Precisely!
I would also add, Apples' way is to keep their customers as much dependent as possible - corporations don't like that.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Expanding Enterprise Efforts, Developing Dedicated Sales Force
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would also add, Apples' way is to keep their customers as much dependent as possible - corporations don't like that.
Besides, if you use SAP you will see how ugly it is, but what are that Apple alternatives? Filemaker? And who tells you Apple will drop the software like they always do? And how does SAP work if Yosemite stops our internet connection? You can' afford these games if you are in business.
They aren't toys but have limitations. I would love to see a iPad pro. More Mac than pad
Apple had a Professional Services group in the late 90s/early 00s that was outside of Cupertino. It never got much support from corporate. Maybe this will be different.
You do realize Apple runs Apple on SAP (on AIX, I believe) and Macs. They run their systems on AIX, Linux, and OSX with a small amount of Windows.
If Apple can run Apple on their stuff your company can too. Think about it - all the stores with managed Macs,all the offices, etc. Just because you don't know how to do it doesn't mean it can't be done.
Just because your IT department is short sighted and only knows Microsoft solutions means they need to be fired. And I say that as an IT professional who knows OS X, Linux, and forgot more about Windows than most know.
Every company depricates software. Even Microsoft. You have to keep up to date or close to it if you want support.
After they abandoned the X-Serve (amazing piece of hardware), I'll never trust them again when selecting them for enterprise desktop.
Best of luck to Apple. They just aren't used to operating in an environment where the customer is treated as if he is always right. You can't tell enterprises you are doing it wrong.
On server side they don't have enough applications tested or benchmarked. On desktop side, corporates are increasingly evaluating virtual desktops. On laptop side, for the average joe employee it departments will not spend 1000 bucks for a laptop. Maybe for a senior executive they might, but that too will be avoided for the sale of keeping a homogenous environment.
It's not that apple can not penetrate this market. They will simply have to approach the segment differently.
On server side they don't have enough applications tested or benchmarked. On desktop side, corporates are increasingly evaluating virtual desktops. On laptop side, for the average joe employee it departments will not spend 1000 bucks for a laptop. Maybe for a senior executive they might, but that too will be avoided for the sale of keeping a homogenous environment.
It's not that apple can not penetrate this market. They will simply have to approach the segment differently.
No I'm sorry but how can I blame the IT department if some Apple computers stop responding to wifi and Apple pretends that nothing happened? I mean that problems come up but Apple's childish attitude of ignoring trouble customers will never make them reliable. Microsoft and Dell would at least try to fix things.
Quote:
Apple's major enterprise push may be an effort to boost flagging iPad sales by attracting a new market and introducing new use cases.
Huh? I don't get your point.
Apple's major enterprise push may be an effort to boost flagging iPad sales by attracting a new market and introducing new use cases.
Huh? I don't get your point.
Well I get this. It just goes to show how many businesses and their CEO's/owners typically care about two things: cheapness and greed. And this works across many different divisions of industry.
Selecting apple hardware or software over Microsoft or Linux or hp is no indication of foresight.
The current IT environments are fine as they are. Further innovations continue to be explored. There are no groundbreaking solutions that Apple is bringing to the table currently to fuel adoption of their solutions. They run their company on apple solutions as far as technically feasible for commercial reasons and market dynamics (I.e. They can't give their employees windows machines). Those very same forces will guide enterprise buying decisions. They will not buy apple because they are fanboys.
Last edited:
Apple will have to drastically reduce prices then. I'd love to have Macs in my office, but I can't recommend spending that much for users who just need MS Office and access to the internet.
And ditching Xserve was not really the most confidence inspiring decision.
And ditching Xserve was not really the most confidence inspiring decision.
When it is proven to have a lower TCO over Windows on the Desktop it does show foresight. Countless studies have shown Macs need less care and feeeding than Windows.
I work in an Enterprise. The POS Dell laptop I get costs as much as a Macbook Pro. Yet in 8 months it's already looking worn down. I bet by year 2 it will be worse than my 2008 Macbook Pro.
You really don't know much about them then. Netboot would be awesome in a corporate environment. With only 1 OS image to manage (remember you can boot an iMac from a Macbook HD, etc) your deployments would be seemless. Store your profiles on the server and have the machine re-image every day. That's what they do in the Apple Stores (with a product called Deep Freeze, IIIRC).
Apple supports OpenDirectory out of the box and you can use it as is or integrate with AD.
Remote Desktop that works well is built into every Mac.
Yup and very few companies do a true study to what to buy. It's usually someone has a preconcieved notion, they stack theirs up to some junk solution and a decision is made. Or they go to Gartner, etc. and get them to write or find some "study" to support their position.
I've seen it time and time again. Technically inferior solutions are picked out of fear, arrogance, or other reasons. Heck, it's how we got Windows - Netware was the far superior NOS back in the day. Linux is the superior server OS, and Macs are the superior desktops.
I disagree. They need to license OSX to run on VMware ESXi on commodity hardware call it OSX For Enterprises or something like that. Apple would have to do nothing (or very little) to have OSX run on ESXi, as ESXi already supports the Darwin Kernel out of the box.
April fools already?
Enterprise plans their IT purchases years in advance, that's why all major tech companies except Apple try to provide a roadmap of where they're going. Apple's fixation on secrecy means it's a lot more risky for enterprise to invest in them. Buy 1000 Apple Jiggers only to find next year when you're ready to expand the deployment, it's been discontinued and the new one is half the size, 1/4 the performance, 3 times the price, and totally unsuited.
How would Apple like it if Intel wouldn't tell them what chips will be available next month?
I can't wait to hear how these sales drones try to convince corporate purchases to pay the apple tax on extra memory. And explain to them that soldered memory is a good thing because they can save money on not having IT staff do the upgrades in-house.
Everything Apple has done since Timmy took over has made the machines worse for corporate. A smaller box on the desk is just easier to steal and offer no advantage to the company. Trading performance for smaller is just stupid in an enterprise environment.
And how are they going to spin the crippled iWork versions to enterprise users. Switch from Word to a version of Pages that has 10% of the features of the old version for Pages. Just magically awesome.
Enterprise plans their IT purchases years in advance, that's why all major tech companies except Apple try to provide a roadmap of where they're going. Apple's fixation on secrecy means it's a lot more risky for enterprise to invest in them. Buy 1000 Apple Jiggers only to find next year when you're ready to expand the deployment, it's been discontinued and the new one is half the size, 1/4 the performance, 3 times the price, and totally unsuited.
How would Apple like it if Intel wouldn't tell them what chips will be available next month?
I can't wait to hear how these sales drones try to convince corporate purchases to pay the apple tax on extra memory. And explain to them that soldered memory is a good thing because they can save money on not having IT staff do the upgrades in-house.
Everything Apple has done since Timmy took over has made the machines worse for corporate. A smaller box on the desk is just easier to steal and offer no advantage to the company. Trading performance for smaller is just stupid in an enterprise environment.
And how are they going to spin the crippled iWork versions to enterprise users. Switch from Word to a version of Pages that has 10% of the features of the old version for Pages. Just magically awesome.
+1 for pointing out the oxymoron.
Nope, the iPod classic never stopped making money. It was what they call in finance a "cash cow" as in a product that will continue to be profitable even after sales fall off a cliff as you don't have to devote any non-production costs to it.
Good point. Apple doesn't provide a reason why they continue to sell 1-2 year old models at slightly reduced prices but with names extremely similar to others. For enterprise, products need to be interchangeable, reliable, and compatible. iPads may be reliable, but the various resolutions and optimal software versions (iOS 8 on a first gen Mini is meh) make iPads a mess for IT.
True, but perhaps this expansion will bring a new phase of actually engaging enterprise for use in enterprise, not just selling to enterprise for personal use.
I'd much rather have Mac OS X on IBM's x3950.
Let IBM license OS X for use on their servers, which are the best in industry.
----------
exactly.
This is everything.
Last edited:
Well, that's not true at all.
MacRumors said:
Yosemite is a 1.0.0 product. It's been out for less than a month. I've been working on enterprise deployment (integration, corporate apps -Microsoft Lync was only just updated for compatibility- configuration, imaging, etc) since the day it came out, and I have zero expectation of ever releasing 10.10.0(.0.0.0.0.0). I've never deployed 10.x.0 of any version of OS X, and with past experience managing OS X (since 10.4), I don't expect or plan that I ever will.
If you need OS X now, why are you not deploying OS X 10.9? 10.9 didn't stop working the day 10.10 came out. Business necessity and continuity supersedes having the "latest and greatest." Our lab environments have been running 10.8 this year, and next year they'll get 10.9, not 10.10.
Last edited:
Apple's product politics is just not compatible with real enterprise environments. They require a predictable product life cycle for hardware and software.
The Yosemite debacle shows clearly that as enterprise customer you cannot trust Apple. A enterprise customer would probably have the requirement to run previous generation (stable) software on current hardware (or at least assure the availability of the previous generation hardware).
----------
Your suggestion simply doesn't work. New Apple hardware doesn't support previous versions of Apple software. Apple usually discontinues current generation hardware if a newer generation goes on sale.
As as enterprise user you cannot live without clear and binding product life cycle!
An enterprise would never install a software that just came out so I don't know what the hell your talking about. Any company who transitions all its software to the new release within one month is purely insane.
There is a reason many companies are still running XP, they don't transition software unless they REALLY HAVE TO. Only retail consumers will install a new software for the latest and greatest and endure a few months of bug fixes, not companies. Windows usually has 1-2 year between major releases were the software is barely usable... 8 took a bit less time.
But in the Apple universe you're being forced to use the latest software.
Please demonstrate me an Apple supported way to install Mavericks on the new 2014 Mac minis or the Retina iMac...