First off, the iMac is not a business oriented computer. It's a 'all in one' / 'all can fail at once' type device that has no place in the general business market.
Like laptops, and you don't see many of those in business...Oh, hang on!
"Unlike Micro$oft zombie loyalists, Apple loyalists made a switch at least once and will do it again when or if something better than Apple and it's ecosystem of products comes along."
I have never met anyone who is an MS zombie loyalist, and I work in IT, MS is the company everyone loves to hate even though they are paying for their products every year.
Apple on the other hand are seriously let down by their zealot zombie legions who swallow anything thats given to them to make them feel superior (Like this totally fact free article)
Increasing Macbook sales don't hurt MS, I support lots of company owned Macbooks they use OSX for home fun stuff but have XP/7 installed for work.
A large portion of Mac sales convert into Windows 7 sales for boot camp, strange this isn't mentioned at all in the article.
I'm a Macbook (and iMac) owner myself but with the new ranges of super thin metal PC laptops becoming available it makes it harder and harder to justify paying the extra for the mac.
Like laptops, and you don't see many of those in business...Oh, hang on!
Speaking of FAIL, so does your argument.
You do have a very good counter argument there.
However many laptops allow the easy exchange of hard drives, memory and batteries. The items that fail the most and can be serviced in house, just like a open tower. This is something a experienced IT Dept. considers when buying new hardware, saving the company money. (and justifying their jobs in the process)
Apple is the one who lately has been locking down their hardware so nearly nothing is user serviceable. What's especially strange is for some machines they will allow hard drives to be removed from laptops and then others not. It's like they are confused and it doesn't bode well for those trying to commit to the platform with no consistency.
Only the MacPro, nearly everything else you lose the whole machine for some time while it's being repaired. This is unacceptable to businesses who large installations have one, two, three or more machines failing a week, mostly from Windows.
It only takes a IT guy a few minutes to slap a newly formatted and Ghosted hard drive in a hosed Windows box and it's ready to get back to work. No need to remove it from the cubicle.
A failed iMac? It's got to go to Apple, the whole darn computer. Live far away? It's go to be shipped.
The company data is on the iMac's hard drive too, for the geeks to sell to the competition. This is also unacceptable.
Hey, you want a fast Windows 7 laptop with great battery life, good weight and all the bells and whistles? Get a Mac.
My clients realized this years ago when I started bringing a MacBook (sometimes a pro) to their office. I ran on battery power the entire meeting, had bluetooth going and my screens looked better and had a better color to them. Case, point, end of discussion.
The MacBook Air really cemented a few converts too. It's not doing well with the consumer but in Biz it is doing very well. It's the BMW to your Cadillac, slimer, faster, quicker, better looking.
On the Windows side... DUMP THE STUPID VGA PORTS! Seriosly, do I need VGA in 2010? And whats with the sliced underbelly? Why all the vents? Can't hire a thermal engineer worth a lick.
However many laptops allow the easy exchange of hard drives, memory and batteries. The items that fail the most and can be serviced in house, just like a open tower. This is something a experienced IT Dept. considers when buying new hardware, saving the company money. (and justifying their jobs in the process)
Apple is the one who lately has been locking down their hardware so nearly nothing is user serviceable. What's especially strange is for some machines they will allow hard drives to be removed from laptops and then others not. It's like they are confused and it doesn't bode well for those trying to commit to the platform with no consistency.
Only the MacPro, nearly everything else you lose the whole machine for some time while it's being repaired. This is unacceptable to businesses who large installations have one, two, three or more machines failing a week, mostly from Windows.
It only takes a IT guy a few minutes to slap a newly formatted and Ghosted hard drive in a hosed Windows box and it's ready to get back to work. No need to remove it from the cubicle.
A failed iMac? It's got to go to Apple, the whole darn computer. Live far away? It's go to be shipped.
The company data is on the iMac's hard drive too, for the geeks to sell to the competition. This is also unacceptable.
It's "not user serviceable" to an idiot. I have no issues getting into one. All those holes, ports, vents, etc come at a cost and that cost is CREAKY PLASTIC, not very Exec Like. They are put together REALLY Well. Buy a computer from Dell, Acer, Gateway, and even HP to an extent and you'll get misaligned lines, poor port placement and edges sharp enough to cut you (AND YES I DID GET CUT!!! ARGH!). But with Apple you get the best components, top notch quality, and yes you will need someone with an IQ to service them but that's what they are paying IT for, right? On a side note it does HELP IT when the laptop is tough to get into because it means less tech-theft like when Bob takes his 8gb Laptop home over the weekend and it comes back with 2gb. That's a loss of $600 to the company.
PC's are like 80's American cars - crappy builds, misaligned parts, too much venting holes ugly as sin looks, Apple is like Lexus and BMW rolled into one - precision cut aluminum with extremely high technical quality and engineering all wrapped around the best components price points can buy.
"Unlike Micro$oft zombie loyalists, Apple loyalists made a switch at least once and will do it again when or if something better than Apple and it's ecosystem of products comes along."
I have never met anyone who is an MS zombie loyalist, and I work in IT, MS is the company everyone loves to hate even though they are paying for their products every year.
Apple on the other hand are seriously let down by their zealot zombie legions who swallow anything thats given to them to make them feel superior (Like this totally fact free article)
Increasing Macbook sales don't hurt MS, I support lots of company owned Macbooks they use OSX for home fun stuff but have XP/7 installed for work.
A large portion of Mac sales convert into Windows 7 sales for boot camp, strange this isn't mentioned at all in the article.
I'm a Macbook (and iMac) owner myself but with the new ranges of super thin metal PC laptops becoming available it makes it harder and harder to justify paying the extra for the mac.
It did take them 9 years to get their act together. I too am liking the new kit but those horrible screens and LOW resolutions put me off big time.
PC's are like 80's American cars - crappy builds, misaligned parts, too much venting holes ugly as sin looks, Apple is like Lexus and BMW rolled into one - precision cut aluminum with extremely high technical quality and engineering all wrapped around the best components price points can buy.
Apple does not and should not target the corporate market because this is a market driven not by actual users but by pencil pushing administrators easily deluded by misleading spec sheets and white papers, which are Microsoft's forte.
I think you are reading a little too much into things. Apple hasn't targeted the corporate market because before 10.6, the foundations of Mac OSX were constantly shifting. Wholesale API changes, new frameworks - kind of like Google tagging everything "Beta", buy focusing just on consumers, Apple had the flexibility to make radical changes without having to be apologetic to corporate customers - since that wasn't their focus.
Now with 10.6, it looks like Mac OSX is maturing to a point where Apple can start to go out for the enterprise. I think you are seeing that with the tighter and native integration with Active Directory and Exchange. With the iPhone paving the way for awareness, the timing has never been better.
Mactripper has really valid points. In enterprise the reason to buy Apple is well...zero unless your main thing is publishing or digital media. One iMac is 2-3 PCs easily, in a corporate environment there are literally zero reasons to buy a fleet of macs, while the mac mini would seem like a viable option, 599 for just a computer which you most likely need to still get W7 for it, so why bother?
We personally have a fleet of dells and if something goes wrong we have service the very next day, and with all our stuff ghosted we can easily put the said offender back into action (not to say Apple doesn't have ghosting options). Most of the people on here trying to hound him are so blind by fanboyism that you can't even logically think of any good reasons to make a real push towards mac in enterprise without sounding like Justin Long
Mactripper has really valid points. In enterprise the reason to buy Apple is well...zero unless your main thing is publishing or digital media. One iMac is 2-3 PCs easily, in a corporate environment there are literally zero reasons to buy a fleet of macs, while the mac mini would seem like a viable option, 599 for just a computer which you most likely need to still get W7 for it, so why bother?
We personally have a fleet of dells and if something goes wrong we have service the very next day, and with all our stuff ghosted we can easily put the said offender back into action (not to say Apple doesn't have ghosting options). Most of the people on here trying to hound him are so blind by fanboyism that you can't even logically think of any good reasons to make a real push towards mac in enterprise without sounding like Justin Long
No, he doesn?t nad neither do you. The problem with Apple succeeding in the enterprise is not because that they aren?t selling a small configurable tower. Apple inability to succeed in the enterprise is due to their Mac business model which focuses on the consumer.
Even if Apple made the mythical xMac with a million configurable methods there are still huge problems that prevent Macs from making a dent in the enterprise. For starters, Apple?s lack of OS licensing creates a huge problem for enterprise use. By only selling Mac OS X with the HW then they will forced to buy from Apple if they wish to continue to use Macs which makes Macs much more costly over PC vendors clamoring for a companies business when the result is still the same OS with the same UI and I/O despite using many PC vendors.
Buying a Mac and paying for Mac OS X just to force Windows use is not cost effective. Executives can get away with this and Apple?s current product offerings already suit many of their elitist needs.
Finally, Apple is quick to drop legacy code, force developers to update their software and to drop support for legacy HW. There are a few exceptions, but not many. Mac OS X is clearly geared as a consumer OS. MS on the other hand has no choice but to support a great deal of HW and legacy code in their OS. This creates a lot of problems for MS? OS, but it also puts Windows in the unique position that has yet to have any challengers and having an xMac will not change anything.
Those are few on the main issues as to why Mac OS X is simply not designed to compete in the enterprise. Unless Apple licenses their OS to other vendors and offers a clear roadmap to allow for corporate planning they can?t compete. There is nothing wrong with both business models succeeding in their own niche.
Mactripper has really valid points. In enterprise the reason to buy Apple is well...zero unless your main thing is publishing or digital media.
Or anything related to mathmatics, science, or where you would have traditionally used a Unix based workstation. He doesn't make valid points, just myopic yet sweeping generalizations.
For the average office worker, you are correct - a Mac is probably overkill. However, because of the iPhone and the popularity of the Mac at home, users are now starting to request and demand Mac's in the office.
As for prices, Mac's tend to have double the useful life of a Windows PC - mainly because the OS doesn't rot in place like Windows tends to. Some of it is also the higher speced hardware that Apple provides simply lasts longer because it's more powerful with a longer service life than bargain basement disposable PC's. That starts to balance out the cost equation. When you factor in the new energy star and EPEAT standards that focus on the entire life cycle of a computer, not just it's energy efficiency, the longer useful life of a Mac is an even greater advantage. Blind focus on initial purchase price is going to be a road to public relations disaster with the popularity of environmentalism and very public focusing on "carbon footprints". Industry norms used to be for a three year life cycle for desktops and laptops - to reduce "eWaste" Energy Star and EPEAT both are pushing for five year life cycles. Don't underestimate the power of things like EPEAT to influence buying patterns.
Quote:
We personally have a fleet of dells and if something goes wrong we have service the very next day, and with all our stuff ghosted we can easily put the said offender back into action (not to say Apple doesn't have ghosting options).
In some way's Mac OSX is easier to deploy than Windows. And there is no practical reason why you couldn't do the same thing you outline here with a Mac.
And Apple isn't the only one that has had delivery issues from time to time - even the famed Dell is having delivery issues right now - we are experiencing significant and continual delays due to several supply shortages. That's life.
Quote:
Most of the people on here trying to hound him are so blind by fanboyism that you can't even logically think of any good reasons to make a real push towards mac in enterprise without sounding like Justin Long
I don't think there is a need to push - nor is it reasonable to expect the Mac to displace Windows. But they are here to stay. That's not blind fanboyism, there are legitimate reasons to use a Mac vs a Windows machine (and yes, user preference is a perfectly valid reason). After all, computers are just tools. Mac's are becoming an officially supported platform in my organization, and I never thought I would see that happen. We have several very active user communities and they have, on their own, created the same security standards and management standards for the Mac's as we have for our Windows desktops. It's made it that much easier to make the argument that they should be a supported platform, and that's exactly what is happening now - those community grown standards and policies are now being validated and rolled into our IT fabric. The next iteration of my work provided laptop will probably be a MacBook Pro - and there is a good chance I will procure it via a sanctioned enterprise hardware contract. Just a couple years ago I would have told you that would never happen.
Apple can do better in the business market for desktops if they give them what they already know, a expandable below $1000 priced tower.
The same tired old rhetoric.
Oh if I had a penny for all the times I 've heard about the expandable tower below $1000.
IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN, GET OVER IT.
Under $1000 and expandable is nonsense, because in a few years time when one wants to expand/upgrade/etc. you might as well throw the tower out of the window because no expansion will be better in terms of price/performance than an new all in one computer. It's been proven historically time and again...Take a 4 year old pc tower and try to expand it....right, no sata II, no chips that fit, slow memory...not that expandable.
If one really wants an super powerful and expandable tower there's the mac pro for that, end of story.
What really bothers me with that moronic rhetoric, is how impervious the proponents are to reality. If there proposed scheme is so great how come apple with their complete line up is outgrowing pc's in this segment, even considering how a lot of pc software doesn't have a good mac counterpart in some business applications...
I have never met anyone who is an MS zombie loyalist.
Go over at the moron's playground that is engadget to meet MS zombie loyalists, and also almost all mainstream tec sites. These people are the pits when it comes to intelligence, they are fanatical and endlessly grateful for a platform that has brought them grief, failed ideas, vapourware, inability to adapt and evolve, complete and utter lack of vision, and the constant copying in an inferior way of other peoples ideas.
For crying out loud, in 2019 ms copies the dock in 7 and it's hailed by the paid advertisers that are the mainstream tec media as some sort of revolution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanPartin
A lot of us "made the switch" and are Apple's biggest critics when products or services don't meet expectations. Unlike Micro$oft zombie loyalists, Apple loyalists made a switch at least once and will do it again when or if something better than Apple and it's ecosystem of products comes along. We are not loyalist out of laziness or fear of making a change, we are loyalist because we've found a better option that actually works as needed!
Post of the year for me, very, very well put. Bravo! Please allow me to use it as my next sig.
Or anything related to mathmatics, science, or where you would have traditionally used a Unix based workstation. He doesn't make valid points, just myopic yet sweeping generalizations.
For the average office worker, you are correct - a Mac is probably overkill. However, because of the iPhone and the popularity of the Mac at home, users are now starting to request and demand Mac's in the office.
As for prices, Mac's tend to have double the useful life of a Windows PC - mainly because the OS doesn't rot in place like Windows tends to. Some of it is also the higher speced hardware that Apple provides simply lasts longer because it's more powerful with a longer service life than bargain basement disposable PC's. That starts to balance out the cost equation. When you factor in the new energy star and EPEAT standards that focus on the entire life cycle of a computer, not just it's energy efficiency, the longer useful life of a Mac is an even greater advantage. Blind focus on initial purchase price is going to be a road to public relations disaster with the popularity of environmentalism and very public focusing on "carbon footprints". Industry norms used to be for a three year life cycle for desktops and laptops - to reduce "eWaste" Energy Star and EPEAT both are pushing for five year life cycles. Don't underestimate the power of things like EPEAT to influence buying patterns.
In some way's Mac OSX is easier to deploy than Windows. And there is no practical reason why you couldn't do the same thing you outline here with a Mac.
And Apple isn't the only one that has had delivery issues from time to time - even the famed Dell is having delivery issues right now - we are experiencing significant and continual delays due to several supply shortages. That's life.
I don't think there is a need to push - nor is it reasonable to expect the Mac to displace Windows. But they are here to stay. That's not blind fanboyism, there are legitimate reasons to use a Mac vs a Windows machine (and yes, user preference is a perfectly valid reason). After all, computers are just tools. Mac's are becoming an officially supported platform in my organization, and I never thought I would see that happen. We have several very active user communities and they have, on their own, created the same security standards and management standards for the Mac's as we have for our Windows desktops. It's made it that much easier to make the argument that they should be a supported platform, and that's exactly what is happening now - those community grown standards and policies are now being validated and rolled into our IT fabric. The next iteration of my work provided laptop will probably be a MacBook Pro - and there is a good chance I will procure it via a sanctioned enterprise hardware contract. Just a couple years ago I would have told you that would never happen.
As someone who owned pcs and use a mac (powerpc mini hooked up to the bravia, a hackintosh and my roommates macbook) I've yet to experience Windows just bogging to death unless you have a million programs installed but let's not be naïve and think macs don't suffer from the same thing because they do, one look at my roommates macbook reaffirms that. But I never install a gang of software on anything I own because well I know I'll never use it.
Anyways now that Apple has switched to Intel I'd say they have the same failure rate and are equally spec'd against comparable pc's neglecting displays. I read far too often about Apple products failing and not being more than a few years old, To me its a fact of life and you expect things to die eventually so I will just go out and say that the hardware itself has the same life as its pc brethren which isn't surprising seeing as how they are near identical now.
Paying the Apple tax is nice for consumers because they want a better experience than Windows and expect they to get a better experience, paying the Apple tax in enterprise is about as silly as they come, we don't care about a flashy dock or expose, or the Apple experience, we care first and foremost about doing work and being easy to manage and watch (they keep a sharp eye on everyone who sits at a computer at work)
We upgrade our computers 5-6 years to more efficient and powerful units unless they are just minimally used in which case they are the last to be upgraded. Macs aren't compatible with our software we run at the resort, so it will never be an option for us unless we put Windows on it, in which point we could have just bought a PC. It would be nice to see a bit of experimentation at work, but I know it won't happen.
Still Apple will be fine, they make their money on the consumer segment and MS dominates the enterprise and consumer market. Apple doesn't need to change the formula from what their doing to be successful
My corporation unfortunately buys PCs all the time. Yet they cause me nothing but consternation. The initial price might be less for PCs, but the total cost including down time caused by malicious bugs, etc., and other Windows-related problems cannot be less. I've spent minutes, hours and days in an unproductive mode because of PCs. My corporation needs to wake up and start buying Macs so all of its employees can be more productive and in long run save our customers money. It's inconceivable to me my bosses can't see the light.
"The survey also found high user satisfaction with Windows 7. More than a third -- 37 percent"
I don't know why, but I find that sentence funny. Is it just me or do we now consider anything over 30% a success in terms of satisfaction with an OS. I consider that a failure. What was Vista's satisfaction percentage before word got out it was a dog?
I'm sure that there are a few surveys that showed 10.5 getting off to a bit of a slow start. That begs me to ask why in these two platforms, have they made such huge efforts in getting the visual part down, but have really dropped the ball on the everyday things. IMHO Leopard is broken, and Snow Leopard is also broken AND still has a lot of PPC code in it.
Does it boil down to a mass exodus of coders that are retiring and the next generation doesn't have the skill of the previous ones? Or, is it an attempt to make you buy all new stuff every 3 years?
I want to hear from longtime Mac users and see what their opinion is. Is it one step forward and two back or am I being too hard on Apple?
I've yet to experience Windows just bogging to death
I love how the miracle windows operators come out of the woodwork in these kinds of discussions
I'm happy for you. You are in the minority. If this was the non-issue you are trying to portray it to be, it wouldn't be discussed with such frequency on websites and tech blogs, and there wouldn't be a whole cottage industry of registry cleaners and programs to speed windows up.
On the other hand, when I purchased my MacBook Pro, I hooked it into my 5 year old PowerBook G4 and transferred all my programs and files over. I didn't even have to re-install any software. Sure it took about 5 hours to copy everything over, but it was almost 200GB's of data and applications. And if I do have an issue with my OS, I can do an archive and install or a re-install under 10.6 - and all my settings and programs are preserved.
Windows has no equivalent. The registry sucks. It's a bad design. What brilliant person thought it was a good idea to put all the critical system settings in an easily corruptible flat database with no fault tolerance? At least with preference files on the Mac, if I have a problem with one application it's just that one application, not my whole system. I'm not going to render my Mac unbootable by deleting a preference file, but you can kill a windows install in the registry editor if you aren't very careful.
Quote:
Anyways now that Apple has switched to Intel I'd say they have the same failure rate and are equally spec'd against comparable pc's neglecting displays.
There are different levels of quality in parts - not all suppliers are created equally. Also, the way they are put together matters too. But it's just not about parts that fail - as you point out, that affects everyone at one point or another...
Quote:
I read far too often about Apple products failing and not being more than a few years old, To me its a fact of life and you expect things to die eventually so I will just go out and say that the hardware itself has the same life as its pc brethren which isn't surprising seeing as how they are near identical now.
See, that's where you are wrong. I have plenty of older PC's that still work - the key difference is, because you can get lower end components, people often do. Focused on short term costs and not overall life cycle. The difference is those PC's are practically useless running todays software. I have a machine I built and it takes only 1 gig of RAM! Now true, I built it to do one specific task at the time, but if I had spent $50 more on a better motherboard, that machine would be useful for so much more. It can make a good firewall right now, but that's about it. I learned my lesson on that one. The upper middle - that's where you want to be. Best overall value for money expended. That's the space that Apple excels at (and why they have a market cap that exceeds google).
Take Dell for example, I just went over and started browsing through their desktop machines - not until you get up into the $600 machines do you hit computers that can take more than 4 gigs of RAM. How future proof is that? Memory is one of the best things you can do to improve performance, cost for cost. Even the Mac mini can take 8 gigs of RAM now. Yeah, you can buy a $300 machine today - but the next version of Office will render it basically unusable.
So yes, you can buy cheaper PC's - but at the expense of long term usage and flexibility.
Quote:
Paying the Apple tax
There is no Apple tax. You can buy a quality machine, or you can buy cheaper less capable hardware. If you want a stripped, bare bones experience, congratulations - there are plenty of Windows PC vendors who are happy to oblige you.
Quote:
paying the Apple tax in enterprise is about as silly as they come
Really? Feature for feature, the iMac is a great machine. It's all-in-one form factor is very clean and easy to deploy. It reduces clutter in an employee's work area. Mac's have fewer issues than PC's, starting with the lack of viruses or malware, easier software and OS maintenance and overall more pleasurable user experience. Their industrial design is top notch. We have less help desk tickets from our Mac users - that's something we can and do measure. Facts - the opposite of made up "feelings" in an Internet forum.
Quote:
we don't care about a flashy dock or expose, or the Apple experience, we care first and foremost about doing work and being easy to manage and watch (they keep a sharp eye on everyone who sits at a computer at work)
Then computers that simply work better from the start should be of great interest to you. Unless you have some innately irrational dislike for Mac's (or just a lack of experience - why are you on a Mac site again?)
Quote:
Macs aren't compatible with our software we run at the resort, so it will never be an option for us unless we put Windows on it, in which point we could have just bought a PC. It would be nice to see a bit of experimentation at work, but I know it won't happen.
Then that's the best reason to not use a Mac. They aren't for everyone, but where they can work they often make a great fit. Our users think so.
Quote:
Still Apple will be fine, they make their money on the consumer segment and MS dominates the enterprise and consumer market. Apple doesn't need to change the formula from what their doing to be successful
Your absolutely right - Apple is already successful - with a minority market share they take a majority profit.
But there still is room for them to improve. As I have said, between the iPhone and the maturing of Mac OSX, I expect Apple to start moving in and taking the high end of the enterprise computer business just like they have in the consumer space. The timing is good, and OSX 10.6 integrates into an Active Directory/Exchange environment very well. As they have shown in the consumer space, they don't have to take the majority of the market share to be successful. They just have to take the most profitable chunks. I have no doubt they will eventually do it - they already have a demonstrated track record in the consumer space for computers, for music players and now smartphones. It's not a fluke, they know their target markets and how to win them. When they finally do "get serious" about the enterprise, it will be very obvious. And yes, they are paying attention. Trust me, so is MS and vendors like Dell, HP, Acer, etc.
I love how the miracle windows operators come out of the woodwork in these kinds of discussions
I'm happy for you. You are in the minority. If this was the non-issue you are trying to portray it to be, it wouldn't be discussed with such frequency on websites and tech blogs, and there wouldn't be a whole cottage industry of registry cleaners and programs to speed windows up.
On the other hand, when I purchased my MacBook Pro, I hooked it into my 5 year old PowerBook G4 and transferred all my programs and files over. I didn't even have to re-install any software. Sure it took about 5 hours to copy everything over, but it was almost 200GB's of data and applications. And if I do have an issue with my OS, I can do an archive and install or a re-install under 10.6 - and all my settings and programs are preserved.
Windows has no equivalent. The registry sucks. It's a bad design. What brilliant person thought it was a good idea to put all the critical system settings in an easily corruptible flat database with no fault tolerance? At least with preference files on the Mac, if I have a problem with one application it's just that one application, not my whole system. I'm not going to render my Mac unbootable by deleting a preference file, but you can kill a windows install in the registry editor if you aren't very careful.
There are different levels of quality in parts - not all suppliers are created equally. Also, the way they are put together matters too. But it's just not about parts that fail - as you point out, that affects everyone at one point or another...
See, that's where you are wrong. I have plenty of older PC's that still work - the key difference is, because you can get lower end components, people often do. Focused on short term costs and not overall life cycle. The difference is those PC's are practically useless running todays software. I have a machine I built and it takes only 1 gig of RAM! Now true, I built it to do one specific task at the time, but if I had spent $50 more on a better motherboard, that machine would be useful for so much more. It can make a good firewall right now, but that's about it. I learned my lesson on that one. The upper middle - that's where you want to be. Best overall value for money expended. That's the space that Apple excels at (and why they have a market cap that exceeds google).
Take Dell for example, I just went over and started browsing through their desktop machines - not until you get up into the $600 machines do you hit computers that can take more than 4 gigs of RAM. How future proof is that? Memory is one of the best things you can do to improve performance, cost for cost. Even the Mac mini can take 8 gigs of RAM now. Yeah, you can buy a $300 machine today - but the next version of Office will render it basically unusable.
So yes, you can buy cheaper PC's - but at the expense of long term usage and flexibility.
There is no Apple tax. You can buy a quality machine, or you can buy cheaper less capable hardware. If you want a stripped, bare bones experience, congratulations - there are plenty of Windows PC vendors who are happy to oblige you.
Really? Feature for feature, the iMac is a great machine. It's all-in-one form factor is very clean and easy to deploy. It reduces clutter in an employee's work area. Mac's have fewer issues than PC's, starting with the lack of viruses or malware, easier software and OS maintenance and overall more pleasurable user experience. Their industrial design is top notch. We have less help desk tickets from our Mac users - that's something we can and do measure. Facts - the opposite of made up "feelings" in an Internet forum.
Then computers that simply work better from the start should be of great interest to you. Unless you have some innately irrational dislike for Mac's (or just a lack of experience - why are you on a Mac site again?)
Then that's the best reason to not use a Mac. They aren't for everyone, but where they can work they often make a great fit. Our users think so.
Your absolutely right - Apple is already successful - with a minority market share they take a majority profit.
But there still is room for them to improve. As I have said, between the iPhone and the maturing of Mac OSX, I expect Apple to start moving in and taking the high end of the enterprise computer business just like they have in the consumer space. The timing is good, and OSX 10.6 integrates into an Active Directory/Exchange environment very well. As they have shown in the consumer space, they don't have to take the majority of the market share to be successful. They just have to take the most profitable chunks. I have no doubt they will eventually do it - they already have a demonstrated track record in the consumer space for computers, for music players and now smartphones. It's not a fluke, they know their target markets and how to win them. When they finally do "get serious" about the enterprise, it will be very obvious. And yes, they are paying attention. Trust me, so is MS and vendors like Dell, HP, Acer, etc.
Windows bogging down is never an issue with me or work because we don't let people goof off and like I said I don't download programs out the yingyang and any person at work who installs something beyond what we tell them is subject to termination depending on frequency of violations and content, so we don't really have many software related issues from Windows. In the past 2 years we've had a total of 3 security vulnerabilities two of which were caused by the same person and thus terminated.
Our short term costs and lifetime expectancy are part of the equation when we buy, we don't keep our computers and they end up getting donated to local charities/ NPO's so we recoup some of the costs of upgrading. Its rare to get a critical hardware failure like the cpu going, usually its a power supply or hard drive going. These are on about 700 a piece machines, but we are going to have to scale back due to budget cuts and will be getting 500 dollar bare bone machines that are just tower only.
We could easily extend our buying schedule to 7 years but top brass likes to keep things up to date with all our resorts. Also we don't get new monitors when we get new PCs, so were still rocking CRTs from 01 lol. I think we have about a 40/60 ratio of lcd to crt monitors right now, can't speak for other resorts though.
Anyways a pc spec'd the same as a mac isn't going to get dusted significantly their performance is comparable and usually its a back and forth with the pc or mac winning in certain categories, its not some landslide completely favoring one over the other.
Most of our help tickets extend from something in our database going down not on our end or some moron guest trying to be "uber hacker", we don't have many serious issues because were well established but a resort we just added into the family was a damn nightmare getting everything right, it was a nightmare becuase they were running archaic hardware and still on windows 2000 or XP, when all our resorts were on Vista and had newer up to date servers.
Comments
First off, the iMac is not a business oriented computer. It's a 'all in one' / 'all can fail at once' type device that has no place in the general business market.
Like laptops, and you don't see many of those in business...Oh, hang on!
Speaking of FAIL, so does your argument.
I have never met anyone who is an MS zombie loyalist, and I work in IT, MS is the company everyone loves to hate even though they are paying for their products every year.
Apple on the other hand are seriously let down by their zealot zombie legions who swallow anything thats given to them to make them feel superior (Like this totally fact free article)
Increasing Macbook sales don't hurt MS, I support lots of company owned Macbooks they use OSX for home fun stuff but have XP/7 installed for work.
A large portion of Mac sales convert into Windows 7 sales for boot camp, strange this isn't mentioned at all in the article.
I'm a Macbook (and iMac) owner myself but with the new ranges of super thin metal PC laptops becoming available it makes it harder and harder to justify paying the extra for the mac.
Like laptops, and you don't see many of those in business...Oh, hang on!
Speaking of FAIL, so does your argument.
You do have a very good counter argument there.
However many laptops allow the easy exchange of hard drives, memory and batteries. The items that fail the most and can be serviced in house, just like a open tower. This is something a experienced IT Dept. considers when buying new hardware, saving the company money. (and justifying their jobs in the process)
Apple is the one who lately has been locking down their hardware so nearly nothing is user serviceable. What's especially strange is for some machines they will allow hard drives to be removed from laptops and then others not. It's like they are confused and it doesn't bode well for those trying to commit to the platform with no consistency.
Only the MacPro, nearly everything else you lose the whole machine for some time while it's being repaired. This is unacceptable to businesses who large installations have one, two, three or more machines failing a week, mostly from Windows.
It only takes a IT guy a few minutes to slap a newly formatted and Ghosted hard drive in a hosed Windows box and it's ready to get back to work. No need to remove it from the cubicle.
A failed iMac? It's got to go to Apple, the whole darn computer. Live far away? It's go to be shipped.
The company data is on the iMac's hard drive too, for the geeks to sell to the competition. This is also unacceptable.
My clients realized this years ago when I started bringing a MacBook (sometimes a pro) to their office. I ran on battery power the entire meeting, had bluetooth going and my screens looked better and had a better color to them. Case, point, end of discussion.
The MacBook Air really cemented a few converts too. It's not doing well with the consumer but in Biz it is doing very well. It's the BMW to your Cadillac, slimer, faster, quicker, better looking.
On the Windows side... DUMP THE STUPID VGA PORTS! Seriosly, do I need VGA in 2010? And whats with the sliced underbelly? Why all the vents? Can't hire a thermal engineer worth a lick.
Happy Holidaze to everyone!
You do have a very good counter argument there.
However many laptops allow the easy exchange of hard drives, memory and batteries. The items that fail the most and can be serviced in house, just like a open tower. This is something a experienced IT Dept. considers when buying new hardware, saving the company money. (and justifying their jobs in the process)
Apple is the one who lately has been locking down their hardware so nearly nothing is user serviceable. What's especially strange is for some machines they will allow hard drives to be removed from laptops and then others not. It's like they are confused and it doesn't bode well for those trying to commit to the platform with no consistency.
Only the MacPro, nearly everything else you lose the whole machine for some time while it's being repaired. This is unacceptable to businesses who large installations have one, two, three or more machines failing a week, mostly from Windows.
It only takes a IT guy a few minutes to slap a newly formatted and Ghosted hard drive in a hosed Windows box and it's ready to get back to work. No need to remove it from the cubicle.
A failed iMac? It's got to go to Apple, the whole darn computer. Live far away? It's go to be shipped.
The company data is on the iMac's hard drive too, for the geeks to sell to the competition. This is also unacceptable.
It's "not user serviceable" to an idiot. I have no issues getting into one. All those holes, ports, vents, etc come at a cost and that cost is CREAKY PLASTIC, not very Exec Like. They are put together REALLY Well. Buy a computer from Dell, Acer, Gateway, and even HP to an extent and you'll get misaligned lines, poor port placement and edges sharp enough to cut you (AND YES I DID GET CUT!!! ARGH!). But with Apple you get the best components, top notch quality, and yes you will need someone with an IQ to service them but that's what they are paying IT for, right? On a side note it does HELP IT when the laptop is tough to get into because it means less tech-theft like when Bob takes his 8gb Laptop home over the weekend and it comes back with 2gb. That's a loss of $600 to the company.
PC's are like 80's American cars - crappy builds, misaligned parts, too much venting holes ugly as sin looks, Apple is like Lexus and BMW rolled into one - precision cut aluminum with extremely high technical quality and engineering all wrapped around the best components price points can buy.
"Unlike Micro$oft zombie loyalists, Apple loyalists made a switch at least once and will do it again when or if something better than Apple and it's ecosystem of products comes along."
I have never met anyone who is an MS zombie loyalist, and I work in IT, MS is the company everyone loves to hate even though they are paying for their products every year.
Apple on the other hand are seriously let down by their zealot zombie legions who swallow anything thats given to them to make them feel superior (Like this totally fact free article)
Increasing Macbook sales don't hurt MS, I support lots of company owned Macbooks they use OSX for home fun stuff but have XP/7 installed for work.
A large portion of Mac sales convert into Windows 7 sales for boot camp, strange this isn't mentioned at all in the article.
I'm a Macbook (and iMac) owner myself but with the new ranges of super thin metal PC laptops becoming available it makes it harder and harder to justify paying the extra for the mac.
It did take them 9 years to get their act together. I too am liking the new kit but those horrible screens and LOW resolutions put me off big time.
PC's are like 80's American cars - crappy builds, misaligned parts, too much venting holes ugly as sin looks, Apple is like Lexus and BMW rolled into one - precision cut aluminum with extremely high technical quality and engineering all wrapped around the best components price points can buy.
Yeah, like the Nvidia 9600?
You are getting utterly boring with your continuing bull. Give us a rest.
For sake of those of us who know how to use the ignore function, is it really necessary to quote the trolls entire post?
Apple does not and should not target the corporate market because this is a market driven not by actual users but by pencil pushing administrators easily deluded by misleading spec sheets and white papers, which are Microsoft's forte.
I think you are reading a little too much into things. Apple hasn't targeted the corporate market because before 10.6, the foundations of Mac OSX were constantly shifting. Wholesale API changes, new frameworks - kind of like Google tagging everything "Beta", buy focusing just on consumers, Apple had the flexibility to make radical changes without having to be apologetic to corporate customers - since that wasn't their focus.
Now with 10.6, it looks like Mac OSX is maturing to a point where Apple can start to go out for the enterprise. I think you are seeing that with the tighter and native integration with Active Directory and Exchange. With the iPhone paving the way for awareness, the timing has never been better.
We personally have a fleet of dells and if something goes wrong we have service the very next day, and with all our stuff ghosted we can easily put the said offender back into action (not to say Apple doesn't have ghosting options). Most of the people on here trying to hound him are so blind by fanboyism that you can't even logically think of any good reasons to make a real push towards mac in enterprise without sounding like Justin Long
Mactripper has really valid points. In enterprise the reason to buy Apple is well...zero unless your main thing is publishing or digital media. One iMac is 2-3 PCs easily, in a corporate environment there are literally zero reasons to buy a fleet of macs, while the mac mini would seem like a viable option, 599 for just a computer which you most likely need to still get W7 for it, so why bother?
We personally have a fleet of dells and if something goes wrong we have service the very next day, and with all our stuff ghosted we can easily put the said offender back into action (not to say Apple doesn't have ghosting options). Most of the people on here trying to hound him are so blind by fanboyism that you can't even logically think of any good reasons to make a real push towards mac in enterprise without sounding like Justin Long
No, he doesn?t nad neither do you. The problem with Apple succeeding in the enterprise is not because that they aren?t selling a small configurable tower. Apple inability to succeed in the enterprise is due to their Mac business model which focuses on the consumer.
Even if Apple made the mythical xMac with a million configurable methods there are still huge problems that prevent Macs from making a dent in the enterprise. For starters, Apple?s lack of OS licensing creates a huge problem for enterprise use. By only selling Mac OS X with the HW then they will forced to buy from Apple if they wish to continue to use Macs which makes Macs much more costly over PC vendors clamoring for a companies business when the result is still the same OS with the same UI and I/O despite using many PC vendors.
Buying a Mac and paying for Mac OS X just to force Windows use is not cost effective. Executives can get away with this and Apple?s current product offerings already suit many of their elitist needs.
Finally, Apple is quick to drop legacy code, force developers to update their software and to drop support for legacy HW. There are a few exceptions, but not many. Mac OS X is clearly geared as a consumer OS. MS on the other hand has no choice but to support a great deal of HW and legacy code in their OS. This creates a lot of problems for MS? OS, but it also puts Windows in the unique position that has yet to have any challengers and having an xMac will not change anything.
Those are few on the main issues as to why Mac OS X is simply not designed to compete in the enterprise. Unless Apple licenses their OS to other vendors and offers a clear roadmap to allow for corporate planning they can?t compete. There is nothing wrong with both business models succeeding in their own niche.
Mactripper has really valid points. In enterprise the reason to buy Apple is well...zero unless your main thing is publishing or digital media.
Or anything related to mathmatics, science, or where you would have traditionally used a Unix based workstation. He doesn't make valid points, just myopic yet sweeping generalizations.
For the average office worker, you are correct - a Mac is probably overkill. However, because of the iPhone and the popularity of the Mac at home, users are now starting to request and demand Mac's in the office.
As for prices, Mac's tend to have double the useful life of a Windows PC - mainly because the OS doesn't rot in place like Windows tends to. Some of it is also the higher speced hardware that Apple provides simply lasts longer because it's more powerful with a longer service life than bargain basement disposable PC's. That starts to balance out the cost equation. When you factor in the new energy star and EPEAT standards that focus on the entire life cycle of a computer, not just it's energy efficiency, the longer useful life of a Mac is an even greater advantage. Blind focus on initial purchase price is going to be a road to public relations disaster with the popularity of environmentalism and very public focusing on "carbon footprints". Industry norms used to be for a three year life cycle for desktops and laptops - to reduce "eWaste" Energy Star and EPEAT both are pushing for five year life cycles. Don't underestimate the power of things like EPEAT to influence buying patterns.
We personally have a fleet of dells and if something goes wrong we have service the very next day, and with all our stuff ghosted we can easily put the said offender back into action (not to say Apple doesn't have ghosting options).
In some way's Mac OSX is easier to deploy than Windows. And there is no practical reason why you couldn't do the same thing you outline here with a Mac.
And Apple isn't the only one that has had delivery issues from time to time - even the famed Dell is having delivery issues right now - we are experiencing significant and continual delays due to several supply shortages. That's life.
Most of the people on here trying to hound him are so blind by fanboyism that you can't even logically think of any good reasons to make a real push towards mac in enterprise without sounding like Justin Long
I don't think there is a need to push - nor is it reasonable to expect the Mac to displace Windows. But they are here to stay. That's not blind fanboyism, there are legitimate reasons to use a Mac vs a Windows machine (and yes, user preference is a perfectly valid reason). After all, computers are just tools. Mac's are becoming an officially supported platform in my organization, and I never thought I would see that happen. We have several very active user communities and they have, on their own, created the same security standards and management standards for the Mac's as we have for our Windows desktops. It's made it that much easier to make the argument that they should be a supported platform, and that's exactly what is happening now - those community grown standards and policies are now being validated and rolled into our IT fabric. The next iteration of my work provided laptop will probably be a MacBook Pro - and there is a good chance I will procure it via a sanctioned enterprise hardware contract. Just a couple years ago I would have told you that would never happen.
the fear that msft has instilled into many minds stops any progress at all . if these small biz owners only knew the joy of a mac . the ease of use,
a mac can run 24/7 for 5 yrs and still excell .. can the windell's say the same ??
small buisness makes up the bulk of p/c users not big clone buying companies .
merry christmas to all
peace 9
blah..blah..blah...
Apple can do better in the business market for desktops if they give them what they already know, a expandable below $1000 priced tower.
The same tired old rhetoric.
Oh if I had a penny for all the times I 've heard about the expandable tower below $1000.
IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN, GET OVER IT.
Under $1000 and expandable is nonsense, because in a few years time when one wants to expand/upgrade/etc. you might as well throw the tower out of the window because no expansion will be better in terms of price/performance than an new all in one computer. It's been proven historically time and again...Take a 4 year old pc tower and try to expand it....right, no sata II, no chips that fit, slow memory...not that expandable.
If one really wants an super powerful and expandable tower there's the mac pro for that, end of story.
What really bothers me with that moronic rhetoric, is how impervious the proponents are to reality. If there proposed scheme is so great how come apple with their complete line up is outgrowing pc's in this segment, even considering how a lot of pc software doesn't have a good mac counterpart in some business applications...
Give it a rest, it's 2010 already.
I have never met anyone who is an MS zombie loyalist.
Go over at the moron's playground that is engadget to meet MS zombie loyalists, and also almost all mainstream tec sites. These people are the pits when it comes to intelligence, they are fanatical and endlessly grateful for a platform that has brought them grief, failed ideas, vapourware, inability to adapt and evolve, complete and utter lack of vision, and the constant copying in an inferior way of other peoples ideas.
For crying out loud, in 2019 ms copies the dock in 7 and it's hailed by the paid advertisers that are the mainstream tec media as some sort of revolution.
A lot of us "made the switch" and are Apple's biggest critics when products or services don't meet expectations. Unlike Micro$oft zombie loyalists, Apple loyalists made a switch at least once and will do it again when or if something better than Apple and it's ecosystem of products comes along. We are not loyalist out of laziness or fear of making a change, we are loyalist because we've found a better option that actually works as needed!
Post of the year for me, very, very well put. Bravo! Please allow me to use it as my next sig.
Or anything related to mathmatics, science, or where you would have traditionally used a Unix based workstation. He doesn't make valid points, just myopic yet sweeping generalizations.
For the average office worker, you are correct - a Mac is probably overkill. However, because of the iPhone and the popularity of the Mac at home, users are now starting to request and demand Mac's in the office.
As for prices, Mac's tend to have double the useful life of a Windows PC - mainly because the OS doesn't rot in place like Windows tends to. Some of it is also the higher speced hardware that Apple provides simply lasts longer because it's more powerful with a longer service life than bargain basement disposable PC's. That starts to balance out the cost equation. When you factor in the new energy star and EPEAT standards that focus on the entire life cycle of a computer, not just it's energy efficiency, the longer useful life of a Mac is an even greater advantage. Blind focus on initial purchase price is going to be a road to public relations disaster with the popularity of environmentalism and very public focusing on "carbon footprints". Industry norms used to be for a three year life cycle for desktops and laptops - to reduce "eWaste" Energy Star and EPEAT both are pushing for five year life cycles. Don't underestimate the power of things like EPEAT to influence buying patterns.
In some way's Mac OSX is easier to deploy than Windows. And there is no practical reason why you couldn't do the same thing you outline here with a Mac.
And Apple isn't the only one that has had delivery issues from time to time - even the famed Dell is having delivery issues right now - we are experiencing significant and continual delays due to several supply shortages. That's life.
I don't think there is a need to push - nor is it reasonable to expect the Mac to displace Windows. But they are here to stay. That's not blind fanboyism, there are legitimate reasons to use a Mac vs a Windows machine (and yes, user preference is a perfectly valid reason). After all, computers are just tools. Mac's are becoming an officially supported platform in my organization, and I never thought I would see that happen. We have several very active user communities and they have, on their own, created the same security standards and management standards for the Mac's as we have for our Windows desktops. It's made it that much easier to make the argument that they should be a supported platform, and that's exactly what is happening now - those community grown standards and policies are now being validated and rolled into our IT fabric. The next iteration of my work provided laptop will probably be a MacBook Pro - and there is a good chance I will procure it via a sanctioned enterprise hardware contract. Just a couple years ago I would have told you that would never happen.
As someone who owned pcs and use a mac (powerpc mini hooked up to the bravia, a hackintosh and my roommates macbook) I've yet to experience Windows just bogging to death unless you have a million programs installed but let's not be naïve and think macs don't suffer from the same thing because they do, one look at my roommates macbook reaffirms that. But I never install a gang of software on anything I own because well I know I'll never use it.
Anyways now that Apple has switched to Intel I'd say they have the same failure rate and are equally spec'd against comparable pc's neglecting displays. I read far too often about Apple products failing and not being more than a few years old, To me its a fact of life and you expect things to die eventually so I will just go out and say that the hardware itself has the same life as its pc brethren which isn't surprising seeing as how they are near identical now.
Paying the Apple tax is nice for consumers because they want a better experience than Windows and expect they to get a better experience, paying the Apple tax in enterprise is about as silly as they come, we don't care about a flashy dock or expose, or the Apple experience, we care first and foremost about doing work and being easy to manage and watch (they keep a sharp eye on everyone who sits at a computer at work)
We upgrade our computers 5-6 years to more efficient and powerful units unless they are just minimally used in which case they are the last to be upgraded. Macs aren't compatible with our software we run at the resort, so it will never be an option for us unless we put Windows on it, in which point we could have just bought a PC. It would be nice to see a bit of experimentation at work, but I know it won't happen.
Still Apple will be fine, they make their money on the consumer segment and MS dominates the enterprise and consumer market. Apple doesn't need to change the formula from what their doing to be successful
I don't know why, but I find that sentence funny. Is it just me or do we now consider anything over 30% a success in terms of satisfaction with an OS. I consider that a failure. What was Vista's satisfaction percentage before word got out it was a dog?
I'm sure that there are a few surveys that showed 10.5 getting off to a bit of a slow start. That begs me to ask why in these two platforms, have they made such huge efforts in getting the visual part down, but have really dropped the ball on the everyday things. IMHO Leopard is broken, and Snow Leopard is also broken AND still has a lot of PPC code in it.
http://rixstep.com/1/2/20091110,00.shtml
Does it boil down to a mass exodus of coders that are retiring and the next generation doesn't have the skill of the previous ones? Or, is it an attempt to make you buy all new stuff every 3 years?
I want to hear from longtime Mac users and see what their opinion is. Is it one step forward and two back or am I being too hard on Apple?
I've yet to experience Windows just bogging to death
I love how the miracle windows operators come out of the woodwork in these kinds of discussions
I'm happy for you. You are in the minority. If this was the non-issue you are trying to portray it to be, it wouldn't be discussed with such frequency on websites and tech blogs, and there wouldn't be a whole cottage industry of registry cleaners and programs to speed windows up.
On the other hand, when I purchased my MacBook Pro, I hooked it into my 5 year old PowerBook G4 and transferred all my programs and files over. I didn't even have to re-install any software. Sure it took about 5 hours to copy everything over, but it was almost 200GB's of data and applications. And if I do have an issue with my OS, I can do an archive and install or a re-install under 10.6 - and all my settings and programs are preserved.
Windows has no equivalent. The registry sucks. It's a bad design. What brilliant person thought it was a good idea to put all the critical system settings in an easily corruptible flat database with no fault tolerance? At least with preference files on the Mac, if I have a problem with one application it's just that one application, not my whole system. I'm not going to render my Mac unbootable by deleting a preference file, but you can kill a windows install in the registry editor if you aren't very careful.
Anyways now that Apple has switched to Intel I'd say they have the same failure rate and are equally spec'd against comparable pc's neglecting displays.
There are different levels of quality in parts - not all suppliers are created equally. Also, the way they are put together matters too. But it's just not about parts that fail - as you point out, that affects everyone at one point or another...
I read far too often about Apple products failing and not being more than a few years old, To me its a fact of life and you expect things to die eventually so I will just go out and say that the hardware itself has the same life as its pc brethren which isn't surprising seeing as how they are near identical now.
See, that's where you are wrong. I have plenty of older PC's that still work - the key difference is, because you can get lower end components, people often do. Focused on short term costs and not overall life cycle. The difference is those PC's are practically useless running todays software. I have a machine I built and it takes only 1 gig of RAM! Now true, I built it to do one specific task at the time, but if I had spent $50 more on a better motherboard, that machine would be useful for so much more. It can make a good firewall right now, but that's about it. I learned my lesson on that one. The upper middle - that's where you want to be. Best overall value for money expended. That's the space that Apple excels at (and why they have a market cap that exceeds google).
Take Dell for example, I just went over and started browsing through their desktop machines - not until you get up into the $600 machines do you hit computers that can take more than 4 gigs of RAM. How future proof is that? Memory is one of the best things you can do to improve performance, cost for cost. Even the Mac mini can take 8 gigs of RAM now. Yeah, you can buy a $300 machine today - but the next version of Office will render it basically unusable.
So yes, you can buy cheaper PC's - but at the expense of long term usage and flexibility.
Paying the Apple tax
There is no Apple tax. You can buy a quality machine, or you can buy cheaper less capable hardware. If you want a stripped, bare bones experience, congratulations - there are plenty of Windows PC vendors who are happy to oblige you.
paying the Apple tax in enterprise is about as silly as they come
Really? Feature for feature, the iMac is a great machine. It's all-in-one form factor is very clean and easy to deploy. It reduces clutter in an employee's work area. Mac's have fewer issues than PC's, starting with the lack of viruses or malware, easier software and OS maintenance and overall more pleasurable user experience. Their industrial design is top notch. We have less help desk tickets from our Mac users - that's something we can and do measure. Facts - the opposite of made up "feelings" in an Internet forum.
we don't care about a flashy dock or expose, or the Apple experience, we care first and foremost about doing work and being easy to manage and watch (they keep a sharp eye on everyone who sits at a computer at work)
Then computers that simply work better from the start should be of great interest to you. Unless you have some innately irrational dislike for Mac's (or just a lack of experience - why are you on a Mac site again?)
Macs aren't compatible with our software we run at the resort, so it will never be an option for us unless we put Windows on it, in which point we could have just bought a PC. It would be nice to see a bit of experimentation at work, but I know it won't happen.
Then that's the best reason to not use a Mac. They aren't for everyone, but where they can work they often make a great fit. Our users think so.
Still Apple will be fine, they make their money on the consumer segment and MS dominates the enterprise and consumer market. Apple doesn't need to change the formula from what their doing to be successful
Your absolutely right - Apple is already successful - with a minority market share they take a majority profit.
But there still is room for them to improve. As I have said, between the iPhone and the maturing of Mac OSX, I expect Apple to start moving in and taking the high end of the enterprise computer business just like they have in the consumer space. The timing is good, and OSX 10.6 integrates into an Active Directory/Exchange environment very well. As they have shown in the consumer space, they don't have to take the majority of the market share to be successful. They just have to take the most profitable chunks. I have no doubt they will eventually do it - they already have a demonstrated track record in the consumer space for computers, for music players and now smartphones. It's not a fluke, they know their target markets and how to win them. When they finally do "get serious" about the enterprise, it will be very obvious. And yes, they are paying attention. Trust me, so is MS and vendors like Dell, HP, Acer, etc.
I love how the miracle windows operators come out of the woodwork in these kinds of discussions
I'm happy for you. You are in the minority. If this was the non-issue you are trying to portray it to be, it wouldn't be discussed with such frequency on websites and tech blogs, and there wouldn't be a whole cottage industry of registry cleaners and programs to speed windows up.
On the other hand, when I purchased my MacBook Pro, I hooked it into my 5 year old PowerBook G4 and transferred all my programs and files over. I didn't even have to re-install any software. Sure it took about 5 hours to copy everything over, but it was almost 200GB's of data and applications. And if I do have an issue with my OS, I can do an archive and install or a re-install under 10.6 - and all my settings and programs are preserved.
Windows has no equivalent. The registry sucks. It's a bad design. What brilliant person thought it was a good idea to put all the critical system settings in an easily corruptible flat database with no fault tolerance? At least with preference files on the Mac, if I have a problem with one application it's just that one application, not my whole system. I'm not going to render my Mac unbootable by deleting a preference file, but you can kill a windows install in the registry editor if you aren't very careful.
There are different levels of quality in parts - not all suppliers are created equally. Also, the way they are put together matters too. But it's just not about parts that fail - as you point out, that affects everyone at one point or another...
See, that's where you are wrong. I have plenty of older PC's that still work - the key difference is, because you can get lower end components, people often do. Focused on short term costs and not overall life cycle. The difference is those PC's are practically useless running todays software. I have a machine I built and it takes only 1 gig of RAM! Now true, I built it to do one specific task at the time, but if I had spent $50 more on a better motherboard, that machine would be useful for so much more. It can make a good firewall right now, but that's about it. I learned my lesson on that one. The upper middle - that's where you want to be. Best overall value for money expended. That's the space that Apple excels at (and why they have a market cap that exceeds google).
Take Dell for example, I just went over and started browsing through their desktop machines - not until you get up into the $600 machines do you hit computers that can take more than 4 gigs of RAM. How future proof is that? Memory is one of the best things you can do to improve performance, cost for cost. Even the Mac mini can take 8 gigs of RAM now. Yeah, you can buy a $300 machine today - but the next version of Office will render it basically unusable.
So yes, you can buy cheaper PC's - but at the expense of long term usage and flexibility.
There is no Apple tax. You can buy a quality machine, or you can buy cheaper less capable hardware. If you want a stripped, bare bones experience, congratulations - there are plenty of Windows PC vendors who are happy to oblige you.
Really? Feature for feature, the iMac is a great machine. It's all-in-one form factor is very clean and easy to deploy. It reduces clutter in an employee's work area. Mac's have fewer issues than PC's, starting with the lack of viruses or malware, easier software and OS maintenance and overall more pleasurable user experience. Their industrial design is top notch. We have less help desk tickets from our Mac users - that's something we can and do measure. Facts - the opposite of made up "feelings" in an Internet forum.
Then computers that simply work better from the start should be of great interest to you. Unless you have some innately irrational dislike for Mac's (or just a lack of experience - why are you on a Mac site again?)
Then that's the best reason to not use a Mac. They aren't for everyone, but where they can work they often make a great fit. Our users think so.
Your absolutely right - Apple is already successful - with a minority market share they take a majority profit.
But there still is room for them to improve. As I have said, between the iPhone and the maturing of Mac OSX, I expect Apple to start moving in and taking the high end of the enterprise computer business just like they have in the consumer space. The timing is good, and OSX 10.6 integrates into an Active Directory/Exchange environment very well. As they have shown in the consumer space, they don't have to take the majority of the market share to be successful. They just have to take the most profitable chunks. I have no doubt they will eventually do it - they already have a demonstrated track record in the consumer space for computers, for music players and now smartphones. It's not a fluke, they know their target markets and how to win them. When they finally do "get serious" about the enterprise, it will be very obvious. And yes, they are paying attention. Trust me, so is MS and vendors like Dell, HP, Acer, etc.
Windows bogging down is never an issue with me or work because we don't let people goof off and like I said I don't download programs out the yingyang and any person at work who installs something beyond what we tell them is subject to termination depending on frequency of violations and content, so we don't really have many software related issues from Windows. In the past 2 years we've had a total of 3 security vulnerabilities two of which were caused by the same person and thus terminated.
Our short term costs and lifetime expectancy are part of the equation when we buy, we don't keep our computers and they end up getting donated to local charities/ NPO's so we recoup some of the costs of upgrading. Its rare to get a critical hardware failure like the cpu going, usually its a power supply or hard drive going. These are on about 700 a piece machines, but we are going to have to scale back due to budget cuts and will be getting 500 dollar bare bone machines that are just tower only.
We could easily extend our buying schedule to 7 years but top brass likes to keep things up to date with all our resorts. Also we don't get new monitors when we get new PCs, so were still rocking CRTs from 01 lol. I think we have about a 40/60 ratio of lcd to crt monitors right now, can't speak for other resorts though.
Anyways a pc spec'd the same as a mac isn't going to get dusted significantly their performance is comparable and usually its a back and forth with the pc or mac winning in certain categories, its not some landslide completely favoring one over the other.
Most of our help tickets extend from something in our database going down not on our end or some moron guest trying to be "uber hacker", we don't have many serious issues because were well established but a resort we just added into the family was a damn nightmare getting everything right, it was a nightmare becuase they were running archaic hardware and still on windows 2000 or XP, when all our resorts were on Vista and had newer up to date servers.