Everybody wins, IBM sells 970's to themselves, Apple finds way into the office market, IBM employees enjoy the benefits of the best operating system available.
If the rumours about the 970 being cheaper by 35% less than the Moto G4...then Apple could hit a home run on a high performing BMac.
The 970 may do well in business if its cost is as low as some say. Maybe a few years ago the G3 would have worked in a low cost office computer, but the P4 Dells set a high expectation for hardware performance today. It may be seen as a hedge against going obsolete? Well, maybe the 970 can take that a step further, and Apple can sell 64-bits as a hedge against going obsolete?
NETRO, this is the type of feedback I'm talking about.
"Business Bundles" are a great idea. Buy 'em in pallettes of 100. Office X pre-installed. Swap 'em out for the old noisy Dells, provide an hour of employee training and walk away.
Haha, that's funny. "An hour of employee training". My mom moved from Windows 98 to Windows XP at work, and her along with 80% of the department totally freaked. They got more than an hour of training on XP, but it's still too much newness for computer illiterate people to handle. They aren't like us--they see a new feature and it fills them with anxiety and dread, thinking, "how am I going to use this now! I have to learn it all over again!!!! WHA WHA WHAAAAAA" Seriously, you overestimate the general public when it comes to computers. They are intellectually lazy and don't want to learn any more than they have to. To them it is better to use what they know, even if it is inferior, than have to learn something new that may be superior.
As for the business bundles, it's a good idea, but I don't think Apple needs to sell a new model ONLY to businesses. How long did it last with selling the eMac ONLY to edu? Not long, because if it's a good machine then Mac users will want to buy it, and Apple would be crazy not to profit from selling it to all potential buyers. So make a businessMac, sell it to the public at once price, and sell it to businesses in "bundles" at a lower price. This way the business sees that they're getting a great deal, Mac users are happy, and Apple gets even more sales than if they only sold to business dorks.
I don't see this happening. Jobs doesn't cater to the business mindset, never has. What I see as more likely is Apple getting into business through the server space, using the xServe and maybe even licensing OS X to IBM.
Haha, that's funny. "An hour of employee training". My mom moved from Windows 98 to Windows XP at work, and her along with 80% of the department totally freaked. They got more than an hour of training on XP, but it's still too much newness for computer illiterate people to handle. They aren't like us--they see a new feature and it fills them with anxiety and dread, thinking, "how am I going to use this now! I have to learn it all over again!!!! WHA WHA WHAAAAAA" Seriously, you overestimate the general public when it comes to computers. They are intellectually lazy and don't want to learn any more than they have to. To them it is better to use what they know, even if it is inferior, than have to learn something new that may be superior.
JD, you are of course right. I didn't really mean one hour literally, I was just trying to emphasize that most workers only use the web, email and Office, and that transition is pretty easy for anyone with a brain.
And no, I don't overestimate the general public. I do free-lance Mac consulting full-time and I could tell you stories you wouldn't believe.
Apple's whole identity can be summed up in two words, "Think Different". While I realize that Dell undercuts prices and sells millions of shitty little black boxes that have pissy little hard drives that will die in a few months, or power supply unit fans that fail causing the system to melt down, or motherboards that simply crap out, or systems that are not electronically shielded (ask me about that one!!!), and sells them at $599 and the dumbass corporate purchase manager (insert your business's own title here) sees this and says "Buy, buy!!" when the TCO is horribly high on a Windows system and the server platform and licensing costs for Office continue to rise. Trust me, our company just went through that corporate nightmare to the tune of over $25,000,000.00
Apple will let Dell own the corporate waters because it is cut throat. PeeCee companies live and die in that world. Dell's time will come, just as Compaq's, HPs, Gateway's (insert shitty PC company name here) have in the past.
Apple isn't a cut-throat company. They need to make a decent profit margin on each system (thus the higher cost) and the reasons have been argued for countless eons on this and other forums.
Let's just forget all about this "we can compete with Dell" attitude, because Apple will never sell a crappy little box that requires a rebuild every other month....
Good point about the aggressive competition in the corporate market space, unfortunately Dell (among others) is taking those tactics and those "crappy little boxes" into the education market.
Ding! Suddenly competing with Dell has become a real issue to Apple in Apple's domain but on Dell's terms.
I understand what you're saying. Apple shouldn't make poor quality boxes to expand for its own sake. However, Apple has been losing market share while (marginally) maintaing profit margins. This. Must. Change. OS X is not sufficient for growth. The iPod line is proof that Apple in part understands this.
If kids are being educated and raised with PCs and people go to work with PCs, where exactly does Apple get its foot in the home?
Wintel has achieved a virtual cradle-to-grave dominance!!!
. . . Let's just forget all about this "we can compete with Dell" attitude, because Apple will never sell a crappy little box that requires a rebuild every other month....
Your post is essentially on the mark, yet I believe there are solutions to this problem. It's not about beating Dell in the business sector, nor is it about giving up on the business sector just because 90 percent of corporate management would never consider anything but Windows.
Right now, Apple does not have a product that can sell for general office use. If Apple made a Mac for this market and was able to pickup just 0.5 percent of business sales going to Windows PCs in the first couple years, that would be a great start. Not all business folks are satisfied with MS and some would really welcome a viable alternative. Apple hardware can cost just a little bit more, especially if a few perceptive managers see how they would benefit in the long run. Apple doesn't have to sell everyone, just a few. If Apple has three percent of the total market now, that extra half percent of business sales would make a difference.
A bonus for making such a Mac is that it will sell into other markets. Slightly different configuration of it could sell into the home market and to schools. A few years ago a low cost G3 may have sold into these markets. Today, the performance bar is up a bit. Once the PowerMac, and hopefully other Macs too, have has the 970, then Apple can make a better performing Mac at the very low end.
I don't think the hardware is as big a problem as software, spelled M-i-c-r-o-s-o-f-t. Apple could build a box that would meet corporate hardware requirements, and maybe even for an acceptable price, but if it isn't fluent in Windows Office (Outlook, Exchange functionality, Word macros, PowerPoint appearance and features, etc., maybe even Access) it'll be a non-starter for much of the (non-creative) corporate world.
For better or worse, much of the corporate world runs on Microsoft Office, and end-users won't embrace a solution that doesn't offer virtually 100% compatibility with their existing software packages. The creamy goodness of Aqua and Mach are fine until non-technical end-users are asked to accept reduced functionality and compatibility for the sake of a better platform.
This explains why Apple emphasizes creative and SOHO applications and hardware platforms, not cheap corporate boxes that play completely into Microsoft's strengths.
Imagine if Apple offered business machines for free. Would that improve their corporate footprint very much? I'm not so sure, especially when the costs of doing business are already falling gracefully.
I'm looking forward for that first BIG announcement that some entire corporation is going mac. Often it's more about relationships than capabilities, and Apple needs some results in this and all other areas.
IMHO, Apple must, definitely, go to a "volume/price" economic strategy, on the business market, without loosing its "Think Different" Quality and Design superiority.
Making a special machine (low - $500, medium - $600, and high - $700, ranges?) with all that "ready to do things and programs" that we all have to use on our daily jobs, seems to be a very good first step to conquer the IT guys.
And, yes I agree, Apple must sell them by dozens.
And, for the other hand, Apple must SHOW those IT guys how that wonderful "mac hines" can really work.
Yes, SHOW them, because they don't know it, and so, because of that, they don't believe that the Macs can do it - all that monotonous working stuff - with a low cost and in a much more friendly and joy way, keeping and maintaining the personnel happy and healthy.
At the last shareholder meeting Jobs himself told, in asnwer to a question that T. Cook VP at Apple, would be more then happy to have suggestions on how to improve apple marketshare in the businnes area (all sizes small to big 500).
Here is the email, please since for once we have a way to let our voice heard make good points, no flame.
Timothy D. Cook
Executive Vice President of Worldwide Sales and Operations
IT guys who, we say, hate Apple machines because they are easy to maintain, have poor compatibility with Windows machines etc etc will need more than a training session to get them onside.
I worked at an Apple retailer here in Australia and now work as a web designer. We use all Mac machines including Xserves for storage (stay with me here, there is a point coming soon). While I was at the Apple retailer, we would get calls from home users and businesses (small to mid-large) asking for maintainance service. It made up a reasonable part of our business. At any one time (during the three years I was there) we had two full time Mac technitians on staff. When they were hired, none of them had any formal training (once with us, we would send them to Apple accreditation sessions), they just had an interest in Macs. I'm told that the average starting age of all the Mac Techs we had at our store in it's 12 year history was 17.5 years.
Why is this?
Some say that Microsoft has inferior products that crash all the time and need constant supervision to run. But, Microsoft promotes this and advertises the need for technitians by putting on various seminars and launching Microsoft education programs through various institutions world wide. Apple doesn't do this to anywhere near the extent that Microsoft does. Why? Maybe because Apple machines don't need that supervision. Maybe because the average Mac user is on their second, third or sixth Mac and knows that if the system hangs, "all I need to do is restart it. Now where is that pesky little button?!?!".
Whatever the reason is, IT technitians who specialise in Microsoft software, who have been told over and over again that Apple doesn't run Microsoft Word, and believe it (yes, they still exsist) don't want to know about Apple machines.
What about Apple setting up AND advertising their own accreditation plan? Even better yet, why not talk to the institutions teaching the next generation of IT technitians and put in a couple of Mac related subjects? If you can break that mind set early and get these new guys thinking "hey, that Mac really is quite cool! That OSX stuff really is simple to use!" then your battle is already half won. Sure, these guys won't be in the work force for another 3-4 years while they finish their degrees, but when they come out of Uni, they will be much more open to using Macs and therefore, when asked the tough questions like "what do you think of these Macs" they don't snap back the reply of "Macs are crap!!! They don't even run Microsoft Word!!!".
I don't know how this sort of thing works in The States, or if you guys already have some form of Apple technitian training outside of Apple dealers. Here in Australia, you'd have to dig pretty deep to even find out about accreditation if you're not in a dealer. Over here, we are losing heaps of big Apple clients because of the destinct lack of support available for the platform. Schools have all but left with only a few high schools carrying a few Macs for media classes. I went to Deakin Unversity and they were almost all Mac back then (1997-2000), now there is one room of beige G3's in the library for book searches. I think that if Apple incorporated some Apple technitian skills into the curriculum at Universities (Colleges) we would probably see more Macs at schools and in businesses. If not, you have a better qualified workforce to keep the odd complaint at bay and giving Apple a better name. I don't think they can lose from it.
JD, you are of course right. I didn't really mean one hour literally, I was just trying to emphasize that most workers only use the web, email and Office, and that transition is pretty easy for anyone with a brain.
And no, I don't overestimate the general public. I do free-lance Mac consulting full-time and I could tell you stories you wouldn't believe.
Oh, I guess I read your post too literally. He he, that's probably pretty funny/frustrating when you're doing consulting with someone who's computer illiterate. I don't know if I have the sort of patience required to do something like that.
You must have a good sense of what the business community needs in a low-end Mac, if you're in computer consulting.
After thinking about it, it seems that Apple made some design errors with the new iMac, namely, they made it too expensive to manufacture. By making the base a bit more bulky and larger, perhaps Apple could have priced the LCD iMac at eMac price points. I can certainly see the iMac G4 as a good business machine, but not at it's current prices.
The eMac is too bulky to work in the business world. Deskspace is at a premium and LCDs are ubiquitous, it would be a step backwards to use big, bulky CRT computers.
What Apple needs is a AIO desktop that's essentially a Cube with an LCD attached to it. The iMac is almost there, but lacks the expandability, upgradability, and low price. Unfortunately, Apple carried over the poor value feature of the Cube as well.
So we are back to a redesigned iMac that can be manufactured cheaply, so low price points are attainable, or another Cube designed to be sold at an average price of $700 or so.
I work in the IT industry, and have seen it from the eyes of two large (read it as worldwide corporations, Fortune 500 for sure and quite possibly within the top 250) end user companies, and also from the eyes of an IT provider possibly mentioned on these forums (definitely Fortune 500, definitely worldwide).
Apple making the H/W . . . not a problem (not posing specs, because I agree with what I have seen). Apple S/W, even though OT, it's relevant to enterprise penetration . . . somewhat of a problem. Not from the client end, but from the overall network infrastructure end of things. Think in terms of client administration, automated s/w updates, localized (meaning on a server) login ID administration. Yeah, sounz like an NT domain, I know, and I'm washing my mouth out with hot sauce now . I have to put up with this MS POS of a network almost everyday.
In one of the end user companies, our IT staff had proven that MACs were less expensive to support and even to buy (granted that this was in 1995), but the overall client admin from the network was lacking. Needless to say, the 50/50 Mac/PC split soon went to 2/98. With NT controlling a huge portion of that 98%. If Apple is to get serious about the enterprise market, they should look at the admin side of their network infrastructure (at least if they want to hit the large corporations).
Sorry for the rant, but you guys "pulled a nasty scab" off me. I was a Mac Admin that had to switch to NT, which doesn't mean New Technology like Bill Gates says. It stands for: Not Today - Not Tomorrow - Next Time - Not There - Nice Try - (and my favorite) New Trash.
Engineer: Apple has got a lot to offer us. We should look at deploying these to the enterprise.
IT Director: Apple? Are they still in business? They don't read Windows files, Office files, or run our software. Are you insane?
Engineer: They can connect to Windows networks, use Office files (better than the M$ version) but wait, no it cannot run our shitty proprietary DOS/Win9x software.
IT Director: Can't run our software? That's Apple for you. Proprietary!!
Engineer: Wait. M$ is the one writing proprietary software. A lot of the Macintosh OS is now open source and it runs open standards. Unless we want to get stuck in a corner, we should embrace open standards.....
IT Director: Are you insane? I'd lose my job if I suggested that we switch to Apples. M$ gives us what we need and all of our applications work. Why should we switch?
------------------------
And therein lies the problem. Most companies, look at yours, uses some kind of crappy legacy application written for DOS or some other medieval OS and just cannot play well with anything else. Hell, some are probably written by companies no longer in business. And these are not db software than can simply be migrated to another platform. I am migrating all of the Access/MS SQL shit I can to get away from the clutches of the beast. It still won't help. Maybe with Peoplesoft buying JD Edwards and supporting Safari, it will help things from an "inside-out" point of view, but the Mac is still considered a niche OS.
Think about how Microsoft got where they are. Was there any other applications and data that needed to be migrated when they entered the arena? No, they saw that pushing DOS/Windows on businesses would entrenched them for some time to come. Well my friends, that time is still here and doesn't look like it will end any time soon.
The only way for Apple to get a serious push into corporations is to offer a way of converting all the applications a business uses so the transition is seemless. How about that for a support nightmare???
Data/application migration is a key for Apple to pave the way into corporations.
They did the same thing in education, although, education doesn't have a ton of legacy applications that were written by God-knows-who and need to be available. Education isn't that tough of a venue to penetrate, since it doesn't use a lot of diverse applications.
Hardware and software will only get you so far.....support and migration staff is what is needed. Offer a freakin iMac at $399 and businesses will still pass on it...why? Because it cannot be trusted to run that vintage 1994 application written to run in Windows 3.1.....
Figure out a way to migrate businesses and you have got it made. Apple doesn't have the resources (at this point) to get there. Let them push into the home and educational markets where penetration is a bit easier. Let Dell sell and then waste away, to be succombed to the next clone manufacturer.....it's a pointless trend until you can start overcoming the mindless managers that hang on to legacy applications and the security blanket that is M$. Once they die off, and new generations start pushing new ideas, then Apple can seriously take some market share from the corporate world.
I don't think the hardware is as big a problem as software, spelled M-i-c-r-o-s-o-f-t. Apple could build a box that would meet corporate hardware requirements, and maybe even for an acceptable price, but if it isn't fluent in Windows Office (Outlook, Exchange functionality, Word macros, PowerPoint appearance and features, etc., maybe even Access) it'll be a non-starter for much of the (non-creative) corporate world.
For better or worse, much of the corporate world runs on Microsoft Office, and end-users won't embrace a solution that doesn't offer virtually 100% compatibility with their existing software packages. The creamy goodness of Aqua and Mach are fine until non-technical end-users are asked to accept reduced functionality and compatibility for the sake of a better platform.
This explains why Apple emphasizes creative and SOHO applications and hardware platforms, not cheap corporate boxes that play completely into Microsoft's strengths.
Vox,
Best post in the entire thread. Without the Software...Apple goes nowhere. I don't care if their Hardware is half the cost of a typical PC installation. Software is King in Business. Period
OS X doesn't have many of the login/logout capabilities of other OSes. There is another thread here at appleinsider right now discribing them, as well as how a corporate turned down using 1,000 macs because of cross workstation logins.
Well, OS X supports a wide range of login capabilities. As many as any other OS except a few of the Windows/Windows ones. You can auth against Active Directory, LDAP, Kerb, and others. OS X is as close to XP on this as anyone.
Quote:
]Dell hands out business machines like they were $5 cigars. For our office:
$590 of hardware + $120 17' monitor is on my desk:
Pentium 4 2.0 ghz
256 MB of RAM
30 GB hard drive
64MB Video Card
Windows XP Professional
Mouse / Keyboard
Notice the important part SPEED & PRICE.
Well, the 800MHz eMac is $799. Add in a little RAM and you're pretty much in the same place. Sure, it's not 2GHz, but for almost any corporate function it's plenty fast. Sure, it's not cheaper and it's not faster, but we value security over speed in my neighborhood and I'd never trade up to the Windows security/virus situation.
I don't think you give Apple enough credit. In the last three years they went from OS 9 to Jaguar and have moved within spitting distance of MS in most areas, and ahead in others (unix underpinnings). While not an advantage just yet, the disadvantages are small. Apple will get in two or three major OS upgrades before MS ships their next big thing, and Apple appears poised to move ahead in some hardware arenas while the x86 world remains somewhat undecided. Things are hopeful. It will take time.
My personal opinion is simple:
I love my Cubes. I have 5. Give them a modest update - match the mid iMac in specs, upgrade the Airport to 802.11g, *maybe* toss in Bluetooth, and roll them out at a decent price point - $699 maybe. I'd buy a bunch more of 'em.
They're perfect for enterprise because they are *small* and aren't overloaded with unneeded expansion. One problem that a lot of companies have is workstation space. Towers and 17" monitors would require me to buy new furniture for some of my staff. Steelcase costs a shitload more than Apple does, no matter how you look at it.
Further, whether it's a small office or a floor full of cubicles, normal towers are too loud, IMO. I've walked into offices and wondered 'what the hell is that noise...'. The cubes are silent and wonderful and are still more than fast enough for most office work.
I originally bought the Cubes because they were small and quiet. The extra cost of 5 with flatscreens (they were <$1500 each for the bundle) was far, far less than the furniture I would have needed to handle towers and CRTs. The problem that most enterprise has is that the IT guys have their budgets and the furniture people have theirs, and if one f's up the other, so be it.
Comments
Everybody wins, IBM sells 970's to themselves, Apple finds way into the office market, IBM employees enjoy the benefits of the best operating system available.
If the rumours about the 970 being cheaper by 35% less than the Moto G4...then Apple could hit a home run on a high performing BMac.
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
NETRO, this is the type of feedback I'm talking about.
"Business Bundles" are a great idea. Buy 'em in pallettes of 100. Office X pre-installed. Swap 'em out for the old noisy Dells, provide an hour of employee training and walk away.
Haha, that's funny. "An hour of employee training". My mom moved from Windows 98 to Windows XP at work, and her along with 80% of the department totally freaked. They got more than an hour of training on XP, but it's still too much newness for computer illiterate people to handle. They aren't like us--they see a new feature and it fills them with anxiety and dread, thinking, "how am I going to use this now! I have to learn it all over again!!!! WHA WHA WHAAAAAA" Seriously, you overestimate the general public when it comes to computers. They are intellectually lazy and don't want to learn any more than they have to. To them it is better to use what they know, even if it is inferior, than have to learn something new that may be superior.
As for the business bundles, it's a good idea, but I don't think Apple needs to sell a new model ONLY to businesses. How long did it last with selling the eMac ONLY to edu? Not long, because if it's a good machine then Mac users will want to buy it, and Apple would be crazy not to profit from selling it to all potential buyers. So make a businessMac, sell it to the public at once price, and sell it to businesses in "bundles" at a lower price. This way the business sees that they're getting a great deal, Mac users are happy, and Apple gets even more sales than if they only sold to business dorks.
I don't see this happening. Jobs doesn't cater to the business mindset, never has. What I see as more likely is Apple getting into business through the server space, using the xServe and maybe even licensing OS X to IBM.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Haha, that's funny. "An hour of employee training". My mom moved from Windows 98 to Windows XP at work, and her along with 80% of the department totally freaked. They got more than an hour of training on XP, but it's still too much newness for computer illiterate people to handle. They aren't like us--they see a new feature and it fills them with anxiety and dread, thinking, "how am I going to use this now! I have to learn it all over again!!!! WHA WHA WHAAAAAA" Seriously, you overestimate the general public when it comes to computers. They are intellectually lazy and don't want to learn any more than they have to. To them it is better to use what they know, even if it is inferior, than have to learn something new that may be superior.
JD, you are of course right. I didn't really mean one hour literally, I was just trying to emphasize that most workers only use the web, email and Office, and that transition is pretty easy for anyone with a brain.
And no, I don't overestimate the general public. I do free-lance Mac consulting full-time and I could tell you stories you wouldn't believe.
Apple will let Dell own the corporate waters because it is cut throat. PeeCee companies live and die in that world. Dell's time will come, just as Compaq's, HPs, Gateway's (insert shitty PC company name here) have in the past.
Apple isn't a cut-throat company. They need to make a decent profit margin on each system (thus the higher cost) and the reasons have been argued for countless eons on this and other forums.
Let's just forget all about this "we can compete with Dell" attitude, because Apple will never sell a crappy little box that requires a rebuild every other month....
Ding! Suddenly competing with Dell has become a real issue to Apple in Apple's domain but on Dell's terms.
I understand what you're saying. Apple shouldn't make poor quality boxes to expand for its own sake. However, Apple has been losing market share while (marginally) maintaing profit margins. This. Must. Change. OS X is not sufficient for growth. The iPod line is proof that Apple in part understands this.
If kids are being educated and raised with PCs and people go to work with PCs, where exactly does Apple get its foot in the home?
Wintel has achieved a virtual cradle-to-grave dominance!!!
Screed
Originally posted by Rhumgod
. . . Let's just forget all about this "we can compete with Dell" attitude, because Apple will never sell a crappy little box that requires a rebuild every other month....
Your post is essentially on the mark, yet I believe there are solutions to this problem. It's not about beating Dell in the business sector, nor is it about giving up on the business sector just because 90 percent of corporate management would never consider anything but Windows.
Right now, Apple does not have a product that can sell for general office use. If Apple made a Mac for this market and was able to pickup just 0.5 percent of business sales going to Windows PCs in the first couple years, that would be a great start. Not all business folks are satisfied with MS and some would really welcome a viable alternative. Apple hardware can cost just a little bit more, especially if a few perceptive managers see how they would benefit in the long run. Apple doesn't have to sell everyone, just a few. If Apple has three percent of the total market now, that extra half percent of business sales would make a difference.
A bonus for making such a Mac is that it will sell into other markets. Slightly different configuration of it could sell into the home market and to schools. A few years ago a low cost G3 may have sold into these markets. Today, the performance bar is up a bit. Once the PowerMac, and hopefully other Macs too, have has the 970, then Apple can make a better performing Mac at the very low end.
For better or worse, much of the corporate world runs on Microsoft Office, and end-users won't embrace a solution that doesn't offer virtually 100% compatibility with their existing software packages. The creamy goodness of Aqua and Mach are fine until non-technical end-users are asked to accept reduced functionality and compatibility for the sake of a better platform.
This explains why Apple emphasizes creative and SOHO applications and hardware platforms, not cheap corporate boxes that play completely into Microsoft's strengths.
bMac or not, give me an OS X Exchange client ASAP!
didn't m$ say the version of entourage for office this summer would have support?
I'm looking forward for that first BIG announcement that some entire corporation is going mac. Often it's more about relationships than capabilities, and Apple needs some results in this and all other areas.
Making a special machine (low - $500, medium - $600, and high - $700, ranges?) with all that "ready to do things and programs" that we all have to use on our daily jobs, seems to be a very good first step to conquer the IT guys.
And, yes I agree, Apple must sell them by dozens.
And, for the other hand, Apple must SHOW those IT guys how that wonderful "mac hines" can really work.
Yes, SHOW them, because they don't know it, and so, because of that, they don't believe that the Macs can do it - all that monotonous working stuff - with a low cost and in a much more friendly and joy way, keeping and maintaining the personnel happy and healthy.
jamcouto
Porto
Portugal
At the last shareholder meeting Jobs himself told, in asnwer to a question that T. Cook VP at Apple, would be more then happy to have suggestions on how to improve apple marketshare in the businnes area (all sizes small to big 500).
Here is the email, please since for once we have a way to let our voice heard make good points, no flame.
Timothy D. Cook
Executive Vice President of Worldwide Sales and Operations
[email protected]
Already sent my suggestions and got an answer within a day...
IT guys who, we say, hate Apple machines because they are easy to maintain, have poor compatibility with Windows machines etc etc will need more than a training session to get them onside.
I worked at an Apple retailer here in Australia and now work as a web designer. We use all Mac machines including Xserves for storage (stay with me here, there is a point coming soon). While I was at the Apple retailer, we would get calls from home users and businesses (small to mid-large) asking for maintainance service. It made up a reasonable part of our business. At any one time (during the three years I was there) we had two full time Mac technitians on staff. When they were hired, none of them had any formal training (once with us, we would send them to Apple accreditation sessions), they just had an interest in Macs. I'm told that the average starting age of all the Mac Techs we had at our store in it's 12 year history was 17.5 years.
Why is this?
Some say that Microsoft has inferior products that crash all the time and need constant supervision to run. But, Microsoft promotes this and advertises the need for technitians by putting on various seminars and launching Microsoft education programs through various institutions world wide. Apple doesn't do this to anywhere near the extent that Microsoft does. Why? Maybe because Apple machines don't need that supervision. Maybe because the average Mac user is on their second, third or sixth Mac and knows that if the system hangs, "all I need to do is restart it. Now where is that pesky little button?!?!".
Whatever the reason is, IT technitians who specialise in Microsoft software, who have been told over and over again that Apple doesn't run Microsoft Word, and believe it (yes, they still exsist) don't want to know about Apple machines.
What about Apple setting up AND advertising their own accreditation plan? Even better yet, why not talk to the institutions teaching the next generation of IT technitians and put in a couple of Mac related subjects? If you can break that mind set early and get these new guys thinking "hey, that Mac really is quite cool! That OSX stuff really is simple to use!" then your battle is already half won. Sure, these guys won't be in the work force for another 3-4 years while they finish their degrees, but when they come out of Uni, they will be much more open to using Macs and therefore, when asked the tough questions like "what do you think of these Macs" they don't snap back the reply of "Macs are crap!!! They don't even run Microsoft Word!!!".
I don't know how this sort of thing works in The States, or if you guys already have some form of Apple technitian training outside of Apple dealers. Here in Australia, you'd have to dig pretty deep to even find out about accreditation if you're not in a dealer. Over here, we are losing heaps of big Apple clients because of the destinct lack of support available for the platform. Schools have all but left with only a few high schools carrying a few Macs for media classes. I went to Deakin Unversity and they were almost all Mac back then (1997-2000), now there is one room of beige G3's in the library for book searches. I think that if Apple incorporated some Apple technitian skills into the curriculum at Universities (Colleges) we would probably see more Macs at schools and in businesses. If not, you have a better qualified workforce to keep the odd complaint at bay and giving Apple a better name. I don't think they can lose from it.
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
JD, you are of course right. I didn't really mean one hour literally, I was just trying to emphasize that most workers only use the web, email and Office, and that transition is pretty easy for anyone with a brain.
And no, I don't overestimate the general public. I do free-lance Mac consulting full-time and I could tell you stories you wouldn't believe.
Oh, I guess I read your post too literally. He he, that's probably pretty funny/frustrating when you're doing consulting with someone who's computer illiterate. I don't know if I have the sort of patience required to do something like that.
You must have a good sense of what the business community needs in a low-end Mac, if you're in computer consulting.
After thinking about it, it seems that Apple made some design errors with the new iMac, namely, they made it too expensive to manufacture. By making the base a bit more bulky and larger, perhaps Apple could have priced the LCD iMac at eMac price points. I can certainly see the iMac G4 as a good business machine, but not at it's current prices.
The eMac is too bulky to work in the business world. Deskspace is at a premium and LCDs are ubiquitous, it would be a step backwards to use big, bulky CRT computers.
What Apple needs is a AIO desktop that's essentially a Cube with an LCD attached to it. The iMac is almost there, but lacks the expandability, upgradability, and low price. Unfortunately, Apple carried over the poor value feature of the Cube as well.
So we are back to a redesigned iMac that can be manufactured cheaply, so low price points are attainable, or another Cube designed to be sold at an average price of $700 or so.
Apple making the H/W . . . not a problem (not posing specs, because I agree with what I have seen). Apple S/W, even though OT, it's relevant to enterprise penetration . . . somewhat of a problem. Not from the client end, but from the overall network infrastructure end of things. Think in terms of client administration, automated s/w updates, localized (meaning on a server) login ID administration. Yeah, sounz like an NT domain, I know, and I'm washing my mouth out with hot sauce now
In one of the end user companies, our IT staff had proven that MACs were less expensive to support and even to buy (granted that this was in 1995), but the overall client admin from the network was lacking. Needless to say, the 50/50 Mac/PC split soon went to 2/98. With NT controlling a huge portion of that 98%. If Apple is to get serious about the enterprise market, they should look at the admin side of their network infrastructure (at least if they want to hit the large corporations).
Sorry for the rant, but you guys "pulled a nasty scab" off me. I was a Mac Admin that had to switch to NT, which doesn't mean New Technology like Bill Gates says. It stands for: Not Today - Not Tomorrow - Next Time - Not There - Nice Try - (and my favorite) New Trash.
Thanks for putting up with me!
Engineer: Apple has got a lot to offer us. We should look at deploying these to the enterprise.
IT Director: Apple? Are they still in business? They don't read Windows files, Office files, or run our software. Are you insane?
Engineer: They can connect to Windows networks, use Office files (better than the M$ version) but wait, no it cannot run our shitty proprietary DOS/Win9x software.
IT Director: Can't run our software? That's Apple for you. Proprietary!!
Engineer: Wait. M$ is the one writing proprietary software. A lot of the Macintosh OS is now open source and it runs open standards. Unless we want to get stuck in a corner, we should embrace open standards.....
IT Director: Are you insane? I'd lose my job if I suggested that we switch to Apples. M$ gives us what we need and all of our applications work. Why should we switch?
------------------------
And therein lies the problem. Most companies, look at yours, uses some kind of crappy legacy application written for DOS or some other medieval OS and just cannot play well with anything else. Hell, some are probably written by companies no longer in business. And these are not db software than can simply be migrated to another platform. I am migrating all of the Access/MS SQL shit I can to get away from the clutches of the beast. It still won't help. Maybe with Peoplesoft buying JD Edwards and supporting Safari, it will help things from an "inside-out" point of view, but the Mac is still considered a niche OS.
Think about how Microsoft got where they are. Was there any other applications and data that needed to be migrated when they entered the arena? No, they saw that pushing DOS/Windows on businesses would entrenched them for some time to come. Well my friends, that time is still here and doesn't look like it will end any time soon.
The only way for Apple to get a serious push into corporations is to offer a way of converting all the applications a business uses so the transition is seemless. How about that for a support nightmare???
Data/application migration is a key for Apple to pave the way into corporations.
They did the same thing in education, although, education doesn't have a ton of legacy applications that were written by God-knows-who and need to be available. Education isn't that tough of a venue to penetrate, since it doesn't use a lot of diverse applications.
Hardware and software will only get you so far.....support and migration staff is what is needed. Offer a freakin iMac at $399 and businesses will still pass on it...why? Because it cannot be trusted to run that vintage 1994 application written to run in Windows 3.1.....
Figure out a way to migrate businesses and you have got it made. Apple doesn't have the resources (at this point) to get there. Let them push into the home and educational markets where penetration is a bit easier. Let Dell sell and then waste away, to be succombed to the next clone manufacturer.....it's a pointless trend until you can start overcoming the mindless managers that hang on to legacy applications and the security blanket that is M$. Once they die off, and new generations start pushing new ideas, then Apple can seriously take some market share from the corporate world.
Sad, but true....
Originally posted by Voxapps
I don't think the hardware is as big a problem as software, spelled M-i-c-r-o-s-o-f-t. Apple could build a box that would meet corporate hardware requirements, and maybe even for an acceptable price, but if it isn't fluent in Windows Office (Outlook, Exchange functionality, Word macros, PowerPoint appearance and features, etc., maybe even Access) it'll be a non-starter for much of the (non-creative) corporate world.
For better or worse, much of the corporate world runs on Microsoft Office, and end-users won't embrace a solution that doesn't offer virtually 100% compatibility with their existing software packages. The creamy goodness of Aqua and Mach are fine until non-technical end-users are asked to accept reduced functionality and compatibility for the sake of a better platform.
This explains why Apple emphasizes creative and SOHO applications and hardware platforms, not cheap corporate boxes that play completely into Microsoft's strengths.
Vox,
Best post in the entire thread. Without the Software...Apple goes nowhere. I don't care if their Hardware is half the cost of a typical PC installation. Software is King in Business. Period
Originally posted by inkhead
OS X doesn't have many of the login/logout capabilities of other OSes. There is another thread here at appleinsider right now discribing them, as well as how a corporate turned down using 1,000 macs because of cross workstation logins.
Well, OS X supports a wide range of login capabilities. As many as any other OS except a few of the Windows/Windows ones. You can auth against Active Directory, LDAP, Kerb, and others. OS X is as close to XP on this as anyone.
]Dell hands out business machines like they were $5 cigars. For our office:
$590 of hardware + $120 17' monitor is on my desk:
Pentium 4 2.0 ghz
256 MB of RAM
30 GB hard drive
64MB Video Card
Windows XP Professional
Mouse / Keyboard
Notice the important part SPEED & PRICE.
Well, the 800MHz eMac is $799. Add in a little RAM and you're pretty much in the same place. Sure, it's not 2GHz, but for almost any corporate function it's plenty fast. Sure, it's not cheaper and it's not faster, but we value security over speed in my neighborhood and I'd never trade up to the Windows security/virus situation.
I don't think you give Apple enough credit. In the last three years they went from OS 9 to Jaguar and have moved within spitting distance of MS in most areas, and ahead in others (unix underpinnings). While not an advantage just yet, the disadvantages are small. Apple will get in two or three major OS upgrades before MS ships their next big thing, and Apple appears poised to move ahead in some hardware arenas while the x86 world remains somewhat undecided. Things are hopeful. It will take time.
My personal opinion is simple:
I love my Cubes. I have 5. Give them a modest update - match the mid iMac in specs, upgrade the Airport to 802.11g, *maybe* toss in Bluetooth, and roll them out at a decent price point - $699 maybe. I'd buy a bunch more of 'em.
They're perfect for enterprise because they are *small* and aren't overloaded with unneeded expansion. One problem that a lot of companies have is workstation space. Towers and 17" monitors would require me to buy new furniture for some of my staff. Steelcase costs a shitload more than Apple does, no matter how you look at it.
Further, whether it's a small office or a floor full of cubicles, normal towers are too loud, IMO. I've walked into offices and wondered 'what the hell is that noise...'. The cubes are silent and wonderful and are still more than fast enough for most office work.
I originally bought the Cubes because they were small and quiet. The extra cost of 5 with flatscreens (they were <$1500 each for the bundle) was far, far less than the furniture I would have needed to handle towers and CRTs. The problem that most enterprise has is that the IT guys have their budgets and the furniture people have theirs, and if one f's up the other, so be it.