or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Enterprise adopting Apple products as company becomes 'easier to work with'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Enterprise adopting Apple products as company becomes 'easier to work with' - Page 2

post #41 of 82
I do not see any real evidence that Apple has made any major concessions to Enterprise.

It will modernize technology without heavy deference to Enterprise keeping stuff forever, major problem for Microsoft
It will not provide roadmaps to Enterprise, this is too much a competitive advantage - slows down copy cats, SAMSUNG, GOOGLE, Microsoft, DELL, etc.
It will focus on the end user satisfaction not the CIOs, who do not give a lot of concern for end users, their language and measures of success are very different
It will not compete with Enterprise providers unless there is a substantial competitive advantage
It will not troll the cost bottom line at Walmart or Enterprise

These will not change, nor should they. The money to be made is large but the profit is marginal and places Apple in a technology straight jacket.
post #42 of 82
Apple Enterprise market. I don't think they can compete with the Novell side of the market. Plus cross platform compatibility. Having Mac OS X on a Novell of NT network just doesn't fly.
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
An Apple man since 1977
Reply
post #43 of 82
Apple servers are pointless.

Everything is moving to virtualized servers period.

You can purchase better hardware that is better suited for virtualzation from other vendors and that is why Apple got out of the server market plain and simple.

There was not a reason to build products that they could load VMWare, Citrix or Hyper-V on.

The same money you spend on one Apple product you can order 2 (Enterprise class servers, ECC, XEON ect) and load ESXi on each of them and purchase a SAN for nearly the same price.

I applaud Apple not waisting there time on this, there is no point and they can concentrait on what they do best Mobile and desktops.

Getting rid of the Mac Pro is another smart move IMHO there is no need for it any longer.

Thunderbolt, Quad Core i7, 8 Gigs of memory in iMacs and soon laptops why, in realistic terms, would you put that kind of iron into an enviroment with that kind of price point, it does not make since on consumer and enterprise level.

Before I get blasted with the FCP comments I use FCP on an i7 iMac with zero issues.

Besides I read in this forum almost weekly how FCP is a prosumer product now anyway.

iMacs are actually perfect in the enterprise market because less components (the monitor is a none issue and if that is the basis for your argument then you dont understand any of the other points I made) Dual OS's, longer service life.

BTW Apple PC's last longer in Enterprise because people treat them differently, they are proud and excited to use them unlike WinTell which are "Just Windows" computers.

I work for several companies maintaining "Enterprise" networks and every thing I stated I have personally seen with over 20 companies in the last 5 years.

IT managers are not the problem it is the lower level techs that are a problem.

Managers like the newer stuff and if it can make them look good to the executives then they are all for it.

The techs sabotage (I have been personally responsable for busting 12 of them for this) so they dont have to learn, divert from there play... sorry... work time on face book, twitter and the like.

Just what I think and have seen
Life is not measured by the breaths you take, but the moments that take your breath away. - GC
Reply
Life is not measured by the breaths you take, but the moments that take your breath away. - GC
Reply
post #44 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

"Enterprise class" has a specific meaning. Redundant power supplies, hot-swappable RAID drives, ECC RAM, etc. Essentially, the machine needs to have a 99.999 % uptime (or something like that).

The xServe was close, but was discontinued. Bringing back the xServe would be a start, especially if it were tweaked to meet all the Enterprise requirements.

That said, there is a near-infinite range of computer requirements for Enterprises. Even a big company might find applications for the Mini or iMac or MacBook Pro or any of Apple's other products. Additional effort in selling to Enterprises might increase sales of those existing products. But none of the current products are truly Enterprise Class - and that needs to be addressed only if Apple is really interested in that end of the market.

Thunderbolt is a step in the right direction.

I have a loaded iMac 27 TB and an external Promise Pegasus 12 TB RAID (hot swappable -- I tested it).
The raid is much faster than the Internal HDD.

I hope we see TB Compute Boxes:
-- minimal SSD for OS Storage
-- Lots of RAM
-- Lots of CPU Cores
-- Lots of GPU Cores
-- 2 TB Ports

Need more compute power -- just add more compute boxes
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #45 of 82
Apple's enterprise strategy is inconsistent and ever-changing - the opposite of what we IT admins need. I run Xserves for critical services, and minis for ones that don't need 100% uptime. Lion Server has some great features in it for managing MacOS and iOS devices, but without real server hardware to run it on, how can it really scale up? Don't get me started on how neglected ARD is either. Businesses may be buying iPads and MacBooks in larger numbers, but I believe Apple's lack of real enterprise support (hardware and management tools) will restrict how far it grow in large businesses.
post #46 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

So are you saying that it's impossible for Apple to make Macs more friendly in this Windows environment?

I think Apple could remove a good deal of that barrier if it wished.

I don't think Apple can do anything to help enterprise IT departments integrate Macs into their network when so much of it requires Windows. That is unless they want to run Windows on the Macs, but even then the keyboards don't allow Control, Alt, Delete, necessary to log in. Yes, I know there is a way to send that command but it doesn't work over VPN and is difficult to remember how, I know, since I already forgot.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #47 of 82
I will have to disagree with you. Each Apple store has a business rep, and when I owned my little shop, they moved Heaven and Earth to get me what I needed. Perhaps they were not chasing them begging for their business, but they, from my experience, cared about Small business. As to Enterprise, I have no knowledge.
post #48 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

The raid is much faster than the Internal HDD.

I wonder why that is. Unless the the RAID has more cache or is striped. One would think they should be about the same speed for average read/writes.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #49 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGNR8 View Post

Apple servers are pointless.

That is, of course, nonsense.

There are endless small companies who have servers - and don't know how to manage them. So they either do without or spend a fortune on outsourced services.

OS X Server is so incredibly easy to use that any reasonable competent computer user can manage it - providing advanced server functionality at a reasonable cost to even very small businesses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I don't think Apple can do anything to help enterprise IT departments integrate Macs into their network when so much of it requires Windows. That is unless they want to run Windows on the Macs, but even then the keyboards don't allow Control, Alt, Delete, necessary to log in. Yes, I know there is a way to send that command but it doesn't work over VPN and is difficult to remember how, I know, since I already forgot.

Not at all. First, OS X integrates quite nicely with Windows networks. Second, there is a major advantage. Try pricing a Windows Server for unlimited users. Now, look at OS X Server for unlimited users. The cost savings are large enough to justify a little bit of effort learning how to use it.
"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 #50 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

yep. You know how the enterprise + MS gatekeep works for a developer? Well first after you get access to the local MSDN server you download the helper app, which you use to download the install image for the particular flavor of Visual Studio you are authorized to install (but it took 2 hours, several emails, phone calls and walking around to figure that part out). Then when you run the installer (of your local network provided software) it requires you to burn a DVD!!!!

And then you get to request permission to install the software via DVD. The software which all fit in RAM because you are running on a big bad developer box with more RAM than needed to simulate the Armageddon, with enough RAM to mount several DVD images in RAM (and even have image mounting software on the box already) but the IT guys ad MS refuse you let you install without burning to DVD first.

It took hours -- decrypting, burning, verifying, reading bit by bit off the optical media and then installing -- what should have taken just a couple minutes installing to the SSHD from a DVD image in RAM.

Yes, this is what it takes in the modern world to be considered enterprise supportive. When your crazy tech provider CEO says "Are you nucking futz?", "you want me to screw everyone over like that?", "in the name of being enterprise friendly?"!!! The only reasonable response to that is that the majority of the enterprise IT support folks aren't making the enterprise more efficient and adding business value to the organization. They are only there to ensure job security and are so risk adverse that accepting completely whacky behavior like the above becomes the norm.

Look, people in my position, spending that amount of time, waste almost 50% of the cost of that dev god-box in lost productivity installing the basic MS office and developer suites. If someone wants to counter that a network install would be better, they haven't tried many of those either. I have a 1Gb drop to the desk and 10GB to the building so throughput should be good, but I have to mash buttons on the screen -- while the IT rep is on the phone with me, because the remote control software is now considered a security risk for various reasonable reasons.

Please just give me a corporate key for the Mac App store and let me live with the lack of "industry" pandering support.

I enjoy your posts -- the perspective is quite enlightening!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #51 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead View Post

How are Macs not "enterprise-class"?

"Enterprise-class" is double speak for "cheap-assed throw away junk." So no, Macs are not "enterprise-class" in context.
post #52 of 82
Mac has a lot to do for macs to be enterprise friendly. They really need to work on things like better remote security controls.

I want to control easily from a server when a mac shuts down . I want to be able to pretty much control everything on a mac from a mac server without having to script everything.

We are trying to put macs in a public lab and its been a pain in the butt. I was told by apple themselves that i can only do controls via parental controls on osx.

Iwant to be able to shutdown the mac at one time mon night through fri night and another at sat night and sun but parental controls only does sun through thurs night and fri night through sat night.

Things like that makes it a real pain to setup macs in an enterprise environment.

PLus being able to control which programs run and which dont. This is not as easy as it seems because the mac way still has programs popping up that are supposidly allowed to run that dont.

Its a big mess.
post #53 of 82
"Cook is 'more at ease' meeting with enterprise customers"

How unfortunate. Pandering to people whose raison d'ĂȘtre is an endless orgy of greed never results in the production of anything except more of the same.

While most of America has been busy demonstrating that excellence can't arise from an obsession with money, Apple has been proving that vast sums of money can result from an obsession with excellence. Jobs' personal success seems to have come from three things: the ability to recognize crap, the willingness to call crap crap, and the belief that we're capable of something beyond crap.

Cozying up to the crapmeisters will have a predictable result.
post #54 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

IT guys are not usually risk takers. If they go out on a limb and recommend that the entire network be switched to Macs they would have a lot of explaining to do. To keep the status quo is a lot safer.

You would have to be totally incompetent to rip and replace everything in one shot and why would you?



Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Let the top execs and outside sales people have their iPhones and iPads and allow them to access their email from Exchange but that is about as far as it goes. When you are not familiar with Macs it is difficult to keep them secured on the network. For example, I am familiar with one corporation that has their PCs all locked down, no software can be installed without Administrator privileges, however, the art department has Macs and they are wide open.

You can very easily lock down OSX so that no software can be installed by users.
post #55 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Not at all. First, OS X integrates quite nicely with Windows networks. Second, there is a major advantage. Try pricing a Windows Server for unlimited users. Now, look at OS X Server for unlimited users. The cost savings are large enough to justify a little bit of effort learning how to use it.

Dream on. If it makes so much sense why don't IT departments do it? Oh you mean because their CRM runs on Windows, their accounting application runs on Windows, their database runs on Windows, their mail runs on Windows, their twenty zillion copies of Office and Acrobat all run on Windows. Lets spend a billion dollars upgrading all our software and hardware, retrain all our users and hire all new IT support staff just to save a couple thousand dollars on a Mac server that doesn't even have a redundant power supply and absolutely no support timeline other than probably to be discontinued in the near future. Nice plan.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #56 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Look at Apples laptop line up and explain to me what is wrong with hem in a corporate environment! Really this is so ignorant as to be unbelievable in a forum populated with intelligent readers.

Apples desktop line up is messed up for the consumer as it is for the enterprise. However I can't see any reasonable reason why one would go with an Apple server when there are so many other choices available.

Will we ever hear the end of this whine from the entitlement community? Final Cut is only consumer centric because you don't like some of the design decisions made with the recent release. Frankly I don't see a lot of consumers running out to buy Final Cut, probably because it is more of a Pro app than they need.

Lion is a great product. It has it's short comings just like Leopard and Snow Leopard before it.

Give me a break. What sort of non trivial company runs everything on one platform? Frankly trivial operations can now run on the iPhone or iPad. If you have a DBA it might even make sense to run your business from an iPhone. On the flip side the large corporation I work for has always had a heterogeneous hardware mix in the IT rooms even during periods of excessive control over the desktop.

There seems to be a mind set that says Apple isn't suitable for business because they don't sell item xyz. Sadly that is like saying Haas isn't suitable for business because they don't sell sewing machines. If anything Apples focused line up makes for easier business decisions as they either have or don't have what you are looking for.

You are the perfect example of why Apple is perceived of not only as enterprise-unfriendly, but a belligerent cult. "Ignorant" "whine" "entitlement community" - yeah, the best way to keep to customers is to declare that there can't be anything wrong with Apple - it has to be YOU. You can't see why anyone would go with an Apple server? How about that Apple aggressively sold us their server products? What's wrong with the Apple laptop line? How about increasing the price point hundreds of dollars by killing off the white Macbook and offering only more expensive Macbook Pro's or Airs? (and no, 11" screens are not comparable to 13's")

Have your ever been anywhere near the responsibilities of running a large or midsize business?

One of key reasons Apple's consumer business works so well is that it's dependable. No one buys an iPhone wondering if they'll drop the product line next year. Yet, increasingly, that's Apple's attitude towards business related products - touting how good their servers are, or how all the Hollywood editors are using Final Cut Pro - and then pulling the rug out from under you when they grow bored of the segment. We got zero notice when the white Macbook was pulled, and the same will probably be true with the Mac Pro, which will eliminate Apple's last fully expandable machine.

You, and many who post here, have it backwards. Corporations don't exist to conform to what works best for Apple; nor should they.
post #57 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

"Enterprise class" has a specific meaning. Redundant power supplies, hot-swappable RAID drives, ECC RAM, etc. Essentially, the machine needs to have a 99.999 % uptime (or something like that).

The xServe was close, but was discontinued. Bringing back the xServe would be a start, especially if it were tweaked to meet all the Enterprise requirements.

That said, there is a near-infinite range of computer requirements for Enterprises. Even a big company might find applications for the Mini or iMac or MacBook Pro or any of Apple's other products. Additional effort in selling to Enterprises might increase sales of those existing products. But none of the current products are truly Enterprise Class - and that needs to be addressed only if Apple is really interested in that end of the market.

Sounds like it has a specific meaning to you. To me enterprise means laptops, phones, tablets, and servers. Yes, Apple does not have a rackable server anymore. But the things you point out are not in any laptop, phone or tablet.
post #58 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by serogers1970 View Post

I would say the fact that they discontinued their server line at the beginning of this year shows that they are trying to move away from enterprise.

So laptops, phones, and tablets are not used by enterprises? Huh?
post #59 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead View Post

You would have to be totally incompetent to rip and replace everything in one shot and why would you?

Of course it would be stupid. That is what is appealing about keeping the status quo. When your whole network is Windows only, or Mac only, there are no integration issues. It is when you mix the two that the nightmare begins.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead View Post

You can very easily lock down OSX so that no software can be installed by users.

That is if you know how to administer Macs. Same reason you don't take your Ford to the GM dealer for service. They specialize in one system. Windows IT people don't want to touch the Macs.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #60 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

That's of course nonsense, Apple has proved to us over and over again to not give a rat's ass about enterprise or small business. Nothing, nada, zilch!

Gotta agree with ya... Apple and ever more so Steve has always demanded secrecy till the day a a product rollout... This fine for home users and perhaps tolerable for 'small shops' however a company with tens of thousands of workstations this just doesn't fly. They have a real business need to know what they will be buying for at least 18 months ... Even that would be less than optimal for most CIOs.

Apple also has this neat habit of killing an existing model DEAD as soon as a successor is rolled out.... Believe it or not MOST if not ALL big corporations will continue to buy 'old stuff' for over a year while they properly evaluate the new hardware for deployment. Having the rug pulled out at ZERO days notice is just too maddening for big institutions.

In a previous life I've purchased millions of dollars of apple hardware for a large research institute and the fact was the institute was split right down the middle with researchers almost always buying Macs and the public facing and business units almost always going or being forced into windows.

Fun times but I don't miss em...
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #61 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

That is, of course, nonsense.

There are endless small companies who have servers - and don't know how to manage them. So they either do without or spend a fortune on outsourced services.

OS X Server is so incredibly easy to use that any reasonable competent computer user can manage it - providing advanced server functionality at a reasonable cost to even very small businesses.

You dont understand the point.

You are talking about small business (150,000.00 to 1 Million a year) where there is a friend of the owner, part time person or out-sourced IT.

The topic was on "Enterprise" (1 Million and Up) and with that my point is valid.

Please do not add small business to the topic and claim it a point because that is not "Enterprise" customers.

For the point you are making you are absolutely right and a Mac Mini server fills that spot nicely ... "Small Buisness" not "Enterprise".

As does WIndows Server 2011 with 2008 RC2 and Exchange 2010 (This is actually a nice package for the price point) and a small business can call any IT support company as this is industry standard at this point.

People know just enough now from time they spend at a small company working the IT and some how think they know enterprise.
Life is not measured by the breaths you take, but the moments that take your breath away. - GC
Reply
Life is not measured by the breaths you take, but the moments that take your breath away. - GC
Reply
post #62 of 82
Re: "The iPad in particular showed complete domination of the enterprise tablet market, taking 96 percent of total activations tracked by Good Technology."

"Amateur hour is over."
- BlackBerry PlayBook ad, April 2011

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #63 of 82
Go to the following pages on Apple's web site:

http://www.apple.com/pro/

http://www.apple.com/science/profiles/

On these pages, you will find links to case studies of various companies along with how and why they use Mac computers.

Now go the following page:

http://www.apple.com/business/mac/

What do you find there? All the previous case studies have been removed and replaced with Apple marketing. Oh, but at least there are links to profiles of companies using iPhones and iPads.
post #64 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Yet amazingly, laptops which are all in ones, proliferate.

Yet amazingly, it is far easier to open up a MacBook Pro and access the internal disk drives than to do the same on the much larger iMac.
post #65 of 82
XServe and Final Cut Server please!!!!
post #66 of 82
To all the people saying things like "Apple should not waste its time supporting enterprise customers":

If it's ok for you to say that, then shouldn't it be ok for IT departments to say the same thing to their users who want Macs? Would you be willing to let those IT departments quote you and say to their users: "You can't have Macs because the experts on AppleInsider said that Apple should not waste their time supporting us, so in turn we cannot support you."

If you object to this, then aren't you trying to have it both ways? Defending Apple's lack of interest and support for enterprises, while at the same time criticizing IT departments for not supporting Macs due to Apple's lack of interest and support for enterprises?

Do you want to be the one to tell everyone who wants to use Macs at work but is not allowed, that they are SOL and should not bother trying to get Macs at work because Apple doesn't care about them? And can the IT departments quote you on this?

If you really believe Apple should not bother supporting enterprises and should stay out of enterprises, then why criticize IT departments for trying to keep Macs out of their organizations? Aren't they simply following both Apple's vision and your vision of no enterprise? So instead of criticizing those IT departments for keeping Macs out, shouldn't you be commending them?
post #67 of 82
Why worry about the enterprise environment? Apple has been making money hand over fist without worrying about keeping the biz folks happy. HP, Dell, et cetera have worried about that environment and look where it has got them. Low margins and struggling to be relevant technologically. Apple has $80 billion in the bank, and counting, by focusing on the consumer market where beauty, ease of use, and style count for more than worrying about bottom line bean counters. Steve had it right.
post #68 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

"Enterprise class" has a specific meaning. Redundant power supplies, hot-swappable RAID drives, ECC RAM, etc. Essentially, the machine needs to have a 99.999 % uptime (or something like that).

The xServe was close, but was discontinued. Bringing back the xServe would be a start, especially if it were tweaked to meet all the Enterprise requirements.

That said, there is a near-infinite range of computer requirements for Enterprises. Even a big company might find applications for the Mini or iMac or MacBook Pro or any of Apple's other products. Additional effort in selling to Enterprises might increase sales of those existing products. But none of the current products are truly Enterprise Class - and that needs to be addressed only if Apple is really interested in that end of the market.

Well said. Thanks.
post #69 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

That's of course nonsense, Apple has proved to us over and over again to not give a rat's ass about enterprise or small business. Nothing, nada, zilch!

Hence the adoption of Microsoft Exchange email in iOS, Enterprise developer programs for deploying internal iOS apps within a company, and Steve Jobs getting Bill Gates to support Mac OS X since 1997, not to mention continual bragging about iOS adoption rates in the Fortune 500 in recent Stevenotes.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #70 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead View Post

Sounds like it has a specific meaning to you. To me enterprise means laptops, phones, tablets, and servers. Yes, Apple does not have a rackable server anymore. But the things you point out are not in any laptop, phone or tablet.

Fact: RIM doesn't sell rack mounted servers either. So much for the rack-mounted-servers-equals-enterprise theory.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #71 of 82
FACT: RIM Enterprise software runs on rack mounted servers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Fact: RIM doesn't sell rack mounted servers either. So much for the rack-mounted-servers-equals-enterprise theory.
post #72 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTac View Post

Apple will have to fill the gap in the desktop line up if it wants more Macs in business. Many companies won't touch an all in one.

I know what you mean, but I've always found that a bizarre decision by some companies. The last company I worked for (Fortune 500 company) would never allow desktops that were all in one, although in my time there I never experienced them fixing a PC by replacing cards, PSU's etc. If it broke, they seemed capable of re-imaging the hard drive (their standard response to all problems), or just replacing it with a new one.

The same IT department who wouldn't have all in one desktops were also fine with you having laptops, that they never fixed either (beyond their catch all hard drive re-image).

Since shifting companies to one that allows you to pick pretty much the computer you like, I've been amazed how well everything works together. Some people have Windows, some Macs, some Linux and everything works great. We have no more network problems than the supposedly more controlled environment at my last company.

I think one of the barriers to getting Macs into the enterprise is that IT departments tend to be staffed by geeks who like things to be complex, because it makes them feel important, and I think the perception of Windows is that you can tinker with it more, hence the IT geeks like them.
post #73 of 82
I think that if you look at just iOS devices this can be said. With the ability to manage these devices with Apple's own tools or third-party software makes that possible. It's probably the only segment in Apple that's really made a point of trying to integrate with Enterprise environments. Basically, when they made Exchange work well in iOS and the developers came to the platform and delivered all the other tools people wanted it gained traction. However, even in this realm the issues dealing with iTunes accounts, purchasing applications and redeeming codes, is still not ideal. Volume Purchasing Programs are quite helpful and a step in the right direction.

As for the Mac side of things it's a little more depressing, and apparent that helping IT people integrate Macs into the Enterprise has gone down hill. Many people built significant systems around the XServe platform and those people had the bottom dropped out on them, much like Final Cut Pro shops. An OS loaded named "Server" does not make a Mini a server, not by a long shot. Fortunately many things people use to run on Mac Servers are available on other platforms, but not all services.

As for OS X, with Lion and the Mac App Store the Enterprise side is again the afterthought, the second class citizen. The Mac App Store, although a very good thing for consumer just causes the same nightmares the the App Store does in terms of bonding a purchase to an iTunes account. Updates to software, like iPhoto, now embedded into Lion require updates via Mac App Store. What if you block the Mac App Store so your Enterprise users don't try to use their own personal accounts and violate the Terms of Service? Fortunately with Mac management suites you can get around some of this, but just pray DRM isn't a part of the App so you don't have to touch individual systems.

I would also be happy if Apple would make Active Directory binding work the way it had for a long time, right now it's just a POS. 10.7.2 got it working somewhat. Kind of sucks if you buy new Macs in your Enterprise and are forced to the new OS when key components aren't working to attach it to AD, or accessing network file storage. That sounds pretty Enterprise friendly doesn't it? Good luck trying to tell people they can't buy their hardware they want if you're not in a position to do so.

And finally the Mac hardware. I absolutely love the iMac, the MacBook Pro, and the MacBook Air. They are very good pieces of hardware, but at a fairly hefty price. The mini has it's purpose, but I'm not a fan. Many times the form has always gone over function for even basic things. Sure the iMac is a great box, but there are places that want to reuse their monitors through two rotations of hardware perhaps, they last longer. They just want to attach a lower cost box to their display they already have. iMacs don't work well in teaching stations in classrooms or other similar installations. The mini isn't the answer, a Mac Pro is certainly not the answer (and I'll be glad when it's gone). All I want is a small form factor Mac that has the same component options as the iMac with Core i7 processors, memory, storage, and video. I want it to have some of the common ports on the FRONT of the box like USB, headphones. In shared environments like student labs they don't know ports are hidden on the ends of the keyboard and turn around the iMacs to see the ports on the back...pulling out or damaging other cables in the process. They just want to plug their thumb drive in, their headphones in and go. Is that really asking too much? It must be. It's not PRETTY enough for Ive I imagine. Need to open Activity Monitor to see if your hard drive is even doing anything...blinky indicator lights are bad, too.

I imagine another issue I'm going to be posed with there is do you make that damn thing out of aluminum so it's highly recyclable? I'm thinking there are other materials you can use that won't make it a boat anchor (Mac Pro, G5) and artificially inflate the price. A Mac is a beautiful thing, but a really expensive system to run Windows on or have connect to a virtual environment to run Windows apps where MOST of the business applications still reside. The availability of applications to Mac OS X is getting better, but still has a long way to go.

You'll never get a roadmap out of Apple, and IT doesn't like surprises.

I could really care less about optical drives, I rarely use them these days, but I think it would be OK to put in a blu-ray player like people have constantly been asking for over the years. The person who said it is a "bag of hurt" is no longer with use in body (you will be missed Steve). And although digital downloads are the way to go, optical media is still going to be a reality for quite some time until EVERYONE has reliable and affordable broadband to their door.

If you're a company that's fortunate enough to not depend on any software that needs Windows and can have a purely Mac environment, it can probably work too, but I'm just not sure how the higher costs for hardware make it any more economical for TCO. The OS has holes and requires very similar management practices and protections that Windows does.

Make the OS work properly in the Enterprise and App management centrally controlled, maybe tied to AD accounts instead of iTunes accounts. Make the price point more attractive with functional hardware that fits the space and needs better; function not form. Increase the market share of Macs in the Enterprise. After that, the software vendors will follow suit. Maybe someday, but not in my lifetime as a system administrator. I'm likely to start pushing to eliminate Macs from our Enterprise because of the overhead trying to make them work imposes on us every time "just one more thing" comes up, and the next version of "most advanced operating system" comes around.

No one EVER said Apple has to give up how they do things for the consumer, but with a little effort they could do great things in the Enterprise side as well. The company has enough resources to pull off both segments if they really wanted to.

Damn...
post #74 of 82
Considering the number of Apple employees and office locations worldwide, is Apple itself an enterprise? By the logic of some of the people posting here, Apple should not use their own products.

For the people on this forum who think that things would be so great if every company switched to 100 percent Macs and 100 percent Mac OS, here is a question: Is this what Apple does?

If you think companies should be more like Apple, then you should appreciate Apple showing us how they run their own IT operations. If Apple has such great support for its customers, then Apple shouldn't mind sharing some of that knowledge. I would like to see Apple publish its own case study detailing their entire IT infrastructure worldwide. Despite what some people think, there is more to running a company's IT operations than just putting a Mac on everyone's desk. Apple should include answers to "enterprise" questions such as:

How many employee computers and servers does Apple support worldwide?

What is the size of Apple's internal IT staff?

Does Apple use a directory service for things like user authentication? Are all end user computers connected to this directory service? Is it Open Directory, Active Directory, or something else?

Does Apple implement restrictions on user computers, or are people able to do whatever they want on work computers?

Does Apple run mass remote updates on their end user computers? Is it done using Apple Remote Desktop or something else?

Does Apple do inventory management of their end user computers to track users, computer info, software licenses? What software does Apple use for that?

What hardware and operating systems does Apple use for their DHCP servers, DNS servers, VPN servers, web servers, file servers? What hardware and software does Apple use for their own email, contacts, and calendar servers? What type of storage do each of these servers use, and what type of connections? Do they use a SAN, and what software? How are each of these servers backed up, and using what backup software?

What hardware, operating systems, database server, and web server are Apple's iTunes and iCloud servers running on? What type of storage is used? If they use a SAN, which SAN software is it? Do they use Fibre Channel? iSCSI? 10 gigabit ethernet?

What hardware does Apple use for their company routers and network switches?

What does Apple use for its accounting, CRM, ERP, and HR software? What operating systems do they run on?
post #75 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmgiulini View Post

You are the perfect example of why Apple is perceived of not only as enterprise-unfriendly, but a belligerent cult. "Ignorant" "whine" "entitlement community" - yeah, the best way to keep to customers is to declare that there can't be anything wrong with Apple - it has to be YOU. You can't see why anyone would go with an Apple server? How about that Apple aggressively sold us their server products? What's wrong with the Apple laptop line? How about increasing the price point hundreds of dollars by killing off the white Macbook and offering only more expensive Macbook Pro's or Airs? (and no, 11" screens are not comparable to 13's")

Have your ever been anywhere near the responsibilities of running a large or midsize business?

One of key reasons Apple's consumer business works so well is that it's dependable. No one buys an iPhone wondering if they'll drop the product line next year. Yet, increasingly, that's Apple's attitude towards business related products - touting how good their servers are, or how all the Hollywood editors are using Final Cut Pro - and then pulling the rug out from under you when they grow bored of the segment. We got zero notice when the white Macbook was pulled, and the same will probably be true with the Mac Pro, which will eliminate Apple's last fully expandable machine.

You, and many who post here, have it backwards. Corporations don't exist to conform to what works best for Apple; nor should they.

Well, I guess you missed the difference between vendor and consumer. You also miss the reason for the IT deparrtment in the first place.

The sole reason for having an IT department is to make employees more productive. NOT to raise productivity of the IT department in isolation.

Your arguments are those consistently used by IT professionals to claim how they will need more hours to do the same task in a mixed environment, ignoring the fact that the new part of the mix uses far less man hours to stay productive. And the long term licensing fees are significantly lower, something that gets ignored when touting the lower initial cost of parts of the initial install.

You don't like product line modernization and disappearance of an old product? Well, go ahead and buy those Dell low end laptops forever, and you will realize why Apple eventually cut them from the lineup. And the answer isn't what you think it is. (It's not because they are cheap and break easily, reducing productivity and having maintenance contracts more expensive than Applecare.) The real answer is because they replaced those very underpowered white MacBook laptops with an entirely new product, the iPad at a lower price point. (Doh!) Your lack of understanding that employees can get most of what those old MacBooks were capable of being used for actually exists in the new iPad is just another brick in the wall of your failed understanding of IT and it's role in business.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #76 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post

Gotta agree with ya... Apple and ever more so Steve has always demanded secrecy till the day a a product rollout... This fine for home users and perhaps tolerable for 'small shops' however a company with tens of thousands of workstations this just doesn't fly. They have a real business need to know what they will be buying for at least 18 months ... Even that would be less than optimal for most CIOs.

Apple also has this neat habit of killing an existing model DEAD as soon as a successor is rolled out.... Believe it or not MOST if not ALL big corporations will continue to buy 'old stuff' for over a year while they properly evaluate the new hardware for deployment. Having the rug pulled out at ZERO days notice is just too maddening for big institutions.

The missing element is that those tests are required because there was and still is so much variability in the hardware that it becomes very easy for drivers and custom coded software to routinely break because there is a hardcoded hardware flavor of dependency.

While that does happen at times with Macs (e.g. 10.7 with no Rosetta and CAC functionality in the OS) it happens less often and far more openly. Apple advertised the new limitations ahead of time, Dell never does and I'm forced to by ridiculous amounts of stuff from them because of contracts (awfully similar problem to what you have in the next para).

Quote:
In a previous life I've purchased millions of dollars of apple hardware for a large research institute and the fact was the institute was split right down the middle with researchers almost always buying Macs and the public facing and business units almost always going or being forced into windows.

Fun times but I don't miss em...

I wish I could miss 'em...
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #77 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

This is complete crap! What makes one laptop any more enterprise than any other? You honestly sound like one of the brain washed IT types that frustrate users to no end. A computer is suitable for business use if it gets the job done in an economical manner.

You honestly sound like a frustrated wannabe techie who knows nothing about supporting corporate IT. A computer is suitable for business use if it gets the job done AND is supportable, can be monitored and secured; services all end users demand from their IT department. Apple does not currently make this easy, but they are getting there. Don't talk until you put yourself into the shoes of a help desk person who has to support a unjustifiably indignant end user who insists on using his unsupported Mac with enterprise applications and can't understand why he can't run them.
post #78 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by denobin View Post

You honestly sound like a frustrated wannabe techie who knows nothing about supporting corporate IT. A computer is suitable for business use if it gets the job done AND is supportable, can be monitored and secured; services all end users demand from their IT department. Apple does not currently make this easy, but they are getting there. Don't talk until you put yourself into the shoes of a help desk person who has to support a unjustifiably indignant end user who insists on using his unsupported Mac with enterprise applications and can't understand why he can't run them.

Ease of service is also an important consideration. Especially the accessibility of hard drives for upgrades or data recovery. Many IT departments want to do their own repairs because it takes too long to schedule an onsite service appointment and wait for the technician to arrive. Furthermore, Apple does not provide onsite service for all their computer models. Also, many companies keep computers beyond the warranty period and they don't want to pay high service fees to replace something as simple as a hard drive.

In addition to putting oneself in the shoes of a help desk person, I wonder how Apple's own repair technicians feel about replacing components in iMacs and Mac Minis. Inserting a stick of memory does not count.

Is it possible that there are some corporate IT people who use Macs and want their companies to support Macs better, but they are burned out from dealing with Apple's lack of support, as well as ignorance from anti-Mac IT departments, and ignorance from Apple fanboys on forums such as this one? After going through this for several years, would you blame those IT people for getting tired of the whole situation and saying to hell with it, even at the expense of other Mac users?
post #79 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Why not? It's far more stable than burned optical. Typical recordable optical media is hardly archive ready. I shudder to think what will be lost by those who assume their burned CD or DVD safely has their data.

I've had quite a lot of memory sticks die, I wouldn't rely on one for permanent storage.
post #80 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

The missing element is that those tests are required because there was and still is so much variability in the hardware that it becomes very easy for drivers and custom coded software to routinely break because there is a hardcoded hardware flavor of dependency.

While that does happen at times with Macs (e.g. 10.7 with no Rosetta and CAC functionality in the OS) it happens less often and far more openly. Apple advertised the new limitations ahead of time, Dell never does and I'm forced to by ridiculous amounts of stuff from them because of contracts (awfully similar problem to what you have in the next para).



I wish I could miss 'em...

Yep, and as much as I loved to mock the traditional IT group who followed and enforced the wintel or die playbook I did finally understand some of the many pains they suffered... While I happily did as I wanted with my band of hardcore research types. It did dawn on me after many years that the huge difference was that the researchers were very much in need of only a few major things FAST computers and a super super fat pipe to the NREN ... aka the Internet.

An OC192 took care of half the equation and the Macs took care of the other. Each kab ran such unique software it was much easier to do major deployments since they could always be carved up quite easily.

On the other hand the IT group was charges with everything else along with highly sensitive areas like the many ORs (operating rooms). Now, would YOU wanna be responsible for replacing hardware or software or ... ANYTHING in those places?? Talk about ultra high pressure... Which is why it's places like that have so often gone LONG periods of being 'left alone' when it came to upgrade cycles... After all would you wanna be the person who decided to take the OR off it's DOS based world and 'upgrade' them to WindowsME?? Lol lol lol yea me neither.
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Enterprise adopting Apple products as company becomes 'easier to work with'
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Enterprise adopting Apple products as company becomes 'easier to work with'