Apple Tops Dell as Most Sought After Desktop Computers

[LordVic]

Well I see you cannot refute my main point in my reply. Nice talking to you.

except your CIO article is extremely misleading and a poorly written article.

not to mention the very small sample size... but Did you even bother to read Page2?

Page 1 outlines that the costs associated with SUPPORTING Macs in the workplace (technical support tasks) are lower.

However page two outlines the drawbacks. and quote

One of the flaws of the survey is that it doesn't factor in the cost of the PC or Mac itself,

in corporations and mainly business driven work, we're talking about desktop computers, Even decently powered ones that Dell / HP and the like sell for significantly less than any Apple. If you're not including the initial purchasing costs as part of your IT cost overhead (and not just the management costs), you're grossly misleading facts.

This doesn't even include the other issues that this article didnt take into account that for some reason the authors didnt think were necessary to consider while coming up with their articles headlines.

security and file sharing between operating systems, client management, backup and data recovery of Mac files, Active Directory integration, application compatibility, configuration consistency, cross-platform help desk and knowledge base support, and standard management utilities for both Macs and PCs.

Inability to get OSx properly on a windows Active Domain is a huge barrier for just about every IT administrator. Especially one whose primary concerns are well.. everything listed above!

IMHO, Apple Computers, While everyone wants them on their desk for "pretty factors". are NOT cheaper to maintain in the office, especially on a well maintained and properly configured network.

The simple fact is. For some reason, Apple doesn't want in this particular game. They've made every effort to get out of the real corporate environment. They've nixxed the xserve. They don't support many advanced networking protocols and utilities that Windows networks do support and they're just not nearly as easy to get running with advanced policies, and Apple has made no effort to remedy this.

 

[TheHateMachine]

except your CIO article is extremely misleading and a poorly written article.

not to mention the very small sample size... but Did you even bother to read Page2?

Page 1 outlines that the costs associated with SUPPORTING Macs in the workplace (technical support tasks) are lower.

However page two outlines the drawbacks. and quote


in corporations and mainly business driven work, we're talking about desktop computers, Even decently powered ones that Dell / HP and the like sell for significantly less than any Apple. If you're not including the initial purchasing costs as part of your IT cost overhead (and not just the management costs), you're grossly misleading facts.

This doesn't even include the other issues that this article didnt take into account that for some reason the authors didnt think were necessary to consider while coming up with their articles headlines.


Inability to get OSx properly on a windows Active Domain is a huge barrier for just about every IT administrator. Especially one whose primary concerns are well.. everything listed above!

IMHO, Apple Computers, While everyone wants them on their desk for "pretty factors". are NOT cheaper to maintain in the office, especially on a well maintained and properly configured network.

The simple fact is. For some reason, Apple doesn't want in this particular game. They've made every effort to get out of the real corporate environment. They've nixxed the xserve. They don't support many advanced networking protocols and utilities that Windows networks do support and they're just not nearly as easy to get running with advanced policies, and Apple has made no effort to remedy this.

I did not post that article nor did I ever state Apple has a lower cost in an enterprise setting. Please reread my posts.

It was someone else, I even pointed out how that article and research was written by a company who develops software solutions to manage Apple in an enterprise Windows environment. I'm sure they have a financial motive to convince people to bring more Apple into an enterprise.

 

[fourthtunz]

except your CIO article is extremely misleading and a poorly written article.

not to mention the very small sample size... but Did you even bother to read Page2?

Page 1 outlines that the costs associated with SUPPORTING Macs in the workplace (technical support tasks) are lower.

However page two outlines the drawbacks. and quote


in corporations and mainly business driven work, we're talking about desktop computers, Even decently powered ones that Dell / HP and the like sell for significantly less than any Apple. If you're not including the initial purchasing costs as part of your IT cost overhead (and not just the management costs), you're grossly misleading facts.

This doesn't even include the other issues that this article didnt take into account that for some reason the authors didnt think were necessary to consider while coming up with their articles headlines.


Inability to get OSx properly on a windows Active Domain is a huge barrier for just about every IT administrator. Especially one whose primary concerns are well.. everything listed above!

IMHO, Apple Computers, While everyone wants them on their desk for "pretty factors". are NOT cheaper to maintain in the office, especially on a well maintained and properly configured network.

The simple fact is. For some reason, Apple doesn't want in this particular game. They've made every effort to get out of the real corporate environment. They've nixxed the xserve. They don't support many advanced networking protocols and utilities that Windows networks do support and they're just not nearly as easy to get running with advanced policies, and Apple has made no effort to remedy this.

Students are taught PC only IT skills in schools hence the slow adoption of the Mac in the corporate world. Basically a self feeding mechanism. Job security.
Businesses that buy Macs don't need an IT department.

 

[LordVic]

I did not post that article nor did I ever state Apple has a lower cost in an enterprise setting. Please reread my posts.

It was someone else, I even pointed out how that article and research was written by a company who develops software solutions to manage Apple in an enterprise Windows environment. I'm sure they have a financial motive to convince people to bring more Apple into an enterprise.

Wrong guy. My apologies

Students are taught PC only IT skills in schools hence the slow adoption of the Mac in the corporate world. Basically a self feeding mechanism. Job security.
Businesses that buy Macs don't need an IT department.

if you truly believe this, you have little clue what actually happens in a server room behind a real IT department... I'm not talking about your one or two guy IT departments hosting 10-15 BYOD devices.
I'm talking about companies with hundres of people running corporate network infrastructure. Replacing desktop PC's with Mac's doesn't suddenly negate the world of IT.

 

[Renzatic]

...if you truly believe this, you have little clue what actually happens in a server room behind a real IT department... I'm not talking about your one or two guy IT departments hosting 10-15 BYOD devices.

If what guy said were true, we'd all be using Macs now, and Windows would be a distant memory.

There are two reasons why you don't see 500+ machine networks using Macs in a corporate environment.

1. Like you said, Apple doesn't want to be a part of that scene. Sure, you could make a network that large using nothing but Macs in theory, and day to day tasks would probably be a little easier for the individual end user, but it'd actually be far more difficult to maintain than a Windows equivalent network on the back end. Macs don't have the software infrastructure Microsoft provides.

2. It's cheaper, AND it works well. Everyone loves saying that the only reason we don't see more Apple based large networks is because companies are cheap and don't want to spend the extra amount of cash. This is true to a point, but the most important thing is that...wait for it...it works. When you're talking about a corporate network, you're talking about a setup that has to be up 99.999% of the time. Any downtime results in information not getting to where it needs to be, IT guys running up billable hours fixing problems non-stop, unhappy customers, and tons of money lost. If the only reason corporations bought Windows machines were because they were cheap, with the trade-off being they were buying into a crashy, unusable mess, no one would end up using it. Plain and simple. Saving a buck will only take you so far.

 

[bawbac]

I bring you, the joke of the year...

Businesses that buy Macs don't need an IT department.

 

[mc3k]

except your CIO article is extremely misleading and a poorly written article.

not to mention the very small sample size... but Did you even bother to read Page2?

Page 1 outlines that the costs associated with SUPPORTING Macs in the workplace (technical support tasks) are lower.

However page two outlines the drawbacks. and quote


in corporations and mainly business driven work, we're talking about desktop computers, Even decently powered ones that Dell / HP and the like sell for significantly less than any Apple. If you're not including the initial purchasing costs as part of your IT cost overhead (and not just the management costs), you're grossly misleading facts.

This doesn't even include the other issues that this article didnt take into account that for some reason the authors didnt think were necessary to consider while coming up with their articles headlines.


Inability to get OSx properly on a windows Active Domain is a huge barrier for just about every IT administrator. Especially one whose primary concerns are well.. everything listed above!

IMHO, Apple Computers, While everyone wants them on their desk for "pretty factors". are NOT cheaper to maintain in the office, especially on a well maintained and properly configured network.

The simple fact is. For some reason, Apple doesn't want in this particular game. They've made every effort to get out of the real corporate environment. They've nixxed the xserve. They don't support many advanced networking protocols and utilities that Windows networks do support and they're just not nearly as easy to get running with advanced policies, and Apple has made no effort to remedy this.

While an average Mac setup runs $1,622, a Windows machine costs $1,513 and software makers charge slightly more for Apple-centric products. Average IT labor expenditure for Macs is lower with $636 compared to Windows' $781, however companies report a wide variety of experiences in this department.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/12...on_loosens_windows_stranglehold_on_enterprise

When asked how PC and Mac support costs compared overall, nearly half (43%) of respondents felt that their PC support costs were substantially or somewhat higher than their Mac support costs. Only 21% felt that their Mac support costs were substantially or somewhat higher than their support costs for PCs. This was confirmed through our discussions with IT and purchasing managers, where several confirmed that Macs are more expensive in the upfront purchasing cycle, but have found that ongoing support is much less.

http://www.jamfsoftware.com/sites/d...-the-real-costs-of-deploying-Macs-and-PCs.pdf

Older TCO study....
http://www.nashnetworks.ca/pros-cons-and-costs-of-operating-systems.htm

Almost every single study out there highlights the lower TCO of Macs vs PCs. Just because you refuse to admit it, doesn't mean it's not true. Nice talking to you...

http://www.cio.com/article/127050/E..._You_Should_Use_Mac_OS?page=1&taxonomyId=3234

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/17427/

http://www.macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/19946/

http://www.businessweek.com/debateroom/archives/2011/04/macs_merit_their_higher_price_tags.html

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/020513-apple-windows-gartner-266443.html

 

[Prosik]

Why are macs not in enterprise environments.

Why = Bandwidth.

The little popup dialog box that tells you the networked device is unavailable. It instantly tells you the device is not available because the device is constantly checked for accessibility. Windows does not constantly check the devices availability thus saving valuable network resources.

This may be a configurable change on OS X I admit. My experience with enterprise environments is with XP so Microsoft may have screwed themselves with Windows 7 and Windows 8 etc.

 

[laserbeam273]

So all those people who do need them don't have to connect a bunch of clunky and costly Thunderbolt external enclosures. At this point, Apple does not have a single Mac with easily swappable HDD bays. Maybe they could at least give it a couple of 2.5" slots?

But your RMBP should work with a VM... or are you doing really heavy stuff in it?

I do, frequently I have a couple single-threaded tasks going that saturate several cores. But it turns out it was actually overheating (didn't realise that a massive kernel task meant throttling CPU - learn something new every day!). Another reason why I'd like a Mac Pro I guess!