There's no reason to spend a ton of money on Microsoft client licenses (the most expensive part of running any Microsoft-based installation).
That's true, the Microsoft ELAs are a big IT cost and it's how they've managed to lock-in corporates for decades now to use MS products exclusively (the whole suite, not just the OS).
As for IBM, not sure how it is now, but with client side software in the past, though I believe you could make a case to install some MS software on your laptop, the corporate standard suite was the Lotus suite of products (ugh!). I wasn't aware they even had Mac versions of Lotus but it appears they do (quick DDG search referenced it, but not sure that software is still supported??), so this is one way in the past IBM got around not spending as much as other corporates would spend to be a typical MS site. Still, moving from having to pay for Windows licenses to having to pay nothing for an OS license with Apple, that's got to be quite a savings, especially for a company as large as IBM.
As for laptop, their previous choice was (obviously) the ThinkPad (even post sale to Lenovo for awhile), not exactly the cheapest of the bunch (though in the long run I think quite economical). As much as IBM pinches pennies, especially with its suppliers, they I'm sure determined going with Apple is more economical, even if the laptops are initially more expensive (though I wouldn't assume that as fact). Finance makes many decisions in IBM (as other companies I'm sure), so this says quite a lot about Apple and its cost to the company. What I mean is that even ignoring any cost savings for the non-OS licenses, meaning that IBM probably didn't save anything not having to buy MS Office because they had their own suite, they still must have found switching to Apple to be preferable cost wise. What this means is that for corporates who *do* have to pay for MS Office as part of their ELA, they really should look at Apple for savings not only on the OS, because with that OS and hardware product, they get a free office suite too (which will suffice for the VAST majority of an IT department's users, and for those who *require* a product within MS Office, they can as needed buy individual licenses). This is potentially a big story with a big message about costs and savings by going with Apple.
Back in 2006 when I worked for IBM, attempted to order a MacBook but was rejected. Reason was only IBM scientists were only allowed to have Macs. Believe the real reason was then the tie with Lenova where IBM was under contract to buy a percentage of Lenova products per year. Think the contract has now fizzled out.
That's true, the Microsoft ELAs are a big IT cost and it's how they've managed to lock-in corporates for decades now to use MS products exclusively (the whole suite, not just the OS).
[...]
As for laptop, their previous choice was (obviously) the ThinkPad (even post sale to Lenovo for awhile), not exactly the cheapest of the bunch (though in the long run I think quite economical). As much as IBM pinches pennies, especially with its suppliers, they I'm sure determined going with Apple is more economical, even if the laptops are initially more expensive (though I wouldn't assume that as fact). Finance makes many decisions in IBM (as other companies I'm sure), so this says quite a lot about Apple and its cost to the company. What I mean is that even ignoring any cost savings for the non-OS licenses, meaning that IBM probably didn't save anything not having to buy MS Office because they had their own suite, they still must have found switching to Apple to be preferable cost wise. What this means is that for corporates who *do* have to pay for MS Office as part of their ELA, they really should look at Apple for savings not only on the OS, because with that OS and hardware product, they get a free office suite too (which will suffice for the VAST majority of an IT department's users, and for those who *require* a product within MS Office, they can as needed buy individual licenses). This is potentially a big story with a big message about costs and savings by going with Apple.
The key issue is that IBM is
a) a major iOS developer now
b) a major technology consultancy company, requiring durable road warrior workstation quality devices, with technical support worldwide, and stable technical specs (this is a big deal in corp world... buying 30,000 Dells with 20,000 different Hard drive/driver versions is not a good thing when you have any sort of in-house first level tech support).
c) need to be in the *nix/iOS/Windows world.
This basically tells me that a MacBookPro OS X.10 with a Windows VM and a RH VM is the only platform, that covers this. IBM can easily see that spending a small premium on hardware up front covers most of the back end issues (a consultant drop shipping a laptop that breaks is potentially losing $1000+ a day plus the cost of repair).
To get a Dell or HP that is roughly the same platform (sans iOS developer support), is still a $1200-$1800 laptop, and my shop has been a dell shop, and we have buccu problems with drivers (my wireless driver is different than all my partners wireless drivers, and causes all sorts of grief with our cisco corporate wireless [my Airport Extreme wireless... no problem].
I disagree with the 150K/year plan. maybe 150K next year, and 50K after that, but you got to figure a 3 year cycle within IBM for laptops, and not 200K/year 100% turnover (yes, IBM has 450K employees, but strong doubt more than 50% of those have laptops/dev workstations... phones is a different story, the number of assembly line, non-knowledge worker, [literal] paper pushers, or data center tech staff has to be at least 150K ).
Perhaps this will spur IBM to develop and release versions of their software for OSX. They already have Linux & Unix versions of the products I use so it shouldn't be too hard to port them to Apple Software.
Perhaps this will spur IBM to develop and release versions of their software for OSX. They already have Linux & Unix versions of the products I use so it shouldn't be too hard to port them to Apple Software.
They do have some "OS X" releases of software - RAD (Rational Developer) has been available for "OS X" for around 2+ years now. Lotus products have been available. IBM DB2 Universal is not... but then IBM probably expects you to run that on a server. All the software I would ever run on OS X from IBM is out (none)
I was thinking more of (as a minimum) an MQ Client. They had one 15+ years ago....
MQ Server and WAS and IIB would be a really nice to have.
These are all products I use to make a living. Having these would allow me to reduce the number of Windows VM's I need to use.
The other thing I'd like to see happen is that a MacBook Pro would have 2TB of storage and 32Gb RAM. Then I could ditch my Windows Laptop completly.
Apple could bring back the 17in MBP. I'm sure a lot of IBMers would like the extra screen real estate.
Yes I know I'm dreaming but 1TB max HDD/SSD storage has been around for a long long time. It is time that it was increased.
I've replaced the DVD in my 2012 MBP with a 1TB SSD. Now only if it would take more than 16Gb of Ram.
Not sure I care if I install WAS since deployment is typically going to be Linux/AIX.... so testing on "OS X" wise. There is of course WAS test servers built into RAD etc. I am fine with a 13 inch macbook.... I just want to be able to plug in 3 4K monitors to it
Yes this is a long time coming for the IBMers who wisely switched to Apple many years ago.
I personally know some who did long before (10yrs) MS Windows finally gave MacOS some competition.
Now I'm wondering how many MS employees hide a Mac at home ?
A high school friend of mine has worked at Microsoft for over 15 years. His is an Apple house. He briefly gave Windows Phone a shot, but uses an iPhone 6 now and says they are popular at Microsoft. I think Nadella is a lot more laid back about Apple than Steve Ballmer.
Hopefully this pushes other companies. If IBM, the ultimate enterprise company, can be majority Mac, then surely other companies can make it work, as well. My employer is mostly an HP shop, though the higher-ups can choose Lenovo ultrabooks. The HPs still have a bunch of legacy ports such as VGA, Ethernet, Smart Card (which we don't even use), and a proprietary docking port, so they are still nearly an inch thick. I'd much rather have a MacBook Air (preferably the MacBook, but I'm trying to be "realistic").
It's totally impressive as is Apple getting IBM to purchase hundreds of thousands of Macs.
Based on the IBM CIO's account, it seems that IBM was the one convincing Apple to deal, with IBM's 6-8x expected volume of Apple's current largest corporate customer.
Based on the quote from the IBM CIO, any news outlet can just as easily spin it to say "IBM makes Apple put on Big Boy Pants". Is it time for a "Steve would never have done this"?
Don't rejoice until we find out what percentage of these Macs are simply going to be used as Windows terminals running nothing but VMware or Boot Camp all day.
Strange to imagine that place without everyone working on ThinkPads, that must have been painful for Lenovo to lose that contract (or have the exclusivity of it expire, not sure what the details were though I worked at IBM at the time, and Lenovo still supplied ThinkPads to employees for a long time after the sale as I recall). Phones I knew they had been allowing Apple for awhile now, but laptops, that's a big change. But, not only does it mean no ThinkPads, it also means no requirement for Windows (bit of a sting to Microsoft, tee hee hee).
There's not much difference between the two. My high
end Lenovo Thinkpad has been remarkably durable. This is
quite fotunate since regardless of warranty, Lenovo privides
almost zero tech support-otger than to insist you reinstall Windows
needlessly frim their wretched install disc set. On the other
hand, I've owned a lot a different cell phones and have never had
one with as many serious problems as my iPhone 6Plus.
It doesn't matter to me whether it's the hardware or the
terrible mess of an OS iOS 8.4, I have a phone that's always
has problems. Even paying the extra $100 for AppleCare was
useless since the Apple techs have so little knowledge of
iOS 8.4. Not one tech at Apple has been able to do anything but
admit not knowing how the photo library works when I
call about the failure of photos to upload after a certain point.
Plus a multitude of other problems which cause techs to
all say please hold while they try to look up solutions to the
problems. It's been consistenly this way since I switched from
the 4S which did work to the iPhone 6 Plus which never
works. Any other company would be ripped to shreds
if they did this to customers. I fully expected to buy a 2015
Macbook Pro to supplement my Lenovo Thinkpad but
since my iPhone 6 Plus has been such a disaster and
all the problems I continue to read about with Apple ignoring
Macbook Pro problems or waiting to be ordered by lawsuit
settlements to fix, I've realized Apple is as bad if not worse than
any other company when it comes to support (or lack of
support).
Don't rejoice until we find out what percentage of these Macs are simply going to be used as Windows terminals running nothing but VMware or Boot Camp all day.
Very unlikely to have much of that, and if they were running VMWare it is more likely going to be to run Linux.
What do you think will require running Windows? Communication/Mail/Productivity.... All will run on OS X natively. (probably 90% of what is needed).
Rational Application Development - available for OS X. In fact any of the software that is from IBM that is used on the desktop ... if not available now will be available shortly (Server/Linux software may of course never arrive).
In fact OS X is a more natural development environment - since it is closer to the operating system on their servers (UNIX heritage) than Windows.
Your claim is just not logical.
NOTE: I will admit to running VMWare.... but also not for Windows.... For Linux and Oracle RDBMS.
There's not much difference between the two. My high
end Lenovo Thinkpad has been remarkably durable. This is
quite fotunate since regardless of warranty, Lenovo privides
almost zero tech support-otger than to insist you reinstall Windows
needlessly frim their wretched install disc set. On the other
hand, I've owned a lot a different cell phones and have never had
one with as many serious problems as my iPhone 6Plus.
It doesn't matter to me whether it's the hardware or the
terrible mess of an OS iOS 8.4, I have a phone that's always
has problems. Even paying the extra $100 for AppleCare was
useless since the Apple techs have so little knowledge of
iOS 8.4. Not one tech at Apple has been able to do anything but
admit not knowing how the photo library works when I
call about the failure of photos to upload after a certain point.
Plus a multitude of other problems which cause techs to
all say please hold while they try to look up solutions to the
problems. It's been consistenly this way since I switched from
the 4S which did work to the iPhone 6 Plus which never
works. Any other company would be ripped to shreds
if they did this to customers. I fully expected to buy a 2015
Macbook Pro to supplement my Lenovo Thinkpad but
since my iPhone 6 Plus has been such a disaster and
all the problems I continue to read about with Apple ignoring
Macbook Pro problems or waiting to be ordered by lawsuit
settlements to fix, I've realized Apple is as bad if not worse than
any other company when it comes to support (or lack of
support).
Comments
There's no reason to spend a ton of money on Microsoft client licenses (the most expensive part of running any Microsoft-based installation).
That's true, the Microsoft ELAs are a big IT cost and it's how they've managed to lock-in corporates for decades now to use MS products exclusively (the whole suite, not just the OS).
As for IBM, not sure how it is now, but with client side software in the past, though I believe you could make a case to install some MS software on your laptop, the corporate standard suite was the Lotus suite of products (ugh!). I wasn't aware they even had Mac versions of Lotus but it appears they do (quick DDG search referenced it, but not sure that software is still supported??), so this is one way in the past IBM got around not spending as much as other corporates would spend to be a typical MS site. Still, moving from having to pay for Windows licenses to having to pay nothing for an OS license with Apple, that's got to be quite a savings, especially for a company as large as IBM.
As for laptop, their previous choice was (obviously) the ThinkPad (even post sale to Lenovo for awhile), not exactly the cheapest of the bunch (though in the long run I think quite economical). As much as IBM pinches pennies, especially with its suppliers, they I'm sure determined going with Apple is more economical, even if the laptops are initially more expensive (though I wouldn't assume that as fact). Finance makes many decisions in IBM (as other companies I'm sure), so this says quite a lot about Apple and its cost to the company. What I mean is that even ignoring any cost savings for the non-OS licenses, meaning that IBM probably didn't save anything not having to buy MS Office because they had their own suite, they still must have found switching to Apple to be preferable cost wise. What this means is that for corporates who *do* have to pay for MS Office as part of their ELA, they really should look at Apple for savings not only on the OS, because with that OS and hardware product, they get a free office suite too (which will suffice for the VAST majority of an IT department's users, and for those who *require* a product within MS Office, they can as needed buy individual licenses). This is potentially a big story with a big message about costs and savings by going with Apple.
That's true, the Microsoft ELAs are a big IT cost and it's how they've managed to lock-in corporates for decades now to use MS products exclusively (the whole suite, not just the OS).
[...]
As for laptop, their previous choice was (obviously) the ThinkPad (even post sale to Lenovo for awhile), not exactly the cheapest of the bunch (though in the long run I think quite economical). As much as IBM pinches pennies, especially with its suppliers, they I'm sure determined going with Apple is more economical, even if the laptops are initially more expensive (though I wouldn't assume that as fact). Finance makes many decisions in IBM (as other companies I'm sure), so this says quite a lot about Apple and its cost to the company. What I mean is that even ignoring any cost savings for the non-OS licenses, meaning that IBM probably didn't save anything not having to buy MS Office because they had their own suite, they still must have found switching to Apple to be preferable cost wise. What this means is that for corporates who *do* have to pay for MS Office as part of their ELA, they really should look at Apple for savings not only on the OS, because with that OS and hardware product, they get a free office suite too (which will suffice for the VAST majority of an IT department's users, and for those who *require* a product within MS Office, they can as needed buy individual licenses). This is potentially a big story with a big message about costs and savings by going with Apple.
The key issue is that IBM is
a) a major iOS developer now
b) a major technology consultancy company, requiring durable road warrior workstation quality devices, with technical support worldwide, and stable technical specs (this is a big deal in corp world... buying 30,000 Dells with 20,000 different Hard drive/driver versions is not a good thing when you have any sort of in-house first level tech support).
c) need to be in the *nix/iOS/Windows world.
This basically tells me that a MacBookPro OS X.10 with a Windows VM and a RH VM is the only platform, that covers this. IBM can easily see that spending a small premium on hardware up front covers most of the back end issues (a consultant drop shipping a laptop that breaks is potentially losing $1000+ a day plus the cost of repair).
To get a Dell or HP that is roughly the same platform (sans iOS developer support), is still a $1200-$1800 laptop, and my shop has been a dell shop, and we have buccu problems with drivers (my wireless driver is different than all my partners wireless drivers, and causes all sorts of grief with our cisco corporate wireless [my Airport Extreme wireless... no problem].
I disagree with the 150K/year plan. maybe 150K next year, and 50K after that, but you got to figure a 3 year cycle within IBM for laptops, and not 200K/year 100% turnover (yes, IBM has 450K employees, but strong doubt more than 50% of those have laptops/dev workstations... phones is a different story, the number of assembly line, non-knowledge worker, [literal] paper pushers, or data center tech staff has to be at least 150K ).
Perhaps this will spur IBM to develop and release versions of their software for OSX. They already have Linux & Unix versions of the products I use so it shouldn't be too hard to port them to Apple Software.
Perhaps this will spur IBM to develop and release versions of their software for OSX. They already have Linux & Unix versions of the products I use so it shouldn't be too hard to port them to Apple Software.
They do have some "OS X" releases of software - RAD (Rational Developer) has been available for "OS X" for around 2+ years now. Lotus products have been available. IBM DB2 Universal is not... but then IBM probably expects you to run that on a server. All the software I would ever run on OS X from IBM is out (none)
I was thinking more of (as a minimum) an MQ Client. They had one 15+ years ago....
MQ Server and WAS and IIB would be a really nice to have.
These are all products I use to make a living. Having these would allow me to reduce the number of Windows VM's I need to use.
The other thing I'd like to see happen is that a MacBook Pro would have 2TB of storage and 32Gb RAM. Then I could ditch my Windows Laptop completly.
Apple could bring back the 17in MBP. I'm sure a lot of IBMers would like the extra screen real estate.
Yes I know I'm dreaming but 1TB max HDD/SSD storage has been around for a long long time. It is time that it was increased.
I've replaced the DVD in my 2012 MBP with a 1TB SSD. Now only if it would take more than 16Gb of Ram.
I was thinking more of (as a minimum) an MQ Client. They had one 15+ years ago....
MQ Server and WAS and IIB would be a really nice to have.
These are all products I use to make a living. Having these would allow me to reduce the number of Windows VM's I need to use.
The other thing I'd like to see happen is that a MacBook Pro would have 2TB of storage and 32Gb RAM. Then I could ditch my Windows Laptop completly.
Apple could bring back the 17in MBP. I'm sure a lot of IBMers would like the extra screen real estate.
Yes I know I'm dreaming but 1TB max HDD/SSD storage has been around for a long long time. It is time that it was increased.
I've replaced the DVD in my 2012 MBP with a 1TB SSD. Now only if it would take more than 16Gb of Ram.
Not sure I care if I install WAS since deployment is typically going to be Linux/AIX.... so testing on "OS X" wise. There is of course WAS test servers built into RAD etc. I am fine with a 13 inch macbook.... I just want to be able to plug in 3 4K monitors to it
Yes this is a long time coming for the IBMers who wisely switched to Apple many years ago.
I personally know some who did long before (10yrs) MS Windows finally gave MacOS some competition.
Now I'm wondering how many MS employees hide a Mac at home ?
A high school friend of mine has worked at Microsoft for over 15 years. His is an Apple house. He briefly gave Windows Phone a shot, but uses an iPhone 6 now and says they are popular at Microsoft. I think Nadella is a lot more laid back about Apple than Steve Ballmer.
Hopefully this pushes other companies. If IBM, the ultimate enterprise company, can be majority Mac, then surely other companies can make it work, as well. My employer is mostly an HP shop, though the higher-ups can choose Lenovo ultrabooks. The HPs still have a bunch of legacy ports such as VGA, Ethernet, Smart Card (which we don't even use), and a proprietary docking port, so they are still nearly an inch thick. I'd much rather have a MacBook Air (preferably the MacBook, but I'm trying to be "realistic").
It's totally impressive as is Apple getting IBM to purchase hundreds of thousands of Macs.
Based on the IBM CIO's account, it seems that IBM was the one convincing Apple to deal, with IBM's 6-8x expected volume of Apple's current largest corporate customer.
Someone should send this to the WSJ who's spreading FUD about Apple again. The same clowns that claimed Apple cut iPhone 5 orders in half.
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07/31/glimmers-emerge-on-apple-watch-sales-and-theyre-not-pretty/
Based on the quote from the IBM CIO, any news outlet can just as easily spin it to say "IBM makes Apple put on Big Boy Pants". Is it time for a "Steve would never have done this"?
Don't rejoice until we find out what percentage of these Macs are simply going to be used as Windows terminals running nothing but VMware or Boot Camp all day.
Oh nos! How will Lenovo spread it's spam and spy ware now?
Maybe they can get a deal to supply Apple's data centers
There's not much difference between the two. My high
end Lenovo Thinkpad has been remarkably durable. This is
quite fotunate since regardless of warranty, Lenovo privides
almost zero tech support-otger than to insist you reinstall Windows
needlessly frim their wretched install disc set. On the other
hand, I've owned a lot a different cell phones and have never had
one with as many serious problems as my iPhone 6Plus.
It doesn't matter to me whether it's the hardware or the
terrible mess of an OS iOS 8.4, I have a phone that's always
has problems. Even paying the extra $100 for AppleCare was
useless since the Apple techs have so little knowledge of
iOS 8.4. Not one tech at Apple has been able to do anything but
admit not knowing how the photo library works when I
call about the failure of photos to upload after a certain point.
Plus a multitude of other problems which cause techs to
all say please hold while they try to look up solutions to the
problems. It's been consistenly this way since I switched from
the 4S which did work to the iPhone 6 Plus which never
works. Any other company would be ripped to shreds
if they did this to customers. I fully expected to buy a 2015
Macbook Pro to supplement my Lenovo Thinkpad but
since my iPhone 6 Plus has been such a disaster and
all the problems I continue to read about with Apple ignoring
Macbook Pro problems or waiting to be ordered by lawsuit
settlements to fix, I've realized Apple is as bad if not worse than
any other company when it comes to support (or lack of
support).
Don't rejoice until we find out what percentage of these Macs are simply going to be used as Windows terminals running nothing but VMware or Boot Camp all day.
Very unlikely to have much of that, and if they were running VMWare it is more likely going to be to run Linux.
What do you think will require running Windows? Communication/Mail/Productivity.... All will run on OS X natively. (probably 90% of what is needed).
Rational Application Development - available for OS X. In fact any of the software that is from IBM that is used on the desktop ... if not available now will be available shortly (Server/Linux software may of course never arrive).
In fact OS X is a more natural development environment - since it is closer to the operating system on their servers (UNIX heritage) than Windows.
Your claim is just not logical.
NOTE: I will admit to running VMWare.... but also not for Windows.... For Linux and Oracle RDBMS.
not sure if serious or secretly trolling...
not sure if serious or secretly trolling...
Unfortunately very serious.