1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

iPhone not enterprise ready: Gartner

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Jun 27, 2009.

  1. macrumors bot

  2. macrumors 6502

    IT departments have always been control freaks. Just because a device is independently secure and inherently not subject to their obsessive-compulsive control through frivolous and and annoying security policies, does not mean it is unfit for enterprise environments. Let's think about this, if IT cannot crack into an iPhone to control it, how likely is it that someone else will? Or even if they do, how far would they get??
    I think Apple realizes that the thing most people hate about IT departments is how controlling they are, which is one reason they ensure their products are made to not need it. Sorry IT people, your job becomes significantly less important with the reign of Mac (and iPhone).
  3. macrumors 6502a


    The reason IT departments are such control freaks is that all the technical babies out there who don't want to know how their computer works will blame them when things go wrong. Another reason would be unfamiliarity with the device. Popular or not, the iPhone is just one of many smartphones, and if IT departments were simply to allow their users to use whatever phone they wanted, imagine the support headache learning how all those devices interact (or don't) with the network.
  4. macrumors 6502


    Mte you are talking rubbish. We in I.T need the enterprise aspect of of technology for more than security. It's for keeping control of things when they go wrong, need changes or upgrades, etc.

    The most simplest analogy that I can come up with is: computers in an office are much more easier to control when they are in a network. If there are 100 machines in one office, and you had to make changes to them all such as software, or patches, it is A LOT easier doing it at a single point, rather than all individually.

    You must not know ANYTHING about IT if you say "Sorry IT people, your job becomes significantly less important with the reign of Mac (and iPhone).". No one's job in IT is at risk because of mac or iPhone. Blackberry and nokia still have a HUGE monopoly of businesses and the trend will continue..
  5. macrumors 68020


    What a confusing article. It ends with this:

    So the there's really no problem? It seems that communication and organizing are what many people use computing devices for. So why the thumbs down for the iPhone? That wasn't clear.
  6. macrumors newbie


    I have to agree with you on everything except the part of "World Domination" by Blackberry and Nokia . Everybody in my office has already dumped their Blackberrys since AT&T now offers the enterprise package for the iPhone. It won't be long...
  7. macrumors 6502


    I'm one of those end users subject to this general attitude in IT that if you don't want to get run over then don't cross the road and I'm totally with you on this. In my office people are given Blackberry but most of us have iPhones and do almost everything work related on it without interference from IT.
  8. macrumors 6502a


    I do agree that IT professionals are total control freaks, particulary in my company. I have been hounding them for a year now to allow our iphones on the MS Exchange network, but they continue to refuse my requests.

    The problem may lie with the fact that the iPhone can be modified, jailbroken, and hacked to a degree. For example, with a jb phone one can defeat the rather annoying unlock password that defaults with Exchange mail setup. This could be potentially disastrous in the case of a lost or stolen phone where sensitive information may be contained in emails or elsewhere.
  9. macrumors 6502

    Clearly you know nothing about Mac's. We will see what happens in a few years, but as Mac's increase, need for IT WILL decrease.
  10. macrumors 68020


    I personally know of a few major corporations that are switching to the iPhone. Mainly because they can put custom applications on it.

    One is a Major Law Firm in the NYC area.
  11. macrumors 6502a


    If something is plural it doesn't require an apostrophe. Sorry but you are wrong. Not only will Macs still need support, we will soon see how much of IT related issues are user related. The network will still slow down when some idiot decides to send a video attachment to all his mates. Keyboards and mice will still need to be replaced because someone spilled coffee on them, and when they do, the Apple replacements will cost considerably more.

    Have you ever used a Mac in a work environment? With hundreds or even thousands on the same system? Most likely the answer is no, because Macs just don't aim at that market.
  12. macrumors 6502

    Would you please just stay on a PC and stop posting drivel like this? Or do you get paid by Microsoft to spread FUD?
  13. macrumors 6502a


    Another technical baby I can see. I am on a PC, posting from a Mac. Do Apple pay you to spread FUD? No, you pay them.
  14. macrumors 6502

    Thank you for pointing out my grammatical error. It really went a long way to exposing my incompetence.:rolleyes: But actually, you are wrong (we can keep going back and forth on this forever if you would like). Mac's simply do not need as much support as PC's, it is a fact (that's probably incorrect grammar as well, feel free to point it out). I really can't blame you for being defensive about this, because it is your job security after all.
  15. macrumors 6502

    Can't someone "jailbreak" a Blackberry and achieve the same thing??
  16. macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    There is another reason everyone seems to forget about IT departments and why they are such control freaks. They are historically HORRIBLLY under staff. The ideal ration for IT department should be 25 to 1 ratio. For every 25 employees you need 1 IT staff member. Way to many companies are running 50-100 to 1 ratios. This means your IT departments are over burden as it is. Because of this they are going to be very controlling on what goes on the systems because it means FEWER stupid problems from the end users installing things on the computers.

    Also because they are so understaff it does give them enough time for testing to make sure everything works and as such they are not going to let it go out system wide because they do not have time to deal with the stupid problem.

    People are idiots and most of the staff calls IT departments with stupid problems that most of them could solve themselves if they knew even a little about what they are doing.
  17. macrumors 6502a


    In case you hadn't noticed, I did go on to argue the point as well. Pointing out grammatical errors just shows that you aren't quite up to speed on the English language, which I feel is something people ignore too much on messageboards. These aren't text messages where 9 keys have to represent 26 or more digits, you have a full keyboard there. If you aren't up to speed on your first language then it weakens your debating skills.

    I have never seen anyone show any studies whatsoever that show Macs require less support than PCs, just anecdotal evidence presented on Mac fanboards. My own experience is that Macs require less support simply because there are fewer of them. But that is, as with all the other evidence I have seen, personal experience, not indicative of a general trend. In fact if I was being harsh I could say that Macs require more upkeep, seeing as I bought a second hand iBook off ebay and it broke beyond repair within 2 months. But that wouldn't be a fair comparison, just as many of the stories presented on these boards are not fair comparisons either.
  18. macrumors 68000


    QFT. Macs and PCs both require support in terms of software loading and maintenance. The unproven idea that Macs - at least in a corporate environment - need less support needs to die now.

    As for the iPhone and enterprise, not going to happen. Too expensive, too limited and too locked down.
  19. JNB
    macrumors 604


    Funny, in that every study has shown that a Mac-oriented shop has a lower TCO (including the support component) than a PC-oriented one. Ironic, too, that it was Gartner themselves that originated the concept and some of the original metrics.

    Obviously, this really only applies when you compare operations that are predominately one or the other, a smattering of Macs (or PC's) in a business would likely have a slightly greater cost, as the expertise and supply channels are separate, and hence, not benefiting from scale.

    Check out CIO Magazine for a plethora of articles and further reading.
  20. macrumors 68000


    Sorry, but that's simply not true. If you're referring to CIO magazine I sincerely hope it's not their seven reasons not to buy/eight reasons to buy (or whatever it was) articles which were more than a little lacking in substance and quite fundamentally flawed in their assumptions. I'd also hope that you aren't referencing Winn Schwartau's discredited calculation model.

    Gartner did posit the idea about fifteen or so years ago and, in fairness, Macs actually are cheaper than PCS is certain specialized situations however as a general rule they aren't. A good leasing arrangement with a high volume OEM provider coupled with site licensing and support agreements win every time.

    I should point out that I do this stuff as part of my job. It would be nice if there was actually some competition in terms of volume desktop installations but, frankly, there isn't just now. Apple just isn't at the races here.
  21. macrumors 6502

    Lovely argument and wonderful use of the English language. That must mean you know what the @&$! you are talking about.:rolleyes: Thanks for the good laugh, I just don't run into people quite as arrogant and obsessive-compulsive as you... Oh wait, I.T. does seem to attract that.

    I have had fun in never-never land, I have to go back to the real world now where people don't edit their grammar for every single forum post.
  22. macrumors 6502a


    No, Macs attract that. Getting moist over UI details, complaining that their SATA is 1.5GB and not 3. But when their PC goes wrong, they expect someone else to fix it for them.

    I've looked at this CIO magazine and can't see anything about total cost of ownership of Mac compared to PC. That might be because its search function returns articles from 2007.
  23. macrumors 6502

    Wonderful grammar! Does it make you feel superior to claim that you're running Windows on a Mac? I assume that's what you mean by:
    or maybe you're sitting on a PC while typing on a Mac! Either way, you don't deserve the Mac.

    Oh and stop lying about TCO. Everyone knows that there have been studies for decades that show Mac TCO is significantly lower. Even Intel had one in the 90s (before OS X with its even lower TCO) that they were embarrassed to talk about because Apple wasn't using their chips at the time.
  24. macrumors 6502a


    I'm saying a Mac is a PC. If there are studies then please link one, because they aren't easy to find. And if the studies are old they are pretty much irrelevant now anyway, since Apple uses the same components as other manufacturers.
  25. JNB
    macrumors 604


    True, but that's not comparing them on equal terms then, now is it? Plus, that's entirely a high volume/low margin business, which is not Apple's target, and hasn't been in any real manner since the 80's. I'm excruciatingly aware of the standard Dell/MS enterprise business model (I've been there, too, from both sides of the deal ;)). For the majority of the Word/Excel/surf-the-web-at-lunch office drones, that's more than good enough.

    That being said, unless & until Apple decides it's in their interest to compete similarly in the enterprise market, we'll never really know for sure, will we? :)

Share This Page