Apple Mac perceived as easier to use, more secure than Windows among IT departments
Enterprise users and IT departments view Apple macOS devices as much more secure than their non-Mac counterparts, a new survey claims.
Credit: Andrew O'Hara, AppleInsider
Apple mobile device management (MDM) company Jamf carried out the study along with market research firm Vanson Bourne for National Cybersecurity Awareness Month. The two organizations surveyed 1,500 information security and IT professionals on device usage, challenges, and other topics at their workplaces.
According to the survey, there appears to be a trend toward Mac devices -- both at firms currently using Macs and those that predominantly use non-Mac computers. Among respondents, 74% of predominantly Mac users said they will increase the count of Apple computers at their organizations. Among predominantly non-Mac users, that percentage was 65%.
More than three quarters of organizations surveyed, 77%, said they viewed the Mac as the most secure device out of the box. That result was from both Mac and non-Mac companies, and 79% of Mac-using firms said the perceived security of macOS influenced their purchasing decision. Even 57% of predominantly non-Mac organizations said that the Mac's security reputation affected purchasing decisions.
And even once the Mac devices are bought and set up, respondents said that user satisfaction with Apple devices tended to be higher.
With all baked-in security tools active, 71% of both non-Mac and Mac organizations said they had better user satisfaction with the Mac. Additionally, 84% said they'd choose Mac if every individual at their company had to use the same device.
As Jamf points out, the switch to remote work during the coronavirus global health crisis has placed a greater emphasis on device security as more users work on home networks and their own hardware.
Nearly all of the organizations surveyed, 96% of them, said that they will prioritize spending on security software in the future. On the other hand, despite lingering security concerns, Mac-using organizations tend to roll out security patches 30% faster than non-Mac groups. There is still a four-day average from release to rollout for Mac-based security fixes.
Credit: Andrew O'Hara, AppleInsider
Apple mobile device management (MDM) company Jamf carried out the study along with market research firm Vanson Bourne for National Cybersecurity Awareness Month. The two organizations surveyed 1,500 information security and IT professionals on device usage, challenges, and other topics at their workplaces.
According to the survey, there appears to be a trend toward Mac devices -- both at firms currently using Macs and those that predominantly use non-Mac computers. Among respondents, 74% of predominantly Mac users said they will increase the count of Apple computers at their organizations. Among predominantly non-Mac users, that percentage was 65%.
More than three quarters of organizations surveyed, 77%, said they viewed the Mac as the most secure device out of the box. That result was from both Mac and non-Mac companies, and 79% of Mac-using firms said the perceived security of macOS influenced their purchasing decision. Even 57% of predominantly non-Mac organizations said that the Mac's security reputation affected purchasing decisions.
And even once the Mac devices are bought and set up, respondents said that user satisfaction with Apple devices tended to be higher.
With all baked-in security tools active, 71% of both non-Mac and Mac organizations said they had better user satisfaction with the Mac. Additionally, 84% said they'd choose Mac if every individual at their company had to use the same device.
As Jamf points out, the switch to remote work during the coronavirus global health crisis has placed a greater emphasis on device security as more users work on home networks and their own hardware.
Nearly all of the organizations surveyed, 96% of them, said that they will prioritize spending on security software in the future. On the other hand, despite lingering security concerns, Mac-using organizations tend to roll out security patches 30% faster than non-Mac groups. There is still a four-day average from release to rollout for Mac-based security fixes.
Comments
The Walmart/IBM reports of per-unit IT cost savings for Macs reinforce that belief.
Jamf and MS are doing their best with their Apple management tools, specially when you consider that Apple haven't done anything with theirs. But Windows still better integrating in the MS ecosystem that most business / enterprises use. I think Apple is the reason macOS is behind in business and enterprises, and not necessarily the IT guys.
As for why IT departments don’t switch, there are legit issues (there’s no MS Access for Mac OS, and the management tools mentioned by others above), but there’s also the perpetuation of the belief that Macs are inferior.
Which is actually not just a myth, when you look at power-user desktop machines *at the mid price point*: Apple doesn’t have them. With Apple, it’s either a machine that has thermal constraints, or a machine with a massive cost.
Apple shut out a lot of smaller “pro” setups/labs/studios with the vastly increased Mac Pro pricing. If you need heavy CPU/GPU work, and cannot afford a $10K machine (other people have done the analysis work here: the entry model is not competitive with PCs with the same specs), then your only option is a PC of some type.
If you *don’t* need sustained, high heat-generating performance, you buy an iMac or MacBook and things are fine, and maybe better than having a PC in that spot (until there’s a runaway daemon that eats 100% on every core...). There’s generally no reason why any Mac can’t replace an average PC in the workplace, except for that occasional missing software issue, as mentioned above. My companion would’ve ended up buying a MacBook Pro if there was a version of Access for Mac OS (no, running it under WINE or booting to a Windows installation defeats the point of buying a Mac for the OS, for reliability, ease of use, good OS design, comfort...).
Any place that doesn’t need a power-user setup, and doesn’t need MS Access, can probably do fine with any Mac. Even without the much lauded management tools, I would rather work in an IT department responsible for Macs, rather than Windows machines (of any brand).
I also know that Apple’s current software quality would still leave me apologizing to users more than I want to. I just think it would be more tolerable than the apologizing I’d have to do for PC/Windows issues.
And yes, we tech support people *should be* apologizing to end users when we can’t fix problems they experience which are caused by fundamentally bad design; we should NOT be trying to blame the user, or call them the problem, to defend an inherently lazy & abusive industry.
IT departments hate Apple products for the same reason mechanics hate electric cars.
Also the only thing management sees is PRICE, not knowing their virus infected Windows machines will cost more in the future.
They'd lose their jobs.
In my experience, the thought process doesn't even run THAT deep.
It seems more at a primal 'Macs bad' level. They are ignorant of anything beyond that slogan.
There are actually reasons, and even some valid ones. But, the typical IT department person, or even manager, isn't aware of them (pro or con).
There are a bunch, but it seems they are thinking this stuff is all headed into the cloud. Here's an interesting interview with the CEO of Autodesk:
https://architosh.com/2020/10/whats-beyond-revit-anagnost-on-autodesk-aec-futures/
Since he seems to be well aware of the challenge this presents at the level of most firms, I'd guess they are pretty committed to this being the path forward. The good news, is that once this happens, it will all be platform agnostic. The bad news... I have my doubts about how well it will all work.
I fear we'll just be trading off old archaic apps tied to a platform, for clunky cloud-based ones that are 'modern' but have just as many issues of a different kind.
I guess some of the die hard Windows IT heads finally retired.
In my own case, I'd prefer a Windows machine, simply because the toolset for what I do is far more robust and polished than it is for MacOS.
1. Cost. I know the arguments against that, but most companies refresh their PCs every 3 years. The Dell, HP and Lenovo laptops that enterprises prefer are well-built quality machines that have no problem lasting that long.
2. Software. While all the "major" software runs on macOS, a lot of specialty and especially business software doesn't. The benefits of using a Mac are irrelevant if it doesn't run the software that you need to do your job. This is something that is only going to get worse when Mac switches to ARM.
The downsides of running Windows are basically mitigated. IT people are going to be MSCE types so they are well versed with dealing with the problems. Also, Microsoft provides great support. Further, it is faster to just restore the last good scheduled backup, wipe and reimage or just give them a new PC than actually try to "fix" the problem. In fact, while Windows has more problems, IT people are actually more knowledgeable on how to fix them than they would a macOS problem. Given the choice between having to deal with 10 problems a day that you know how to fix - or can easily find the fix in some forum or subreddit because 1000 other Windows admins have had the same - versus 1 problem a day that you don't, most would choose the latter. If you think otherwise, you haven't worked in support or don't know someone who has.
Also, I don't know where the idea that these decisions are driven by IT people come from anyway. That is just sour grapes stuff. Those decisions are actually made by purchasing and acquisitions. The purchasing departments accept input from the IT people, of course, but at the end of the day they are still on the financial side as opposed to the technical. And I repeat: the policy is to refresh your devices once every 3 years regardless of their manufacturer. So you can replace 10,000 Macs every 3 years for $2000 a pop or do the same with Dell/HP/Lenovo for half that. Even if you have a house filled with Macs, iPhones, iPads, Apple TVs and Apple Watches, you are going to go for the latter. It is easier to justify to your boss, plus you are going to have sellers from the PC makers giving you the full court press constantly.
Finally, Microsoft heavily emphasizes the enterprise side of their business. It is their bread and butter. Ditto with the major enterprise PC manufacturers. So when you buy a Dell PC, you get the benefits of Dell AND Microsoft enterprise support. Apple meanwhile ... does Apple promote and emphasize enterprise the way that Microsoft and the PC makers do? Even if they did in times past back when Mac sales were necessary for their survival, surely you must know that Apple is primarily an iPhone (and iPad, AirPod, Apple Watch and services) company now. To put it another way, while enterprises certainly can and do use Apple products, Apple is primarily a consumer products and services company now. Microsoft now likely makes most of their money on products consumers and users never see like databases, servers and especially cloud. Apple by contrast makes very little of their money on that comparatively, and it could be said that nearly all their enterprise revenue comes from the same products and consumers can also buy.
So it is much more complicated than the "lazy IT people" and conspiracies that get bandied about. There are legit business reasons why Windows PCs dominate the enterprise, not least that Windows PCs are only one of an extensive list of enterprise products that Microsoft offers. Even the hardware companies: Dell, Lenovo and HP all make servers and other enterprise hardware. Apple doesn't. With Microsoft and the big 3 PC makers, you could take away all their sales to consumers and they would still be very viable businesses by relying solely on their sales to enterprises. Apple? Not so much.
My Mac-based clients were generally way ahead of my Windows-based clients, both in terms of what they were doing with their computers, and the low-level of support required. Support, workflow, and software was generally better on the Mac side, and that led to more creative and productive use. Again, generalities, but that's what I experienced.
I agree with much of what you said. The problem is that the things you listed are the kind of bean-counter justifications on which many businesses make their decisions. I don't deny that. The problem is those 'spreadsheets' don't easily account for things like creativity, innovation, software quality/workflow differences, productivity, etc. As mentioned above, my Mac-centric clients typically ran circles around their PC-using counterparts when it came down to what they were accomplishing with their computers. But, most companies don't know how to measure that kind of thing, nor do they even try.