Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
As an Analyst Programmer working in a PC / Mac environment, the Mac side of things is a lot less hassle.
Is why I switched to Mac at home about 10 years ago, I wanted to come home and use a computer that worked.

Although there have been moments when the Mac failed to behave, but these are far fewer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
Music to Tim's ears..... he just heard angels sing.

The kind of publicity money can't buy.
And what makes you think This isn't simply PR and part of their deal? Apple has been singing praises to ibm's business and it consulting, IBM is retiring the favor

So I'm sure a lot of money was involved
 
What "humiliation"? IBM has not been in the workstation hardware or software business for some years, so they just want the best platform for productivity at a reasonable cost - that's Mac.

Ginni sold of the chip and much of the server business last year too. International Business Machines no longer has machines. That's the substance of their failures.

But even though IBM exited the workstation business, they didn't issue a press release saying were going hard on overpriced Toshiba's. Here they are reveling as a submissive to apple.

And, not to overstate the point, IBMs new business "apps" strategy just seems like more of the same followership. You can only keep up share repurchases for so long - not a good situation.
 
People who obsess over specs without context are the same as men who obsess over penis size. Bigger is not always better, hun ;)

I'm assuming the snark is meant to distract from the truth that Apple screwed up by bottlenecking their brand new iMacs. A 300 net book will seem faster to the average user than a $1200 + desktop. But the specs don't matter...
 
This is not a fair comparison. In general, Mac users are more intelligent than PC users. That's why the Macs require less management and help from the sys admins.
Although we should not forget that Mac OS X is somewhat stable enough if you don't dig into it like using PC.

Macs are more expensive. However, they last longer than anything on the market.
Well.
iOS 9 refuses to support iTunes 11.4, rendering all macs running snow leopard not able to manage iPhone 6s and above.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not just old & cheap vs new & expensive. One of my coworkers has a 18 mo old i7 based Dell laptop. Somehow it manages to run more slowly than my ancient MacBook Pro. Clearly something is gravely wrong with his configuration, but neither he nor the IT department can figure it out.
Brand new expensive laptops require less service calls than three year old cheap ones.
Details at 11!
 
It would be that way at my office if I could stop people from upgrading the OS on day 1 everytime Apple releases a new version. Oh and stop people from downloading MacKeeper :eek:
I do remember, however, that Mac OS X doesn't push new software updates automatically if you shut down auto updates on Mac App Store.
Ironically, Windows 10 Windows update can hardly be turned off even using group policy. Only chance is setting up an invalid intranet update source and doable internet source.
 
So according to you the 130 000 Apple devices deployed to IBMs 400 000 employees have all gone to previous Apple fans? Wow, I wouldn't have guessed that IBM had that many Apple fans. I wonder if all large, PC-oriented companies are hiding closeted Apple fans?

Or you could be wrong and the Apple experience really is better. Hmmm....
I can agree on this. THis changeover to Apple was not considered overnight. I would assume it was years in the planing. IBM really must think Apple can provide a better experience for their business in certain tasks and are willing to give Apple devices a trial run to see. A very large trial run.

NO SH-T! It took them until 2015 to discover this!?? It has been like that for close to 20 years!
I'm always shocked when the cheap crowd finds the expensive package has less hassle and actually works better, so it saves lots of money in labor and extras in the "long run" or a year or two.

This has been a common discovery in sections of the business world.
IMB discovered this years ago. Just takes a while for it to be approved within IBM, funding for it found and approved and an appropriate time frame for the rollout developed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What about 10 years from now.... Macs are preferred platform for gaming over Windows PCs. I want to see that day next.
With Metal, iOS is slowly looking like the go to for portable gaming. Even Nintendo are branching into iOS gaming with it's DeNA partnership. Metal on OS X though does look to be a game changer. We just have to wait for decent dGPUs for the 4K iMacs. No dGPU option on the 21.5 iMac really hurts this. I'm not talking high end gaming rigs. A lot of people want budget gaming rigs too and currently they look to the non-Mac side for that. In the future with a few small changes Apple could be the prefered hardware vendor of choice for desktop changing.
 
Well. For current state of Windows 10 and El Capitan, I must admit El Capitan is easier to use than Windows 10, while many of such things are "just works".

However, since my Yosemite forces me to do five times full reinstall in five months, I can no longer admit Mac OS X is a stable system. This also breaks my impression on El Capitan running on low end hardware.

Windows 10 is basically designed to be able to run many many hardware configurations, while Mac? Probably only the top tier hardware configurations.

As a Windows/Mac mixed user, I just only get the most from each platform. For Windows, I have Microsoft Visio, and project, and access. For Mac I have XLD, iTunes better management capability, and a chance to use Mac OS X.

Neither reach definite "just works" level without rebooting machine for years. Neither have significant drawbacks preventing me from completing basic tasks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dead0k
And what makes you think This isn't simply PR and part of their deal? Apple has been singing praises to ibm's business and it consulting, IBM is retiring the favor
So I'm sure a lot of money was involved
All that could very well be true, but that still doesn't change the fact that these kinds of headlines are a good measure of publicity to counteract some of those still stubbornly held views that in addition to being more expensive, Macs are not enterprise friendly, expensive to service, or even compatible with PCs.

And after Big Blue's selling their personal computer (2005) and x86 server business (2014) to Lenovo, IBM and Apple are no longer direct competitors. The current partnership between them is a mutually beneficial deal, and if on top of that Apple gets a little free advertising touting some possible advantages for enterprise to run on the Mac platform, while also selling a few hundred thousand extra Macs "on a regular basis", I'd say that's good news for Apple, backroom deals or not.
 
Last edited:
It's not JUST the use of OS X. It's the synergy between OS X and Apple's hardware that makes the Mac as great as it is. Putting OS X on Windows hardware is like putting lipstick on a Pig.

Mac is a PC, OS X runs on a "PC" as does Windows on a "PC" Mac via boot camp. Under that ultra sleak design and sexy interior are components found in dells, HPs etc.

same pig runs OS X and Windows, be it a fashionable pig.

People still don't understand me when I tell them a computer is supposed to last more than 2 years and can't comprehend how I get by with a 7+ year old comp (bought used 3 years ago) even though my 7+ year old comp runs circle around their brand new PCs in every performance benchmark.

You must talk to some really gullible individuals. It's impossible for your 7+ Year old Mac to outperform a modern PC. Cause they both run PC components, and a 2008 CPU/GPU is destroyed by a 2015 equivalent tier machine.

Here is a fun fact, my 2009 top of the range MacBook Pro 17", highest spec laptop in the apple range, beaten by my MacBook 12" retina. The 12" Macbook is a very low performance machine in 2015.

What performance benchmark is your 2008 Mac beating a 2015 PC? Do tell....

Like: About everything:)

Must be gaming !

Those 7970s from 2011 kick ass!! ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Strange enough, on this forum, supposedly an Apple centric forum, there is a large concentration of haters and bashers....
Don't come here if you want an opinion about macs and Apple products in general: they are all bad according with some serial complainers here

Correction. We have a wide spectrum of users, who are allowed to voice their opinions, this is an apple centric website, it is not a fanboys website where only cheering is allowed.

We do come here for opinions about macs and apple products . Look up the definition of opinion, it does not mean praise!

To be clear people who complain about haters/bashers tend to be fanboys who want just positive news, maybe these people are on the wrong site. Cause this is a news and rumours site, not a fanboy site.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SirCheese
All that could very well be true, but that still doesn't change the fact that these kinds of headlines are a good measure of publicity to counteract some of those still stubbornly held views that in addition to being more expensive, Macs are not enterprise friendly, expensive to service, or even compatible with PCs.

Well, I happen to support those views. Macs are not enterprise friendly due to the way Apple develop and support software. Let me give you and the rest of the thread a small example.

At my place of work we have domain names that look like this: 'server.x.company.com'
In Windows and Linux this machine can be referred to as 'server' due to our DNS setup. On mac, however, the short name for the machine is 'server.x'. This caused a some of our configuration to break on mac.

Fortunately there were a fix in Mavericks: Add AlwaysAppendSearchDomains to a configuration file for mDNSResponder in OS X. Changing it via the GUI is not possible.

When Apple released Yosemite, mDNSResponder had silently been replaced with discoveryd which did not have the same configuration options. Again, our configuration was broken on mac. The only possibility was to force re-enabling mDNSResponder by writing more magic strings in plist files deep within OS X

In 10.10.1 it was made possible to configure discoverd the same was mDNSResponder used to be configured (undocumented of course).

According to several rumour sites including MR, discoveryd caused a lot of problems such as excessive CPU usage and ongoing WIFI connectivity issues so in 10.10.4, Apple secretly decided to ditch it and go back to mDNSResponder. All the configuration broke again, but at least the fix was known.

10.11 continues to use mDNSResponder.

Now, all of these configuration options are mostly undocumented and can (and will) break at any time. Nothing has been written in the release notes and in general Apple does not discuss or even inform their customers about changes that might break their setup. That is decidedly enterprise-unfriendly.

This is just one example. There are a lot of other ways Apple is enterprise unfriendly. Windows is ubiquitous in the enterprise world, not because of ignorance of better alternatives, but because Microsoft take their enterprise customers seriously.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jedifaka
I hope the Apple IBM partnership goes really well. Stories like this are PR, though macs are excellent computers and used throughout many industries . It's one of the best laptops you can get. I use a PC and a Mac at work, Mac whenever I can , though software restrictions mean i have to use my PC desktop for certain tasks.

This is not a fair comparison. In general, Mac users are more intelligent than PC users. That's why the Macs require less management and help from the sys admins.

Users are the same . Macs are easier to use.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As an honest answer, I'd say the issue is that MS
- cares too much about legacy
- exposes legacy too clearly
- hides what should be obvious, and exposes what should be hidden.

For example, OSX has a fairly clearly named Disk Utility app with fairly clearly exposed buttons for things like First Aid and Erase.

The equivalent on Windows is the Computer Management app (which is already somewhat problematic because the relationship between "Computer Management" and the "Add Hardware" bits of Control Panel is not at all clear. When you go to the Storage section of Computer management and look around you don't see anything that seems to correspond to a task you might care about (like erasing a disk or checking/fixing the file system) but you see a whole lot of buttons relevant to changing how the program looks (WTF? why is it important to have two buttons for changing the appearance of an already overly complicated program?), and the Action menu only offers to help you create VHDs [but provides a whole lot more ways to lay out the program --- honestly the program seems more interested in ways you can customize its appearance than in any actual computer management}.

But oh, in Windows, you don't actually use EITHER the Control Panel HW section OR the Computer Management app, instead you go to Windows Explorer, select the drive, right click, choose Properties, then in the dialog that comes up find the Tab named Tools.

The point is, all this makes a kind of vague sense if you have been part of the Windows world for 20 years, but it doesn't make sense to a novice. The way functionality (in particular system management functionality) is split across apps and various panels/dialogs reflects history and the addition of new features at different times; it does not reflect a "from the ground up" DESIGN of how to present this functionality, especially bearing in mind the common tasks that users care about.
Apple has been very willing to rethink this sort of workflow design over and over again. Obviously from MacOS to OSX was a big change, then there have been big changes in various apps over the years, just in 10.11 Disk Utility got something of a redesign. MS in the past was terrified to do this sort of large change, and when they finally did (with Windows 8) they made something of a clusterfsck of it, leaving out important functionality, often caring about appearance over usability, and generally enacting a parody of Mac design, a cargo cult that assumed the magic was all in the pixels and that didn't realize the magic is in
(a) asking what the IMPORTANT work flows are,
(b) testing your assumptions against reality and
(c) fixing when your assumptions are proved wrong.

Networking on Windows is the same sort of godawful mess. What ARE Homegroups? What problem do they solve? Why when I go more than one level deep in any network dialog do I start seeing these network terms from the 1980s -- NetBIOS and BEUI and a full tree of every driver that's running my network connection?
Again sure, this stuff is necessary for some purpose --- have it available for those who need it, but don't mix it up with the material that's required by your basic user just trying to get basic internet working.
MS does a little better with say Win7 than with XP, but once again they're frightened to actually rethink and utterly redesign the full work flow, so we get band aids on a messy system, not a clean UI design.

Meanwhile Apple is constantly trying to simplify the user view of this stuff. The full power is there, if you want to launch a command-line or root around inside the Utilities folder; but Apple tries to hide what most people don't need. So, for example, a few OS revisions ago they started to hide the ~/Library folder, presumably because
- almost no-one actually needs to interact with it and
- those who did interact with it tended to screw things up.
(~/Library is full of stuff that looks like you don't need it. Per user prefs, per user caches, log files, and basically every "technical" file that an app needs but that is not a user created document.) You can still open the folder if you believe you need to, from the command-line, but Apple has ensured that the ignorant cannot shoot themselves in the foot.
Similarly they started a few revs ago to largely present in Finder a file system that appears rooted in your home folder. You can break out of that to see the higher levels of the file system but once again you have to work to do that, and Apple's belief (one I'd agree with, based on how I've seen family use their Macs) is that most users do not NEED to know that there is anything on their hard drives beyond their personal home directory, and allowing them to explore there just causes trouble.

You could argue that Windows tries to do the same thing in Windows Explorer, and they tried to do it before Apple, presenting eg the Libraries section of the sidebar. But in my opinion (I think validated by IBM's experience) once again they did the job half-heartedly and instead of constant iteration and improvement, they made one set of changes and then appeared to lose interest. With Apple you see a pattern where, pretty much every rev of OSX from 10.0 has worked harder and harder to hide the dangerous parts of the file system from the user (and to prevent them from HAVING to interact with those dangerous parts). On Windows you don't see that CONSTANT attempt at improvement and the removal of problem areas.
I mean, wow, you really really describe spot on what has been my problem with Windows for years. You just nailed it.
 
what exactly is easier to do on a mac than a pc? i've tried both and macs simply have less customization than pcs..?

Big companies use GM's there's no customization.

This is not a fair comparison. In general, Mac users are more intelligent than PC users. That's why the Macs require less management and help from the sys admins.

:rolleyes:o_O

From an IT perspective that meas there's less for the user to screw up.

For the 20 years I was doing IT I always said "I get paid to fix Windows issues at work. I have Macs at home so I don't have to do the same thing on my day off."

Now you know why I don't have Mac's at home because I spend 8 hours a day on one and don't want the same thing at home.

I agree 100%.
The difference is you can't go to Best Buy or Staples and buy a $299 Mac. That's what people do, they go shopping for a PC and buy the cheapest piece of junk with a sale tag hanging from it. So, of course it isn't going to last. Or perform. Now, if you were to poll PC users who spend >$2000 on their desktop or laptop, I bet you'd have a different set of statistics then what "Mac people" see as PC users!

My PC's last forever also, but I don't buy junk.

Yup...

====

I would have thought this would be obvious to IBM that it's be cheaper to integrate Mac's. I guess ya learn something new everyday.
 
Correction. We have a wide spectrum of users, who are allowed to voice their opinions, this is an apple centric website, it is not a fanboys website where only cheering is allowed.

We do come here for opinions about macs and apple products . Look up the definition of opinion, it does not mean praise!

To be clear people who complain about haters/bashers tend to be fanboys who want just positive news, maybe these people are on the wrong site. Cause this is a news and rumours site, not a fanboy site.
Correction. Every time someone on this forum point out the ridiculous hysteria behind every single Apple release, it's labelled as a fanboy ...

I can see very few "opinions" on MacRumors lately, and a lot of whining, crying, screaming ...

A news has not to be "Positive" or "negative": it's just a news.

Apple released a new iMac 4K. Good. It has some disappointing points (5400RPM spinner, no dGPU in every configuration, soldered RAM and so on ....). Good, it is ok to highlight it and discuss over it. No reason to become a drama queen and start the hysteria about "Tim Cook is a nut .... Jobs was better ... Apple is ripping us ... Macs are appliances ... Windows is better".

This is what EVERY SINGLE THREAD is ....
Speaking about users on a wrong site, I think they should think about considering a good Windows centric website, where they can insult Apple and being fully supported.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.