Macs are 3x cheaper than Windows based PCs says IBM

[N3v3r3nding_N3wb]

1 minute ago, ARikozuM said:

What is Linux? Is it an undiscovered land? /s

Yes, full of wonder and mystery as far as the eye can see! ?

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, N3v3r3nding_N3wb said:

Yes, full of wonder and mystery as far as the eye can see! ?

I'll agree with the wonder. As in, I wonder why my DOS game can't run on Linux.

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, Belgarathian said:

Flame wars aside, what are your thoughts on enterprise macOS roll out given that Apple seems to be focusing on Education and Consumer markets, and not enterprise? RIP Xserve. 

Keep in mind from a management point of view, Education and enterprise are still mostly the same - active directory, file and print, exchange etc. These demands will always exist and Microsoft is still the market leader for a lot of them.

[goodtofufriday]

As an IT admin id waste more reasources getting macs to play nice with all the infurstructure we have in place. Samba smb support is not amazing on macs. Azure and domains also do not play very nice with macs. 

Then i need to spend time finding alternative software that 90% of the general work force in NYC is unfamilar with. So now i need to train myself and train the user. 

 

No thanks. 

[captain_to_fire]

I guess they're right.

 

When Windows 7 was launched, businesses have to get the pricier Windows 7 Professional or Ultimate if the business wants to have full disk encryption. That alone costs a lot of money, not to mention the business owner has to buy PCs with trusted platform module. Windows 7 back then doesn't even have out of the box support for Microsoft Exchange.

 

Fast forward to Windows 10. It's now 64-bit by default and supports Microsoft Exchange and has Windows Defender for security, but as a small business owner he/she wants his/her company files secured from prying eyes so they have to pay for Windows 10 Pro and pay for a computer with a TPM chip.

 

Not so with a Mac. It is 64-bit by default. It runs Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote only), has Microsoft Exchange support, it has FileVault full disk encryption by default and doesn't require a TPM chip, they don't have to pay Office 365 for productivity since it has iWork installed for free (Pages, Numbers, Keynote, iBooks Author), and a Mac can run Windows via VMWare Fusion, Parallels Desktop or Boot Camp, and new OS updates are free. 

 

So for a small business owner with 5-10 employees, it may spend more initially on a Mac but they'll have more value for their money than a Windows PC. My university is now slowly transitioning all computers in the library and registrar offices to Macs.

[N3v3r3nding_N3wb]

9 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

I'll agree with the wonder. As in, I wonder why my DOS game can't run on Linux.

The world may never know.

[Belgarathian]

10 minutes ago, Windspeed36 said:

Keep in mind from a management point of view, Education and enterprise are still mostly the same - active directory, file and print, exchange etc. These demands will always exist and Microsoft is still the market leader for a lot of them.

They killed of Xserve though which means that Apple doesn't have a rack mountable bit of hardware for VM environments... 

[Sakkura]

1 hour ago, Nicholatian said:

Brace yourselves, an ignorant shitstorm of Apple hate comments is coming…

 

 

 

Anyway, this really is the truth. Way back in the day, PCs were sold for a fortune with all of this software included, believe it or not. But they stopped doing that to make things appear more affordable – whenever I tally up something on Lenovo’s website, for example, a decent computer runs me about $2,500 all things considered. It hasn’t changed. Not really.

That's ridiculous, of the very few things that have been stripped from Windows (not PCs, Macs are PCs too), you can get free replacements. So there's no extra spending required for software.

 

The extra support costs are probably legit for a tech-illiterate workforce. But then there are hidden costs from the lack of flexibility and customizability of MacOS, as well as the lower security.

[AlTech]

58 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

That's not what this article is about.  In fact it even admitted macs are overpriced compared to PCs.  The point is that the users on macs typically needed less tech support and less frequent upgrades, and that saved them money over time, in a net sense.

Microsoft has actually acknowledged the problem of non techies not knowing how to use Windows properly.

 

And they're currently trying to fix it.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

Microsoft has actually acknowledged the problem of non techies not knowing how to use Windows properly.

 

And they're currently trying to fix it.

I think this is a job for a sociologist...

[vanished]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

Microsoft has actually acknowledged the problem of non techies not knowing how to use Windows properly.

 

And they're currently trying to fix it.

I thought you couldn't fix stupid though  Well good on 'em for trying...

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I thought you couldn't fix stupid though  Well good on 'em for trying...

You can. It's just frowned upon.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, ARikozuM said:

You can. It's just frowned upon.

oh, yes... I suppose...

[Belgarathian]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I thought you couldn't fix stupid though  Well good on 'em for trying...

 

4 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Microsoft has actually acknowledged the problem of non techies not knowing how to use Windows properly.

 

And they're currently trying to fix it.

I'm impressed (mostly) with the strides Windows 10 has made with catching up to macOS on making the experience personal. They've still got a long, long way to go before they fix stupid though. Having control panel, and settings is a bad start. 

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, Belgarathian said:

 

I'm impressed (mostly) with the strides Windows 10 has made with catching up to macOS on making the experience personal. They've still got a long, long way to go before they fix stupid though. Having control panel, and settings is a bad start. 

They're probably gonna kill off Control Panel in the near future

[Dabombinable]

1 hour ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

That's not what this article is about.  In fact it even admitted macs are overpriced compared to PCs.  The point is that the users on macs typically needed less tech support and less frequent upgrades, and that saved them money over time, in a net sense.

Ok. That makes more sense. TBH that is kind of a no brainer since Windows does cost money to upgrade, is more bloated, less stable (any Linux/Unix/ IBM OS based machine is far more stable) and has a wider range of hardware that is used with it.

[vanished]

15 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

They're probably gonna kill off Control Panel in the near future

Probably... I just wish they'd finish consolidating it with "Settings".  Well, tbh I don't care so much but it must be very confusing for some people to have to go to one place for some things and another for others.

[spartaman64]

it would depend on the setup you have and what services you use. IBM's systems might work better with macs but another company's systems might work better with PC

[TrigrH]

Maybe from a support perspective macs save them money, what about productivity? You cant tell me that someone who has been using windows and gets swapped out with a mac cos IBM thinks its cheaper, is going to get as much work done in the same time.

[ARikozuM]

1 minute ago, TrigrH said:

Maybe from a support perspective macs save them money, what about productivity? You cant tell me that someone who has been using windows and gets swapped out with a mac cos IBM thinks its cheaper, is going to get as much work done in the same time.

Just replace the employee. Give the tech-literate employees whatever machine they're best on.

[vanished]

8 minutes ago, TrigrH said:

Maybe from a support perspective macs save them money, what about productivity? You cant tell me that someone who has been using windows and gets swapped out with a mac cos IBM thinks its cheaper, is going to get as much work done in the same time.

Most people don't know enough that their skills are noticeably different on one system or another, and for the few who are, they are the ones who can probably request whatever OS they want.

 

Or they're skilled enough to just work with whatever.

[Belgarathian]

8 minutes ago, TrigrH said:

Maybe from a support perspective macs save them money, what about productivity? You cant tell me that someone who has been using windows and gets swapped out with a mac cos IBM thinks its cheaper, is going to get as much work done in the same time.

• There are a lot of similarities between the systems, and a lot of the software is identical between the two OS. 
• There will be lost productivity due to the switch, but with training or experience this will develop so the losses incurred are short-term.

6 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Just replace the employee. Give the tech-literate employees whatever machine they're best on.

• Replacing staff is incredibly expensive, even in a tech company tech literate capability will be role dependent. Dorris the office admin doesn't need to be a wizz-kid with Swift, or Linux kernels. 
• Giving tech-literate employees whatever they want I believe is the current model (Linux/windows/mac). I'm pretty sure their Linux machines are Apple hardware with bootcamp. 

 

[79wjd]

6 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Most people don't know enough that their skills are noticeably different on one system or another, and for the few who are, they are the ones who can probably request whatever OS they want.

 

Or they're skilled enough to just work with whatever.

Agreed. The two are basically identical in terms of actually using the OS itself. And it's especially important to remember, that most software looks and functions the same across all platforms....The hardest thing about switching to OS X from Windows is getting used to the window controls being on the opposite side.

[ARikozuM]

10 minutes ago, Belgarathian said:

• There are a lot of similarities between the systems, and a lot of the software is identical between the two OS. 
• There will be lost productivity due to the switch, but with training or experience this will develop so the losses incurred are short-term.

• Replacing staff is incredibly expensive, even in a tech company tech literate capability will be role dependent. Dorris the office admin doesn't need to be a wizz-kid with Swift, or Linux kernels. 
• Giving tech-literate employees whatever they want I believe is the current model (Linux/windows/mac). I'm pretty sure their Linux machines are Apple hardware with bootcamp. 

 

I meant replace as re-place. Put them in their preferred spot.

[Dionyz]

2 hours ago, Belgarathian said:

Ever since Apple switched to Intel 64bit processors the ecosystem has been pretty open... It's only if you want to go through the Apple Store that you can get into trouble. Other than that, you can install whatever applications you like, you just have to allow unauthorized installs in the control panel.

I hate the fact that to put songs on iPhone you HAVE TO GET ITUNES. Jesus I do not like that software, and I would like to do it by plug in and upload. Nope. I have a NAS that can access the file, but cannot download it on iPhone... You loose a lot of access going MAC