What do you think? Would you be willing to shift your enterprise to Macs?
Re: Mac OS being infused with the tools of the corporate IT trade, but can it catch on?
Latest software headlines from Network World:
Kernel developers, Wall Street to come together
Zoho launches e-mail app with offline, mobile access
|
Does Verizon's Voyager stack up to the iPhone? |
|
|
5 IT skills that won't boost your salary 
[1,407]
Women 4 times more likely than men to cough up personal info [589]
Japan's 10 funniest tech-related commercials [Videos] [407]
Throwing away a promo CD is "unauthorized distribution"? [1,265]
Adults too quick to dismiss educational video games [682]
Attack of the iPhone clones [Slideshow] [578]
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX [1,258]
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries [Slideshow] [409]
|
|
Poll
InfoWorld says yes
Apparently, InfoWorld believes that Xserve servers are ready for the enterprise. In the Nov 9, 2006 issue InfoWorld said, "Early next year, OS X Server Leopard (10.5) will transform Apple's already industry-leading Xserve, including the model reviewed here, into an unimaginably feature-rich native 64-bit server platform. And guess what? When you buy it, you're done paying for it..." Who, but the uninformed, would debate this issue?
Done paying for it?
Dont get me wrong, I like OSX, but...
They seem to think that the fact that they have released 5 new versions of OSX since MS released XP is a wonderful thing. It could be, except that we have had to pay for each and every new release. In 5 years, we have spent as much on new versions of OSX for leass than 100 computers as we have paid for the OS on 7 times as many Windows machines.
Done paying for it? Im not so sure...
I do like my Ipod though.
You don't have to buy every new release
If you wait a few months and shop wisely after the introduction, you don't have to pay more than $79 for each new release. Also, wisdom says "you don't have to buy every new release." Do you buy every new model when cars, refrigerators and toasters arrive on the market? Of course not. But, if you do decide to buy every new release, you acquire new and exciting capabilities for your computer on a more real-time basis. You don't have to wait 5 years only to endure the trauma of a massive OS upgrade.
New releases
You don't have to buy every new release
Actually, you do. If you want to have a supportable machine in the enterprise, and if you want to clone your disk images off so that every machine has a working image, then you end up having to get, check, and verify every piece of software on there.
Also some machines need special versions of OS X: every time Apple makes a significant hardware upgrade or release, the newest machines come with their own special version of OSX specific for that machine.
The iLife license you get with the box is useless, by the way, because although you have a license for iLife 07 for that new box, the old one can only use iLife 06, and you're not allowed to install iLife 07 on it. You're also not allowed to install iLife 06 on the box that comes with 07.
Of course you can get enterprise support which does entitle you to all the OS X releases, but not to iLife.
In short, Mac for the enterprise is a joke. First they'll need to fix their support offerings so that I can get the same kind of support globally for my company. Then they need to fix their insane hardware release schedule: if I order A, please don't send me B.
Then licenses: if you're not going to allow me to run iLife using the ilife DVD that comes with the box, then 1) stop selling me a useless software package, or 2) allow me to install it.
Then software release schedules. If you want enterprises to use your shiny new laptop, please make sure all the necessary software works for it before dumping it onto customers: Cisco VPN client, etc. Make sure your OEMs have time to code for the new platform.
Etc.
Apple often rolls out new machines with special images , so forget about using that 1 month old boot cd you got from another box that just arrives.
no need to update
You don't have to buy each new release. Even if you have 100 boxes running 10.4 and buy one new box with 10.5 pre-installed, you can just install 10.4 on it. You don't have to upgrade at all, only when you have a compelling new thing that you really want and think is worth the money.
do try
I own a PowerPC Mac Mini that shipped with 10.4
I recall some certain knowledge from Apple stating that if I attempt to install 10.3, it won't "work." Some PowerMacs had really special builds. That's without mentioning Intel builds.
I seem to recall also that steve jobs told users that "Tiger is so much better and you should really just upgrade" when he was pressed on these issues.
He was quite right, but only shortly thereafter.
Your "best practices" for PCs will not save your Mac.
Please, go ahead and try your idea and report back here in the morning so that we can all hope to learn from your great achievement.
Every Mac comes with the
Every Mac comes with the latest OS. I only buy upgrade subscriptions for 2/3 of my Macs, because the other third will be swapped out around the time a new OS comes out.
Additionally, many of my servers run on 10.3. They do dedicated tasks, and there's no need to bump them to the latest version (just as many XP offices have some servers running 2000).
And when I do upgrade my Mac OS licenses, they cost a HECK of a lot less than upgrading Windows.
But the point you're really missing... when you don't get upgrades for 5 years, you don't get major new functionality for 5 years. Would you find it acceptable if, say... your accounting software was written in 2002?
Count the per-user charges
I'm not sure that 5 upgrades to Mac OS X cost more than one upgrade to Windows. Windows is extremely expensive.
But when you look at per-user charges, OS X is SOOOOOO much cheaper, it is ridiculous. Yes, you can buy a new OS X for each machine every 18 months or so if you want to... but you don't have to buy new licenses for every user for every server technology you use.
If you count up all the software charges, it is vastly more expensive to run Windows (with the added detriment of only two significant upgrades per decade) than OS X.
And is Vista really even a major upgrade? It seems more like a maintenance release with some eye-candy and a huge price-tag.
I'm a bit puzzled by the
I'm a bit puzzled by the math here. If windows and os x cost the same amount, it would make sense for the macs to cost five times as much to keep up to date as a comparable number of windows boxes. As os x is less than half the price of windows, how did you manage to spend as much on the macs as seven times as many windows machines?