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.
IBM Division Investigates Corporate Mac Migration Feasibility
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
IBM has been around, IIRC, since the late 1800s, and got their start making mechanical typewriters and other office equipment. Hence their name: International Business Machines.
Sadly, at this point it's hard to tell if IBM is just trying to look hip, or if they really have a good multiplatform strategy. IBM ought to be telling people they feel the need to lead the corporate world into a multi-platform stance to help alleviate the "all eggs in one basket" millstone which is "everything centered around Microsoft" that has and continues to be the M.O. of most of Corporate America.
Maybe they're doing this, but in my position, all I can do is hope so.
Sadly, at this point it's hard to tell if IBM is just trying to look hip, or if they really have a good multiplatform strategy. IBM ought to be telling people they feel the need to lead the corporate world into a multi-platform stance to help alleviate the "all eggs in one basket" millstone which is "everything centered around Microsoft" that has and continues to be the M.O. of most of Corporate America.
Maybe they're doing this, but in my position, all I can do is hope so.
Why front page news?
I understand that this is IBM employees saying that they like Macs, so it's a good buzz, however I fail to see why this is front page news.
The study is hardly scientific 24 people were asked and only 22 responded. When I did my Master's the lecturer would have thrown out my research if it was that small, as it's impossible to make any conclusions from such a small sample. Sure it's an interesting pilot (as stated), but I wouldn't go tooting any trumpets. You'd have to test at least 5-10% of IBM's employees in a pilot to say you were onto something.
Also things have changed it's not IBM vs. Apple anymore if anybody noticed? To my knowledge IBM doesn't even sell PC's anymore (the Thinkpads were not IBM Thinkpads, they were Lenovo Thinkpads as IBM sold off its PC arm to Lenovo), so it's not people trying to hawk thinkpads who are preferring the MacOS.
IBM has no connection with Windows (and in fact is now very friendly with the open-source community). If anything I'd be thinking IBM hates Microsoft right now because it got all the money from Windows (Bill Gates said "no you can't buy DOS or Windows we want to license it") the rest is history Bill gates made his fortune and IBM's conservative board men have now dropped IBM's PC are completely.
I understand that this is IBM employees saying that they like Macs, so it's a good buzz, however I fail to see why this is front page news.
The study is hardly scientific 24 people were asked and only 22 responded. When I did my Master's the lecturer would have thrown out my research if it was that small, as it's impossible to make any conclusions from such a small sample. Sure it's an interesting pilot (as stated), but I wouldn't go tooting any trumpets. You'd have to test at least 5-10% of IBM's employees in a pilot to say you were onto something.
Also things have changed it's not IBM vs. Apple anymore if anybody noticed? To my knowledge IBM doesn't even sell PC's anymore (the Thinkpads were not IBM Thinkpads, they were Lenovo Thinkpads as IBM sold off its PC arm to Lenovo), so it's not people trying to hawk thinkpads who are preferring the MacOS.
IBM has no connection with Windows (and in fact is now very friendly with the open-source community). If anything I'd be thinking IBM hates Microsoft right now because it got all the money from Windows (Bill Gates said "no you can't buy DOS or Windows we want to license it") the rest is history Bill gates made his fortune and IBM's conservative board men have now dropped IBM's PC are completely.
Not sure I follow these comments. Apple doesn't take corporate customers seriously? Tarnishing the iLife image?
Sorry, but this is ridiculous. I know first hand that Apple takes corporate customers seriously and there are plenty of Mac users who were around before iLife. Then again I could be misinterpreting your definition of corporate customers.
IBM trying to look hip?
I'll subscribe to the avoidance of "all eggs in one basket" theory. Regardless of how many people in an IBM division are purportedly using Macs, this report has an extremely small sample size.
Still, it can't hurt and maybe it shows that Apple's public marketing strategy of appealing to individuals has been working. Individuals are interested, maybe the get a mac for home use, they ask their employers (or employers check out the products themselves), and they give them a go at work. Plus Vista has been a major disappointment. More likely or in conjunction with the above statement, IBM is performing their due diligence at this point by exploring options and examining at what scale they could implement and work with the Mac platform. Of course Windows and Linux aren't going anywhere, so it's not as if this represents a complete shift.
And as for hipness, I hate this term when thrown at the Mac. I view mine as a tool, a machine. Of course I love them, but it's because they work, allow me to get stuff done, and I enjoy using them. The aesthetics these days are a bonus as a lot PC's look like a black version of my old Performa.
In the end regarding IBM, and Apple even, it's not about being cool or 'iFunforall.' It's about productivity and profits.
I take it your Master's was not in statistics. National polling organizations regularly use a sample size of 1,500 to represent the entire US. 5-10% of the total population is definitely not necessary to get a legitimate figure.
Some corporate customers are extremely sensitive to price, but others don't care as much, because when you're paying someone ~$60 an hour to do something you need done, screwing around with the price-point between a Dell Latitude and a MacBook Pro is far less important than getting the work done.
For call centers or other large organizations, the commodity box will still retain it's hold, but of course Apple doesn't care about that market because it's a black-hole.
I take it you never read this article then
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=312300
I am amazed and a bit discouraged that it has taken folks this long to start rejecting Microsoft's crap they try to market as software. In relation to the article, I have always supported a mixed platform environment. I like the idea of diversity.
Maybe not the best software, but I would hardly call it crap.
Until Microsoft enables Visual Basic and Access on the Mac, I don't see large numbers of corporations switching. As a management consultant I have visited too many companies that rely on exactly these two elements / software.
Running parallels or Bootcamp is not an option as this decreases efficiency, increases the necessary support, and increases cost.
Only when a company can switch COMPLETELY with all workstations, laptops, thin clients etc is this a viable option where efficiency through OS X and good hardware will be high. A mixed MS / Apple world is too expensive.
Running parallels or Bootcamp is not an option as this decreases efficiency, increases the necessary support, and increases cost.
Only when a company can switch COMPLETELY with all workstations, laptops, thin clients etc is this a viable option where efficiency through OS X and good hardware will be high. A mixed MS / Apple world is too expensive.
The big companies lease the hardware rather than buying it. Shelf life of less than 3 years on average here. We have ca. 100,000 'work stations' and have only just rolled out XP worldwide. It's the licenses, user support and server infrastructure (and support) for release updates that costs the big money. The actual hardware on the desk is a minimal part of the whole. I think I read somewhere that for each desktop/laptop in the firm, associated costs are more than 20,000 dollars over three years! The actual machine is only the tip of the iceberg.
It depends on the company, some companies (really) don't even rely on VB and Access.
However, there are lots of small software packages out there that do require either a VM (Parallels) or BootCamp. In many applications, Parallels works well-enough to bridge this gap. Again, it depends on the application.
Even mixed environments can work, it just depends on what the company is doing and what systems and applications they're relying on.
- "When presenting at customer or external meetings, I have been greeted with the 'wow factor.' 'Where's the ThinkPad, IBM uses Apples now?'"
I love this absolutely the best
I love this absolutely the best
Given that the source of this article is Roughly Drafted and given Daniel Dilger's notorious propensity for cherry picking facts and quote mining I would actually like to see the full survey.
However, it's certainly interesting reading.
However, it's certainly interesting reading.
Isn't that based on System/360? I thought that was different from Unix.
True, Roughly Drafted can be a bit biased IMO.
IBM is still a massive influence on the computer industry, its one they practically built back in the day. They also do a lot of consulting for other companies now. Basically IBM having success with Macs is a big step, and should enable tests of a similar nature in other large companies.
Incorrect
I take it you never even did a master's, nor have you studied statistics. Maybe you studied the lies, damned lies part of it. Where do I start?
"National polling organizations" (organisations come on!) Any Joe and his dog can make national statistics. So sure someone could interview 1500 people the represent the entire USA.
Would a government body or a University study? Definitely not if the University wanted to have any academic credibility. And the government uses a Census.
Yes, America's full of people getting their own statistics does it mean they are credible? If they call 1500 people a fair sample of America odds on no.
Too bad IBM failed to make a greater effort in keeping Apple on PowerPC. Now they are relegated to being in the same position with Apple that they found themselves with Microsoft. I think the Mac would be better off with PowerPC had IBM made greater efforts but that's obviously not what happened.
It's interesting to see that IBM's interest in the Mac will probably just grow over time. If IBM really wanted to break the Microsoft reliance they should have pushed there own processor technology harder. They should have looked into offering their own JS series blades with OSX server as an option if they were really serious about OSX in enterprise applications.
It's interesting to see that IBM's interest in the Mac will probably just grow over time. If IBM really wanted to break the Microsoft reliance they should have pushed there own processor technology harder. They should have looked into offering their own JS series blades with OSX server as an option if they were really serious about OSX in enterprise applications.
I wonder if anyone over at IBM installed OS/2 on their Mac!
Too funny. I though the same thing. Could they dual boot? Will parallels run OS/2?
Opposites do attract! I bet it's just a fling though. Like a way older man dating some good-looking young blonde.
Although the sampling size is pretty small, just the fact they even attempted the study is very compelling.
Well, Zune and Silverlight might not be resounding successes, but at least they are not actively harming Microsoft. Unlike Vista....
exactly right!! they need to stress their wanting to be the leaders of turning corporate america into a multiplatform institution and being the first to prove they can break the M$-only mold. this would also be a good way to promote their lotus software for iphone and mac.
IBM starting to use some Macs instead of Thinkpads?
HELL HAS FROZEN OVER...
Ballmer?
They are switching some people for compatibility testing/development. Not the whole company.
On a company level I doubt their motivation is anything more then legally being able to run OS X for testing/dev purposes. I'm sure some employees would rather have macs though.