This Infoworld interview with COO of O'Reilly describes the some of their staff's move to Mac OS X and offers this interesting comment:
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.
Corporate Switch?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It would be a great coup, all their books could be stamped with 'Made on a Mac'! Ha - I just wish my company felt the same way.
D
D
Still, I can't see how I would be complaining if everyone started getting new iBooks and TiPBs, through in a few PowerMacs too. That would be very cool, and these guys write the books for all the techies out there.
D
if they get one really high profile company to switch, it could mean amazing things for Apple.
OS X will really shine in a workstation environment with mixed servers. Especially if the servers are mostly *NIX based.
OS X will really shine in a workstation environment with mixed servers. Especially if the servers are mostly *NIX based.
what a great switch ad that would be
if they used the corperation in a switch ad, maybe all the execs standing there representing the company and doing the switch ad together. That would be awesome!
if they used the corperation in a switch ad, maybe all the execs standing there representing the company and doing the switch ad together. That would be awesome!
OS X takes over Linux/Unix-centric shops
Sweeeeet! Apples definitely make sense at companies that are supporting both Unix and PC's on the desktop right now. Unfortunately, only a tiny percentage of companies use Linux/Unix on the desktop.
If you ask me, another fertile ground for corporate expansion is to companies that do a lot of development or maintenance work on Linux/Unix servers. For example, as a database and web developer, I use my desktop or laptop computer mainly to connect to the Unix servers where I actually do development. It makes much more sense in this scenario to use a desktop machine that is running Unix/Linux natively. Desktop Linux is an option, but then you can't run MS Office apps, and from a sysadmin point of view it's much more difficult to support since hardware configuration (even simple things like networking and printing) is much more problematic. Mac OS X fills that gap perfectly, especially with XFree86 installed so you can run XEmacs, etc. directly from the server.
I consider myself more or less a typical software engineer, so I have a feeling OS X does have a future in the enterprise. The rapid adoption of Linux will only help it for the reasons I have stated above: I envision a future with primarily Linux on the server side (to run application servers and databases), and OS X on the desktop. And heck, in this environment you can envision XServes starting to be used as file servers and mail/web servers, and from there you can see XServes starting to compete with Linux boxes the same way that Linux started to compete with Unix boxes a few years ago.
Sweeeeet! Apples definitely make sense at companies that are supporting both Unix and PC's on the desktop right now. Unfortunately, only a tiny percentage of companies use Linux/Unix on the desktop.
If you ask me, another fertile ground for corporate expansion is to companies that do a lot of development or maintenance work on Linux/Unix servers. For example, as a database and web developer, I use my desktop or laptop computer mainly to connect to the Unix servers where I actually do development. It makes much more sense in this scenario to use a desktop machine that is running Unix/Linux natively. Desktop Linux is an option, but then you can't run MS Office apps, and from a sysadmin point of view it's much more difficult to support since hardware configuration (even simple things like networking and printing) is much more problematic. Mac OS X fills that gap perfectly, especially with XFree86 installed so you can run XEmacs, etc. directly from the server.
I consider myself more or less a typical software engineer, so I have a feeling OS X does have a future in the enterprise. The rapid adoption of Linux will only help it for the reasons I have stated above: I envision a future with primarily Linux on the server side (to run application servers and databases), and OS X on the desktop. And heck, in this environment you can envision XServes starting to be used as file servers and mail/web servers, and from there you can see XServes starting to compete with Linux boxes the same way that Linux started to compete with Unix boxes a few years ago.
This may be true for Mac desktops, but not laptops. If you read the O'Reilly article, they were buying iBooks and TiBooks.
Also, you have to consider Total Cost of Ownership (TCO). Let's say you can get 100 PCs for $60,000, or 100 Macs for $100,000. But let's say you need 1 sysadmin (at, say, $60K salary, which is on the low end) for every 50 desktops for a PC, but only 1 sysadmin for every 100 desktops for the Macs. Then even after only one year the cost of the PCs is $180,000, whereas the cost of the macs is only $160,000. And as you extend your time horizon (esp. considering Macs have longer timespans anyway), the difference becomes even more dramatic. For example, using the above scenario for 3 years, the TCO for the PCs is $420,000, whereas the TCO for the Macs is only $280,000. And that's not to even mention the fact that the PC desktops are typically replaced after 2 years, whereas a Mac can still be going strong after 3 or 4 years.
In my opinion, the main reason the PC is entrenched in the corporate world is because of the availability of software and the perception that MS Office only runs on PCs, and correspondingly, because so few people are trained on Macs vs. PCs.
I disagree on the price thing
I beg to differ with ddtlm on the price thing.
If you go to dell's site and try to out fit a workstation with everything a power mac has and I'm sure it will the same price or more. I've investigated this on many occasions and it always the same, equivalent or more.
And if you are switching an entire company then of course you'll get a discount from Apple, it's business.
I beg to differ with ddtlm on the price thing.
If you go to dell's site and try to out fit a workstation with everything a power mac has and I'm sure it will the same price or more. I've investigated this on many occasions and it always the same, equivalent or more.
And if you are switching an entire company then of course you'll get a discount from Apple, it's business.
Re: I disagree on the price thing
I have to agree with ddtlm since most of corporate america has absolutely no use for souped up multimedia machines. They don't buy Dells with specs comparable to a PowerMac. Rather, at this point they are probably buying the cheapest computers they can get bundled with a 15" LCD monitor (very popular now in the corp. world since they save so much desk space). With volume pricing, Dell probably offers such bundles for $700 and up. Apple just can't compete right now with that kind of pricing for the low-end corporate desktop computer.
But, like I said above, I would still choose Apple over Dell for the lower TCO. If I controlled the budget, I would give anyone who needed to travel or telecommute an iBook, and give the rest of the folks either G3 iMacs (if all they do is email and Office docs), or a 15" flat-panel iMac depending on their computing needs. Then again, this also goes along with my philosophy that the average computer user (and especially the corp. user that just does email and Office), has very little use for a powerful CPU, and ease of use an maintainability then becomes the most important factor.
Originally posted by nigel_t
I beg to differ with ddtlm on the price thing.
If you go to dell's site and try to out fit a workstation with everything a power mac has and I'm sure it will the same price or more. I've investigated this on many occasions and it always the same, equivalent or more.
And if you are switching an entire company then of course you'll get a discount from Apple, it's business.
I have to agree with ddtlm since most of corporate america has absolutely no use for souped up multimedia machines. They don't buy Dells with specs comparable to a PowerMac. Rather, at this point they are probably buying the cheapest computers they can get bundled with a 15" LCD monitor (very popular now in the corp. world since they save so much desk space). With volume pricing, Dell probably offers such bundles for $700 and up. Apple just can't compete right now with that kind of pricing for the low-end corporate desktop computer.
But, like I said above, I would still choose Apple over Dell for the lower TCO. If I controlled the budget, I would give anyone who needed to travel or telecommute an iBook, and give the rest of the folks either G3 iMacs (if all they do is email and Office docs), or a 15" flat-panel iMac depending on their computing needs. Then again, this also goes along with my philosophy that the average computer user (and especially the corp. user that just does email and Office), has very little use for a powerful CPU, and ease of use an maintainability then becomes the most important factor.
Kid Red:
Dimwitted? You didn't even read where I said "normal corporate PC's" and "most companies." Hell, I even put "most" in itallics for the dimwits amoung us.
So anyway, you go hauling off talking about a specific company which is totally irrelevant to what I said, spout ignorant unsupported rubbish about support costs, and then mumble something about anual fees for XP. Which don't exist. Nice going.
Dimwitted? You didn't even read where I said "normal corporate PC's" and "most companies." Hell, I even put "most" in itallics for the dimwits amoung us.
So anyway, you go hauling off talking about a specific company which is totally irrelevant to what I said, spout ignorant unsupported rubbish about support costs, and then mumble something about anual fees for XP. Which don't exist. Nice going.
don't forget Jaguar upgrade pricing
In the corporate world, Macs in their current form cannot compete, except on the laptop front.
I'm looking at the PCs around me, all dell boxes, sell for under a grand. We upgrade our PCs every 3 years or so, the monitor stays the same (17" CRTs) and the box gets replaced.
On the hardware front, no Macs come under $1000 without a monitor, that is considered a "pro" feature, so you have to get a PowerMac.
Apple needs to make a pizza box corprate system that can be deployed in bulk and sold cheap. Maybe a G3 based system that doesn't come with any of the iApps, so consumers won't go after it and sold only to businesses.
On the software front, more support of OS X is needed. Lotus Notes, Novell, etc. As more apps become available, this becomes less of an issue. Unfortunately, I don't see IBM Visual Age and similar apps available for the Mac any time soon.
Not a bad idea at all. Maybe they can sell such a G3 computer for $500 to $600, bundled with RemoteDesktop instead of the iApps (except for iCal and iSync). Problem is, consumers can still just download and install the iApps themselves. I would say they would have to take more extreme measures such as explicitly restricting sales to corporate customers, the same way the eMac was originally restricted to educational customers (so corp. customers would have to provide a verifiable Tax ID for their business, etc.)
On the software front, more support of OS X is needed. Lotus Notes, Novell, etc. As more apps become available, this becomes less of an issue. Unfortunately, I don't see IBM Visual Age and similar apps available for the Mac any time soon.
Er, more software support of OS X is always needed, but you're quite misinformed in the examples you chose:
Lotus Notes:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/business_finance/lotusnotes.html
Novell Netware:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/networking_security/netwareclientipedition.html
And no, Visual Age is not available, but there are other fine Java IDEs such as CodeWarrior:
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/development_tools/codewarriorpro.html
Plus, with Apple's strong commitment to Java, the availability of Java tools will only get better...
I would expect Microsoft archenemies like Oracle, Sun, IBM, etc. to provide support for the OSX platform, so if nothing else there should be great software available from them...
the eMac is currently selling at the lowend for $999 after rebates. I am also quite sure that any company buying in bulk would get quite a nice deal on said eMacs. in that way a company can get g4 power for under $1000.
eMacs would make a much better workstation than current PC implementations as well. they would take up less space, use less energy, require far less troubleshooting, and reduce the office clutter by a large amount.
I stand corrected, last time I looked they were still "in the works", guess that was too long ago!
There have been many good reasons discussed in this thread why it could be very good for companies to switch.
However, the arguments all assume that people fairly analyze the situation, don't have draconian internal standards, aren't biased toward Wintel, and are willing to take a risk on something better. How many of us work at places that can answer yes to even two of these?
Now, if a few high profile success stories could be had, then things could start to happen.
However, the arguments all assume that people fairly analyze the situation, don't have draconian internal standards, aren't biased toward Wintel, and are willing to take a risk on something better. How many of us work at places that can answer yes to even two of these?
Now, if a few high profile success stories could be had, then things could start to happen.
Originally posted by iShater
On the software front, more support of OS X is needed. Lotus Notes, Novell, etc. As more apps become available, this becomes less of an issue. Unfortunately, I don't see IBM Visual Age and similar apps available for the Mac any time soon.
FYI: The next version of Novell, Novell 6 I believe, will not need a client to use. Therefore, use with a Mac will be feasible. Also, it is currently possible to connect to Novell servers using LDAP 3, through the Directory Access utility in OS X. I do not know a ton about this, but we are in the progress of setting it up at my college in order to make the mac's a feasible workstation for students. Just thougth you might be interested.
-altair
I mentioned this in a thread just yesterday. It would be great if they would bring back the LC series computer. I loved those things thin, useful and reasonably cheap. They were one of the first Macs that I actually learned to use.
Isn't there a OSX Server deal so that you only have to buy one unlimited license?
Seems like that would be the way to go for a large office.
As I understand it, the Unlimited OS X Server license reffers to the number of cient computers said server can serve to, not the number of OS X Desktop licenses you get
OS X is bundled with any mac sold now, the only cost associated with each desktop license is that of upgading, which I think someone in this thread already reffered to...
for instance, the last upgrade prices was $130, which is a little steep for an upgrade cost, if you ask me, but consider, with the already released jagwire , I wouldn't have to upgrade until another groundbreaking update is released... even so, I think Apple could find it in it's great big heart to give a little discount to a corporate switcher...
speaking of big hearts...
if eMacs were purchased, all of those monitors bought could be donated to charity or something in that area, one could say that purchasing macs,and moving away from windows brings out the good in a corporation...
oh,and to the new guy...
(I'm new to posting, but an Apple IIe was the first computer I set my eyes on, at 7 I could figure out how to play games!, plus, I've been reading these forums for a while)
*NIX reffers to UNIX, LINUX, SOLARIS OS (which is a varient of UNIX, Mac OS X is a *NIX when you get into the nitty gritty of it...