Mac OS X and the Windows Corporate Environment
Working with a bunch of creatives, I have noticed that I.T. would rather deal with M$ for all the other administrative types. So much so, that in order to broaden my skills and have me support those types, they had me study for my MCP and pay for taking the test - which I passed.
Now, after reviewing all the study material, I started to (shudder) appreciate why I.T. types embrace Windoze. The ability to run it on the cheapest hardware, the assurance that the current version will be available for licensing, the controlling aspect from a network administration point-of-view when it comes to everything from applications installation to default user settings, the ability to do remote installs a couple of different ways, and a few more things I don't see in OS X (or am missing in OS X Server).
I have also realized from this exercise some of the more annoying reasons about why I hate Windoze is why I have stayed as a Mac specialist. However, I have wondered why Apple hasn't tried to take every last Windoze feature and incorporate a similar corporate-desired need into their OS.
Is Apple depending too much on individuals running/maintaining their computers to make it big in a corporate setting? Am I missing something in terms of how easy it is to manage OS X deployed to hundreds of users (and please don't mention Unix command line stuff - I said "easy")? Or does Apple believe that central planning of I.T. is akin to Soviet central planning? (I hope that last line doesn't mark me for Political Outsider!)
Thoughts?
Now, after reviewing all the study material, I started to (shudder) appreciate why I.T. types embrace Windoze. The ability to run it on the cheapest hardware, the assurance that the current version will be available for licensing, the controlling aspect from a network administration point-of-view when it comes to everything from applications installation to default user settings, the ability to do remote installs a couple of different ways, and a few more things I don't see in OS X (or am missing in OS X Server).
I have also realized from this exercise some of the more annoying reasons about why I hate Windoze is why I have stayed as a Mac specialist. However, I have wondered why Apple hasn't tried to take every last Windoze feature and incorporate a similar corporate-desired need into their OS.
Is Apple depending too much on individuals running/maintaining their computers to make it big in a corporate setting? Am I missing something in terms of how easy it is to manage OS X deployed to hundreds of users (and please don't mention Unix command line stuff - I said "easy")? Or does Apple believe that central planning of I.T. is akin to Soviet central planning? (I hope that last line doesn't mark me for Political Outsider!)
Thoughts?
Comments
"The ability to run it on the cheapest hardware"
Ok, OS X runs on a $500 Mac.
"the assurance that the current version will be available for licensing"
What do you mean?
"the controlling aspect from a network administration point-of-view when it comes to everything from applications installation to default user settings"
What exactly is missing in OS X that windows has?
The current OS would mean that if I.T. types deployed Panther, and we suddenly hired a gaggle of workers, we would want to deploy Panther further. But Apple will not sell us Panther, and insists on selling us Tiger, which would mean forcing an upgrade on everyone to remain standard... yes, I know - who cares? But that's how I.T. thinks!
The network administrator controlling has to do with being able to push out updates with ePolicy. Is something like that available in OS X? How would one push out an update to an application?
Apple Remote Desktop.
Open Directory administration using Workgroup manager.
Those 2 should give you all the big brother features that Windows has using Active Directory.
Apple caters to consumers and creative thinkers. Change is okay. Mystery of what is coming next is exciting. New.
Neither will probably change soon. Live it. Love it.
Originally posted by iPeon
Ok, OS X runs on a $500 Mac.
But you can't run said Mac out of the box.
Originally posted by Ra
But you can't run said Mac out of the box.
You're joking I take it.
Originally posted by iPeon
You're joking I take it.
No I'm serious - it doesn't come with a keyboard or mouse.
Originally posted by Ra
No I'm serious - it doesn't come with a keyboard or mouse.
You're right though. There should be a business version with bundled keyboard and mouse. Many companies that lease their computers don't have spares hanging around and it's a non-essential pain to have to purchase them seperately.
Originally posted by mynamehere
The mac mini definitely doesn't count. It's overpriced for it's extremely limited features. I can get a similarly-specced pc for ~300 with keyboard, mouse and monitor (and sometimes printer)
no you can't. I am sure it won't even have a gpu and of course will be using celeron processor which apple has no equivalent to.
Originally posted by NaMo4184
no you can't. I am sure it won't even have a gpu and of course will be using celeron processor which apple has no equivalent to.
Yeah, keep drinking your Kool Aids.
for a more realistic picture of the world and the PC world, read this thread, and especially post #1.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=56669
Originally posted by NaMo4184
I like koolaid a lot but only fruit punch. Apple's koolaid has been bitter as of late. I am not saying that the macmin is not way over priced. I am saying you can't get the equivalent at 300 dollars. More like 450 to 500 which includes monitor keyboard and mouse and maybe a printer
What your not pointing out is that apple is a much smaller market and can't afford to give the type of discounts that you see in the PC world. And of course those cheap computers are exactly that, cheap. The mac mini may cost a little more but you get quality. As for big business use, I am sure apple caters for business on a seperate model, IE, give them a call as to using the stores and webby which is aimed at retail/home users