The web client is flash based. vSphere 6.5 is finally introducing a HTML5 version, but it is not full featured yet.
IBM Says Macs Are Up to $543 Less Expensive Than PCs Over Time
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The web client is flash based. vSphere 6.5 is finally introducing a HTML5 version, but it is not full featured yet.
2ilent8cho
macrumors 6502
Sounds like they have done it wrong. The App store should be logged in with the end users Apple ID, and if they want to give them apps you have to pay for on the App Store you would allocation them via an MDM, and if the person left you would revoke the licence from their Apple ID for use with somebody else. So either they do not have an MDM setup or they just don't know how to correctly administer Apple devices.
BeefCake 15
macrumors 68020
Thanks for posting this, I had a hard time finding it at first.
Excellent video for those interested in business case of technology changes on Enterprise level but not so much for end user pissing contests.
Those figures would probably have to be tempered even further just for a quick and dirty stab at the number of OSes in use since a large number of corporate computers do not link externally to the internet but are either networked internally or at best to a limited intranet. That would most likely hit the number of Mac machines in use given their relative scarcity in the corporate sector.
TechZeke
macrumors 68020
My rMBP and iMac both reliably run Windows, so they can technically do more than PCs.
Even still, this isn't 10 years ago. Except for the specific engineering program here and there or Visual Basic, I can pretty do everything on straight macOS. I even do AutoCAD on macOS now.
I own 2 PCs because I like technology and can afford it. My 15" has a Windows 10 partition, but sometimes I want to carry something more portable around campus like my Surface Pro 4. I also like to game every once in awhile, so I built a gaming PC because I can.
When it's an SSD problem, the machine is running slow because the storage is slow, not because there is a problem with the program or macOS itself. My gaming PC and Surface Pro 4 are both running on pure SSD like my rMBP and iMac, so any problem I get is with a program or Windows 10 itself.
Last edited:
bladerunner2000
Suspended
I can't buy one yet, need to wait for drivers to be to released first.
And of course having a partnership deal with Apple there's absolutely no bias in this report whatsoever.
deckard666
macrumors 65816
For a partner as large as IBM? Yes they would.
Even for PCs, if you buy the same model in bilk, set up an image with WDS. Unbox the PC, PXE boot to WDS, lay down the image. Software deployed through GPO.
You can't really scale down those numbers to smaller enterprises. 1) will you be able to get the Macs pre-configure? 2) do you run Windows software?, then you need a license for Windows and something like Fusion. 3) MacOS still does not deal very well with AD.
fischersd
macrumors 603
Heh. You really didn't answer either of my questions and added new info.
Curious if Apple is finally embracing the enterprise market directly - would certainly be nice to see.
There are other enterprise directory offerings which work with AD - if you have a lot of *nix in your shop, you'll want something to do DCE/DFS with them as well.
usarioclave
macrumors 65816
In general, the savings on Macs vs PCs come down to support. IBM internally bills support calls back to the BU, which is how they can tell that various pieces of hardware cost more/less.
That was said in previous reports by iBM: it really comes down to supportability. Most small businesses with Macs would agree. In general, you need at least 1 FTE for anything more than 20 PCs, whereas you can get away with like .1-.5 FTEs for the same number of Macs.
Bacillus
Suspended
That exactly depicts the Apple/IBM partnership.
Anything web/Citrix based is a low common denominator that could have been achieved with ANY web-enabled platform from ANY company - WITHOUT the IBM partnership...
Last edited:
When I buy a new iMac, I always get good money for my old one. So true... In the long run Apple isn't that expensive.
Except when it comes to phones... iPhone is crazy over priced. Still by the thing though
My 1000 euro cheaper PC (compared to a maxed out iMac) runs like an beast with 6 cores, GTX1070, 32gb mem, 950 pro M2 SSD, does the job much much SO much faster. It kicks Mac Pro's butt easy. For example, it opens my 14GB PSB files in 1 minute and saves it under a minute. My iMac needs 17 minutes (with SSD) to open the file and its harsh to work in. Saving the file makes it to stall the whole system till the job is done. My PC is saving me time doing me more on a day plus I can update it with new parts to keep it running like a beast in the future instead of buying again a maxed out imac for big cash.
iMacs look pretty. Yes, but my 3415W dell screen is pretty damm sexy too! Even the Define R5 case is pretty need!
An very disapointed Mac user who switched to PC 8 weeks ago.
This is an intresting point of view on saving cost. Nice! It looks like it really depends on scale. Cause it doenst work in my scenario sketched above. But it works in a bigger picture pretty fine.
Last edited:
Be that as it may it would have been nice of IBM to provide a little substance. To me this reads like a car manufacturer telling you what mileage you might get.
RogueWarrior65
macrumors 6502
I've been saying this for 25 years. It's not really about the hardware. It's more about the support costs. 25 years ago, I was the sole tech support person for a department with about 200 Macs in a Fortune 500 company. By contrast, the IT department had a about a 4-to-1 ratio of PCs to IT personnel. So, purely from a human-resources point of view, Macs are significantly less expensive. But here's where practicality and politics collide. To the VPs, having a large headcount meant control over more money and therefore more prestige in the company. This is still the case today in many companies. Clearly, they haven't learned from the mistakes of Fairchild Semiconductor.
GeneralChang
macrumors 68000
This lines up completely with my professional experience. I am more productive on a Mac and have fewer issues that require me to bug IT on a Mac. Glad that's not just my personal bias getting in the way.
This lines up completely with my professional experience. I am more productive on a Mac and have fewer issues that require me to bug IT on a Mac. Glad that's not just my personal bias getting in the way.
If you need some more muscle, you are pretty screwed with Apple these days and an old 1000+ old Mac pro as only choice.. with limited options. It made me moving to a PC. I am more productive with a much faster system. The OS differences are not that big.
baryon
macrumors 68040
Since time is money, and setting up, troubleshooting and properly maintaining a PC takes much more time, this makes sense.
When me and my relatives used Windows, I was constantly fixing, formatting, reinstalling, uninstalling, cleaning, tweaking, and troubleshooting everyone's computers. A badly maintained PC will slow down within mere months, and the vast majority of people who use them have no idea how to maintain them properly. And a slow PC costs money, because money = time especially for a corporation.
Ever since I convinced everyone I know to get a Mac (for my own benefit), I haven't been called to fix anything. No one had to reinstall their OS and all their apps, no one had to go into the Registry Editor and change obscure keys to make the PC run again, no one had to go into msconfig and turn off processes that should have been removed when an app was uninstalled, etc.
Windows is absolutely fine for people who know what they're doing and have time and are willing to mess around with this sort of stuff. But for those, including myself, who'd rather spend as little time as they can at a desk in front of a computer, the Mac is definitely going to save them a lot of effort, time and money.
When something works well, you don't even notice it.
This is why it's important that Apple should continue to take the Mac seriously. It's something they're consistently doing well, and that the world needs rather than just wants. The iPhone is great and all, but it's not nearly as important as a real computer to get your work done. And the iPad isn't going to replace anyone's PC anytime soon.
When me and my relatives used Windows, I was constantly fixing, formatting, reinstalling, uninstalling, cleaning, tweaking, and troubleshooting everyone's computers. A badly maintained PC will slow down within mere months, and the vast majority of people who use them have no idea how to maintain them properly. And a slow PC costs money, because money = time especially for a corporation.
Ever since I convinced everyone I know to get a Mac (for my own benefit), I haven't been called to fix anything. No one had to reinstall their OS and all their apps, no one had to go into the Registry Editor and change obscure keys to make the PC run again, no one had to go into msconfig and turn off processes that should have been removed when an app was uninstalled, etc.
Windows is absolutely fine for people who know what they're doing and have time and are willing to mess around with this sort of stuff. But for those, including myself, who'd rather spend as little time as they can at a desk in front of a computer, the Mac is definitely going to save them a lot of effort, time and money.
When something works well, you don't even notice it.
This is why it's important that Apple should continue to take the Mac seriously. It's something they're consistently doing well, and that the world needs rather than just wants. The iPhone is great and all, but it's not nearly as important as a real computer to get your work done. And the iPad isn't going to replace anyone's PC anytime soon.
Flight Plan
macrumors 6502a
I call "incompetent math" on the part of IBM. Or maybe it's just plain BS.
I cannot build a Mac the way I want it, let alone build it for less than a PC. I refer you to my signature for details...
I cannot build a Mac the way I want it, let alone build it for less than a PC. I refer you to my signature for details...
You're right a friends mom is not calling about a hardware problem, she's calling about how to get her pictures from her phone to the Mac or something else interface related.
Heh. You really didn't answer either of my questions and added new info.
It is unknown and unlikely that Apple is embracing the Enterprise like we may think of it. But if you go to them and purchase in the same volume as IBM, and I'm sure that the otics of IBM buying Macs is not lost on them, they will provision what you want.
GeneralChang
macrumors 68000
Can't speak for your use case, but the OS differences, software issues, and general unreliability of a $2500 ThinkPad killed me when I was on that thing. I spent more time arguing with my computer (or letting IT argue with it) than I did actually working. My $2500 Mac just gets out of my way and lets me work.
I don't need a ton of power (most people don't), but I do get that the workstation users have kinda been abandoned by Apple. Which is a shame.
I've been in IT over 35 years, doing infrastructure support for the last 20. The normal ration now is about 100 users per tech. In larger companies, those ration looked skewed because they will include member of IT that do not directly support the endpoints.
jonen560ti
macrumors member
I'm sceptical. I work in an environment with around 50 PC's and about 5 Macs. I certainly haven't spent less time supporting the Macs than i have PC's considering the ratio