Ouch. Serious misconceptions about things, and the now all to familiar lie of "security through obscurity". But still, ouch.

The blind leading the blind....
Most of these guys wouldn't know the true cost of ownership from a hole in the ground and are only interested continuing to grow/sustain their empires.

I guess none of their companies provide/create any content related materials, they just sub it out to companies that are 90%+ Mac.

Isn't corporate america great!? Lord knows, I like the perks but sometimes I've gotta scrtach my head at this stuff.

With caveat that all comments have passed through Andy McCue's journalistic filter:

Quote

Richard Yeo, CTO at easyGroup, simply stated: "Proprietary hardware and software, overpriced, few applications."

This is perhaps the most interesting comment, because it contains factual assertions that can actually be examined.

"Proprietary hardware and software"

Last time I checked, Windows was proprietary software (though admittedly not hardware). Solaris systems are proprietary hardware and software. Most industrial switches and infrastructure products use proprietary hardware and software, and thus need specialist training and equipment to configure. Actually, Linux is unusual rather than the norm.

"Few applications"

This can mean anything from "it doesn't support a critical application for our workflow" to "I have no idea what I'm talking about". Often, "few applications" means "doesn't support the proprietary (there's that word again) windows infrastructure that our system is built around". Even this is false; the primary reason I don't have full integration with the PC network at work is that I do not trust Outlook / Exchange. Even so, I can still happily connect to windows shares, move files, send e-mail, and do a bunch of other stuff.

"overpriced"

A far more complex one to consider. However, several articles exist that suggest that purchase price is comparable between similarly configured Win and Mac machines. TCO is notoriously hard to measure, with claims both ways. Productivity is even harder. Most interesting is that articles exist about organisations choosing to install Apple products because they were cheaper.


Infrastructure is expensive, so I can't see a rapid move to Apple in the enterprise. However, smaller companies have more flexibility in this regard. Also, Apple's desktop integration is quite good, so they may slowly make corporate inroads from that direction.

It's somewhat disappointing that so-called experts cannot simply say "I don't see us making the necessary infrastructure changes to introduce Apple products", and instead must try to shore up their position by displaying their ignorance.

Quote

AFCdtLoeb wrote:
Ouch. Serious misconceptions about things, and the now all to familiar lie of "security through obscurity". But still, ouch.

And these are the people directing technology for corporate America! Scary!

Hurry, someone tell Oracle and Cisco the news so they can retun all their xserves and xserve raids!

Proprietary? Open firware. Open source kernel. Open source CPU architecture. Everything else is pretty much industry standard.

These guys have no first hand knowledge about what they are speaking. Heck, their even PC knowledge is generally limited to what their IT guys tell them. And we know how smart IT guys usually are! All of this makes the actual details of their statements... irrelevent.

What is not irrelevent is that as long as these guys have such opinions (regardless of their accuracy) Apple will have no chance of making it in the enterprise. IBM to the rescue?

That Cisco is using Apple SAN for their own corporate stuff?

Isn't it funny that X-Serves are about HALF the price of Dell Servers?

Isn't it funny that this guy's head is so far up his #@@ he can see his own yellowed liver?

And if he can't see the forest for the trees, look to those who can and know what Apple technology can do for you.

http://www.cct.lsu.edu/news/pressreleases/pr011805.php

The adoption of Mac will go like this:

Creative>>Consumers>>SME>>Corporate

Corporate will be the last to adopt. The stampede will start when a SME or a Corporate outmaneuvers similar business, via an IT system based on Mac.

It's not surprising that the average jobspan for these quacks is about 15 months.


They are often unconnected with technology and often, as outsiders, they do not know their own organization's business. They remain ignorant of user need and demand, and are generally a headache. Want to know what I really think....

David

While I am sure there are some areas where the software is not available, I work in a law office with a Windows server on dell hardware. Jaguar works great with the server. Windows XP Home edition users were out of luck; you needed the more expensive version to talk to the server. Shame on Microsoft. I get my email and share files with ease.

unfortunately to these people proprietary means "i dont use it, so it isnt good" and then throw out buzz words to sound intelligent when they havent done any research

and they also dont want to lose their jobs, because of the entire no viruses thing...

TRO

...since year after year, CIO's are less and less relevant to me getting any real IT work done.

Security: Even If obscurity was OS X's advantage , it sure worked on Woodhouse. Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS? What kind of #@%! is that. Medical industry pencil necks don't get to talk about security. Ask D.O.D.! We wish we could get UNIX on every desktop in the whole place. OS X is a superior gui built on a superior architecture that is secure to its core. If it weren't, there'd be no internet because we all know for damn sure it's Unix doing the heavy lifting 24/7.

Price: Well, duh! Macs are too freaking expensive for business. IT is no longer a strategic advantage. IT is a basic, logistical necessity. IT Standards have matured. That makes it a commodity, substitute product. How exactly does daily-grind office work earn/save the company more money if its done on a Mac? Fact is, the price disparity has protected bean-counting idiots from the REAL question of whether their staffs could be more productive and happier with Macs instead of Wintel.

The mini is a glimmer. But what the... After the big announcement, I can't get a 1 gb Shuffle for 4 weeks! Dang, I guess it's the same old Apple after all.

OK, big enterprise! Any takers? Anyone...

Ask yourself this question: Who would it serve for IT "industry leaders" to promote Apple/OS X/Unix? Answer: End users, Corporate customers, Disgruntled office workers....ha ha ha. Who is conspicuously missing from that list? IT professionals. IT industry leaders advocating a paradigm shift in the enterprise market to Macs is career suicide, or at least a self-imposed culling of the proverbial IT herd. I can't swing a dead cat without hitting 10 junior college kids holding a fresh-printed MCSE/MCSD certification. Heck, such certification programs are to junior colleges as DUI defense is to the legal profession- a lucrative cottage industry. The point is this, don't expect a resounding recommendation form the IT sector...afer all, it's like saying, "Buy a mac, and you'll need us less."

Typical corporate IT propoganda. A Guest in another thread kept making these same sorts of dimwit noises, claiming that Apple needed absolute compatibility with .Net, ActiveX, and other virulent Microsoft garbage before they'd make any headway in the corporate world. Frankly, if that's the case, I'm not Apple would even want to be a big player. It's like being a supplier to WalMart; the money's good, but eventually WalMart owns you. There is a big difference, though, in that corporate IT actually pays to be owned by Microsoft.

Saying Apple is irrelevant to business is like saying the Democratic party is irrelevant to politics......puleeze....don't take this sucker bait.

their middle name is Apple-bashers … and obviously they had to poll their own readers …
Sad !

Quote

jimothy wrote:

Quote

AFCdtLoeb wrote:
Ouch. Serious misconceptions about things, and the now all to familiar lie of "security through obscurity". But still, ouch.

And these are the people directing technology for corporate America! Scary!

CIOs often don't understand the needs of their users, nor do they care to learn, they are subject to fads and 'groupthink' but are almost impossible to change their minds because their entire careers may be wrapped around a decision made 5-years ago. If a CIO dismissed the Mac in 1999, it looks very bad—in his mind—for him to suddenly accept the Mac platform now.
These guys come from the same culture that dismissed the PC, DTP, and the web when they were first introduced; these guys think in saurian terms.

Please read all of this long comment before replying!

I'm a CIO, and I love my Macs (I have four at home, often use my PB at work and in a previous job I worked for Apple.) For my business I buy Dells...

For two years I have bought the SX series (SX260, SX270 and now SX280. You'll only find them if you look at the business options on the Dell website.) These are small form factor machines - using 2.5 inch drives, laptop technology and with a footprint not much larger than a Mac Mini. For two years. They've been very reliable - except the laptop drives which are not designed for continuous running, so the SX280 now uses 3.5inch drives to improve the reliability. I will be interested to see how Mac Minis (and I'll be buying one for the department) last in this respect when they are running 24 hours a day as our systems have to.

Why do I buy Dell's? Because they offer the lowest cost of ownership of any Windows PC. (We have run tests using HPaq, IBM, and locally built PCs, and this is a clear decision.)

Why do I take my Dell laptop on business trips? Because of the battery life: I get 4 hours - always - out of my Dell battery: my Pbook never gives me more than 3 and usually only 2. I really can't find why, and would be interested to know if someone can help explain this!!!

Why do I run Windows PCs? Because of the cost to replace all the legacy applications that people run here based on Windows technology... I wish I could change, and if I was in a greenfield site I would use Macs, but unfortunately that's not real life. It reminds me of the man who when lost in Ireland stopped to ask the way to Dublin. The Irishman answered that he wouldn't start from here...

Applications include, but are not limited to Client for Oracle 11.03 (not supported on the Mac;) 17 - SEVENTEEN - applications written in Visual Basic around MS SQLserver and/or Access; a proprietry CRM system written using the FoxPro engine for Windows (which runs well under VPC, but why buy an iBook or PBook just to run VPC?) an almost unlimited number of Excel spreadsheets which rely on ODBC connections to the Oracle, SQLServer, Acccess and FoxPro databases that I haven't yet found suitable ODBC drivers for (they're free with Windows;) Business Intelligence Suite built on Cognos and Reporting built in Crystal Reports; a global Active Directory and Exchange structure with groupwide shared calendars integrated into the email system... I could go on. I am replacing all of these systems with Open Standard systems, spending around 2 million UKP of my annual 3 million pound budget on doing so, but it will be another four years before they are all replaced. Then I can look into replacing the PCs with Macs.

I hope that gives you some insight into the mind of the knowledgable CIO. I have to agree however that the bunch - as reported - by silicon.com seem less knowledgable in this area than they might otherwise be. However, knowing some of their views beyond this report, I would have to say that they are more aware than they have been represented - and none of you have mentioned the realistic comments of JP Rangaswami, global CIO at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein...

Regards.

--
Dick

It's been like this since the dawn of the Mac.

The IT department gets paid when people can't get their computers working on their own. If the machines are maintainable by the users, what do you need an IT department for?

This also explains why IT is warmer to linix and other things far more "obscure" then Macintosh.

>> And these are the people directing technology for corporate America! Scary!

... corporate UK actually

Study after study have shown the cost of ownership of Macs are lower than Windows machines. So why their belief that Macs are expensive. Because they are ill-informed and part of the Windows economy that keeps them employed. Ever ask an IT guy at work if you can connect to the company network remotely from a Mac or access office emails from home? They all say the same things: it's not supported, not compatible, doesn't play nice with Windows networks, etc.... Well, most of them honestly don't know how to do it so they offer the standard "company line" to hide their own ignorance. They also have every incentive not to support other platforms such as Macs & Linux because it could make all those Windows Certifications they've invested thousands on become worthless if their company decided to switch platforms. The "Windows economy" very well entrenched from top to bottom in corporate IT. It's as simple as that.

You hit the nail on the head. I've worked in corporate IT, and believe me, they are very cognizant of that fact. In fact, it's an "unofficially official" policy in many IT departments to defend the Windows platform and to marginalize and expell all other platforms. That's why Macs have the unfounded reputation as being incompatible with corporate networks, doesn't work with VPNs, doesn't play nice in wirless networks, etc.....

Now that IBM has sold it's PC business, it would make perfect sense for IBM to re-package Macs and sell them as IBM business solutions.

They could offer Mac mini bundles with IBM keyboards and displays, together with the full range of PowerBooks, desktops, workstations and servers.

If the IBM label were nailed onto each unit, IT bosses would have a much harder job to marginalise them.

At the end of the day, everybody would win - except those trying to keep their jobs by propping up Microsoft.

As a previous poster mentioned, IT managers might initially get away with talking down a theoretical alternative to Wintel, but if your greatest rival converts to Mac and starts gaining a competitive edge over you, your CEO is going to be asking some very interesting questions about your previous advice.

IT managers clearly aren't willing to listen to the message, but CEOs will eventually be hearing the message from other sources.

I've worked in corporate IT and have setup Windows and Macs in mixed networking environments and I found it interesting that you mentioned your company has done tests on cost of ownership to decide on which PC to use. But, Macs were not included in the testing. Maybe the results would've been different if you actually included Macs in the testing and not just wintel PCs. Afterall, there's been many studies done over the years that have shown Macs to have a significantly lower cost of ownership than PCs. Most of the higher costs come from more frequent software upgrades and more tech support staff needed to maintain Wintel machines versus Macs.
Also, the costs of switching platforms you mentioned automatically eliminates non-Windows platforms in your mind. But you never quantified those "costs". Mac OS X now has excellent support of Windows networking protocols and I've found them to be almost "plug and play" within Windows environments. In fact, it's actually much simpler to setup a Mac on a Windows network than a Windows PC. The only real problem that I've found with Macs in business is the occasional lack of software for certain specialized applications. But that becomes a chicken and egg issue. Unless there are more Macs in business, there's no incentive for progranners to write such specialized business software for the Mac.
As for your preference of Dell laptops over Powerbooks for business use mainly because of it's longer battery life. I've actually found the reverse to be true. Maybe the latest Intel Centrino and Pentium Mobile laptops are different, but I've found most Windows laptops (Dells included) to have only 1.5 to under 2.5 hours of battery life. If anything, laptops are the only area where Apple has any kind of toe hold in corporations aside from desktop graphics.
Lets be honest. I've worked in IT for several companies large and not so large. The real reasons Macs (or any other platform) are almost non-existent in corporations are resistance from the IT staff and ignorance of the Mac platforms features and capabilities. There's just no incentive for IT staff to support and promote a platform in which they have little or no expertise in since it may ultimately make their work harder or even threaten their jobs.

Thank you DWallin. Due to the very nature of being a mac lover, most don't work in an enterprise environment, so I'm grateful for your real-life point of view.
But, to be honest, I don't want everyone using a mac. I'm comfortable with my mac life, and if the rest of the world finds their daily grind that bit harder - well, I'm not really bothered.

the first step Apple fans, is to identify how to target and give businesses that competitive edge...

no.1 problem is there isn't enough information about how to really do this. from what i've read the Apple people that won those Oracle and Cisco accounts aren't telling much about how they did it -- hell, maybe Steve just got John Chambers and Larry to swing 'round his place for dinner. Made them an offer they couldn't refuse

no. 2 problem is as you all rightly pointed out is the quagmire most IT people find themselves in -- windows technologies, windows hardware, patchy cobbled together proprietary solutions, vb this, dll that, investment in msce, asp, .net and so on... IT people feel threatened by non-windows stuff for the most part...

but i have been in SMEs where having Macs would make everyone much happier. the amount of time wasted with viruses and this and that, and all the emails warning about "don't open emails that say..." could be much better spent enjoying your "daily grind"

While the article doesn't spell it out, this was about IT in the United Kingdom, not the US:
Newham Borough Council?
Leeds Teaching Hospitals?
NHS Trust? (National Health Service)
"betting exchange"?

I'm not sure if this was covert Apple bashing or just poor journalism... Every person or institution referenced was in Britain, but the article sure implies that this is how Apple is perceived in the US.

Apple may never change the big corporate world, it seems. But that isn't business, not all of it. Many many others operate and work in truly small businesses, ie, less than 50 employees. For us, IT support costs (and downtime, and virus issues, and so on) are very directly out of our bottom line, and no question Mac is highly effective for us. But it is a different environment. If you are starting a company, or have a small company, it is different. (Biggest problem in the very small business environment is still Quickbooks and time accounting software, by the way. Apple should just buy QB for Mac from Intuit, add it to a meaningful full featured small business suite and sell it with the mini as a Very Cheap Solution for the small and startup business.)

Hi. Me and my buddy from high school decided to start selling custom t-shirts out of his garage. Since I know how to run Windows Update and he doesn't, we decided that I would be the CIO. After performing complex cost evaluations using pricegrabber.com, I determined that Dell's are cheap... or as my "CIO for Dummies" book calls it, "Total Cost of Ownership".

Anyhow just thought you all would be interested in some real world experiences from a true big time corporate executive. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go change the toner in our printer.

I've run Cost of Ownership studies before. When I worked for Apple I used to do presentations on it at exhibitions in the UK. I remember the M$ reps taking notes while I did them...

Trouble is I can't even get near doing it for Macs in my business because they won;t run the existing software. I know it will make sense in the long term, but I have to change *SO* much legacy before I can get there... At the moment the Macs have to have a higher cost of ownership because each one needs a Windows PC on it as well and that takes us back to the original.

I'd love to know the answer on battery life...

Cheers.

--
Dick

I must admit to not having read every single comment that has been submitted so apologies if I'm repeating one but...

In my experience IT departments have a vested interest in sticking with Windows- keeping their jobs. 1) they have skills in Windows and moving to Mac would either mean retraining or replacement of staff perhaps the very staff who would make the decision to swap. 2) Not as many IT people are needed to support Macs so there's another source of job loss.

Security through obscurity probably has some truth to it and virus writers aim for maximum disruption. I have always wondered why those writers don't attack mainframes and the like. Mainframes and servers are the most important computers on the internet. Taking those machines down will definitely give more bang for the buck. Many of the aforementioned run unix. They can't get taken down. Mac OS X is unix...

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Security through obscurity probably has some truth to it …………

That's utter nonsense.

It's just a smokescreen put up by Windows apologists to try and divert people from the fact that there are thousands of PC viruses and zero OS X viruses.

There would be considerable kudos or notoriety to be the first to create a viable OS X virus. Many people don't run any virus protection on their Macs and are frequently in touch with other Mac users. If a virus could be created, it could spread very rapidly indeed. But the emphasis remains on the word 'if'.

As I mentioned earlier, a 'security' company has reportedly spent six months trying and do just that and even with all their experience, resources and most of the source code, they failed.

I'm not saying that it's always going to be impossible, but it's obviously a massively more formidable challenge than to write yet another virus for Windows.

When the military builds their secret base in Nevada instead of New York, THAT is a classic example of "security through obscurity". And it works, doesn't it?

When people dismiss Apple's advantage this way, they are ironically warning people that "You'll loose your security advantage as soon as Apple starts outselling Microsoft."!

Quote

dwallin wrote:
I've run Cost of Ownership studies before. When I worked for Apple I used to do presentations on it at exhibitions in the UK. I remember the M$ reps taking notes while I did them...

Trouble is I can't even get near doing it for Macs in my business because they won;t run the existing software. I know it will make sense in the long term, but I have to change *SO* much legacy before I can get there... At the moment the Macs have to have a higher cost of ownership because each one needs a Windows PC on it as well and that takes us back to the original.

I'd love to know the answer on battery life...

Cheers.

--
Dick

Dick is actually 100% correct. In my rant earlier in this thread, I was directing my venom at the MINDSET that it's the MS/WINTEL way, or nothing. In truth, backward compatibility with legacy applications and adherence to very old or proprietary standards IS a huge obstacle for widespread adoption of the Mac in the corporate sector. You will find many businesses will only change platforms when they can be confident that the "hiccup" it causes in terms of their ability to access, use, and store old information ALONG WITH the new is mild at worst.

Quote

algr wrote:
When the military builds their secret base in Nevada instead of New York, THAT is a classic example of "security through obscurity". And it works, doesn't it?

When people dismiss Apple's advantage this way, they are ironically warning people that "You'll loose your security advantage as soon as Apple starts outselling Microsoft."!

The weather is better in Nevada, not mention the wide open spaces that are better for testing Earth-Jupitarian hybrid aircraft.

The Mac OS is more secure in that at least the doors have locks compared to Windows/Explorer/Outlook where the doors are off the hinges.

at least the doors have locks

Yea, that too

film at 11.

Hi. Me and my buddy from high school decided to start selling custom t-shirts out of his garage. Since I know how to run Windows Update and he doesn't, we decided that I would be the CIO. After performing complex cost evaluations using pricegrabber.com, I determined that Dell's are cheap... or as my "CIO for Dummies" book calls it, "Total Cost of Ownership".

Anyhow just thought you all would be interested in some real world experiences from a true big time corporate executive. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go change the toner in our printer.

Pardon my ignorance. Do CIO stands for Corporate Ignorant Officer?