I want to sync with my desktop when corporate sync through the microsoft exchange server; with little to no effort.

Its six and two threes, really. Both do the same thing.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #104 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

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 MS RDP client for OS X is missing several features, one being being the TS Gateway support.
post #105 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

What about clients?

You buy 1000 mbp's and have image them for users in a corporate setting with software, etc. and get rid of garage band and other software. How do you do it?

Symantec Altiris (Deployment Server) supports Windows, OS X, and Linux clients for deployment of software, and (I believe for the Mac) imaging.
post #106 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko View Post

Windows user: why would I want to sync with my desktop when corporate sync through the microsoft exchange server; with little to no effort.

Well, it's not about you. I can imagine that some people can do that. For others, there may be little to no effort on their parts, but the stage has been set by a whole cadre of MS Certifieds whose sole occupation is to make it possible and maintain its possibility.

But, I can imagine that some people have a life outside the corporate office, that they might have a spouse or family member they want to synch with, and they may own more than one device privately themselves.

And, there are countless small businesses and non-profits and schools and institutions that are looking for inexpensive, easy to configure and maintain systems that don't require paying a whole department of cheery chaps with MS certifications, nor paying the onerous licensing fees to MS for every little feature or new user or added access point or whatever.

There are stories every day about how this very idea you are dismissing actually turns out to be a godsend for individuals and small operations everywhere. They had no idea what was possible with so little equipment and so little software, and for so little time, effort and money. It also helps them to compete with the big boys in their industries asymmetrically; in many areas they are able to leapfrog over different technologies despite "accepted wisdom" to the contrary.
post #107 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Why? Especially in business - the iMac with the power cable and ethernet cable, or the new Mac notebooks teamed with the thunderbolt displays are awesome, clutter free workstations.

Businesses need to keep running. If need be, when a monitor dies you can go many places and buy one and be back running within an hour. Sure you can connect a second monitor to an iMac to keep running but then you have just thrown out your argument of a clutter free workstation.

To replace that dead monitor on an iMac you can't use the computer while it is being done. Are you going to keep spare iMacs lying around the office?
post #108 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTac View Post

Businesses need to keep running. If need be, when a monitor dies you can go many places and buy one and be back running within an hour. Sure you can connect a second monitor to an iMac to keep running but then you have just thrown out your argument of a clutter free workstation.

To replace that dead monitor on an iMac you can't use the computer while it is being done. Are you going to keep spare iMacs lying around the office?

How do these organizations manage laptops? Same deal.

How often does a monitor die? The last computer monitor that's died on me was in the CRT days, and that was a refurb from a second tier brand, KDS or something like that. Even CRTs last nearly a decade. I've not owned an LCD that long, but none of those have died yet.

If you have hundreds of installations, any decent organization should have a few spare machines pre-imaged, regardless of brand. With an iMac, it's easy to transfer the user's drive data to a spare machine in half an hour using target disk mode (doesn't require a monitor), fix the old one when it's convenient and the old one is ready for the next swap-out.
post #109 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

How do these organizations manage laptops? Same deal.

How often does a monitor die? If you have hundreds of installations, any decent organization should have a few spare machines pre-imaged, regardless of brand.

Exactly. The iMac argument becomes moot when you realise almost everyone will most likely be running a laptop as their only machine, which in the world of portable everything (still waiting for the portable kitchen sink) is becoming increasingly more common. I'm in the head office with 5 other people, 5 of us are on laptops and the book keeping guy is on the desktop.

I'm on a MacBook Pro (developer) and the IT Manager (my boss) is using a Asus with Linux. If either of these machines goes wobbly then we'll be screwed because these are our personal machines and we'll need to get them repaired, but the windows laptops just sit in a cupboard - literally.

Broken? Get one out the cupboard.
Heck, we even have an IBM X336 in the cupboard for some reason.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #110 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabbelen View Post

Well, it's not about you. I can imagine that some people can do that. For others, there may be little to no effort on their parts, but the stage has been set by a whole cadre of MS Certifieds whose sole occupation is to make it possible and maintain its possibility.

But, I can imagine that some people have a life outside the corporate office, that they might have a spouse or family member they want to synch with, and they may own more than one device privately themselves.

And, there are countless small businesses and non-profits and schools and institutions that are looking for inexpensive, easy to configure and maintain systems that don't require paying a whole department of cheery chaps with MS certifications, nor paying the onerous licensing fees to MS for every little feature or new user or added access point or whatever.

There are stories every day about how this very idea you are dismissing actually turns out to be a godsend for individuals and small operations everywhere. They had no idea what was possible with so little equipment and so little software, and for so little time, effort and money. It also helps them to compete with the big boys in their industries asymmetrically; in many areas they are able to leapfrog over different technologies despite "accepted wisdom" to the contrary.

that's why you go to the da cloud if you're a small office. pay the fee for Office 365 and hosted exchange and don't bother to buy any of your own hardware or software. i know someone that sets up Windows servers for small businesses and i always tell him to just tell his clients to go to da cloud.
post #111 of 124
deleted
post #112 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

that's why you go to the cloud if you're a small office. pay the fee for Office 365 and hosted exchange and don't bother to buy any of your own hardware or software. i know someone that sets up Windows servers for small businesses and i always tell him to just tell his clients to go to the cloud.

*the
fixed


Jokes aside.
Using SAS can be a benefit to a business but it can also be a curse. Yes you don't have to maintain your own hardware, but if something goes tits up with the software provider then you're stuck loosing money every second. If you also want to expand your software's capabilities to meet your business needs, then it is very likely that you will not be able to extend your software beyond its default set your originally purchased and it will become a hindrance - you would have to use a service such as Azure that would most likely be as expensive if not more expensive than owning your own hardware due to fees associated.

With your own hardware you can expand, tweak, twiddle, chop, change and kick it around to suit your needs.

Linux for the servers and the Macintosh for the desktops. Powerful servers for cheap and capable workstations with proven long life spans.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #113 of 124
Most enterprise IT folks are against Apple because they haven't kept up with all the changes. Many Enterprise IT folks have a strong distaste of Apple and their products stemming directly from the bad years at Apple prior to Steve Jobs return and restructuring. Mac OS X didn't ship until 2000/2001 and it's come a long way from even Jaguar days.

What they don't know staggers the mind...

1. Their view of Apple stems from Mac OS 7-9 days where the system was bizarre (AppleTalk, etc.) and locked down in ways that would make a Geek cringe
2. They don't know Mac OS X is really Unix under the hood (most enterprise IT folks are very familiar with Linux and UNIX). Show them Apache, SSH, top, ps, vim, emacs, etc.
3. They don't know that Mac OS X can talk to Exchange 2007 / 2010
4. They don't know they can join ActiveDirectory easily (10.7.2 fixed an issue in 10.7.0/1)
5. They don't know you can dual boot a Mac with Windows
6. They don't know you can run VMWare Fusion or Parallels to run Windows in a VM
7. They don't know Citrix has a Mac OS X Client
8. They don't know how much faster Mac OS X boots than even Win7 64bit. They are completely unaware of how much smoother everything is in general
9. They don't know they can enterprise manage Mac's using JAMF Casper Suite
10. They don't know they can run Casper Suite on a Linux / UNIX server that can run Java Tomcat & MySQL server. (i.e. they don't need a Mac server at all)
11. They don't know about Apple Remote Desktop
12. They might not know how good TeamViewer is on the Mac (cross platform remote control)
14. They don't know how much more secure Mac OS X is than Windows, they are polluted by the FUD being spread whenever some minor issue hits the media

Enterprise IT is somewhat familiar with iPads (only because Exec's demanded it), when iOS 5 shipped an alert went out stating that it fixes 96 vulnerabilities iniOS 4. So they made an urgent demand to upgrade all iPhones and iPads when Apples servers were overwhelmed and many users were getting bricked as a result. Later the next day, they had run some penetration testing and determined that the vulnerabilities were nowhere near as bad a risk as they first assumed.

If your enterprise is not supporting iOS devices yet, make sure they know about Good.com's Good for Enterprise server. It is very close to BlackBerry levels of security and new features are pouring out of Good every couple of months. Good runs on iOS and Android phones and is quickly stealing business from RIM / BlackBerry.
post #114 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

That's probably the best place for them.

OS X is a certified Unix, and Linux incorporates most of the strengths of Unix operating systems. Either is going to provide more security and stability for an enterprise than Windows can.

Windows is at its core a single-user system, onto which multi-user capabilities have been grafted. In contrast, Unix is inherently multi-user, and hundreds of thousands of programming decisions have been made throughout all levels of the OS to reflect that, keeping processes and files protected in ways Microsoft won't be able to match without losing backward compatibility, often resorting to bizarre workarounds like directory virtualization which has broken more than a few apps.

Moreover, Microsoft has a long history of prioritizing developer convenience over end-user security, resulting in a great proliferation of apps, but which have a dizzying scope of vulnerabilities.

Unix is the core of computing, and the core of the Internet. Microsoft is currently the last man standing with a non-Unix-flavored OS, but even they offer a modest admission: Enterprise editions of Win 7 come with a Unix shell, as though recognizing the relative lameness of DOS.

Microsoft is popular only because Microsoft has been popular. This has led to an entrenched vendor lock-in unlike anything we've seen before. But as Mac popularity grows, and as Linux continues to dominate the server space, IT staffer arguments favoring Windows become ever more self-evidently self-serving, providing little if any value to the organizations they serve.

Seeing BASH in Windows suggests a dangerous fork in the road ahead for Microsoft: they'll either stay with their inherently brittle kernel and hope that patching it can keep it alive, or they'll switch to a Unix kernel.

I'm not sure which is riskier for them. I'm just glad I don't need to make that decision. I use Mac and Linux here.

That was one of the big reasons for me heading down the Macintosh route. UNIX.
I love Linux but the desktop variants annoy me to no end, but boy how I love to rip the thing apart when setting up a new server.

The biggest issue I have with Microsoft windows is the Registry.
Linux, Unix and the Mac get lovely little package receipts, Windows gets the registry. I'm an educated man, I know my way around a Microsoft Windows environment, but the registry is so flaky that I've managed to brick a couple of computers because of it.
Then you have the abysmal user permissions - or the lack thereof. I used to hack the XP machines in college by doing a couple of exploits, and these were the machines set up by the "Microsoft Certified" IT department. I do wonder how shocked they were to find that all the computers in the upper library terrace had a nice set of tits appear on screen when you started the computer. (I was 17, sue me )
Me and a few friends hacked Quake 2 onto one of the servers to play network games as well. Fun times for all!

The reason for Microsoft's popularity is nothing short of brainwashing, as extreme as that sounds - go into a business with a clueless exec or an IT Manager who practically wears the windows flag on novelty underwear and they will not 'want', but 'need' MS Office, Windows and Exchange in order to function. I'm the only one in the office with Microsoft Office, everyone else has LibreOffice. No compatibility issues at all - I actually proffer LibreOffice calc when dealing with CSV files - at least there I can choose the damn character set.

What I don't get is why Windows has a termainal shell at all. In a *nix system its the swiss army knife of every possible command you could ever want, need and dream of. In Windows its just... there. Anything useful in the DOS Prompt has a GUI equivalent. Using a command line version, especially with DOS Syntax, just seems like such a roundabout way of completing a given task.

Standards are another issue as well, I don't need to say anymore than that - it is Microsoft, answer is obvious.

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #115 of 124
deleted
post #116 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

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?

Quote:
Originally Posted by djames4242 View Post

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.

Do the people who say "Apple doesn't care about enterprise" or "Apple doesn't need enterprise" or "Enterprise is bad for Apple" also think that Apple is not an enterprise itself? Do they think that a company as large as Apple is simply run from a single Mac Mini sitting in a closet? Or their entire network consists of some Airport base stations? There is much more to a running a company's IT than simply putting a computer on everyone's desk. That's why I would like to see details of what hardware and software Apple uses in all aspects of their daily operations. Especially their back-office operations such as email server, file server, web server, accounting, HR, and logistics. These details would also help companies which are currently struggling with supporting mixed platform environments. They can just see how Apple does it. The only reason Apple would have for not providing these details is that they want to maintain this public perception of being 100 percent Mac and Mac OS when in reality they also use other platforms to a significant degree, but are unwilling to admit it.
post #117 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBrickley View Post

3. They don't know that Mac OS X can talk to Exchange 2007 / 2010

Why does the OS need to talk to Exchange? Surely that is an application concern?

Quote:
5. They don't know you can dual boot a Mac with Windows

Shooting the cost right up when you have to then purchase a Windows licence

Quote:
6. They don't know you can run VMWare Fusion or Parallels to run Windows in a VM

Shooting the cost right yp when you have to then purchase a Windows licence (and VMWare or Parallels)

Quote:
7. They don't know Citrix has a Mac OS X Client

Depending on your Citrix environment it can be a pain to use.

Quote:
8. They don't know how much faster Mac OS X boots than even Win7 64bit. They are completely unaware of how much smoother everything is in general

I don't turn off my work PC, why should booting time be a concern?

Quote:
9. They don't know they can enterprise manage Mac's using JAMF Casper Suite

Doesn't that tool only support OSX and iOS clients? Does that mean you need to purchase multiple management tools for various OS's, an alternative would be to run the Symantec Altiris suite, which supports multiple platforms including OSX

Quote:
11. They don't know about Apple Remote Desktop

They don't? Or you think they don't?

Quote:
12. They might not know how good TeamViewer is on the Mac (cross platform remote control)

??? Not sure where you are going here?

Quote:
14. They don't know how much more secure Mac OS X is than Windows, they are polluted by the FUD being spread whenever some minor issue hits the media

Not sure where you are going here either? Haven't had a virus on Windows for a very long time, work or home.
post #118 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

How often does a monitor die? The last computer monitor that's died on me was in the CRT days, and that was a refurb from a second tier brand, KDS or something like that. Even CRTs last nearly a decade. I've not owned an LCD that long, but none of those have died yet.

I would swap out 1 to 2 dead (LCD) monitors a week, some would be over 5 years old, some would be just out of warranty
post #119 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

I would swap out 1 to 2 dead (LCD) monitors a week, some would be over 5 years old, some would be just out of warranty

Ah, that's getting interesting. Out of a pool of how many actively used monitors?
post #120 of 124
the company i work for is global, big, lots of sites, manufacturing plants, call centres, data centres, lots of people, lots of investment in core applications on windows and unix (sun)

i use my own mbp when travelling, and leave the dell laptop bolted to my desk, *most* of what i need to do day to day works on the mac, but a few things don't, so i have to resort to vmware or wait until i can use the deskbound laptop

the it dept. supports rim/android/iphone/windows smartphones, and if someone plugs a non-windows device into the network the world doesn't come to an end, the it people i know are generally positive about macs, but policy is windows

as a 10+ year mac user, i'd love more formal support, but the fact is apple has abandoned the enterprise, aside from personal computing it has nothing fit for it, and judging by the last few years' behaviour has no intention of playing anything more than this peripheral role

remember the xserve...

"Customers looking to upgrade, replace, or supplement existing Xserve systems with new Apple hardware have two options:
• Transition to Mac Pro with Snow Leopard Server
• Transition to Mac mini with Snow Leopard Server"

translation: apple doesn't want to be in the datacentre, please call hp/dell/cisco/ibm or some other company that can handle it, because apple can't

ms offers end to end capability from the edge to the datacentre, and supports it's stuff for a long time after end of sale (an awful lot longer if you are big enough!), it's a no brainer for the large enterprise customer, and business application developers will continue to give priority to windows because that's the market

most people in large companies have years of experience with windows, using it, supporting it, loathing it, in my organization the application development/replacement and user training costs of switching to mac would be horrendous - that's why it's not easy, nothing to do with obstructive it people, they're just following company policy and going with the best available option
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