What is Digg?237 Comments
- inactive, on 12/27/2008, -12/+91FTA- ""Have software that will only run on a PC? No problem," recounts Romanelli. "There is software for the Mac called VMWare that will run Windows like an application on the Mac." Using VMware, he says, you can install any Windows software you need and work just like you're on a PC"
As long as people keep buying Windows licenses they aren't switching away from the Windows platform, just switching to a more expensive PC. They are still making Microsoft rich and adding to Steve Jobs' coffers at the same time. Add the cost of a retail Windows license to the cost of the Mac and there isn't a cost comparison. This assumes the business owners will do this legally and not run pirated software. VMware isn't free, either. Macs aren't ready for business as long as you have to buy a Windows license to run the software you need. - ohplease, on 12/27/2008, -14/+65OSX is the enterprise desktop equivalent of Windows NT4. Until we see something remotely close to Active Directory integrated Group Policy Objects and a corporate email system that can realistically compete with Exchange, no enterprise architects are going to give it a second look. Macs are impossible to centrally manage in a large enterprise (10,000+ corporate desktops) compared to Windows. Apple knows this and isn't even trying to compete in this segment.
The only people that dont get this are Apple fan boys who think that an enterprise network is just a bunch of PCs plugged into shared wiring, and PC journalists that have never managed a network bigger than 500 users. - bluehouse, on 12/27/2008, -4/+51What businesses? Where? This guy searched the country, found 4 business possibly making the switch and he concludes all businesses every where are switching? Take head, remove from ass please
- SOS84, on 12/27/2008, -16/+60"The Mac OS has long been known as an operating system for graphic artists and creative folks"
This is the most tired and nonsensical lie that Job's Mob spouts regarding Apple's OS. - inactive, on 12/27/2008, -1/+36You miss my point. Microsoft sells an operating system, not hardware. In any scenario if you install Windows you need a license to install it and Microsoft sells it's software. Whether it's on a Dell, an HP, or an Apple hardware platform you are still in the Windows camp.
- Evildudetx, on 12/27/2008, -12/+46Yeah, I don't see this working all that well. Why the hell would I want to support Mac OS and then have to support Windows running in virtual sessions on top of that? What sense does that make?
Windows will continue to dominate the workplace. Apple had their shot and messed it up. - UnWeave, on 12/27/2008, -4/+35FTA - '"Believe it or not, it was a cost issue. It was actually cheaper to buy iMacs than comparable PCs. A few years ago, this wasn't the case," Romanelli says.'
Where the hell was he trying to buy his PCs from? - Urkel, on 12/27/2008, -3/+28People who praise VMWare or Parallels as a BUSINESS solution are people who haven't put much time into using those apps. While they are nice to have for occasional windows use, the reality is that it requires a lot of memory, it slows down a system and it forces average end users to manage two OS's even though they can barely manage one.
And what exactly is the end result? A $1500 computer pretending it is a $400 computer.
All the negatives and positives of running windows still exist so why does the media push so hard at pretending there is some sort of corporate sweep where business people are looking to emulate OS's when their primary apps are available on BOTH platforms. - rpeters, on 12/27/2008, -10/+33*****. Utter *****. The only Apple computer that is a good bang for the buck is the Macbook (preferably the older the plastic ones). I'm looking at iMacs now and browsing BB and see huge differences in specs per price (I made that factor up).
- doctordbx, on 12/27/2008, -4/+25I think this is more wisful thinking than reality.
- mr5150, on 12/27/2008, -5/+26All this talk about VM ware and Parallels is nonsensical in the business environment. The likelihood of ditching MS servers altogether will not occur so a sensible approach would be to created a terminal services box and load up cheap Terminal Services licenses as most of the MS based apps in the corporate environment would most likely be, small business apps and specialized accounting packages too costly to convert or unavailable. Alternatively wine for mac or crossover by codeweavers does a really great job of creating a WinApps environment for users to run locally.
With some quality logical thought and perseverance Mac in the workplace is a hugely doable project with some really great cost saving benefits for the company looking at this as an alternative and enjoying the benefits that Apple has to bring to the corporate support table which MS have dominated for the past two decades. - Ramble, on 12/27/2008, -9/+28Yea right. Who makes popular business software for the Mac? No-one. What runs the financial institutions? Linux (and sometimes Windows).
Hell, even in my sector - physics where a lot of the software is open source and cross platform no-one would use a Mac. - waspbr, on 12/27/2008, -6/+23very lame uninsightful article
- thedragon4453, on 12/27/2008, -1/+17Yeah, but discouraging Mac sales isn't helping anyone. Windows 7 looks like it will completely trounce Vista. I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that Macs have become a more viable option due to things like Vmware and Parallels.
At some point, as Mac market share grows, the new Mac users will be clamoring for native or cross platform software, and the devs will deliver to protect bottom line. Virtualization for Macs is a stop gap. I also don't think you'll find a lot of Mac users spending a lot of time in a virtual machine. I think most only use it for a program or two, but do most of the day-to-day in OS X.
What would be even better though is if Linux could edge its way into the market more though. That would really force competition. For more, see the Browser wars. You'd still be using IE 6 if not for Firefox. - darkNiGHTS, on 12/27/2008, -11/+27It's sad that six delusional Apple fanboys actually dugg up the parent comment.
- ashleyjrw, on 12/27/2008, -2/+17I'm *****? What because I don't judge people based on what OS they choose to use? I use OSX; I wouldn't use Windows now; I wouldn't use Linux (for anything other than a server); I wouldn't ever eat cheese again (hate the stuff)…they're called preferences.
I used Windows for god knows how many years (right up to Vista — in fact I've spent many hours defending Vista on forums, I was a total Windows fanboy right up to the morning I got my Mac), theres nothing wrong with it, I just prefer OSX.
So not based on what OS you use, right back at you — YOUR the ***** up one out of us two; grow up! :) - blergle, on 12/27/2008, -2/+14Few areas need to be addressed first. Firstly if Apple are so hot for the enterprise, why did they discontinue their XServe RAID? Ok they are pushing a third party SAN now, but for those of us who are needing replacement parts for the old RAID it's not ideal. Might be an idea to fix Leopard server so it doesn't keep crapping out if you simply log on to it then try to do something.
ARD is a nice idea, but still a toy. You know if I want to push out a script to 100+ Macs, guess what? I don't want to have to make sure they are all turned on and booted and laptop users are in work connected to the network before I can do this. I want to setup the script and fire it off to be installed whenever they can. Sure they are starting to get the idea with the 'task server' in version 3 however that's only useful if you are installing packages. Yes I could make a package for every single line script I want to send out, but that's a PITA when I should be able to just send things out asynchronously with one click.
Wireless 802.1X with PEAP authentication seriously needs to be fixed. Trying to explain to users that no actually you can't have the 32 character enterprise network password for the wireless authentication that drops you into the business VLAN is difficult, but it keeps asking for it even after it's in the relevant keychains. Sometimes turning airport off and on again works.
Active Directory integration is ok when it works, but plagued by stupid irrelevant errors such as telling you your administrative binding password is wrong when it isn't (when actual problem is there is an old Kerberos config file hanging around in /var/db/dslocal/nodes/Default/config/ that needs deleting.) - hamobu, on 12/27/2008, -6/+17Every few years I see these "business will run on Mac" articles. So far no evidence that Macs will gain foothold beyond yuppie and beatnik turtleneck market.
- Murdats, on 12/27/2008, -0/+11alienware? bloody expensive machines r us?
- unluckier, on 12/27/2008, -6/+15I can't comment on the quality or effectiveness as I have not used the software, but OSX has equivalents of Active Directory:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/direct ...
Group Policy:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/client ...
Corporate email:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/mail.h ...
and more:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/
Saying it's the equivalent of NT4 and that Apple isn't even trying to compete in this segment is a bit ignorant. - Munk3y, on 12/27/2008, -13/+22Buried as BS.
- inactive, on 12/27/2008, -5/+14"Clearly, you've never been in a "creative" corporation. I've worked for several (huge ones). They ALWAYS use Macs for their creative divisions, which often leads to Mac creep."
Probably.
"Creatives don't want to know how their computer works. They don't want to struggle through every operation. They want to be creative."
Noone wants to struggle through every operation; not 'Creatives', not IT people and certainly not the layman. That's why millions of dollars are spent every year by Microsoft, Apple, Gnome (or KDE, or whichever you prefer) and dozens of other corporations researching human-computer interaction to make our lives easier, often to great effect. What they don't figure out first, they nick from each other; which in the end probably benefits everyone regardless of their chosen OS.
"... for those of you about to get compterier-than-thou, I have some questions for you. Do you care about how your car works? Have you ever upgraded its engine? If so, did you do it yourself? If the answer to any of these questions was "no" then please shut the ***** up."
Yes, I do care about how my car works. Most people in the IT profession are interested in all kinds of systems, not just computers. No, I have never upgraded a car's engine, if I did attempt to I'd probably blow myself up somehow, proverbially if not in the literal sense. Have you ever made your own paints, or programmed custom tools for Photoshop (or whichever software you prefer)?
"Macs are the computers we wanted when we were kids (at least those of us who are old enough to remember a world without computers in our homes). We wanted science-fiction-level ease of use. We wanted bells and whistles."
I'm sure you did want a Mac when you were a kid; I'm fairly certain I did too. That didn't suddenly make them intrinsically better before, and it doesn't now.
"If you want to get into the guts of computers AND get sanctimonious about it, then knock yourself out. I'll be over here making a living creatively and I'll really appreciate your knowledge the next time I'm at Best Buy and you, or some other member of the Geek Squad, directs me to the products I need for my overpriced wonder machine."
May I remind you that you wouldn't have computers at all without people who want to 'get into the guts' of them. You think you're somehow superior because you think profit from your creativity and we do not, whereas the software and hardware you use to draw and communicate, indeed all modern devices upon which you rely are products of our creativity; something which I feel has far more intrinsic beauty and usefulness than a few lines on a proverbial canvas. - polumrak, on 12/27/2008, -3/+12Actually, ohplease is 100% correct.
OD is nowhere near Active Directory, and Mac OS X Server's Postifx is nowhere near Exchange.
In terms of manageability and scalability, and in terms of stability as well.
Trust me. Worked with both. - inactive, on 12/27/2008, -3/+11woah, you can dual boot on macs? that's really special.
- mxman420, on 12/27/2008, -3/+11I'm an older accounting student and also a tutor for acct and finance. Let me tell the biggest problem I have with students are the half that own Macs. Sorry, Macs and acct/finance do not get along. Most of the people have problems with Excel, the standard of what is used in the industry, and pulling up research such as companies financial documents. Apple and Mac may be increasing in the private world, but in my field, I have also work as an accountant for a pharmaceutical company, and there are no Macs around. The closest thing is half the office has iPhones. But that is starting to change too. Half of the ones left have bought Blackberry Storms.
- Breyker4711, on 12/27/2008, -1/+9Or people could just think you are being a dick...
- inactive, on 12/27/2008, -2/+10Macs will never take over the business world due to their ***** backward compatibility. There is already a huge list of software that won't work on Snow Leopard at mac rumor forums. A lot of people had to move over from PPC to Intel, who knows what other radical moves Apple will do next time around.
At least with Windows you know that everything will work. I can use all of my XP apps on Vista. Ironically, this is why people call Windows bloated, but it's the main reason why it's so successful in the business area. - saikyan, on 12/27/2008, -0/+8Car analogies don't work.
Lamborghini uses VW engines. - ashleyjrw, on 12/27/2008, -9/+17Lie? Have any proof to back that up? I'm not in the "creative world" (I can't design to save my life), but a lot of friends are — they all use Macs, and everyone they know use Macs. Of course its not more popular than Windows, OSX only has a total market share of ~12%, but its very popular in the design world.
In the average business though (documents, spreadsheets, email, etc.) there isn't much need for OSX due to the cost of a new machine. I still see offices with Celeron and Pentium 3 CPUs, so even a Mac Mini is over powered for their needs!
I use a Mac, I would NEVER use a Windows PC again; the only thing I don't like is the price — as a student, I pray everyday my Mac has a long life ahead if itself, cause if it dies, I am....*****. - turpialito, on 12/27/2008, -7/+15Although you hit the nail on the head, sadly the fanboys are digging you down. Akin to religious fanatics, these fanboys wouldn't accept the truth if it hit them in their smug faces with a sledgehammer.
- MtheoryX, on 12/27/2008, -1/+81.) You cannot run "all the same software." For example, try managing AD
2.) Macs crash too. Ever heard of a kernel panic?
3.) Your single case is not the rule
4.) You need to use a Mac for much longer than a single week to have any weight for comment at all.
...and this is coming from a Mac user. You're making the rest of us look bad, so stop it already. - gohepcat, on 12/27/2008, -0/+7PC users who actually know how incredibly powerful an AD environment is might go berserk because we see what things are like in the real world. Switching to Macs would be simply impossible for every business I've ever worked with.
I know it's hard to believe, the business world really is filled with software that doesn't have an equivalent on the Mac. - Claverhouse, on 12/27/2008, -3/+9Now Apple are using PC components made by Intel, NVidia and ATI, and are allowing more than one drive to be installed, combined with the fact that it can run Windows software, it means they are well on the way to producing a pretty good Windows PC.
- RagingIce, on 12/27/2008, -4/+10Making unsubstantiated claims isn't hard, and you probably could have done it in less than 4 paragraphs...
- gohepcat, on 12/27/2008, -1/+6I know John Halamka. It's only through the lax atmosphere at Harvard that he can get away with this. The sheer amount of people needed to support these Macs make them a bad choice.
People who truly don't know what MS is like on the server/network side have no idea what they are talking about. The sheer maount of free training and support from MS is baffling. - hdrkid, on 12/27/2008, -6/+11I can get a laptop at Office Depot for $299 with all the bells and whistles. Apple is too pricey. Now if Apple allowed clones instead of suing them, maybe it would be more cost competitive. Already they move to Intel so people ask the question "Why pay more?"
- AzzX, on 12/27/2008, -4/+9I get paid to use Macs - but PC hardware in the right hands (not a Apple fanboy) can achieve so much more - that is life get over it.
Articles like this are so bloody stupid I cannot believe the inccuracy attached to it. - permaremote, on 12/27/2008, -1/+6Our basic work Dells cost about £450 (24" widescreen Core2, 2Gb etc), the cheapest equivalent mac was £799 at the time. Since then, we've added video cards and replaced a faulty HDD, which involved a cheaper and easier operation than we could've managed with a Mac.
I've grown up with Macs, always loved 'em, but I'm much less enthusiastic about them now. I've had too many crashes, file and driver compatibility probs, not to mention hardware grief (ever spilled a single drop of water on an Apple keyboard? Don't. Those new mouses with the nice thin lead? It's the only mouse model I've had to replace. Single button, at that). Noone ever seems to mention Applecare, which seems vital when buying a new Mac now.
I use Windows, Mac and Linux equally, but I'd much prefer Ubuntu in the workplace, if that was a viable option. - inactive, on 12/27/2008, -0/+5Thats weird, because all our engineers, physicists and bio science people use macs. I guess it's because we have top researchers that actually get paid decent money and get good grants. sucks to be poor like you guys.
- inactive, on 12/27/2008, -1/+6Actually the back-end servers often run on the AS/400.
- Tekmazter, on 12/27/2008, -0/+5To someone not familiar licensing costs, performance metrics and just good 'ol policies and procedures, let me break down a few false claims from the article:
"Have software that will only run on a PC? No problem," recounts Romanelli. "There is software for the Mac called VMWare that will run Windows like an application on the Mac." Using VMware, he says, you can install any Windows software you need and work just like you're on a PC. "Plus, there's no need to reboot to do this.
Sure, you can run VMware and install Windows ... but in this regard, Romanelli is a bit of a fool. What end user is going to have beefy enough hardware to run Windows on top of another OS and get decent performance out of a desktop? This just isn't a viable solution and why it's not even done in the Windows world at the desktop. Romanelli should also begin informing his employees that their MAC's performance is going to tank under the load of two operating systems using the same disk to do I/O, share memory and time ticks on their proc's. Of course this can be compensated for with some high end desktops, but wait --this is supposed to be CHEAPER. This leads me to move on to his next comment ...
"Even better: it saved the company money."
In what capacity? Someone call out the Microsoft licensing police because if this company saved $$$ going this direction there is no way they're compliant. First, you have to buy a new Windows VECD license. That's right... you have to still buy Windows. And, you have to have a dedicated license for every VM you run. You still have to buy Office licenses or whatever the hell else you plan to use which is Microsoft royalty as well. Even if you only need 1/3 Windows in a virtual environment, any savings you initially saw to buy JUST MAC's is more than gone plus a further investment in additional software and hardware.
"there is free software available for download on the Mac called NeoOffice and it will open and save Word docs and Excel files the same way Microsoft Office does"
Depending on your current employees familiarity or skill level with MS Office, good luck! You're going to spend many thousands to train everyone all over again. The support costs from an IT perspective alone could be substantial. But wait, they're already getting paid ... so that doesn't count --SCREW IT!
"I think most Apple computers will enter enterprises in 2009 as a result of users connecting their own machines, rather than IT departments purchasing them," Smulders says."
This is just flat out wrong. With regulatory compliance alone, more government regulation at both the state and federal levels, any business with a need to protect information and answer to clients will have to be more agressive in restricting personal laptops and remote access from non-company-owned systems. The one thing I will say here is that with more and more VPN technologies being clientless (SSL VPN comes to mind), at least MAC's can connect remotely via a web browser. Actually bringing in equipment to an office which has policies and procedures established to further control information inside of its walls however is not something I expect personally owned MAC's to be able to flourish under. - withincontext, on 12/27/2008, -0/+5Alienware probably.
- counterplex, on 12/27/2008, -0/+5I agree with you on the central management bit completely. However, as a Mac user who finds increased productivity on OSX vs. Vista, I've found that even integrating into the network as a client has its benefits.
Sure, Mac users are considered "unsupported" in any enterprise environment, but it's good to be able to interconnect with the rest of the workplace. I know most of my colleagues are happy using some flavor of Windows which means we don't have a critical mass of OSX users that central management becomes a problem. I'm hoping by the time it does become an issue there will be tools to do the job. - rpeters, on 12/27/2008, -1/+6@galaxylander
I'm looking at HP's all-in-one desktop...don't forget that entire screen is one giant multi-touch screen. I'm sure there's a small price bump for THAT feature. Even in the base model, it has 4 gigs to the imac's 1 gig. It doesn't have the better graphics card (not THAT much better than the integrated one), but does have the card reader (i know, plug a reader into the imac's usb and you're gold).
In the end, the base models for each are roughly the same with the HP coming in at 50 bucks less.
Even for the higher end models for each, the price is in favor of the HP with better/more features for less price (with the exception of the imac's faster C2D clock speed). - saikyan, on 12/27/2008, -0/+5The problem is, yours is an experience as an individual user. The corporate perspective has very different requirements and expectations, some of which the Mac does not fit into very easily.
- kreatre2007, on 12/27/2008, -0/+5PCs may be cheaper in terms of price of purchase but, they are NOT cheaper to maintain. This old argument of "PCs are cheaper than Macs" is very tired now. This argument leaves out the comparison between the two platforms and it does not take into account the advantages and disadvantages of the two choices. Sure, you can buy a cookie cutter Dell for a cut throat price but, it's a piece of crap. Here's a compelling reason: Macs are more secure than Windows PCs are. There is even less of a chance that the information stored on them will be compromised. Also, end users tend to download a lot of crapware that pops upon various websites. I have observed this happening a lot less often on Macs. You're using Solaris servers so there must have been a "compelling reason" behind that choice. Why not just do what "everyone else" does and use Windows servers?
- a2fan, on 12/27/2008, -0/+4@Ramble -- I've worked as a contractor for a number of NASA projects and I see tons of Macs being used by the scientists and mission techs. They aren't fanboys, they just have work to get done.
- unitedatheism, on 12/27/2008, -0/+4You bought a fiat, but you think that is a lambo because you don't know ***** about cars.
You should just keep the original engine instead of trying to boost your computer with a proper OS and face the consequences. - carbonfilament, on 12/27/2008, -1/+5@smj887:
Its not the software, its the OS. I used PCs for years, aside from my first computer which was an apple2c. I bought a G5 tower 3 years ago, and continued to use my windows laptop until this past february when it got replaced with a MacBook Air.
Whenever I help out my dad with his computer (PC) or any of my friends that have PCs, I find I always have to engage my left brain more. The Mac OS is (for me) a more graphical layout, a more intuitive layout, and I find that I have to worry less about the computer working. If I want the computer to do something it just does it. This leaves my right brain free to be creative. It really is that simple.
There are other benefits of the apple/osx partnership that you can't find elsewhere in the market. The most notable being that they build their hardware and their software, and design them to work together. This is related to the above, which means that the machine almost always "just works". I hear a lot of griping from recent switchers and PC users about the "Apple knows best" attitude. What I find is that when I turn on my computer I don't want to worry about whether something will work right, whether I'll have to download a new driver to plug in a printer, whether I can interface with my friends computers, etc etc. The Mac out of the box is very customizable, it often is just not clear to recent switchers because they are used to having to work hard at everything. The fact is that Macs, out of the box, play nice with almost every device, network well with almost every operating system, and I've discovered that is Apple knows best about how my machine should interface with my friend's windows PC, that's just fine with me. I have other ***** to do than worry about how to get some trivial task done.
There is no denying that a windows PC can do the same, it just takes more effort from the left side of my brain. Its not that I'm not capable of downloading drivers and setting up networking, its that I don't want to deal with it while I'm concentrating on creative output. Everyone that works hard on a project can appreciate this - something that distracts you from your project breaks concentration and screws up your flow. Apparently windows designers and their anti-virus counterparts don't really get this since windows (and the anti virus stuff you need installed) give you pop up notifications of anything and everything every 2 minutes.
It also means that visually the machine and the OS interface are linked and look great together, which while it sounds dumb IS cosmetically pleasing. My Air still brings a smile to my face in a way that not many PC laptops ever have. People design bad looking computers. Its just a fact of life, and I'd rather not own an eye sore.
There's no doubt that the Mac IS still a computer, and does still have problems. Every once in a while I have to stop what I'm doing and engage my left brain, open terminal, and troubleshoot a problem. However this is FAR less often (once or twice a month, and I'm on the computer around 16 hours a day when I'm prepping a project) than I ever had to deal with it on my windows machine.
And for all you linux folks out there, I know, I know....I'm sure there are great linux distros. If one of my Macs breaks, I might think about building a linux box next cause I've never done it. But right now, and for the foreseeable future, everything is working fine. I'll continue to use smooth, well programmed interfaces like OSX, switch, visual hub, and all the rest of the well programmed software that's available for free or very cheaply. - Breyker4711, on 12/27/2008, -1/+5I find it funny that people get worked up over which hammer is better. Using OS X, a Linux distro, or Windows get similar results. Superiority of an OS basically comes down to a matter of preference to which one is better (for you).
So stop lying to yourselves over this ***** and understand not everyone is going to agree with your opinion. To go along with that: saying there isn't a movement to alternatives to windows through out the population is like saying Apple is really just for creative types... meaning don't be ***** stupid. They all ultimately do the same thing, just certain operation are better suited for a specific hammer.
Grow up people -
Show 51 - 100 of 241 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is