I wonder how hard it would be to also add GPS in the Mac Notebook lines. This would make retrieval much easier if someone lost or had their notebook stolen. It can't cost too much as it is built into my Panasonic Lumix camera. It would be a welcome item to have to a more precise "Find my mac" feature. It would make the computer a bit more useful for location aware apps too.
I wonder how hard it would be to also add GPS in the Mac Notebook lines. This would make retrieval much easier if someone lost or had their notebook stolen. It can't cost too much as it is built into my Panasonic Lumix camera. It would be a welcome item to have to a more precise "Find my mac" feature. It would make the computer a bit more useful for location aware apps too.
Would be largely pointless if you ask me, while notebooks etc are portable, I still like to think of them more as "transportable", as in I move it from the office, to home, to mym Mums house etc, but never actually on the go (I know other people's usage varies) and GPS reception in buildings is usually no better than IP address tranaslocation.
My non-3G/GPS iPad it found to within a few meters of my iphone when they are both next to each other indoors and I track them down.
I wonder how this is going to affect the Mac Mini since there is a separate Mini server.
Also a separate Mac Pro Server. Likely won't affect either of them, particularly the Mini. I also don't believe they'll still be selling the Mac Pro Server by Lion's release.
One of my biggest pet peeves with Snow Leopard is that you can't Remote to another Mac and use it without the remote-controlled Mac's screen being fully visible and anyone being able to walk up to it and mess with your session.
I hope they fix this in Lion so that you remote desktop to a machine, that machine's screen is blanked and locked, like it is under Windows. This is one of the few things MS got right that Apple has consistently failed at.
One of my biggest pet peeves with Snow Leopard is that you can't Remote to another Mac and use it without the remote-controlled Mac's screen being fully visible and anyone being able to walk up to it and mess with your session.
I hope they fix this in Lion so that you remote desktop to a machine, that machine's screen is blanked and locked, like it is under Windows. This is one of the few things MS got right that Apple has consistently failed at.
Apple already fixed it. It's called Apple Remote Desktop and its available on the Mac App Store.
Apple doesn't do enterprise because there is no money to be made in the enterprise market.
So if some corporate employees asks their IT department why they can't have Macs , would it be ok for that IT department to quote your explanation above?
Mac fans like to explain away Apple's lack of enterprise support. But these same Mac fans then berate corporate IT departments for not supporting Macs more. You can't have it both ways.
So if some corporate employees asks their IT department why they can't have Macs , would it be ok for that IT department to quote your explanation above?
Mac fans like to explain away Apple's lack of enterprise support. But these same Mac fans then berate corporate IT departments for not supporting Macs more. You can't have it both ways.
Your comment makes no sense and is typical of many forum members who love to remove context.
I said Apple doesn't do enterprise in the sense that they don't concentrate on that market because there is no money to be made. How is this difficult for you to understand?
It is up to IT departments to allow Macs on the networks not Apple so you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
When you have IBM, HP, Acer, Dell all giving corporate deals that Apple essentially can't match what do you think the bean counters are going to go for? Therefore my statement stands.
What users want and what users get in the corporate world are always two different things but then you'd know that if you had done anything in corporate IT. Look at where Macs are relegated to in corporate IT... generally the graphics departments or website testing. Rarely are they used for day to day work.
This is not a failing of Apple's it's a failing of the corporates because they are too blind to see that Macs have lower TCOs than PCs and yet all they look at is how much Macs initially cost.
Apple chooses not to actively go into the enterprise market because it's just so difficult to get stupid IT managers to Think Different.
If enterprise were intelligent they would spend the higher upfront costs and go Apple and make that money and more back in the lack of support costs but when you're controlled by the beanies and blaming it on shareholders then the lack of foresight comes to play.
I've just come out of working for a corporate IT support company who themselves are a corporatation and I've seen it first hand. When your customers have better IT equipment than an IT outfit and your customer's machines are crap then you can understand how pathetic the enterprise market really is. Hell, our machines were secondhand from some of our customers.
And you think Apple is going to make inroads with companies like that? Keep dreaming.
Mac fans like to explain away Apple's lack of enterprise support. But these same Mac fans then berate corporate IT departments for not supporting Macs more. You can't have it both ways.
IT departments don't like to support Macs out of self-preservation. Supporting Macs would threaten their job security.
I'm really looking forward to seeing what Apple does over the next couple of Mac OS X releases. I do think they will kill off Server and implement more of Server's features into the desktop OS and make servers easy.
Apple doesn't do enterprise because there is no money to be made in the enterprise market. There are many that would disagree but the enterprise market is generally tighter than a virgin on her wedding day. They hate spending money and Apple likes to find markets that do like to spend money.
You also have to consider that, by essentially giving away a server class OS, Apple is severely undercutting the Windows Server market. M$ charges a premium for their offering, with expensive seat licenses, rendering the cost of the server hardware almost immaterial. Yes, Linux has been an alternative, but Apple is making servers easy. Linux still requires a gearhead IT guy, or paid support.
Your comment makes no sense and is typical of many forum members who love to remove context.
I said Apple doesn't do enterprise in the sense that they don't concentrate on that market because there is no money to be made. How is this difficult for you to understand?
If it's ok for Mac fans to use that as an explanation for Apple lack of enterprise support, then it should also be ok for IT departments to use that as a reason for not buying more Macs. After all, don't companies want to buy from vendors that understand and support their market?
In order for IT departments to invest heavily in Macs, they need to know that they will get the proper support from Apple. And Steve Jobs saying things like "enterprise is not our customer" is not very reassuring. Given Apple's attitude toward enterprise customers, do you think companies will fall over themselves to buy Macs? So don't make the IT departments out to be the total bad guys. There is plenty of blame to go around. But all the end user sees is their IT department telling them no, and people on forums like these putting the sole blame on the IT departments.
That's not true at all. Apple offers great support for enterprise markets, they just don't have special divisions for those customers. In other words Apple treats enterprise customers no different to their consumer customers who they already treat with high regard.
IT's perception of what Apple supplies is wrong and that can be seen with their recent announcement for the Apple Stores.
Enterprise like to be treated differently to everyone else but Apple doesn't care. They offer the same level of service to all. If the Enterprise was willing to spend $500/year then they get priority treatment but if they don't then they get the same as everyone else.
That's not true at all. Apple offers great support for enterprise markets, they just don't have special divisions for those customers. In other words Apple treats enterprise customers no different to their consumer customers who they already treat with high regard.
IT's perception of what Apple supplies is wrong and that can be seen with their recent announcement for the Apple Stores.
Enterprise like to be treated differently to everyone else but Apple doesn't care. They offer the same level of service to all. If the Enterprise was willing to spend $500/year then they get priority treatment but if they don't then they get the same as everyone else.
Apple has chosen to address enterprise sales and support using a third party (Unisys). This approach works better then Apple trying to tailor its operations to deal with the enterprise.
Comments
I wonder how hard it would be to also add GPS in the Mac Notebook lines. This would make retrieval much easier if someone lost or had their notebook stolen. It can't cost too much as it is built into my Panasonic Lumix camera. It would be a welcome item to have to a more precise "Find my mac" feature. It would make the computer a bit more useful for location aware apps too.
Would be largely pointless if you ask me, while notebooks etc are portable, I still like to think of them more as "transportable", as in I move it from the office, to home, to mym Mums house etc, but never actually on the go (I know other people's usage varies) and GPS reception in buildings is usually no better than IP address tranaslocation.
My non-3G/GPS iPad it found to within a few meters of my iphone when they are both next to each other indoors and I track them down.
@autism
Mac os x Lion and Mac os x Lion Server are now combined....... which means that you will not have to buy a server edition of Lion.
You enable the server in the preference pane on Lion.
I wonder how this is going to affect the Mac Mini since there is a separate Mini server.
I wonder how this is going to affect the Mac Mini since there is a separate Mini server.
Also a separate Mac Pro Server. Likely won't affect either of them, particularly the Mini. I also don't believe they'll still be selling the Mac Pro Server by Lion's release.
I wonder how this is going to affect the Mac Mini since there is a separate Mini server.
There will still be a need for a Mini without an Optical and with a 2nd Drive.
I wonder how this is going to affect the Mac Mini since there is a separate Mini server.
If anything, many people will "play around" with Lion server and then decide to get a Mac mini server.
I wonder how this is going to affect the Mac Mini since there is a separate Mini server.
Thunderbolt too hopefully.
Then we can have true high speed external storage.
It should also allow the addition of additional Gbit ethernet ports
I hope they fix this in Lion so that you remote desktop to a machine, that machine's screen is blanked and locked, like it is under Windows. This is one of the few things MS got right that Apple has consistently failed at.
One of my biggest pet peeves with Snow Leopard is that you can't Remote to another Mac and use it without the remote-controlled Mac's screen being fully visible and anyone being able to walk up to it and mess with your session.
I hope they fix this in Lion so that you remote desktop to a machine, that machine's screen is blanked and locked, like it is under Windows. This is one of the few things MS got right that Apple has consistently failed at.
Apple already fixed it. It's called Apple Remote Desktop and its available on the Mac App Store.
Apple doesn't do enterprise because there is no money to be made in the enterprise market.
So if some corporate employees asks their IT department why they can't have Macs , would it be ok for that IT department to quote your explanation above?
Mac fans like to explain away Apple's lack of enterprise support. But these same Mac fans then berate corporate IT departments for not supporting Macs more. You can't have it both ways.
So if some corporate employees asks their IT department why they can't have Macs , would it be ok for that IT department to quote your explanation above?
Mac fans like to explain away Apple's lack of enterprise support. But these same Mac fans then berate corporate IT departments for not supporting Macs more. You can't have it both ways.
Your comment makes no sense and is typical of many forum members who love to remove context.
I said Apple doesn't do enterprise in the sense that they don't concentrate on that market because there is no money to be made. How is this difficult for you to understand?
It is up to IT departments to allow Macs on the networks not Apple so you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
When you have IBM, HP, Acer, Dell all giving corporate deals that Apple essentially can't match what do you think the bean counters are going to go for? Therefore my statement stands.
What users want and what users get in the corporate world are always two different things but then you'd know that if you had done anything in corporate IT. Look at where Macs are relegated to in corporate IT... generally the graphics departments or website testing. Rarely are they used for day to day work.
This is not a failing of Apple's it's a failing of the corporates because they are too blind to see that Macs have lower TCOs than PCs and yet all they look at is how much Macs initially cost.
Apple chooses not to actively go into the enterprise market because it's just so difficult to get stupid IT managers to Think Different.
If enterprise were intelligent they would spend the higher upfront costs and go Apple and make that money and more back in the lack of support costs but when you're controlled by the beanies and blaming it on shareholders then the lack of foresight comes to play.
I've just come out of working for a corporate IT support company who themselves are a corporatation and I've seen it first hand. When your customers have better IT equipment than an IT outfit and your customer's machines are crap then you can understand how pathetic the enterprise market really is. Hell, our machines were secondhand from some of our customers.
And you think Apple is going to make inroads with companies like that? Keep dreaming.
Mac fans like to explain away Apple's lack of enterprise support. But these same Mac fans then berate corporate IT departments for not supporting Macs more. You can't have it both ways.
IT departments don't like to support Macs out of self-preservation. Supporting Macs would threaten their job security.
I'm really looking forward to seeing what Apple does over the next couple of Mac OS X releases. I do think they will kill off Server and implement more of Server's features into the desktop OS and make servers easy.
Apple doesn't do enterprise because there is no money to be made in the enterprise market. There are many that would disagree but the enterprise market is generally tighter than a virgin on her wedding day. They hate spending money and Apple likes to find markets that do like to spend money.
You also have to consider that, by essentially giving away a server class OS, Apple is severely undercutting the Windows Server market. M$ charges a premium for their offering, with expensive seat licenses, rendering the cost of the server hardware almost immaterial. Yes, Linux has been an alternative, but Apple is making servers easy. Linux still requires a gearhead IT guy, or paid support.
Your comment makes no sense and is typical of many forum members who love to remove context.
I said Apple doesn't do enterprise in the sense that they don't concentrate on that market because there is no money to be made. How is this difficult for you to understand?
If it's ok for Mac fans to use that as an explanation for Apple lack of enterprise support, then it should also be ok for IT departments to use that as a reason for not buying more Macs. After all, don't companies want to buy from vendors that understand and support their market?
In order for IT departments to invest heavily in Macs, they need to know that they will get the proper support from Apple. And Steve Jobs saying things like "enterprise is not our customer" is not very reassuring. Given Apple's attitude toward enterprise customers, do you think companies will fall over themselves to buy Macs? So don't make the IT departments out to be the total bad guys. There is plenty of blame to go around. But all the end user sees is their IT department telling them no, and people on forums like these putting the sole blame on the IT departments.
That's not true at all. Apple offers great support for enterprise markets, they just don't have special divisions for those customers. In other words Apple treats enterprise customers no different to their consumer customers who they already treat with high regard.
IT's perception of what Apple supplies is wrong and that can be seen with their recent announcement for the Apple Stores.
Enterprise like to be treated differently to everyone else but Apple doesn't care. They offer the same level of service to all. If the Enterprise was willing to spend $500/year then they get priority treatment but if they don't then they get the same as everyone else.
That's not true at all. Apple offers great support for enterprise markets, they just don't have special divisions for those customers. In other words Apple treats enterprise customers no different to their consumer customers who they already treat with high regard.
IT's perception of what Apple supplies is wrong and that can be seen with their recent announcement for the Apple Stores.
Enterprise like to be treated differently to everyone else but Apple doesn't care. They offer the same level of service to all. If the Enterprise was willing to spend $500/year then they get priority treatment but if they don't then they get the same as everyone else.
Apple has chosen to address enterprise sales and support using a third party (Unisys). This approach works better then Apple trying to tailor its operations to deal with the enterprise.