In view of this (and really, this trend has been predictable for a while), it's fascinating that Intel is investing in Windows-bsaed Ultrabooks. Why not invest the $300M in R&D to improve their chips more to help Apple sell more? Why not catch a new wave rather than trying to pull a receding one back into relevance?
Intel is not a stupid company. So their strategy is intriguing. Is it because they don't like Apple's control? Or they simply want to expand this market? Or is Microsoft staking them in this $300M investment?
It's completely because Apple refuses to put "Intel Inside" on the end of it's commercials. That's the story on the inside of the water coolers so it has to be the truth. Without that tag line, Intel is losing massive monies because no one knows what is inside the box other than core i# processors.
Much of the software I use depends upon reliable RS232, USB or Ethernet communications and sadly you can't alway rely on VMs to handle that right. There is almost zero Mac support in the world of industrial controls.
Pro and Science contains profiles of various companies using Mac computers. But what does Business contain? Apple marketing and links to "iPad in Business" and "iPhone in Business".
This is a misleading article. The study referenced states that nearly half of corporations have issued at least one Mac to an employee. My company has 300,000 employees and I know there are a few Macs, but the total number of Macs at my company is statistically insignificant. A tiny fraction of a percent. But this counts as a corporation issuing Macs.
The referenced article also mentions how OS X is not deployed on most of these Macs. Why have a Mac if you can't have the best part of the Mac, which is the OS?
We can all get giddy that the day is coming when Macs will truly rule the office and I really hope that day comes, but be real people. It ain't gonna happen soon. We just spent a few million on an ERP system that must run on an IE browser. Other companies are doing this too. They're not going to throw that investment away.
We spend $1M/yr+ on CAD SW. Only pieces of it run on Mac.
Much of the software I use depends upon reliable RS232, USB or Ethernet communications and sadly you can't alway rely on VMs to handle that right. There is almost zero Mac support in the world of industrial controls.
There are always going to be niches that are problems. That doesn't change the point of the story - that Macs are growing in corporate use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
Compare Apple's Creative Pro, Science, and Business sections:
Pro and Science contains profiles of various companies using Mac computers. But what does Business contain? Apple marketing and links to "iPad in Business" and "iPhone in Business".
Academic science researchers are very big Mac users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saldog
This is a misleading article. The study referenced states that nearly half of corporations have issued at least one Mac to an employee. My company has 300,000 employees and I know there are a few Macs, but the total number of Macs at my company is statistically insignificant. A tiny fraction of a percent. But this counts as a corporation issuing Macs.
The referenced article also mentions how OS X is not deployed on most of these Macs. Why have a Mac if you can't have the best part of the Mac, which is the OS?
We can all get giddy that the day is coming when Macs will truly rule the office and I really hope that day comes, but be real people. It ain't gonna happen soon. We just spent a few million on an ERP system that must run on an IE browser. Other companies are doing this too. They're not going to throw that investment away.
We spend $1M/yr+ on CAD SW. Only pieces of it run on Mac.
Still years away folks. Not months. Years.
It's still nice to dream though.
There's nothing at all that's misleading in the article - and they even gave some specific examples:
"Cisco CIO Rebecca Jacoby said that about 16,000 employees, or one quarter of the company's 63,870 total workers, use Macs with the concentration of users hovering between 20-30 percent depending on country."
Furthermore, they stated that while 46% of corporations use Macs, only 7% of the computers given to employees are Macs, so your point is well covered. The important fact is that a decade ago, that percentage was probably 1-2% of computers given to employees were Macs (almost entirely in graphics), so it's a big gain.
However, I can't find anything in the article that suggests that Macs are not running OS X as you suggest. In fact, the article specifically suggests that many IT groups do not want to buy a separate Windows license.
As for CAD, it is true that the Mac has a long way to go, but with the (re)release of AutoCAD for the Mac, they've made a big start. I know that this is only one of AutoDesk's products, but it's still a big start.
It's completely because Apple refuses to put "Intel Inside" on the end of it's commercials. That's the story on the inside of the water coolers so it has to be the truth. Without that tag line, Intel is losing massive monies because no one knows what is inside the box other than core i# processors.
;-)
What is the data indicating that Intel is losing massive sums because there is no Intel Inside sticker on Macs?
Let's imagine there are such stickers. Would more Macs sell and therefore enrich Intel? Would customers, after having purchased a Mac with such a sticker, forsake the option of ever buying anything with AMD inside?
Academic science researchers are very big Mac users.
Only in *casual* computing. 15 yrs ago, you could argue academic helped keep Apple alive. Now, we represent a rather small percentage. Nevertheless, at conferences, Macs continue to be a dominant presence.
What is the data indicating that Intel is losing massive sums because there is no Intel Inside sticker on Macs?
Let's imagine there are such stickers. Would more Macs sell and therefore enrich Intel? Would customers, after having purchased a Mac with such a sticker, forsake the option of ever buying anything with AMD inside?
There's a non-standard wink at the end of his post. I think he's joking.
It continues to amaze me that Apple is content to sit back and not try to make serious inroads (or at least a concerted effort) to get businesses using Macs. For consumers, it doesn't really matter, most can probably get by with an iPhone and iPad, but professionals are a different animal. With that said, I can't fathom why they don't encourage the "whole ecosystem" idea with people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
Compare Apple's Creative Pro, Science, and Business sections:
Pro and Science contains profiles of various companies using Mac computers. But what does Business contain? Apple marketing and links to "iPad in Business" and "iPhone in Business".
Especially when you look at Science and the professional R&D market, it's not like they have much of a choice. Chances are, they have certain requirements that only a Mac (or Linux box) can serve. I'm thinking mostly about use of open-source and providing developer tools at a low cost.
I seem to recall they even presented at one of the WWDC sessions a few years ago and talked about some of the computation problems that their users work on.
Here's another that Apple actually features on their Science page: http://www.ebi.ac.uk/
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Academic science researchers are very big Mac users.
No they weren't. Historically the Mac had a much lower TCO than a PC, the only problem was that the upfront cost of a Mac was that much more.
Still remember in the mid 90s meeting the IT Dept head for Dennis Publishing. She ran 300-400 desks (all Macs) with 2 other guys. Her counterparts at Haymarket (iirc) had 500 seats, all PC and had a support department of 30. Same with E&Y in London. They binned Macs in the mid 90s, and a support dept of 6 went to 50.
But of course, PCs are cheaper......
You are totally right. The problem Macs faced in larger companies was that the IT manager couldn't build as large a kingdom supporting Macs, therefore a loss of relevance in the whole scheme of things.
School systems, on the other hand, needed a lot of computers scattered over many sites. They were so easy to use that teachers often did whatever was needed on their own. No kingdom required.
It continues to amaze me that Apple is content to sit back and not try to make serious inroads (or at least a concerted effort) to get businesses using Macs. For consumers, it doesn't really matter, most can probably get by with an iPhone and iPad, but professionals are a different animal. With that said, I can't fathom why they don't encourage the "whole ecosystem" idea with people.
You need to look at it from Apple's point of view. Apple is promoting what is selling and where they have strong market presence; iPhones and iPads. They get far more band for their buck.
the iPod market has passed its peak, and even though Apple has a very strong presence there, there's no future in that market other then to continue to service it. The desktop computer market is weak and not keeping up with the laptop business, so Apple puts their effort where it will create the biggest effect; the laptop market. They sell a lot of Mac Laptops that will only run Windows OS, but the more boxes you get out there the easier it will be some day to see a "flash over" effect to OSX. Who knows when or even if, but it will be easier to have happen with millions of Mac laptops in place in the enterprise market.
The iPhone and iPad are flowing into the enterprise market in unbelievable numbers and have a common OS and UI. Apple is moving their OSX to have a more UI similarity to the iOS UI. It may be extremely easy to see the "flash over" effect take place when users see both iOS and OSX as familiar.
MS is positioning itself to have that common UI with Windows8. If they are too late to the party and their phones and tablets don't catch on, then Apple is poised to grab the mobile PC market and a big chunk of the desktop market as well, and take it away from Windows boxes.
I would actually expect the Mac to decline in the corporate environment with the OS X Lion SMB compatibility issues with Windows Servers. Larger corporations might be able to afford workarounds such as Thursby's DAVE software but for SME's, with existing Windows infrastructure, it's a compatibility issue too far.
Best to have an all Windows, or all Mac environment.
Comments
And so it begins: the REAL marketshare push.
If only Steve Jobs could have lived to see this.
Then again, he'd probably forseen this!
In view of this (and really, this trend has been predictable for a while), it's fascinating that Intel is investing in Windows-bsaed Ultrabooks. Why not invest the $300M in R&D to improve their chips more to help Apple sell more? Why not catch a new wave rather than trying to pull a receding one back into relevance?
Intel is not a stupid company. So their strategy is intriguing. Is it because they don't like Apple's control? Or they simply want to expand this market? Or is Microsoft staking them in this $300M investment?
It's completely because Apple refuses to put "Intel Inside" on the end of it's commercials. That's the story on the inside of the water coolers so it has to be the truth. Without that tag line, Intel is losing massive monies because no one knows what is inside the box other than core i# processors.
;-)
http://www.apple.com/pro/
http://www.apple.com/science/
http://www.apple.com/business/mac/
Pro and Science contains profiles of various companies using Mac computers. But what does Business contain? Apple marketing and links to "iPad in Business" and "iPhone in Business".
The referenced article also mentions how OS X is not deployed on most of these Macs. Why have a Mac if you can't have the best part of the Mac, which is the OS?
We can all get giddy that the day is coming when Macs will truly rule the office and I really hope that day comes, but be real people. It ain't gonna happen soon. We just spent a few million on an ERP system that must run on an IE browser. Other companies are doing this too. They're not going to throw that investment away.
We spend $1M/yr+ on CAD SW. Only pieces of it run on Mac.
Still years away folks. Not months. Years.
It's still nice to dream though.
Much of the software I use depends upon reliable RS232, USB or Ethernet communications and sadly you can't alway rely on VMs to handle that right. There is almost zero Mac support in the world of industrial controls.
There are always going to be niches that are problems. That doesn't change the point of the story - that Macs are growing in corporate use.
Compare Apple's Creative Pro, Science, and Business sections:
http://www.apple.com/pro/
http://www.apple.com/science/
http://www.apple.com/business/mac/
Pro and Science contains profiles of various companies using Mac computers. But what does Business contain? Apple marketing and links to "iPad in Business" and "iPhone in Business".
Academic science researchers are very big Mac users.
This is a misleading article. The study referenced states that nearly half of corporations have issued at least one Mac to an employee. My company has 300,000 employees and I know there are a few Macs, but the total number of Macs at my company is statistically insignificant. A tiny fraction of a percent. But this counts as a corporation issuing Macs.
The referenced article also mentions how OS X is not deployed on most of these Macs. Why have a Mac if you can't have the best part of the Mac, which is the OS?
We can all get giddy that the day is coming when Macs will truly rule the office and I really hope that day comes, but be real people. It ain't gonna happen soon. We just spent a few million on an ERP system that must run on an IE browser. Other companies are doing this too. They're not going to throw that investment away.
We spend $1M/yr+ on CAD SW. Only pieces of it run on Mac.
Still years away folks. Not months. Years.
It's still nice to dream though.
There's nothing at all that's misleading in the article - and they even gave some specific examples:
"Cisco CIO Rebecca Jacoby said that about 16,000 employees, or one quarter of the company's 63,870 total workers, use Macs with the concentration of users hovering between 20-30 percent depending on country."
Furthermore, they stated that while 46% of corporations use Macs, only 7% of the computers given to employees are Macs, so your point is well covered. The important fact is that a decade ago, that percentage was probably 1-2% of computers given to employees were Macs (almost entirely in graphics), so it's a big gain.
However, I can't find anything in the article that suggests that Macs are not running OS X as you suggest. In fact, the article specifically suggests that many IT groups do not want to buy a separate Windows license.
As for CAD, it is true that the Mac has a long way to go, but with the (re)release of AutoCAD for the Mac, they've made a big start. I know that this is only one of AutoDesk's products, but it's still a big start.
It's completely because Apple refuses to put "Intel Inside" on the end of it's commercials. That's the story on the inside of the water coolers so it has to be the truth. Without that tag line, Intel is losing massive monies because no one knows what is inside the box other than core i# processors.
;-)
What is the data indicating that Intel is losing massive sums because there is no Intel Inside sticker on Macs?
Let's imagine there are such stickers. Would more Macs sell and therefore enrich Intel? Would customers, after having purchased a Mac with such a sticker, forsake the option of ever buying anything with AMD inside?
Academic science researchers are very big Mac users.
Only in *casual* computing. 15 yrs ago, you could argue academic helped keep Apple alive. Now, we represent a rather small percentage. Nevertheless, at conferences, Macs continue to be a dominant presence.
What is the data indicating that Intel is losing massive sums because there is no Intel Inside sticker on Macs?
Let's imagine there are such stickers. Would more Macs sell and therefore enrich Intel? Would customers, after having purchased a Mac with such a sticker, forsake the option of ever buying anything with AMD inside?
There's a non-standard wink at the end of his post. I think he's joking.
We have a wink emoticon here, for future clarity.
And so it begins: the REAL marketshare push.
It continues to amaze me that Apple is content to sit back and not try to make serious inroads (or at least a concerted effort) to get businesses using Macs. For consumers, it doesn't really matter, most can probably get by with an iPhone and iPad, but professionals are a different animal. With that said, I can't fathom why they don't encourage the "whole ecosystem" idea with people.
Compare Apple's Creative Pro, Science, and Business sections:
http://www.apple.com/pro/
http://www.apple.com/science/
http://www.apple.com/business/mac/
Pro and Science contains profiles of various companies using Mac computers. But what does Business contain? Apple marketing and links to "iPad in Business" and "iPhone in Business".
Especially when you look at Science and the professional R&D market, it's not like they have much of a choice. Chances are, they have certain requirements that only a Mac (or Linux box) can serve. I'm thinking mostly about use of open-source and providing developer tools at a low cost.
One example: http://www.sbgrid.org/
I seem to recall they even presented at one of the WWDC sessions a few years ago and talked about some of the computation problems that their users work on.
Here's another that Apple actually features on their Science page: http://www.ebi.ac.uk/
Academic science researchers are very big Mac users.
Exactly.
No they weren't. Historically the Mac had a much lower TCO than a PC, the only problem was that the upfront cost of a Mac was that much more.
Still remember in the mid 90s meeting the IT Dept head for Dennis Publishing. She ran 300-400 desks (all Macs) with 2 other guys. Her counterparts at Haymarket (iirc) had 500 seats, all PC and had a support department of 30. Same with E&Y in London. They binned Macs in the mid 90s, and a support dept of 6 went to 50.
But of course, PCs are cheaper......
You are totally right. The problem Macs faced in larger companies was that the IT manager couldn't build as large a kingdom supporting Macs, therefore a loss of relevance in the whole scheme of things.
School systems, on the other hand, needed a lot of computers scattered over many sites. They were so easy to use that teachers often did whatever was needed on their own. No kingdom required.
It continues to amaze me that Apple is content to sit back and not try to make serious inroads (or at least a concerted effort) to get businesses using Macs. For consumers, it doesn't really matter, most can probably get by with an iPhone and iPad, but professionals are a different animal. With that said, I can't fathom why they don't encourage the "whole ecosystem" idea with people.
You need to look at it from Apple's point of view. Apple is promoting what is selling and where they have strong market presence; iPhones and iPads. They get far more band for their buck.
the iPod market has passed its peak, and even though Apple has a very strong presence there, there's no future in that market other then to continue to service it. The desktop computer market is weak and not keeping up with the laptop business, so Apple puts their effort where it will create the biggest effect; the laptop market. They sell a lot of Mac Laptops that will only run Windows OS, but the more boxes you get out there the easier it will be some day to see a "flash over" effect to OSX. Who knows when or even if, but it will be easier to have happen with millions of Mac laptops in place in the enterprise market.
The iPhone and iPad are flowing into the enterprise market in unbelievable numbers and have a common OS and UI. Apple is moving their OSX to have a more UI similarity to the iOS UI. It may be extremely easy to see the "flash over" effect take place when users see both iOS and OSX as familiar.
MS is positioning itself to have that common UI with Windows8. If they are too late to the party and their phones and tablets don't catch on, then Apple is poised to grab the mobile PC market and a big chunk of the desktop market as well, and take it away from Windows boxes.
Best to have an all Windows, or all Mac environment.