iPodDailyNews - Where iPod news comes first

Typo in first line; "Macs in the enterprise aren't just cheaper to manage, they're cheaper too" also... First

Hey "first", I think the emphasis is on "a lot" cheaper.

Mar 09, 10 - 02:50 pm Comment from: Tiger Leopard

I clicked the full article and read some of the comments. They all seem to dispute the claims by saying Macs provide less functionality.

omg #3

Mar 09, 10 - 02:53 pm Comment from: theloniousMac

This is why I'm broke. Stupidacs never fail.

This just in... The sky is blue


MDN MW: "tax"

Mar 09, 10 - 02:55 pm Comment from: ChrissyOne

My Mac provides all the funtionality of OS X, Windows XP and Windows Vista. I'm not sure how that's 'less'.

This is why IT staff needs more Windows PCs and fewer Macs. Job security.

Mar 09, 10 - 02:58 pm Comment from: Cubert

Like Neo, they are slowly but surely starting to wake up.

Mar 09, 10 - 03:07 pm Comment from: KingMel

The last time that I saw the price list for my government agency, the monthly costs of PCs and Macs (desktops and laptops) were very close (within $10 to $20 per month). But I suspect that the vast majority of the help desk money goes to support PC problems. I pretty much only see the support guys every three years when it comes time to swap out my machine (and I make my own personal backup using CCC, just in case).

Though I prefer and admire the Mac platform, I am unaware of even one large Mac network. Is there a single instance of a 1M or 500K-Mac network? Even 100K? Please don't include single-site supercomputer installs. Also, are there tools available that support global network management and administration? My belief is that we haven't reached the point where there are real enterprise networks with a significant Mac presence nor is there the necessary administrative ecosystem to support them, but I'm interested to read what you all may be aware of.

Interesting;

I think there's a company called Apple that has a large, global network installed using MAC OS. I could be wrong. You might want to check.

Mar 09, 10 - 03:48 pm Comment from: Beowulf

@Interesting

Werner trucking big enough for you? They switched all desktops to Macs about 4 years ago. Everything except the AS400 mainframe.

Mar 09, 10 - 03:52 pm Comment from: HueyLong

@Interesting:

Er, Enterprise: how about Apple Inc.

But tell me a company you know that has a network installed base of 1,000,000 PC Desktops? There are some big companies out there... and I'd be interested to know.

These comparisons are always to an extent related to context. If that context is heavily Windows-centric - Active Directory, SharePoint, Exchange, IIS, etc. - and Windows is what IT knows, obviously there will be added effort in making the Apple silk purse comply with the Windows sow's ear. Large enterprises also rely on tools like Tivoli to monitor and maintain their desktops, and some of those tools don't "do" Mac.

Hardware support is a different matter. The Dells, HPs and monitors we used to support were all covered by multi-year onsite contracts. The cost to get such coverage on one's Macs must also be factored in any comparison.

Claims the report from the No Duh Foundation.

Apple's an interesting, if unusual, example. Even it has fewer than 30k employees. I'm not sure how many sites or data centers it maintains but the sheer number of stores makes it interesting. Werner Trucking only has about 15k but I will definitely read up on its migration. I'm really unaware of any significant installs so I appreciate the info!

AAPL just went over 200 Billion market cap. Watch out MSFT

They just figured this out? In 1998, after having been frustrated by the unreliability of Windows, maintenance downtime and expense of support, I made the wholesale switch to Macs for our company. It's not just the hard $$. Since then, we haven't endured crashing when trying to make a deadline, slow apps due to anti-virus overhead, re-installs, peripherals that don't work after an update, and the countless updates, pop-up windows, interruptions, productivity killers, and the infamous Y2K non-event. The Mac OS isn't perfect, but Windows has no place in my small business. I can't afford it.

Mar 09, 10 - 04:43 pm Comment from: Original Jake

This is very useful ammo for those in large corporate environments fighting to add Macs to the mix or, god forbid, as the default standard.

Mar 09, 10 - 04:47 pm Comment from: Arnold Ziffel

Think of the electricity and time that could be saved around the world if everyone ran Macs - no time and energy wasted running anti-malware BS.

Where I used to work, my Dull Windows 'puter was unusable for the first 5 to 10 minutes after booting/rebooting.

Mar 09, 10 - 05:21 pm Comment from: Jubei

Great ammo. Too bad the biggest gate to get through is that Active-x -Sharepoint that LOCKS the user to Internet Explorer/ Windows. Then .aspx-.net that further locks the user to IE/Windows.

If this monopolizing system is allowed to continue, the monopoly can never be broken.

Mar 09, 10 - 06:12 pm Comment from: JadisOne

"You can buy a PC for $400, while the cheapest Mac is over a thousand," Jon Graff, director of IT operations at A&E;, told CIO.com last year.. "In the real world, you're spending a lot more on a Mac."

The cheapest Mac is $599 which is not 'a lot more' than a PC.

I am tired of all this PC cheapest that MAC crap.
I work at sales for one of the major PC OEM out there. The reality is that all PC that start at 399.00 are below margin (meaning that they are being sold below the cost, so loosing money). So sales reps are constantly pushed to do "up sales": add warranty, printers, software, etc. Because if you just sold the base PC, you will not have any bonus, since you are selling products under margin, below cost. I just happened to work selling to major accounts (4 to 5 billions or up purchase power), and none of these business buy 300 dollars PC. Every time I sell 25-100 or more desktops, the average price is 700-900- dollars at least. So, the 300 PC is just for home, business PC are not cheap, sales rep are trained to up sales all the time and at the end companies always pay above 500 at least for any pc.
Now, if the company is going to sell at lost (below cost), then nobody can beat that, and sure apple will not enter that game. So stop taking a 400 PC intended for home user, and used it as flag for business cases, when that is not real.
I just took a PC that is advertised at 399.99, change the monitor for a decent quality one, add 1u of antivirus, change the OS from win7 home to win7 Pro (yes because any home OS like xp home, vista home, win7 home will not connect to a domain, so will not work in business environment), change the dvd rom to a dvd-writer, add a wireless card, and price went up to 860 (after an instant rebate of 364). The real price is 1184.00, but they will sell it for 860.00 to attract the user, so the sales rep have to up sale here to bring profit to the company.
Just to end this: You have no idea what mean business buying win7 home OEM and then find out that they need win7 pro to connect to their networks, and there is no other option that buying a retail upgrade for 184.00. I see it all the time, it is just stupid.

Mar 09, 10 - 08:04 pm Comment from: m159

IT workers who responded pcs cost the same or less were not thinking about answering correctly, but about their career futures.

@ HueyLong

Hey Huey, when "Interesting" talked about "a company you know that has a network installed base of 1,000,000 PC Desktops".

It confused me until I realized he didn't mean "Company",
he ment "Botnet"!

Mar 09, 10 - 11:10 pm Comment from: Derek in Milan

Big networks are 500 computers or so, even in very large companies.
In a fantasy pc world there are 500,000 windows machines all hooked together.
Not.

The PC/Corporate/Govt. world is full of bullshit and is killing this planet.

A lot of Start-Up guys recommend to go all mac. That's enough for me.

Mar 11, 10 - 06:05 am Comment from: Derek Currie

As I posted at the CIO site:

For the nay-sayers: There is nothing particularly new in this report apart from it being a contemporary discussion. Every professional report ever done that has compared the actual costs of Windows PCs versus Macs has consistently proven that Macs are less expensive. Opinions to the contrary either take into account requirements for Windows-only applications or they are plain old mythology.

Where people get fouled up is thinking that shelf price equals full cost. This article points out the low management costs of Macs, historically known to be as much as 10x lower. This is part of what is called Cost Of Ownership or COO. It is sometimes called Total Cost of Ownership or TCO. Macs consistently have the lowest COO. The other critical measure is Return On Investment or ROI. Macs consistently win here due to their more user-friendly, more efficient, less cumbersome GUI as well as their longer life in the field.

Mar 11, 10 - 06:16 am Comment from: Derek Currie

Jubei sez: "Too bad the biggest gate to get through is that Active-x -Sharepoint that LOCKS the user to Internet Explorer/ Windows. Then .aspx-.net that further locks the user to IE/Windows."

All of the above pose a critical question to IT staff: Do you want to be malware free or NOT?

ActiveX is a wide open gate inviting in malware. Any script kiddy can write an ActiveX exploit.

IE is known worldwide to be the single worst as well as least secure web browser. Even version 8 has not kept up with web standards. It allows ActiveX infection. It uses aberrant, non-standard code via JScript and MS-only HTML calls. Any IT pro who allows IE in his shop is in a world of hurt. ANY other web browser is preferable.

As is often the case, it comes down to intelligence, training and giving a shite about the business you work for. There really is no viable excuse for using IE or any non-standard web code. The alternatives are plentiful and superior.

The survey found that Macs were cheaper in six of seven computer management categories: troubleshooting, help desk calls, system configuration, user training and supporting infrastructure (servers, networks and printer). Nearly half of the respondents cited software licensing fees as roughly the same for both platforms.hard drive destruction

May 04, 10 - 12:53 am Comment from: in.here1

I saw the presentation it was lack luster. Face it the fan boys didn't get to see deity Jobs and of course can't take any constructive criticism being said about great apple 70 270 braindumps. Apple is moving away from being a niche player in the creative industry to a consumer company that is concerned with renting movies 70-290 exam, selling music, and organizing aunt so&so;'s photos. They insist on disposable products as seen by more an built in items and less expandability testking 70-291. 10 years ago apple/jobs made headlines at expandable Macs at half the price of a current MacPro. I see many creative's moving away from Apple because of the price and lack of features 70-450. Yes i know costly bleeding edge is kewl but industry standard, reliability and regular connections are worth my time and trouble.