Seeking Windows Alternatives

Discussion in 'MacRumors News Discussion (archive)' started by arn, Aug 6, 2002.

  1. arn
    macrumors god

    arn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2001
    #1
    MacMinute cites this press release from YankeeGroup on a recent report on alternatives to Windows. Of interest, it appears that Windows dissatisfaction is at an all time high, and may provide more opportunity for Apple to gain marketshare:

    A recent joint survey of 1,500 corporations by Sunbelt Software, Inc. and the Yankee Group found that nearly 40% of the respondents were so outraged by Microsoft's new licensing scheme that they are actively seeking alternative products.
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2001
    Location:
    Champaign, IL, USA
    #2
    Well, there's only really one windows alternative
     
  3. Moderator emeritus

    eyelikeart

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Location:
    Metairie, LA
    #3
    damn...40% is a bold factor...

    I firmly believe there are many more than that who are frustrated with Windows...but most I've run into don't know any better or are just afraid of a Mac...

    one thing I hate dealing with is when people say "Well I've always heard that Macs suck..."

    but then when I ask them why I get no retort... :rolleyes:

    anyway...I think the time will come when we're seeing many companies making the switch over to Mac OS X once they are so frustrated with Windows and it's b.s. that they finally just snap... :D
     
  4. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2001
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #4
    A lot of Windows users I know do complain about cost and this and that. But only very few of them even think about switching. They don't even consider to have a Linux, Apache based Web or Intranet Server. No, they just buy Windows because it is allready installed on their Dell's.

    But everybody looks with envy at my TiBook with OSX. :D
     
  5. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2001
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #5
    ah yes and they shurly will have the eyes pop out when they'll see my new (upcomming) G4 with Cinema HD Display.

    please bring out those new G4 tomorrow
     
  6. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2002
    Location:
    Geneva, Switzerland
    #6
    Just hope that...

    ... Apple won't make a foolish move instead of using this window of opportunity. I often have the impression that when a company makes a bad move the competition tends to follow rather than use it for its own benefit. I hope that if the article is right, Apple will be able to take advantage of it.

    Cheers all,
    Pit : )

    ++++
     
  7. macrumors 68020

    mymemory

    Joined:
    May 9, 2001
    Location:
    Miami
    #7
    Ok, just one question?

    Do you know how much does it cost to create a Mac based network compared to windows?

    At lits 3 or 4 times more, just because the price of the hardware. Just figuring that out people will re-think about changing platforms, specially large corporations.

    If WE as mac users can not find all the applications for OSX from OS9, imagine to jump from Windows to OSX.

    If I have to set up a network in my bank I will go for Windows, the tach support guys will have to deal with the problems and still a long way cheaper.
     
  8. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2002
    #8
    :mad:

    What utter BS!

    Apple uses the same networking technology as the Wintel crowd. From cabling to routers they use the exact same infrastructure from the exact same vendors.

    The only difference is the price of the computers themselves, and Macs are FAR from 3 to 4 times more expensive, especially when one looks at TCO (total cost of ownership).

    Look at the number of IT peons it takes to manage a wintel network. Look at the number of IT peons it takes to manage a like number of Macs. According to the Garnder Group, and other studies, the Macs require one third to one fifth the IT resources.

    Hmm, 10% more expensive on inital purchase, 60% to 80% cheaper to maintain over the nex t 2 to 5 years.

    mymemory, go troll elsewhere...
     
  9. macrumors 68030

    Snowy_River

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Corvallis, OR
    #9
    While I'll agree that Macs are more expensive, I've worked as a network administrator on a Windows Network. For a mere twelve or so computers, the company paid me $34k per year to keep them up and running. In addition, we also had outside tech support from both a local company and from MS. This probably amounted to on the order of an additional $5k-$8k per year.

    As a contrast, I have also worked as a Mac network admin. For eight computers I had about two to three hours per week doing administration, the rest of the time I worked as an engineer - billable time. We also had outside support, amounting to two service calls in a year, to the tune of about $800.

    Now, if you think that you can save on the order of $40k (per year) on a dozen PCs over Macs, you're welcome to try. From the point of view of a major company, every one that I've ever talked to that has evaluated Macs vs. PCs, PCs are cheaper in the short run, but Macs are far cheaper in the long run.
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #10
    I think this is why most of the schools around my area are slowly converting to macs. Almost all of the computer labs in the high schools are now macs. I remeber 4 years ago being a freshmen and seeing a dominate ration of pc's over macs. It's all slowly changing.

    And isn't it nice?? :p
     
  11. macrumors 6502a

    ImAlwaysRight

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2002
    #11
    You need to remember your average consumer doesn't have $6500 to throw into a new system. More like $1-2K, which is why PC's sell so well. The base PowerMac costs $1600, $2600 if you want to add the 17" display, and this machine doesn't even have L3 cache, is stuck at 800MHz, and uses PC133 RAM and an ATA/66 hard drive. You can get a lot more PC for $2600.

    I know the Mac OS has advantages, which is why I use it, but cost is still THE primary factor when it comes to a computer purchase for most folks.
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    etoiles

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2002
    Location:
    Where the air is crisp
    #12
    ...people will be happy with Apple's licensing schemes until they want to upgrade their system and realize they have to pay for a full new version.

    This is not only about switching from 10.1 to 10.2, remember 10.0 to 10.1 ? It was 'free' (well, $20 for handling), but only for a short period of time. When I went to the Apple store, they told me that I would have to pay for a full 10.1 !!! And that the best way to 'upgrade' was to buy a new computer !!!!!!! How arrogant is that ? And I am supposed to feel bad about copying the OS from a friend after that ?

    I am still happy with OSX, but some salespeople need a good smacking.
    :mad:
     
  13. macrumors 68030

    Snowy_River

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Corvallis, OR
    #13
    Your Apple store lied to you then. I recently bought an older iMac for my uncle. It had MacOS X 10.0 on it, and I knew that he would be far happier with 10.1.x. We went to our local Apple store and got a 10.1 CD for $10. No full version. Just a service fee.
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    drastik

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2002
    Location:
    Nashvegas
    #14
    you gto lied to, I got 10.1 upgrades free about two months ago, upgraded my little sisters iMacDV. I walked into the reseller, asked for an upgrade disk, they gave it to me, I left.
     
  15. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    #15
    Just remember, it's corporate nature to exploit a monopoly...

    Whilst I'm not suggesting that Apple are anywhere near as bad as M$, just remember 'free email for life' until you have to pay $100 for it (or the ever so special, valued customer offer of $49)

    'nuff said.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    drastik

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2002
    Location:
    Nashvegas
    #16
    OMG!!!!! I thought we were past this!!!! Apple NEVER, EVER said FREE FOR LIFE. I've posted threads asking someone to prove it, I've scoured the web looking myself. They never promised you Free email for life. You entered into a contract with Apple, Inc. that is a standard agreement (remember clicking agree for terms and policy?) Every Apple Terms and COndition liscense I have seen reserves them the right to end the agreement at anytime.

    I have no sympathy for you if you didn't read it, thats why you have to click agree to get the service.

    Man, soemtimes you people amaze me.:mad:
     
  17. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2001
    #17
    Yep!. A few of apples more recent 'stunts' have made me think twice about the potential cost of ownership. If windows users are 'outraged' at M$'s licensing schemes, lets hope apple don't implement some of the more daft serial number/one cd per machine rumours we hear about. Judging by the .Mac fiasco and the 129quid upgrade (please!! 129 quid to kill a beach ball?!!), I suspect they will. :mad:

    actually, what osX HAS done is convince me that the world of linux is indeed viable - maybe this is where the 'switch' campaign is leading.
     
  18. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Location:
    Where am I???
    #18
    Oh please, people.

    Listen, Apple never told you iTools would be free for life. It costs them a lot of money to keep it free, so in order to get back some of that cost, they charge you $100/yr. You may think that is too expensive, but that is your perogative.

    Apple does not OWE anybody a free OS X 10.2 upgrade. You got 10.1 free, and now you're bitching. And dont give me the "OS X isnt really a complete OS" crap. When will you be satisfied that it is a complete OS? When it comes standard with iTransporter? or iBig-Mac-and-Fries? Seriously, Apple has given us a lot for free and although I will not be paying $100 for .mac, I dont feel as if I am owed it.

    And as for the viability of Linux, go ahead and try it. You'll be back. If you run a server, sure, Linux is great. For a desktop machine, forget it. Seriously. Go ahead and try.
     
  19. macrumors 6502

    maclamb

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2002
    Location:
    Northern California
    #19
    remember

    if you switrch from PC to mac you can keep/reuse:
    Monitor
    RAM
    Hard drives
    CDROM Drives
    Zip/Iomega Drives

    Also, ask your PC preineds how long it would take how much it would cost to recver from a hard drive failure.
    Assuming all data was backed up - if their C: drive failed they have to:
    Reinsitall the OS
    Reinstall All Apps ( to restore registry settings)

    On a mac you can just reinsitall the OS (fast) and copy user files back - so all or most settings are restored.

    And, whomever said mac networks were 3-4 times as much hasn't actually done it.
    All hardware, etc is reusable - even licnese costs for MAC OSX Server are cheaper , i think, than NT/Win2K licenses. - not sure on this one.
     
  20. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #20
    It's easier to admin Windows

    As a network administrator for a site with 350 computers and a big Mac geek and I can admit that in a standardized outfit it is much easier to admin Windows machines. We spend $1000 on our 2.2Ghz Dells with 19in monitors and CDRW drivers. Not bad for $1000 considering they're full towers and they also have gigabit Ethernet (Intel 845G chipset). When we receive 50 new machines we create a base model with all the necessary software for the machines. We then use StorageSoft Imagecast to dump a hard drive image of the workstation and distribute it to our workstations. We can build an image in a day and deploy it in less than an hour. The software is only $750 for our site. On the other hand a small group of Macs (7) takes me just as long to deploy as there are no imaging solutions that offer the same ease of use, ease of integration, and low price that ImageCast offers. When a PC stops working I simple image it using network boot features via PXE and it's back up and running within 15 minutes. When a Mac dies I have to reinstall the OS and all necessary software. Don't kid yourself either we have plenty of Macs that die. Overall I would say for US (keyword there: US) it costs slightly less (TCO) to run the PCs as any ease of administration is lost with the high price we pay for our G4s. Now in a small shop without imaging I'd say the Mac wins since it you still have to manual install and troubleshoot the PCs, but with imaging the Macs don’t stand a chance. I'd like Apple to further develop their hard drive image technology to better serve the IT community.


    BTW ImageCast does Linux Ext 2 drives. Not 3 though :(

    -Tim Smith
    Network Administrator
    New Tech High School
    www.newtechhigh.org
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2001
    Location:
    Scandinavia
    #21
    OMG! You pathetic whiners!!!! I don't like to pay for .mac either, but it's a good service (much better than some of the "free" ones). And what the h*ll. You think killing the spinning beachball is the only thing new in Jaguar? the new features in Jaguar are so good it's worth every dollar. Rendezvous alone would be worth $129. Maybe you have been living under a rock, cause you probably haven't heard the news on the economic troubles lately.... And BTW, this is the first time in 17 months you'll have to fork up your «hard» earned money to get the newest OS from Apple. Go back to yer stinkin Wintel PC and watch the BSOD!!!
     
  22. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #22
    Another thing

    Another thing: Dont compare retail prices. No on pays retail. Windows XP is $40 a copy on a Microsoft Select plan and Windows 2000 Server is about $200. Apple really doesn't cut good deals with software or hardware to schools anymore. We got our Dells about 25% off retail. Apple offered us nothing even close to that.

    -Tim
     
  23. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    #23
    Ah well, I'll consider myself told then regards my earlier post then and apologise for my foolishness in critising Apple ;)
     
  24. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    #24
    I not only agree with the previous posts that maintaining a Mac user base is cheaper in the long run but I contend, based on usage of people I know and my own personal experience, that individual Mac ownership is also cheaper over the long run.

    I own a beige g3, a 6400 and an imac (each with various upgrades) and they're all still kicking. Handling very well mind you-- audio, web design, and occasional video editing. Any PC friends I've had for a period have converted to mac based on their experience compared with mine other mac users in my circle of friends. I've known nobody with a pc that is as old or extensively used as my macs that still functions. They're crap--consistently troublesome. I've witnessed months of frustration from several pc users with difficulties I can't even imagine. It's mind boggling to me that there is still any debate. I hear many pc users manage happily with their machines but who are you? it's a mystery to me. In both professional and personal use I've never met an IT guy or anyone who manage their pcs as well as mac users--ever. Show me an alien and I'll believe it.
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2001
    Location:
    Scandinavia
    #25
    Re: It's easier to admin Windows

    Ever heard of Mac OS X Server and NetBoot? You should look into it....
    Oh, BTW, welcome to MR
     

Share This Page