Macs are 3x cheaper than Windows based PCs says IBM

[TidaLWaveZ]

This honestly doesn't make any sense to me.  Doesn't tell you where the money is saved.  What does a mac come with that a windows pc doesn't?  Is there some included software on mac that you have to pay for on Windows?  Is the hardware in a Windows PC going to wear out in half the time?

 

I personally cant think of any situation where Mac beats Windows in an enterprise scenario and this article doesn't give you any examples either.  I can't see Apple having a better alternative or working better/easier with things like Active Directory.

[captain_to_fire]

1 minute ago, Sakkura said:

Kinda confusing that Windows and MacOS switch sides in that list...

 

Not sure why so many are focusing on Bitlocker. There are plenty of alternatives that are free and don't require TPM. Also, the MacOS version isn't better/cheaper for not using a TPM chip, it's just different - without TPM you're getting a different (lower) level of security.

Not quite. You do realize that both BitLocker and File Vault both uses AES, a technology created with the help of the US government. So they're pretty much on the same level of encryption. 

[paddy-stone]

I personally hate macs, and although I use windows/PC more than 50% of my time it's usually to do with work and installing/building PCs.... I think they should consider PCs with linux as an alternative that would probably save them even more money personally, if the software is available of course, but should be considering WINE is an option too. I know it would involve some learning on the part of the employees that use the software, but it's not going to be that steep of a learning curve for the end users, and the IT people would most likely have at least a working knowledge of linux anyway maybe.

Maybe I'm wrong and my grasp of it is over simplified.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

This honestly doesn't make any sense to me.  Doesn't tell you where the money is saved.  What does a mac come with that a windows pc doesn't?  Is there some included software on mac that you have to pay for on Windows?  Is the hardware in a Windows PC going to wear out in half the time?

 

I personally cant think of any situation where Mac beats Windows in an enterprise scenario and this article doesn't give you any examples either.  I can't see Apple having a better alternative or working better/easier with things like Active Directory.

Read the thread - I've explained it on the previous page. 

[Sakkura]

13 minutes ago, hey_yo_ said:

Not quite. You do realize that both BitLocker and File Vault both uses AES, a technology created with the help of the US government. So they're pretty much on the same level of encryption. 

They use the same encryption, but Bitlocker adds security on top of that with the TPM chip. Though not everyone agrees it's worth much, it's still a functional difference.

 

Also I believe Bitlocker can be used without TPM, just not by default.

[Doobeedoo]

For general consumers getting a PC/laptop is reverse so, yeah. That's what everyone care anyway. Also having better specs.

 

[TidaLWaveZ]

1 hour ago, Windspeed36 said:

No - it doesn't work like that. You see with retail copies of a Microsoft product, you need to keep the physical media around for it and you cannot bundle it into an image. This means two things - firstly, if you've a business with 50+ seats it becomes very difficult to keep track of which license belons where. You're also not allowed to use Office 365 Home/Personal in a business environment as per the EULA. The second issue is that you can't bundle it into an image if you're using a retail product. With a MAK (mass activation key) obtained through Open/VLSC/SPLA/EA, you can create an image for an OS using 1 product key but you can't have that same image use a list of say 500 retail keys.

 

For the tech support issue, more stuff generally goes wrong with Windows than it does with MacOS - from driver updates to users being able to accidentally change something like a network adapter status. With MacOS the OS updates are also better thought out - I've currently got a list of about 400 new patches to go through to either aprove or disallow for Windows environments - if I accidentally allow a certain patch for say SBS 2011 or 2008 R2 that doesn't play nice with a certain piece of software I could break the functionality of tens of thousands of client endpoints and hundreds of servers, all in production environments.

 

I'm not saying that MacOS avoids this issue entirely however generally there are less recorded issues of patch problems compared to Windows.

 

 

 

-------

 

The issue I'm noticing with the points that a lot of you are raising is that while they are somewhat valid, they are not applicable to an enterprise enviornment - a lot of you seem to be looking at this from the point of view of a tech enthusiast/gamer, not from a corporate/enterprise mindset where one wrong step can affect 10's of thousands of users and cost a huge amount of money in terms of broken SLA's amongst other things.

 

I get what you're saying and tend to agree, but I think there are more reported problems with Windows because it's just so much more prevalent in the workplace.  If 90% of workplace computers were macs, then more reported problems would come from macs. Lord knows how many nights I slaved away over Windows update problems though. I do agree that Windows is more susceptible to small user issues like disabling the network adapter but this should make it more customizable for an admin.  An admin could push policies that stop certain users from accessing any potential mishaps, like disabling network adapter.

 

I'm not familiar with macs being used in an enterprise situation at all, but I still don't see how they can compete especially from a compatibility standpoint.

[leadeater]

Well speaking from experience from working at an IT support company exclusive to the education sector the notion that Mac's require less support is an utter lie. We had thousands of clients (schools and universities) and a very good time/job management system that every tech, engineer, client manager etc all had to use and reporting generated from this information.

 

If you want a common user experience across Windows and Mac devices so you can have true portability and control Mac OS starts to buckle very quickly, it's just not designed for this. Yes there are management tools, yes I have extensively used Jamf Casper Suite (worth every dollar) but lets not go crazy and start saying Mac OS is an equal to Windows when it comes to enterprise network configurations.

 

Network home drives, user based and computer based configuration profiles, zero touch OS and software deployment etc all things that just work on Windows if tried on Mac OS you'll be in for a massive shock and tons of support hours to keep it going. Mac OS is fundamentally made for personal use and has functions halfheartedly added in to the OS to allow for enterprise management.

 

To be fair to Mac OS all these things worked very well in 10.6, that was excellent and very well polished. You could do all the above and expect them to not only work consistently and properly but they would do so for years. Ever since 10.7 the whole management side of Mac OS has been broken, constantly changing and just a damn nightmare. Thankfully I don't have to do that anymore.

 

Every Mac OS computer setup on a corporate network requires 3 to 5 times the support hours and overall ends up with a worse user experience than a Windows user. The one thing, I hate to say it, and the saving grace of Mac OS in the enterprise is the big shift to cloud applications and web driven interfaces. The need to have Windows like control on a Mac is reducing quickly so the solution is to change your mindset on how to manage Mac OS or to not manage it so to speak, this is not solely limited to Mac OS though it has the same positive spin on Windows management too.

 

Also specifically on the point about Mac users not requiring much help desk support, they just don't ask for it when they need it. Mac users more typically have the "I can fix it" attitude compared to a Windows user and to add to that typically have the rights on the device to try and fix it. What actually happens is they wait until it is totally impossible not to ask for help and the device is utterly trashed and is a huge job to fix where if they just spoke up from the start could have been done in 5 minutes over a remote support session.

[AlTech]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

snip

lol. In my school, half of the printers don't work with Macs and the Macs have issues with Wi-Fi connectivity . Only teachers and students who WANT Macs use them. Everybody else uses PCs.

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

lol. In my school, half of the printers don't work with Macs and the Macs have issues with Wi-Fi connectivity . Only teachers and students who WANT Macs use them. Everybody else uses PCs.

Yep and that is the sad truth about Macs on managed networks most of the time. It can be done much better than what you are experiencing and observing but to do it more often requires 3rd party tools unlike Windows where for most people what is natively available is enough; AD, GPO, WDS/MDT etc.

[79wjd]

7 hours ago, Bleedingyamato said:

Apple frequently does stupid things that consumers hate yet they make huge profits.

 

Nintendo has made huge very widely acknowledged mistakes and poor business decisions with the gimmicky designs of the Wii and Wii U along with boy properly cultivating third party support for their consoles that would encourage more AAA titles on Nintendo consoles.  Yet they still must do alright because they're still in business.

 

Intel is obviously very profitable since it's in a oligopoly with AMD in the CPU market so of course they're profitable and can afford to absorb the cost of this poor decision.

 

Does this make any of these companies stupid choices any better?  Of course it doesn't.

 

Companies make costly and/or avoidable mistakes all the time and keep on going.

 

---------

 

It is a fact that Intel could've chosen to provide training and reference materials to its employees instead of switching to Macs. It is also a fact that increased literacy with Windows would reduce problems that would typically come up and thus reduce the overall cost of using Windows.  

 

But yeah I'm 100% wrong and actually teaching people how to properly use what they have is a terrible idea.  It's better to toss all those evil Windows computers into the garbage and buy overpriced Macs just to use a different OS.  ?  /s

There is a big difference between having a bad idea and being able to do basic cost analysis. You don't quite seem to understand that the enterprise sector doesn't function the same way as the consumer sector.

 

--------

 

You're right, they could have....however, they did basic cost analysis and ran test cases before they started to switch in mass and determined that switching to Macs was the cheaper option. 

 

And yes, trying to teach people how to use something is ultimatley going to fail for the majority of users who don't want or care about learning to use their computer better. From a business perspective, the cheaper option is the better option. Why try and teach people to not be idiots when you can provide them with an alternative that reduces the level of issues they can have. (Not to mention Windows still runs into a shit load of driver issues, which isn't something that the user will ever be able to deal with, and is something that will ALWAYS require some kind of technical support)

[suicidalfranco]

yep, MacOS is amazing, best OS ever!

Been on it since 10.5 never regretted a thing. Which makes me really sad that Cook's Apple no longer makes a Mac that caters to me (hardware wise). Now i have to see if it's possible to make hackintoshes out of the Dell Inspiron, Alienware or EVGA SC17. If not it would just mean that i'll be a full Linux users at home and outside (right now have Ubuntu on my rig and use a MacBook when i'm out and about), window$ will never be an option for me

[leadeater]

35 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

(Not to mention Windows still runs into a shit load of driver issues, which isn't something that the user will ever be able to deal with, and is something that will ALWAYS require some kind of technical support)

The only counter to this is that there really isn't any driver issues when buying business laptops and desktops, they make sure they have this nailed down with solid driver packs and only using first party chipsets where possible (Intel only for example). You will typically find an HP EliteDesk or EliteBook uses Intel network, wireless, bluetooth and realtek audio which HP/Intel/Realtek makes sure that basic level drivers have been included with Windows.

 

Windows 7 was the last OS where you had to install drivers on for example an HP Elite 8300 SFF to even get full basic functionality. Windows 8/8.1 could almost run right out of the box on any HP device (NOT consumer) and Windows 10 is even better.

 

At one point I was managing 11 different HP Elite/Z series desktop models, 3 different HP EliteBook laptop models and 9 different Lenovo laptop models running Windows 7 x64 OS. All these different devices were spread across 3 campuses in 3 different cities all managed remotely from the primary site so you had to make sure everything was done right, I can only think of 1 driver issue that effected 1 model of HP desktop (which wasn't my mistake ). Using SCCM greatly helped with driver management and installation of course but that's nothing unique, every large business has a tool of this kind and even WDS+MDT can do a very similar job.

[79wjd]

16 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The only counter to this is that there really isn't any driver issues when buying business laptops and desktops, they make sure they have this nailed down with solid driver packs and only using first party chipsets where possible (Intel only for example). You will typically find an HP EliteDesk or EliteBook uses Intel network, wireless, bluetooth and realtek audio which HP/Intel/Realtek makes sure that basic level drivers have been included with Windows.

 

Windows 7 was the last OS where you had to install drivers on for example an HP Elite 8300 SFF to even get full basic functionality. Windows 8/8.1 could almost run right out of the box on any HP device (NOT consumer) and Windows 10 is even better.

 

At one point I was managing 11 different HP Elite/Z series desktop models, 3 different HP EliteBook laptop models and 9 different Lenovo laptop models running Windows 7 x64 OS. All these different devices were spread across 3 campuses in 3 different cities all managed remotely from the primary site so you had to make sure everything was done right, I can only think of 1 driver issue that effected 1 model of HP desktop (which wasn't my mistake ). Using SCCM greatly helped with driver management and installation of course but that's nothing unique, every large business has a tool of this kind and even WDS+MDT can do a very similar job.

When I was doing IT I ran into a decent number of driver-related issues (the company was running Optiplex 780s, 990s, and Precision T1700s). Granted, that the 780s were back from the XP/Vista days. Although, the more common issues, I would say, was caused by some windows bug/corruption or some update-related issues that broke things (even though the update was blocked by a GP) -- plus all the unplugged monitors/keyboards/mice/etc...

[bobhays]

7 hours ago, abazigal said:

Well, things got so bad that at one point, it was taking my desktop about 10 minutes to start up and load the apps. And I already disabled many of the apps. I recall playing Warcraft 3, then witnessing loading times slowing dramatically, and I basically had to defrag my hard drive every day just to maintain the status quo. Plus my windows desktops slowed down to the point where I was replacing them every 2+ years. 

 

I recall getting two major virus attacs, though AVG took care of them. Contrast with my Mac, zero attacks and I don't have any anti virus software installed. 

 

Oh yes, and OS X had one super cool feature where I could take a screenshot with a keyboard shortcut. Very handy. 

 

Can't say I have tried WMP. I do know that once, I need to copy a few audio files from a listening comprehension CD from school to pass to my colleagues. Slot it into my imac's cd drive, and iTunes launches, with a prompt asking me if I wanted to extract its contents. Minutes later, the job was done. I was like "?". 

 

It's all these little conveniences that add up to a more seamless Mac user experience for me. 

 

I know - I must come across as some tech idiot here, and you are all probably laughing and going "You could have solved this problem by doing X" but these are my genuine experiences. In short, the problems I was experiencing with my windows PCs all but went away after I switched to a Mac, without me needing to do anything extra or different. The only downside was losing access to my Windows game collection, but given that I had recently joined the workforce then, not being able to play games turned out to be a hidden blessing in disguise.  

I completely understand. Things like that are what make or break experiences for users. Having a 1 button screenshot is cool, but personally I prefer the snipping tool. The vast majority of times I need to take a screenshot I dont want the whole screen so that's nice. One problem though is that I'm not sure how people who don't know about it would find out about it. For example I don't remember how I found the snipping tool, probably google searching "Windows screenshot" years ago, but since then it's been great.

 

As for the CD ripping thing, had you done it on a windows PC the same would have happened with WMP.

 

I don't think I've had an actual virus attack since Vista. One of the best anti-virus programs is wait for it.... AdBlock. Sounds dumb but the main way people get viruses is clicking on things they aren't supposed to. Not from hacked software or something but just from malicious clickbaits.

[Curufinwe_wins]

I mean it makes a lot of sense for people using Unix commands to buy macs instead, but after using it for work for a summer, there is literally no OS I've used that is less efficient for power use than OS X. So awful.

[79wjd]

13 minutes ago, bobhays said:

I completely understand. Things like that are what make or break experiences for users. Having a 1 button screenshot is cool, but personally I prefer the snipping tool. The vast majority of times I need to take a screenshot I dont want the whole screen so that's nice. One problem though is that I'm not sure how people who don't know about it would find out about it. For example I don't remember how I found the snipping tool, probably google searching "Windows screenshot" years ago, but since then it's been great.

OS X has two screenshot macros -- cmd + shift + 3, which grabs the whole screen, and cmd+shift+4, which work the same way as snipping tool.

9 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

I mean it makes a lot of sense for people using Unix commands to buy macs instead, but after using it for work for a summer, there is literally no OS I've used that is less efficient for power use than OS X. So awful.

How so? I'd consider myself a power user and I don't find OS X to be worse than Windows in that regard. 

[Curufinwe_wins]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

OS X has two screenshot macros -- cmd + shift + 3, which grabs the whole screen, and cmd+shift+4, which work the same way as snipping tool.

How so? I'd consider myself a power user and I don't find OS X to be worse than Windows in that regard. 

Lack of aero snap, clicking through windows, awful resizing functionality, idiotic action bar placement, to name a few.

 

I know you can install addons to fix that shit but that doesn't work if you are on a work computer that is locked down to all hell.

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Lack of aero snap, clicking through windows, awful resizing functionality, idiotic action bar placement, to name a few.

 

I know you can install addons to fix that shit but that doesn't work if you are on a work computer that is locked down to all hell.

Snapping is definitely an issue (which is why I use Better touch tool, which is amazing). Clicking through windows, I assume you mean through the dock/taskbar, in which case I'd give windows a slight edge since you can left-click on the program to bring up a list of its windows whereas in OSX you have to right click (so marginally worse). Resizing is basically the same as snapping (unless you mean something different?). I don't see any issues with the placement of the action bar (assuming you're referring to the bar at the top of the screen, I actually like it since it's static irrelevant of windows/sizes). 

[Curufinwe_wins]

6 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Snapping is definitely an issue (which is why I use Better touch tool, which is amazing). Clicking through windows, I assume you mean through the dock/taskbar, in which case I'd give windows a slight edge since you can left-click on the program to bring up a list of its windows whereas in OSX you have to right click (so marginally worse). Resizing is basically the same as snapping (unless you mean something different?). I don't see any issues with the placement of the action bar (assuming you're referring to the bar at the top of the screen, I actually like it since it's static irrelevant of windows/sizes). 

I mean apps opening in truly idiotic sizes and the min/max functionality being completely worthless, clicking through windows I mean like if you are in word and you want to click on some thing you also have up in chrome then you need to click "into chrome" then click onto what you were trying to click. Instead of just clicking the damn thing in the first place. And the stupid thing at the corner is just awful. God that made me upset. Clicking into a program to make it swap then having to go back across the screen to open the menu. So inefficient.

 

I'm sure there are add-ons that fix those stupid things, but when you are a heavy multimonitor multitasker, and every swap takes extra time, extra effort (esp with resizing ugh), and extra clicks man that pissed me off.

 

But hey, Unix terminal is nice. (Also I think apple's file browser is an absolute disaster even if time machine is amazing and should be on everything everywhere).

[79wjd]

33 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

I mean apps opening in truly idiotic sizes and the min/max functionality being completely worthless, clicking through windows I mean like if you are in word and you want to click on some thing you also have up in chrome then you need to click "into chrome" then click onto what you were trying to click. Instead of just clicking the damn thing in the first place. And the stupid thing at the corner is just awful. God that made me upset. Clicking into a program to make it swap then having to go back across the screen to open the menu. So inefficient.

 

I'm sure there are add-ons that fix those stupid things, but when you are a heavy multimonitor multitasker, and every swap takes extra time, extra effort (esp with resizing ugh), and extra clicks man that pissed me off.

 

But hey, Unix terminal is nice. (Also I think apple's file browser is an absolute disaster even if time machine is amazing and should be on everything everywhere).

I actually prefer having to click into a window first, but to each their own. 

 

The min/max isn't really targeted at a power user imo since it's "your selected size" or "full screen" (and full screen is atrocious on any/all platforms). Apple just really needs to get their snapping tool in proper order (I want quadrant snapping without having to use an add on). 

 

And I mostly use macros to interface with the menus, so I don't usually access it all that much, but when I do, I do prefer having it centralized. 

[Whispre]

13 hours ago, Windspeed36 said:

 

See my comments regarding licensing - Microsoft Open/EA's are astronomically expensive (~$900 RRP for Office Pro 2016, per user CAL's for Exchange at $230ea)

You still have to pay for Exchange CALs if you want to use an Exchange server with a MAC, and you have to pay Server CALs if you want to connect to a Windows Server with a MAC, and you have to pay SQL CALs if you want to connect to SQL with a MAC, and you still have to pay for Office Pro if you want to run it on a MAC, and so on, and so on, and so on. Those are not extra costs for running Windows, those are extra costs for using those software/system packages. None of those things are required to run Windows Client, you can use free Office software, connect to free Linux servers, use free email services etc., just like a MAC.

[bobhays]

3 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

OS X has two screenshot macros -- cmd + shift + 3, which grabs the whole screen, and cmd+shift+4, which work the same way as snipping tool.

How so? I'd consider myself a power user and I don't find OS X to be worse than Windows in that regard. 

Oh that's pretty cool. I still think Windows is much better power user OS as pointed out by @Curufinwe_wins

3 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Snapping is definitely an issue (which is why I use Better touch tool, which is amazing). Clicking through windows, I assume you mean through the dock/taskbar, in which case I'd give windows a slight edge since you can left-click on the program to bring up a list of its windows whereas in OSX you have to right click (so marginally worse). Resizing is basically the same as snapping (unless you mean something different?). I don't see any issues with the placement of the action bar (assuming you're referring to the bar at the top of the screen, I actually like it since it's static irrelevant of windows/sizes). 

I don't think windows has an edge in the taskbar because of the right click left click. I think it's just the task bar is better in the way it handles windows. For example if I want a window to show up on the dock I have to minimize it. Otherwise it's just a list of apps. So I can't use it to switch apps as easily. Also I think its much better to have the action bar with the window because then you don't have to move the mouse around.

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

I actually prefer having to click into a window first, but to each their own. 

 

The min/max isn't really targeted at a power user imo since it's "your selected size" or "full screen" (and full screen is atrocious on any/all platforms). Apple just really needs to get their snapping tool in proper order (I want quadrant snapping without having to use an add on). 

 

And I mostly use macros to interface with the menus, so I don't usually access it all that much, but when I do, I do prefer having it centralized. 

now this is a WHAT? I understand some people might have a preference to having the action bar in one place all the time, but why would you prefer to have to click each window first? You have to go click on the window and then all the way back up to the top. I mean you might have to click on the window first in Windows too if the action bar is hidden behind something else but that comes up less often and even when it does you dont have to move as much as in MacOS. Macros work great for most things especially if you use it often but it doesn't work all the time and then you have to memorize all of them too. Either way, macros isn't really an excuse for the inefficiency of the click menus.

[79wjd]

1 hour ago, bobhays said:

Oh that's pretty cool. I still think Windows is much better power user OS as pointed out by @Curufinwe_wins

 

I don't think windows has an edge in the taskbar because of the right click left click. I think it's just the task bar is better in the way it handles windows. For example if I want a window to show up on the dock I have to minimize it. Otherwise it's just a list of apps. So I can't use it to switch apps as easily.

 

Also I think its much better to have the action bar with the window because then you don't have to move the mouse around.

 

now this is a WHAT? I understand some people might have a preference to having the action bar in one place all the time, but why would you prefer to have to click each window first? You have to go click on the window and then all the way back up to the top. I mean you might have to click on the window first in Windows too if the action bar is hidden behind something else but that comes up less often and even when it does you dont have to move as much as in MacOS. Macros work great for most things especially if you use it often but it doesn't work all the time and then you have to memorize all of them too. Either way, macros isn't really an excuse for the inefficiency of the click menus.

I think it honestly comes down to personal preference. I'd consider myself a power user and I use both windows and OSX and I still prefer using OS X. The things @Curufinwe_wins complained about aren't issues for me: Better Touch Tool makes OS X's poor snapping irrelevant as it's superior to the default Windows snapping, I prefer having to click into a window first and I prefer a fixed menu position. I never use min/max on windows or OSX (snapping is superior), I separate all my work from different projects into different spaces so I don't have layers of windows so I don't often switch windows through the dock/taskbar. 

 

The dock works basically the same as the task bar. If you have a program open and right click the program (instead of left clicking like in Windows), then it will give you a list of windows (in a list format rather than a preview-window format) -- they don't need to be minimized.  

 

Here is what comes up if I right-click chrome (all the chrome windows are open and non are minimized: 

 

 

 

 

Again, personal preference. I've never found myself hindered by having to click into a window if I want to access it's menu (plus, I'm generally already in the window if I plan on going into its menu).  

 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Whispre said:

You still have to pay for Exchange CALs if you want to use an Exchange server with a MAC, and you have to pay Server CALs if you want to connect to a Windows Server with a MAC, and you have to pay SQL CALs if you want to connect to SQL with a MAC, and you still have to pay for Office Pro if you want to run it on a MAC, and so on, and so on, and so on. Those are not extra costs for running Windows, those are extra costs for using those software/system packages. None of those things are required to run Windows Client, you can use free Office software, connect to free Linux servers, use free email services etc., just like a MAC.

The general consensus is though that those who have a Windows OS environment generally use Microsoft products for email and office. Yes I know there are free alternatives for this however if you're talking purely by vendor, Apple cuts out the cost for Office.