I know in higher-ed, when it comes to faculty and staff, outside of a journalism/advertising or art department, they're still sucking at M$'s teat.
When they hired me, one of the requests I made was that I was given a Mac to use, the dean approved it, but the IT dept didn't, so I was stuck with a Dell laptop that I rarely use (I actually installed Ubuntu 11 on it). There are several people in the last year that just have gotten fed up and purchased our own MacBook Airs and Pros, and iPad's. It's funny to go to most of our meetings and the majority of people are in there with an Apple product, but our college's IT department won't "support" any of it...
No, the person I was replying to was saying that CEOs should 'just order' the IT guys to provide macs to employees who preferred them. I was explaining why that doesn't work. If you have a business need for a mac in a large enterprise you can normally get one, but the only people who find themselves in that situation are people working on a few specialist areas. They invariably also need PCs in order to interact with the rest of the house systems.
And then you proceeded to explain why it was never in a business' best interests to buy a few Macs, which was ridiculous. If you're happy backing back into the small point that in extraordinarily large enterprises, there is great inertia in IT, then we're good. But that's not what this discussion was about. You seem to have blinders on, that your experience in "one of the largest banks in the world" (congratulations) is applicable to the other 98% of companies.
I'd love to agree with you and say they "mandate" Apple products, but there are so many legacy systems and software packages out there that are Windows (or if web based, IE 6) reliant. So you can't just abandon ship.
is what we are using to solve that issue. I run all the windows apps I need on my mac or on my linux workstation using Citrix Receiver. Your company just has to make the investment in the infrastructure.
And then you proceeded to explain why it was never in a business' best interests to buy a few Macs, which was ridiculous.
No - I didn't. If you're in an office with 10,000 seats, and you need 30 macs then you don't even bother having any mac IT people. You just pay Apple to do all your hardware servicing. If you have 3000 macs, that's no longer viable - if you replace 3000 PCs with Macs, then you're going to have serious expenses.
Quote:
If you're happy backing back into the small point that in extraordinarily large enterprises, there is great inertia in IT, then we're good. But that's not what this discussion was about. You seem to have blinders on, that your experience in "one of the largest banks in the world" (congratulations) is applicable to the other 98% of companies.
I'm not just talking about the extraordinarily large firms, I'm a contractor so I see a lot of sites. The entire finance sector runs on complex legacy software that takes years to migrate. The iPad is an amazing opportunity for Apple to get their products into the enterprise precisely because it isn't up against any existing tablet solutions that clients have already bought into.
98% of companies may be small, but 33% of paid employees in the US work in firms with a headcount of 5000 or more.
Me, too. That's the only way it could be done. From the very top. They've got the clout and control the cash flow. Those IT guys have dicked Mac products for years, maybe even some for good reasons, but those guys basically swore their loyalty to everything Windows without question. I'm not asking that Windows not be used. I'm only asking for a little more parity. Let employees have some say about what they'd like to use. Yes, it makes it harder to support two platforms instead of one, but give the iMacs or Mac Minis a chance. They're terrific products that support both OSX and Windows and they're space and energy efficient. I'd like to see a 30% Apple desktop penetration into the corporate world. I think the next generation of college students will definitely be actively pro-Apple.
IT guys are trained to call MS whenever something breaks. They are just remote hands for MS. Moving to Apple requires them to think. It is scary for them. And most of their clients (us) can do what needs to be done without them. It is job suicide to allow Macs in their citadel!!!!
I know in higher-ed, when it comes to faculty and staff, outside of a journalism/advertising or art department, they're still sucking at M$'s teat.
That is categorically false, at least insofar as faculty is concerned. Professors (and grad students) have been huge supporters of Macs even when Apple was down in the dumps. Arguably, academics and education in general played a huge role in keeping Apple alive. The popularity of Macs is particularly true in the science and math departments. You go to just about any science conference and half of the computers are Macs. This is has been the case for two decades. It is a bit more mixed in the engineering departments but not because of restrictions by IT staff, but because many engineering profs often use their laptops to control custom designed equipment, which remains easier to do on PCs.
The entire finance sector runs on complex legacy software that takes years to migrate.
Most large companies have some kind of Citrix presence. They can just deliver their legacy applications using that technology. The large companies I've worked for use it to run linux on thin client PCs not OS X on Macs, but it could be done. You'd just have a bunch of Macs running OS X with Citrix Receiver installed. That being said I wouldn't recommend it because it'd be incredibly expensive.
I think it's more that every student already has either an iPod or an iPhone anyway at this point. The old offer just didn't make sense.
I always thought the old deal made sense. Why? From a buyer's standpoint I can just resell the iPod on eBay/Craigslist to reduce the cost of my computer. The new deal doesn't allow for that (to Apple's advantage). What am I really going to do with $100 worth of iTunes credit? Buy Lion and some music? That is about it? I would have rather gotten a $100 gift card to the Apple store.
In regards to the promotion doing well...I don't think the promotions matter that much because folks are going to need to buy a computer for school no matter what Apple offers.
Most large companies have some kind of Citrix presence. They can just deliver their legacy applications using that technology. The large companies I've worked for use it to run linux on thin client PCs not OS X on Macs, but it could be done. You'd just have a bunch of Macs running OS X with Citrix Receiver installed. That being said I wouldn't recommend it because it'd be incredibly expensive.
Absolutely, and I brought that up myself in an earlier post, but like you say - financially it only makes sense with cheap linux hardware on the desktop. Macs have to enter the enterprise on their own feet, rather than as dumb terminals to Windows - and that will happen as the technology environment permits it - generally not because CEOs issue some high level order.
That is about it? I would have rather gotten a $100 gift card to the Apple store.
I guess that was another way that they could have gone, but I think that there would have been even more grouching over that. There aren't many things you can actually get for 100$ in the Apple store these days, so they'd have had to offer both options.
Anyway from Apple's perspective this works better because it directly builds the platform ecosystem by pumping money to content providers, and the more content Apple shifts the more leverage they have with content owners.
I would have rather gotten a $100 gift card to the Apple store.
That would be nice from the customer's perspective. But look at it from Apple's perspective, why would they give you a gift card that can be spent on purchasing someone else's products? They might as well hand the $100 to In Case or Western Digital.
That would be nice from the customer's perspective. But look at it from Apple's perspective, why would they give you a gift card that can be spent on purchasing someone else's products? They might as well hand the $100 to In Case or Western Digital.
I doubt their margins on stuff in the apple store is much lower than the margins on music on iTunes. In both cases it's ultimately somebody elses product.
Well I personally know someone who was going to get a MacBook with a free iPod Touch but now that Apple's not offering that he's now leaning towards a Toshiba laptop.
Well I personally know someone who was going to get a MacBook with a free iPod Touch but now that Apple's not offering that he's now leaning towards a Toshiba laptop.
The "smart" decision isn't always so simple when money is tight and needed for books. Sometimes the extra value of the iPod Touch is enough to make it worth it. I suggested to him that some features in Lion itself are worth the extra cost, but we'll see. IMO, with all the freeware options, $100 of software is far less than half as valuable as a $200 iPod Touch.
The "smart" decision isn't always so simple when money is tight and needed for books. Sometimes the extra value of the iPod Touch is enough to make it worth it. I suggested to him that some features in Lion itself are worth the extra cost, but we'll see. IMO, with all the freeware options, $100 of software is far less than half as valuable as a $200 iPod Touch.
Definitely. Unfortunately Apple had to stop the predictable pattern of giveaways (just as they stopped the predictable pattern of iPhone launches), because people started to hold off purchasing until the sale, which only hurts Apple. If the public knows when a sale is going to start, they begin to plan shopping around that once-in-a-lifetime labor day sale that happens every year.
They have a product that's in high demand. There's no reason for them to give too much of a discount. For those who buy something else, hopefully it will work out fine for them. Often it won't, and they'll learn their lesson - you always get what you pay for in this world. If something's cheaper than something else, there's always a reason for that discount. And it's not because the cheaper thing is better.
The "smart" decision isn't always so simple when money is tight and needed for books. Sometimes the extra value of the iPod Touch is enough to make it worth it. I suggested to him that some features in Lion itself are worth the extra cost, but we'll see. IMO, with all the freeware options, $100 of software is far less than half as valuable as a $200 iPod Touch.
I disagree. A 200 dollar iPod Touch might only be more valuable to someone who does not already have one or already have an iPhone. If you try to sell that iPod touch, you might find a considerable amount of resistance in this economy to pay more than 100 bucks and you will have spent a lot more time trying negotiate with a buyer, answer questions over and over again from prospective buyers or get frustrated by people offering trades instead of money for things that you might not even want.
Getting 100 bucks that can be used to buy music, videos, iOS apps or even mac app is much more flexible to a larger audience.
For a big firm with a huge entrenched IT function, ordering IT around is like ordering around your drug dealer. Yes, you are his customer, but you are also dependent on what he supplies you - so negotiations are somewhat more delicate.
Ah -- now I realize why after the PC support guy gives me a "fix", I feel happy for some time, but it does not last long. Soon the problems with a PC show up, and I desperately need another fix! I have to keep going back to the guy for more fixes, and after some time, the small fixes are not enough. It takes more expensive fixes to get the same feeling after a while!
Comments
When they hired me, one of the requests I made was that I was given a Mac to use, the dean approved it, but the IT dept didn't, so I was stuck with a Dell laptop that I rarely use (I actually installed Ubuntu 11 on it). There are several people in the last year that just have gotten fed up and purchased our own MacBook Airs and Pros, and iPad's. It's funny to go to most of our meetings and the majority of people are in there with an Apple product, but our college's IT department won't "support" any of it...
No, the person I was replying to was saying that CEOs should 'just order' the IT guys to provide macs to employees who preferred them. I was explaining why that doesn't work. If you have a business need for a mac in a large enterprise you can normally get one, but the only people who find themselves in that situation are people working on a few specialist areas. They invariably also need PCs in order to interact with the rest of the house systems.
And then you proceeded to explain why it was never in a business' best interests to buy a few Macs, which was ridiculous. If you're happy backing back into the small point that in extraordinarily large enterprises, there is great inertia in IT, then we're good. But that's not what this discussion was about. You seem to have blinders on, that your experience in "one of the largest banks in the world" (congratulations) is applicable to the other 98% of companies.
I'd love to agree with you and say they "mandate" Apple products, but there are so many legacy systems and software packages out there that are Windows (or if web based, IE 6) reliant. So you can't just abandon ship.
http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/pr...tentID=2300386
is what we are using to solve that issue. I run all the windows apps I need on my mac or on my linux workstation using Citrix Receiver. Your company just has to make the investment in the infrastructure.
And then you proceeded to explain why it was never in a business' best interests to buy a few Macs, which was ridiculous.
No - I didn't. If you're in an office with 10,000 seats, and you need 30 macs then you don't even bother having any mac IT people. You just pay Apple to do all your hardware servicing. If you have 3000 macs, that's no longer viable - if you replace 3000 PCs with Macs, then you're going to have serious expenses.
If you're happy backing back into the small point that in extraordinarily large enterprises, there is great inertia in IT, then we're good. But that's not what this discussion was about. You seem to have blinders on, that your experience in "one of the largest banks in the world" (congratulations) is applicable to the other 98% of companies.
I'm not just talking about the extraordinarily large firms, I'm a contractor so I see a lot of sites. The entire finance sector runs on complex legacy software that takes years to migrate. The iPad is an amazing opportunity for Apple to get their products into the enterprise precisely because it isn't up against any existing tablet solutions that clients have already bought into.
98% of companies may be small, but 33% of paid employees in the US work in firms with a headcount of 5000 or more.
Me, too. That's the only way it could be done. From the very top. They've got the clout and control the cash flow.
IT guys are trained to call MS whenever something breaks. They are just remote hands for MS. Moving to Apple requires them to think. It is scary for them. And most of their clients (us) can do what needs to be done without them. It is job suicide to allow Macs in their citadel!!!!
I know in higher-ed, when it comes to faculty and staff, outside of a journalism/advertising or art department, they're still sucking at M$'s teat.
That is categorically false, at least insofar as faculty is concerned. Professors (and grad students) have been huge supporters of Macs even when Apple was down in the dumps. Arguably, academics and education in general played a huge role in keeping Apple alive. The popularity of Macs is particularly true in the science and math departments. You go to just about any science conference and half of the computers are Macs. This is has been the case for two decades. It is a bit more mixed in the engineering departments but not because of restrictions by IT staff, but because many engineering profs often use their laptops to control custom designed equipment, which remains easier to do on PCs.
The entire finance sector runs on complex legacy software that takes years to migrate.
Most large companies have some kind of Citrix presence. They can just deliver their legacy applications using that technology. The large companies I've worked for use it to run linux on thin client PCs not OS X on Macs, but it could be done. You'd just have a bunch of Macs running OS X with Citrix Receiver installed. That being said I wouldn't recommend it because it'd be incredibly expensive.
I think it's more that every student already has either an iPod or an iPhone anyway at this point. The old offer just didn't make sense.
I always thought the old deal made sense. Why? From a buyer's standpoint I can just resell the iPod on eBay/Craigslist to reduce the cost of my computer. The new deal doesn't allow for that (to Apple's advantage). What am I really going to do with $100 worth of iTunes credit? Buy Lion and some music? That is about it? I would have rather gotten a $100 gift card to the Apple store.
In regards to the promotion doing well...I don't think the promotions matter that much because folks are going to need to buy a computer for school no matter what Apple offers.
Most large companies have some kind of Citrix presence. They can just deliver their legacy applications using that technology. The large companies I've worked for use it to run linux on thin client PCs not OS X on Macs, but it could be done. You'd just have a bunch of Macs running OS X with Citrix Receiver installed. That being said I wouldn't recommend it because it'd be incredibly expensive.
Absolutely, and I brought that up myself in an earlier post, but like you say - financially it only makes sense with cheap linux hardware on the desktop. Macs have to enter the enterprise on their own feet, rather than as dumb terminals to Windows - and that will happen as the technology environment permits it - generally not because CEOs issue some high level order.
That is about it? I would have rather gotten a $100 gift card to the Apple store.
I guess that was another way that they could have gone, but I think that there would have been even more grouching over that. There aren't many things you can actually get for 100$ in the Apple store these days, so they'd have had to offer both options.
Anyway from Apple's perspective this works better because it directly builds the platform ecosystem by pumping money to content providers, and the more content Apple shifts the more leverage they have with content owners.
I would have rather gotten a $100 gift card to the Apple store.
That would be nice from the customer's perspective. But look at it from Apple's perspective, why would they give you a gift card that can be spent on purchasing someone else's products? They might as well hand the $100 to In Case or Western Digital.
That would be nice from the customer's perspective. But look at it from Apple's perspective, why would they give you a gift card that can be spent on purchasing someone else's products? They might as well hand the $100 to In Case or Western Digital.
I doubt their margins on stuff in the apple store is much lower than the margins on music on iTunes. In both cases it's ultimately somebody elses product.
Well I personally know someone who was going to get a MacBook with a free iPod Touch but now that Apple's not offering that he's now leaning towards a Toshiba laptop.
Let us know when the final decision is made
Not everyone can make smart decisions
Let us know when the final decision is made
Not everyone can make smart decisions
The "smart" decision isn't always so simple when money is tight and needed for books. Sometimes the extra value of the iPod Touch is enough to make it worth it. I suggested to him that some features in Lion itself are worth the extra cost, but we'll see. IMO, with all the freeware options, $100 of software is far less than half as valuable as a $200 iPod Touch.
The "smart" decision isn't always so simple when money is tight and needed for books. Sometimes the extra value of the iPod Touch is enough to make it worth it. I suggested to him that some features in Lion itself are worth the extra cost, but we'll see. IMO, with all the freeware options, $100 of software is far less than half as valuable as a $200 iPod Touch.
Definitely. Unfortunately Apple had to stop the predictable pattern of giveaways (just as they stopped the predictable pattern of iPhone launches), because people started to hold off purchasing until the sale, which only hurts Apple. If the public knows when a sale is going to start, they begin to plan shopping around that once-in-a-lifetime labor day sale that happens every year.
They have a product that's in high demand. There's no reason for them to give too much of a discount. For those who buy something else, hopefully it will work out fine for them. Often it won't, and they'll learn their lesson - you always get what you pay for in this world. If something's cheaper than something else, there's always a reason for that discount. And it's not because the cheaper thing is better.
The "smart" decision isn't always so simple when money is tight and needed for books. Sometimes the extra value of the iPod Touch is enough to make it worth it. I suggested to him that some features in Lion itself are worth the extra cost, but we'll see. IMO, with all the freeware options, $100 of software is far less than half as valuable as a $200 iPod Touch.
I disagree. A 200 dollar iPod Touch might only be more valuable to someone who does not already have one or already have an iPhone. If you try to sell that iPod touch, you might find a considerable amount of resistance in this economy to pay more than 100 bucks and you will have spent a lot more time trying negotiate with a buyer, answer questions over and over again from prospective buyers or get frustrated by people offering trades instead of money for things that you might not even want.
Getting 100 bucks that can be used to buy music, videos, iOS apps or even mac app is much more flexible to a larger audience.
For a big firm with a huge entrenched IT function, ordering IT around is like ordering around your drug dealer. Yes, you are his customer, but you are also dependent on what he supplies you - so negotiations are somewhat more delicate.
Ah -- now I realize why after the PC support guy gives me a "fix", I feel happy for some time, but it does not last long. Soon the problems with a PC show up, and I desperately need another fix! I have to keep going back to the guy for more fixes, and after some time, the small fixes are not enough. It takes more expensive fixes to get the same feeling after a while!
That drug dealer analogy is brilliant!!