Well remind me never to work with those companies for not having AV software. The AV software is to protect the customers from the company passing virus by mistake. If a company that I work with sent me a virus and it wreck my PC I would demand they pay for repairs and they rightfully should. For a business it is poor practice not to run AV software.
As for the firewall software if you want to use the mac have a built in firewall so does windows so it not a fair comparison. Plus the company should be running hardware firewalls any how so again a non issue.
Problem is cost wise their is not a huge difference. Depending on the size I am guessing small paying for an IT guy is going to cost the same because even with windows one IT guy could run more computers than there currently are so with the Mac it not going to change. So the IT budget does not change.
Crashing and system down time is a BS argument.
If the guy looking at the saving understand the information he will cut through the BS very quickly. So be very careful on how you do it and it better not just add to the normal BS in the go over to a mac arguments that a lot of people use.
first of all, thankyou, termina3 for the support
second of all, when my IT manager read your post, this was his reaction:
if your company does not have adequate virus protection, you can't go around pointing the finger at others. it's not my responsibility to protect everybody with whom i have contact. whether i
choose to is another matter altogether. besides which, it's been demonstrated that many "leading" antivirus programs actually reduce the security and integrity of the mac os.
saying that the mac os and windows both have firewalls is like saying that my house has a door and my bank has a door, so my house is as secure as my bank.
um, no. sorry. there are so many holes in this argument i don't even need to address it.
finally, the reason why my IT manager rolled his eyes and walked away is because
there's better things he could be doing right now. because he's not managing a team of people whose job it is to fix randomly crashing computers in our office, the IT department actually gets stuff done. they've just upgraded our intranet. i'm not saying that intranets don't get upgraded in windows based environments. but it's sure a lot harder when 80-90% of your day is answering telephone calls such as "my computer just gave me an error -46. what does that mean?" or "can you come and look at this? i can't print! there's no printer!"
again, i'm not saying these issues are absent with the mac os, there are a few niggles and bugs. however, work is not lost because computers crash frequently, and such errors occur far less frequently. so we get more work done. so our boss (who pays us all money, remember) is not paying us to sit and do nothing while some other guy, also being paid money, tears himself away from whatever he was being paid to do, comes and fixes the problem, then goes back to what he was doing. so a simple error, in effect, costing the time and wage of
two people to correct, is simply avoided.
please explain how this is not more cost efficient, because i'm sure there are many, many accountants out there who'll be extremely interested in what you have to say. this last reason, above any colour management or sheer processing power, is why the design and film industries have used macs for so long. especially in these industries, which often bill by the hour, time needs to be very efficiently spent, and any downtime that can be avoided, is.
in the mean time, i'm getting back to work.
