Honestly? I'm yet to see a person that I know to be using Windows 8 and hating it. Beside having it on half our computers, Win 8 machines have started leaking into our corporate users. Since all of them are using business apps which run on desktop, all of Metro they see is Start screen, which some like, and some are indifferent. No haters yet. After that, business is as usual. If you ignore meddling with Windows (which corporate users don't do anyway), using your applications on Windows 8 really does not differ from using them on Windows 7.
Beside that, 8 boots much faster than 7, seems to be very stable, gives nice perks like multi-boot from VHDs, handles updates better and have number of tweaks compared to Windows 7. Beside agreeing or disagreeing with visual dissonance between Metro and desktop, and lack of Aero on desktop, there is nothing for users to hate. And those are visual, not functional "issues".
Nikon these comments (especially words I highlighted in bold) bothered me, since I read in a few articles, where corporate World are not ready to upgrade to Windows 8 and their give negative feedback on metro style touchscreen interface. So I thought before anyone starts stating that I am pulling words out of the air, I found the article which I had read, see below.
Small business maybe migrating, but established business are not moved from Windows 7 and some not even from XP!
BTW: I got my first blue screen from Windows 8 today, well not blue, but the bloody software stopped working and I had to physically pull my computer plug out the socket. I think my iMac had indigestion.
of course Microsoft is going to try to leverage their monopoly to stop the BYOD movement. When people have a choice, they do not use a super slow, crappy Microsoft OS running on crappy PC cloner hardware. Not to mention all the crippleware IT departments put on their Windows boxes to try and make the fundamentally insecure Windows OS more secure which is laughable as every month a new virus/worm spams work email.
I ask all the time if i can bring in my own machine but the brain dead Microsoft drone IT department has bought the Microsoft propaganda hook line and sinker.
I stopped at "Microsoft is largely irrelevant to computing of late".
You shouldn't be wasting our time with nonsense.
If you like nonsense, though, just google "Apple has failed". Same crap, different name.
In what way do you think they are relevant? What trends in computing, or technology generally, are taking, or have taken, direction from Microsoft lately? They've been irrelevant to computing for at least the last five years, perhaps even longer.
In what way do you think they are relevant? What trends in computing, or technology generally, are taking, or have taken, direction from Microsoft lately? They've been irrelevant to computing for at least the last five years, perhaps even longer.
The disturbing thing about Microsoft's suicidal tendencies is that once their rusting oil tanker finally drifts to a halt and sinks, Apple, having won, will inevitably _become_ Microsoft.
No, Apple will not become the next Microsoft, because it has an entirely different business model.
In contrast, look at OS X Server. $20 with unlimited client licensing.
So much for the Apple Tax.
You are kidding right? its just a bunch of namagment apps that run on a desktop OS on desktop hardware, the mac mini is not a server class device just because Apple says it is - where is the redundancy? every component in a macpro or mac mini is a single point of failure with the possible exception of the dual nics in the pro. Can I install VMs of OSX "SERVER" on my company's large blade cluster ESX environment for production purposes? me thinks not...
There is another issue, OSX Server installs everything and treats the user with kid gloves, this takes a larger amount of resources than are necessary. Windows server installs just the basics and you add the items you need and nothing else. You can even run windows server with NO GUI at all... in fact going forward that is becoming a preferred method in many scenarios.
Just because a product is called a server doesn't mean that it is a server class OS. OSX Server as it stands now, is just a nice add on tool set for OSX Desktop.
You are kidding right? its just a bunch of namagment apps that run on a desktop OS on desktop hardware, the mac mini is not a server class device just because Apple says it is - where is the redundancy? every component in a macpro or mac mini is a single point of failure with the possible exception of the dual nics in the pro. Can I install VMs of OSX "SERVER" on my company's large blade cluster ESX environment for production purposes? me thinks not...
There is another issue, OSX Server installs everything and treats the user with kid gloves, this takes a larger amount of resources than are necessary. Windows server installs just the basics and you add the items you need and nothing else. You can even run windows server with NO GUI at all... in fact going forward that is becoming a preferred method in many scenarios.
Just because a product is called a server doesn't mean that it is a server class OS. OSX Server as it stands now, is just a nice add on tool set for OSX Desktop.
Redundancy is an outdated concept, it's replaced - many years ago - by cheap of the shelf computers and components and a Mac mini qualifies as such.
And as far as I know you can virtualize the latest version of Mac OS X Server (you do need to buy a separate license for it).
If you need servers the best (and most obvious) way is to use linux, most of the internet runs on it so it should scale well for any organization.
Mac OS X Server would be a great choice to manage it all.
Redundancy is an outdated concept, it's replaced - many years ago - by cheap of the shelf computers and components and a Mac mini qualifies as such.
And as far as I know you can virtualize the latest version of Mac OS X Server (you do need to buy a separate license for it).
If you need servers the best (and most obvious) way is to use linux, most of the internet runs on it so it should scale well for any organization.
Mac OS X Server would be a great choice to manage it all.
J.
Ive worked in places where outages can cost upwards of $10,000/minute or $600,000 per hour. I have seen what happens when managers and executives fail to buy redundancy up front and there is a failure down the road - I have seen the lack of a redundant core switch take out a whole data center for an hour and a half - Trust me you do not want to be in the room when the IT director is explaining to the C-levels why his $30,000 savings cost the company about $1,000,000 in business.
remember the good ole days when people said Apple was doomed, Apple should liquidate and repay the share holders, and other things like that...well MS is still massively larger than Apple was at the time, and still very profitable.
MS is nowhere near death spiral...not everyone lives in the apple stores warm glo - some of us live in reality...
They may not be in a death spiral, but they sure are bleeding profusely. Their recent Windows offerings are a total pile of shit that is going to hurt them for quite some time. There is no end in sight for this train wreck.
no one - I just happen to have real world experience in the enterprise, I am trying to add my insight to the conversation. and for the record, Apple makes good stuff, I like OSX and ran it till a couple weeks ago when I retired my MacBook bc it can no longer run modern OSX, I do plan to buy a new mac in the next few months and have sold my family on Macs and iPhones, I am buying my mom an ipad for Christmas, and so on...so I am far from an Apple hater or a shill...
Sooo... when you leave the Apple Store's warm glow, it's suddenly 1996 and Apple is doomed again? LOL. Your "reality" = "the good ole days."
Forgive my lack of clarity, I am not saying Apple is doomed, far from it - I am saying that to say MS is doomed is just as short sighted as those who said Apple was doomed.
Honestly? I'm yet to see a person that I know to be using Windows 8 and hating it. Beside having it on half our computers, Win 8 machines have started leaking into our corporate users. Since all of them are using business apps which run on desktop, all of Metro they see is Start screen, which some like, and some are indifferent. No haters yet. After that, business is as usual. If you ignore meddling with Windows (which corporate users don't do anyway), using your applications on Windows 8 really does not differ from using them on Windows 7.
Beside that, 8 boots much faster than 7, seems to be very stable, gives nice perks like multi-boot from VHDs, handles updates better and have number of tweaks compared to Windows 7. Beside agreeing or disagreeing with visual dissonance between Metro and desktop, and lack of Aero on desktop, there is nothing for users to hate. And those are visual, not functional "issues".
What bullshit! Do you really think all the horrible reviews of WIN 8 and RT are somehow totally off base? Or that people can't read? And one must wonder why they fired the guy in charge of development as soon as they released this pig. So "not hating" it is the threshold of a successful product from MSFT?
Just because a product is called a server doesn't mean that it is a server class OS. OSX Server as it stands now, is just a nice add on tool set for OSX Desktop.
Which is really no different than Windows or just about any Unix distro. My Windows Server is nothing more than Windows with some management apps and a few server preloads. If you can point to any substantive difference in model, I'll be surprised.
There are no "desktop" OS's any more, not since the NT kernel and OS X replaced earlier systems.
Not so fast - A fully supported version of RHEL is about $1200 per server, a Windows server 2012 Standard license is about $900
huh? Not sure where you are coming up with numbers or what you are comparing. Comparing a crippled Windows Server install (without including all the other Microsoft Server software needed to run it) with a full, unlimited, everything included, all upgrades, etc... RHEL version is a bit of a stretch. Of course not to mention, if your IT department is clueless, you can get real admins to support you rolling _free_ Linux for much cheaper than RHEL. Not to mention you can run a complete enterprise stack on said Linux boxes for zero dollars.
no one - I just happen to have real world experience in the enterprise, I am trying to add my insight to the conversation. and for the record, Apple makes good stuff, I like OSX and ran it till a couple weeks ago when I retired my MacBook bc it can no longer run modern OSX, I do plan to buy a new mac in the next few months and have sold my family on Macs and iPhones, I am buying my mom an ipad for Christmas, and so on...so I am far from an Apple hater or a shill...
Ok, It's clear I shouldn't have asked the question.
In response to your previous post: if you must have your databases (or other services) online and responsive all the time the software should make it redundant not the hardware. This means that you can use relatively cheap systems and swap one in case of failure, ask Google for example.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
Honestly? I'm yet to see a person that I know to be using Windows 8 and hating it. Beside having it on half our computers, Win 8 machines have started leaking into our corporate users. Since all of them are using business apps which run on desktop, all of Metro they see is Start screen, which some like, and some are indifferent. No haters yet. After that, business is as usual. If you ignore meddling with Windows (which corporate users don't do anyway), using your applications on Windows 8 really does not differ from using them on Windows 7.
Beside that, 8 boots much faster than 7, seems to be very stable, gives nice perks like multi-boot from VHDs, handles updates better and have number of tweaks compared to Windows 7. Beside agreeing or disagreeing with visual dissonance between Metro and desktop, and lack of Aero on desktop, there is nothing for users to hate. And those are visual, not functional "issues".
Nikon these comments (especially words I highlighted in bold) bothered me, since I read in a few articles, where corporate World are not ready to upgrade to Windows 8 and their give negative feedback on metro style touchscreen interface. So I thought before anyone starts stating that I am pulling words out of the air, I found the article which I had read, see below.
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/76455.html
Small business maybe migrating, but established business are not moved from Windows 7 and some not even from XP!
BTW: I got my first blue screen from Windows 8 today, well not blue, but the bloody software stopped working and I had to physically pull my computer plug out the socket. I think my iMac had indigestion.
of course Microsoft is going to try to leverage their monopoly to stop the BYOD movement. When people have a choice, they do not use a super slow, crappy Microsoft OS running on crappy PC cloner hardware. Not to mention all the crippleware IT departments put on their Windows boxes to try and make the fundamentally insecure Windows OS more secure which is laughable as every month a new virus/worm spams work email.
I ask all the time if i can bring in my own machine but the brain dead Microsoft drone IT department has bought the Microsoft propaganda hook line and sinker.
In what way do you think they are relevant? What trends in computing, or technology generally, are taking, or have taken, direction from Microsoft lately? They've been irrelevant to computing for at least the last five years, perhaps even longer.
I utterly disagree with this statement!
It's been more like ten years...
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbryanh
The disturbing thing about Microsoft's suicidal tendencies is that once their rusting oil tanker finally drifts to a halt and sinks, Apple, having won, will inevitably _become_ Microsoft.
No, Apple will not become the next Microsoft, because it has an entirely different business model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
In contrast, look at OS X Server. $20 with unlimited client licensing.
So much for the Apple Tax.
You are kidding right? its just a bunch of namagment apps that run on a desktop OS on desktop hardware, the mac mini is not a server class device just because Apple says it is - where is the redundancy? every component in a macpro or mac mini is a single point of failure with the possible exception of the dual nics in the pro. Can I install VMs of OSX "SERVER" on my company's large blade cluster ESX environment for production purposes? me thinks not...
There is another issue, OSX Server installs everything and treats the user with kid gloves, this takes a larger amount of resources than are necessary. Windows server installs just the basics and you add the items you need and nothing else. You can even run windows server with NO GUI at all... in fact going forward that is becoming a preferred method in many scenarios.
Just because a product is called a server doesn't mean that it is a server class OS. OSX Server as it stands now, is just a nice add on tool set for OSX Desktop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajverbrugh
"Methinks this will come back and bite them in their greedy little behinds."
Time to move to Linux Servers
Not so fast - A fully supported version of RHEL is about $1200 per server, a Windows server 2012 Standard license is about $900
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer
You are kidding right? its just a bunch of namagment apps that run on a desktop OS on desktop hardware, the mac mini is not a server class device just because Apple says it is - where is the redundancy? every component in a macpro or mac mini is a single point of failure with the possible exception of the dual nics in the pro. Can I install VMs of OSX "SERVER" on my company's large blade cluster ESX environment for production purposes? me thinks not...
There is another issue, OSX Server installs everything and treats the user with kid gloves, this takes a larger amount of resources than are necessary. Windows server installs just the basics and you add the items you need and nothing else. You can even run windows server with NO GUI at all... in fact going forward that is becoming a preferred method in many scenarios.
Just because a product is called a server doesn't mean that it is a server class OS. OSX Server as it stands now, is just a nice add on tool set for OSX Desktop.
Redundancy is an outdated concept, it's replaced - many years ago - by cheap of the shelf computers and components and a Mac mini qualifies as such.
And as far as I know you can virtualize the latest version of Mac OS X Server (you do need to buy a separate license for it).
If you need servers the best (and most obvious) way is to use linux, most of the internet runs on it so it should scale well for any organization.
Mac OS X Server would be a great choice to manage it all.
J.
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer
Not so fast - A fully supported version of RHEL is about $1200 per server, a Windows server 2012 Standard license is about $900
Who pays your posts?
J.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn
Redundancy is an outdated concept, it's replaced - many years ago - by cheap of the shelf computers and components and a Mac mini qualifies as such.
And as far as I know you can virtualize the latest version of Mac OS X Server (you do need to buy a separate license for it).
If you need servers the best (and most obvious) way is to use linux, most of the internet runs on it so it should scale well for any organization.
Mac OS X Server would be a great choice to manage it all.
J.
Ive worked in places where outages can cost upwards of $10,000/minute or $600,000 per hour. I have seen what happens when managers and executives fail to buy redundancy up front and there is a failure down the road - I have seen the lack of a redundant core switch take out a whole data center for an hour and a half - Trust me you do not want to be in the room when the IT director is explaining to the C-levels why his $30,000 savings cost the company about $1,000,000 in business.
They may not be in a death spiral, but they sure are bleeding profusely. Their recent Windows offerings are a total pile of shit that is going to hurt them for quite some time. There is no end in sight for this train wreck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnjnjn
Who pays your posts?
J.
no one - I just happen to have real world experience in the enterprise, I am trying to add my insight to the conversation. and for the record, Apple makes good stuff, I like OSX and ran it till a couple weeks ago when I retired my MacBook bc it can no longer run modern OSX, I do plan to buy a new mac in the next few months and have sold my family on Macs and iPhones, I am buying my mom an ipad for Christmas, and so on...so I am far from an Apple hater or a shill...
That its a pile of shit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Sooo... when you leave the Apple Store's warm glow, it's suddenly 1996 and Apple is doomed again? LOL. Your "reality" = "the good ole days."
Forgive my lack of clarity, I am not saying Apple is doomed, far from it - I am saying that to say MS is doomed is just as short sighted as those who said Apple was doomed.
What bullshit! Do you really think all the horrible reviews of WIN 8 and RT are somehow totally off base? Or that people can't read? And one must wonder why they fired the guy in charge of development as soon as they released this pig. So "not hating" it is the threshold of a successful product from MSFT?
The more you tighten your grip, Balmer, the more systems will slip through your fingers
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer
Just because a product is called a server doesn't mean that it is a server class OS. OSX Server as it stands now, is just a nice add on tool set for OSX Desktop.
Which is really no different than Windows or just about any Unix distro. My Windows Server is nothing more than Windows with some management apps and a few server preloads. If you can point to any substantive difference in model, I'll be surprised.
There are no "desktop" OS's any more, not since the NT kernel and OS X replaced earlier systems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer
Not so fast - A fully supported version of RHEL is about $1200 per server, a Windows server 2012 Standard license is about $900
huh? Not sure where you are coming up with numbers or what you are comparing. Comparing a crippled Windows Server install (without including all the other Microsoft Server software needed to run it) with a full, unlimited, everything included, all upgrades, etc... RHEL version is a bit of a stretch. Of course not to mention, if your IT department is clueless, you can get real admins to support you rolling _free_ Linux for much cheaper than RHEL. Not to mention you can run a complete enterprise stack on said Linux boxes for zero dollars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer
no one - I just happen to have real world experience in the enterprise, I am trying to add my insight to the conversation. and for the record, Apple makes good stuff, I like OSX and ran it till a couple weeks ago when I retired my MacBook bc it can no longer run modern OSX, I do plan to buy a new mac in the next few months and have sold my family on Macs and iPhones, I am buying my mom an ipad for Christmas, and so on...so I am far from an Apple hater or a shill...
Ok, It's clear I shouldn't have asked the question.
In response to your previous post: if you must have your databases (or other services) online and responsive all the time the software should make it redundant not the hardware. This means that you can use relatively cheap systems and swap one in case of failure, ask Google for example.
J.