They're using JAMF Casper Suite for their macs.
The last time I looked, if the company does not want to buy additional third party software for that purpose, an IT team would simply use Microsoft's WSUS and Group Policies to distribute software to client PCs. The user would not even have to click anything - the software would just appear installed and ready on his machine. And this is just what built-in features of Windows and Windows Server do for you - of course, there are also other software solutions available that will significantly increase the ease of use, if you want or need that.
The only thing noteworthy here is that some external party developed a software for Macs that serves a similar purpose - and they needed to mention that because everybody in the business already knows that Apple provides no such tools for their own operating system.
Regarding the amount of software calls, there is not even remotely enough data and background information available to make a meaningful judgment. Are those users sitting in the same departments as the PC users doing the same work and using the same front- and back-end software and do all users have admin privileges or are they all restricted users? If there were actual similarities between the user groups, that number might tell us something meaningful about the differences between the platforms. As it is, it's just marketing ********.
I've 35 years of IT background and 20+ years of that in professional IT and for more than a decade I have now worked in large multi-platform environments. I don't care if you throw a Windows or Linux machine at me or a Mac. What I know from experience is that Macs make nice computers at home or in rather small and isolated environments. But in corporate networks, when you need more than just a web browser or simple access to a file server somewhere, they still just don't play well with others and you always have to go the extra mile to make a Mac work well enough with the rest of the environment. So pardon me when my work experience tells me that it's at best wishful romantic thinking when somebody says that Macs need less support than PCs. It's as easy - or hard - to migrate to Linux as it is to migrate to a Mac, and integrating each platform into a corporate environment requires about the same effort. Either Linux has come a long way or OS X hasn't sufficiently evolved where it matters for businesses. The truth remains that only Microsoft offers - out of the box - all the necessary tools to build, maintain and support a large environment where all services integrate well with each other while also providing centralized administration. Yes, there are third party tools for everything everywhere - for a load of extra money, of course. But out of the box, Microsoft still is the unchallenged king of the hill.
The only thing that I see here is the joint marketing machinery of Apple's and IBM's partnership at work.
If the Surface Book sells well, Microsoft might switch its focus to hardware rather than services.
No, they wouldn't, simply because it's not their core business. Their Surface (and Lumia) products should be regarded as reference hardware, not as an attempt to kill their OEM business.
OS X is tuned for it. 
