DRB

Soli said:

MacPro said:

 but ...but dentists still use Windows 7.

Fabulous news  ... as is AAPL ... just approaching $267!

The title and article don't say much. Using Apple products in 100% of companies simply means that they either issue or allow iPhones and iPads for at least one employee. Chances are they are using Windows, Linux, and Unix servers, Windows for most of their traditional PCs, and then support iPhone and Android, and probably some iPads for various executive needs or particular employees that use it as an appliance. I'd be surprised if this stat hasn't been the case for a decade.

And where's your proof? Obviously Apple doesn't go after the server market. But they do go after the laptop, desktop, tablet and smartphone markets. There was a statement in the articles that said that HUNDREDS of corporations have at least 10,000 Apple devices deployed. IBM has 200,000 Macs and God knows how many iPads and iPhones, probably another 200,000 devices is my guess. Some of these companies have been deploying iPhones and iPads for a while, only some are starting to deploy Macs, but the thing is, IBM went from O to 200,000 Macs in about 5 years. So give the rest of these companies time and see what happens. IBM/Japan, for example now has standardized on Macs and in order to get a PC, you have to submit a request and give actual reasons why you want a PC, and obviously not that many are requesting PCs at IBM Japan. Say what you want, more and more employees in the corporate world are using smartphones as much as they use any other device. In some cases, more. I believe that Apple has had a pretty steady amount of market share in the corporate world with iPhones. I think it's hovering at around 75% or so. And if Apple's getting more laptop and desktop sales into Corporate market, even better. Didn't Walmart just conclude a test with some Macs and after they concluded their tests, they decides to deploy 100,000 iMacs at WalMart Corporate? Face it, Macs and Apple devices are getting more and more traction in Corporate market, especially if the company offers these products to their employees to allow the employee to choose. For Windows to get their 90+% market share, they had to get companies to FORCE PCs onto their workforce. Forcing someone to use something doesn't mean that person WANTS to use the product and it doesn't mean it's better and it doesn't mean the employee is more productive. obviously IBM's internal metric indicate that their employees are more productive and happier, require less IT support and the overall cost are lower with Macs vs PCs. You can deny it all day long, but it's not going to change IBM's metrics by living in denial about this phenomenon.

GeorgeBMac said:

AppleInsider said:

...

employees that used Mac machines were 22 percent more likely to exceed expectations in performance reviews compared to Windows users. Employees generating sales deals has 16% larger proceeds from Mac users as well.
...

I guess having read enumerable medical studies proving that black is white and the sun rises in the west, and having started as an accountant fully cognizant of the truth behind the saying that:  "Figures lie and liars figure", I have become quite cynical of statistics -- particularly those that fail the smell test.

In the case of medical studies it has become generally accepted in the medical community that the primary determinant of the outcome of a study is who funded the study.   And, we all know about accountants and lawyers...

This one fails the smell test.  It reeks of using statistics to prove a point.
Are Macs better in the business environment?   Very likely -- particularly if you it's a favorable environment.   But, these stats sound highly suspicious to me.

IBM is just reporting their findings. IBM sells and supports Windows and Macs to their customers, but their internal use of each platform is what THEY are researching because it helps them make better decisions moving forward in how to deal with their internal IT issues with employees. IBM used force their employees to use Windows, but they don't anymore and now they are looking at various metrics and reporting just to let people know what happens when you change to their new and different method of dealing with IT and their employees.

GeorgeBMac said:

AppleInsider said:

...

employees that used Mac machines were 22 percent more likely to exceed expectations in performance reviews compared to Windows users. Employees generating sales deals has 16% larger proceeds from Mac users as well.
...

I guess having read enumerable medical studies proving that black is white and the sun rises in the west, and having started as an accountant fully cognizant of the truth behind the saying that:  "Figures lie and liars figure", I have become quite cynical of statistics -- particularly those that fail the smell test.

In the case of medical studies it has become generally accepted in the medical community that the primary determinant of the outcome of a study is who funded the study.   And, we all know about accountants and lawyers...

This one fails the smell test.  It reeks of using statistics to prove a point.
Are Macs better in the business environment?   Very likely -- particularly if you it's a favorable environment.   But, these stats sound highly suspicious to me.

Why would it fail the smell test. IBM was never a Mac user because they were Apple's biggest competitor. For most people, it's hard to go public and tell the world that what you used to sell and support is garbage. It's like the CEO of Ford telling the world that now, 40% of his workforce drives GM cars and they are more productive, happier, etc. IBM still has a vested interest in Lenovo, which is one of the biggest PC mfg. and that's the brand IBM uses. So why would IBM go around basically telling the world that PCs (Lenovo) suck in comparison to Macs? And that doesn't pass the smell test?

ITGUYINSD said:

I suppose if one person in each of the 500 companies has an iPhone, then this could be said, too!

The article states that " Also in 2019 are hundreds of different organizations that have over 10,000 Apple devices deployed." Take IBM for example. about 5 years ago, IBM had practically 0 Macs, now they have 200,000 and it doesn't appear that that number is getting smaller. It takes a few years to go through the typical cycle at IBM, but if IBM is finding that the Mac users are far more productive, what happens is that this will catch on with their other users and it's very possible, that more and more IBM employees will switch to a Mac when it's time for them to get a new computer. But having 40% Macs to PC isn't bad at all. That's a VERY respectable percentage. I don't know how many iPhones and iPads, but they probably have somewhere around 200,000 or so assorted iDevices in addition to the 200,000 Macs.

greg uvan said:

This is a weird article. I was trying to imagine what it would mean for a fortune 500 company to _not_ use any Apple products. It's hard to even imagine. If iOS has, let's say, 13% marketshare, that's one in every 8 people who are using an iPhone. What are the chances that clustered in a fortune 500 company are hundreds, if not thousands, of people, and none of them is using an iPhone. 

Corporations are typically run differently than the average consumer. These Fortune 500 corporations typically have plenty of money to spend on IT for their employees. if you look at the majority of the consumer base, they can't afford that much, which is why the majority of Android phones sold are the cheap ones in the $200 or less category. Plus, Corporations tend to like using what works better for their environment. IBM has done several presentations over the years regarding their transition to Apple products and whether it's the laptop side or the mobile device side, Apple has lots of advantages over Windows or Android. It's still refreshing that Apple has finally cracked into the Fortune 500 market and once they are in at this level, it's hard to get them out, especially when these companies are saving money or getting higher productivity out of their employees.