Slashdot Mirror


Enterprise CTO Switches to Mac OS X

louismg writes "BlueArc CTO Geoff Barrall, using a PC day in and day out, found things becoming progressively more difficult as they increased in complexity. After one final straw, he sought out an alternative, and switched to Mac OS X -- in a corporate environment. His column, titled 'Rethink Before You Reinstall' documents the challenges facing Mac OS X in enterprise, and how he has changed his views." We've not had a switcher/MS-bashing/Apple rules/etc. article in a little while, so here you are.

10 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Re:MacOSX with all Microsoft Software ... 'differe by Otter · · Score: 5, Insightful
    And yet -- it solved his problem, didn't it? He has the applications he wants without the support issues that were making him crazy. Truth is, Microsoft makes some really nice products when they're not tied to that awful OS and when they follow Apple UI guidelines.

    _Your_ problem may be that he's using a Microsoft product, but that's not what _his_ problem was.

  2. Re:Stop the presses! by jaoswald · · Score: 5, Funny

    No, you miss the point!

    There is a person who uses a computer to make presentations to customers so that his business can make money.

    I've certainly never seen anything like this on Slashdot before!

    The consequences are potentially enormous. It might be that this person doesn't even know Perl!

  3. Apple's "top down" revolution by tres · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's nice to see Apple winning the "top down" revolution. I can only hope, as a sysadmin, that Apple's OS X will continue to make inroads into the corporate sector. It is easy to administer, robust, stable--and best of all, works as advertised.

    I don't know how many times I've been burned by Windows products that just don't work right. I don't know how many times I've had to deal with stupid Windows problems and kludge together a solution. I'm tired of wasting my time with the same non-issues over and over again. I know I'm not the only one.

    Apple's mistake back in the 90's was to try winning a "bottom up" revolution. Giving their computers to school districts, in theory was a great idea; it produced people who were used to using Apple computers would go buy Apple, or use it at work. Apple made a simple product that worked well, but was stigmatized as a "toy."

    It wasn't Microsoft, but rather IBM won that battle by using a "top down" revolution. Appealing to the execs/technophiles in an organization. Making the PC seem more "professional," or technically advanced. Microsoft has been riding on that IBM wave ever since. But they've shot themselves in the foot more times than I can count.

    It's nice to see the tables turned: Microsoft's "Jolly Rancher" OS keeps trying to "dumb-down" bad engineering with more annoying wizards, more annoying popups, and more annoying "security" features that just make working with it impossible.

    While Microsoft attempts to win a "bottom up" revolution with candy-colors and glitz, Apple has made a real, rock solid OS that can be used by anyone. While Microsoft alienates more and more corporate customers, Apple is selling comparably priced corporate systems to their PC counterparts.

    More proof that Microsoft's greatest nemisis is Microsoft.

    --
    Notes From Under *nix: blas.phemo.us
  4. A shame an idiot wrote the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a systems admin who recently switched to Apple, I thought that this story might be worthy of forwarding to my boss. Unfortunately the article doesn't address anything of particular interest.

    For technical people, the reasons we use our computers go beyond simply writing Word documents or opening Excel spreadsheets. The average clod in a company though doesn't care what their hardware is, what their operating system is, they just want to know that Office is there.

    Therefore an article that simply talks about how Office works on a non-PC platform is nothing worth getting a boner over. If he'd spoken about Keynote, addresses the advantages of an open file format, spoken about how his company had developed software to write customized presentations based on info pulled live from their database or something - hooray. Perhaps he could have mentioned how easy it is to produce PDF versions of pretty much anything - which in this cross-platform era is a good thing since your document will look the same anywhere. I think my point is understood by this stage.

    Me thinks that this whole article is a way to get people to his company's website.

    1. Re:A shame an idiot wrote the article by dbrutus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem he was having was dll hell. The fix he instituted was using Mac OS X bundles which have all the code self-contained inside a double click to launch the app directory.

      Pair this article with a technical description of bundles and why they're nifty and you have a useful 1-2 punch.

  5. Contradiction... by ElGanzoLoco · · Score: 5, Funny

    [...]nothing that would lead anybody to think I'm using anything other than a regular PC. No blue screens [...]

    Isn't that a contradiction? :)

    --
    Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!
  6. Re:no sense by dbrutus · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think it much more likely that he meant he's reinstalled Windows in all its variations many times over the past years.

    There is a difference between running a complex program on Mac OS X and on Windows. Windows throws DLL files in various places along with registry entries. Apple has bundles which are double click to open the app inside directories. Apple bundles use .plist files (created in xml) instead of registry entries and the .plist files are in the bundle. What is also in the bundle is the executable code and the application strings for as many languages as you like.

    Most apps can just be dragged around between disks and continue to function just fine because all their components are moved with a single icon drag and their location stays the same relative to the base location of the bundle directory.

    All in all, it's an elegant solution and eliminates a lot of DLL hell.

  7. XP is no silver bullet by Dragonfly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    XP is better than what came before, but just last week I had to spend an hour troubleshooting and finally reinstalling Outlook XP on my girlfriend's brand-new Vaio. After 6 weeks of working fine Outlook just refused to open, no matter how many times you "repaired" it. No software/hardware changes to the setup, just 6 weeks of turn it on in the AM, check email all day, and turn it off at night. If this is enough to break Outlook in a little over a month, then someone at Microsoft (still) isn't doing their job.

    For a point of comparison, my PowerBook G4 has been running OS X 10.1->10.2.4 since July '01 (across several network environments), and I haven't had to reinstall anything. Just 2 data points, but ones I find telling.

  8. Re:Use Office on XP then use it on OS X. by SAN1701 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Meanwhile, in the deeps of Microsoft Mac Business Unit...

    -Hi. I just want to see what you guys are doing here.
    -Hi, Bill! We are doing many improvements in Office, Outlook...
    -Calm down! No need to hurry! You guys seem to work too much!
    -Indeed! Now we're porting SQL-Server to Mac OS X Server...
    -I see. But as I said, there's no rush. Drink less coffee, work less daily hours, enjoy life more... Buy a videogame to your employees!
    -Actually, we're very busy because we want to start to port the whole .NET...
    -That's it! 6 months of vacation to everybody. On me! You guys deserve it!

  9. Re:no sense by Smurf · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yes, that's a nice feature. Windows apps can do this too, if the're written properly. Office, for example, can be moved, as can most other applications. Instead of dragging the executable bundle, however, you drag the program directory.

    I'm sorry but this is not quite true. Your commentary struck me as odd, so I decided to test it myself (as I am tied to a Win 200 machine). I moved the "Microsoft Office" folder from the "C:\Program Files\" folder to another one in drive C. This is what happens every time I launch the programs directly from the "Microsoft Office\Office" folder:

    Excel: "An error occurred and this feature is not functioning properly. Would you like to repair this feature now?". If I say yes, it asks me for the Office installers. As I don't have the installers at hand, I am forced to cancel the "installation", after several error dialogs. Afterwards, (or if I say I don't want to "repair this feature"), things appear to work correctly (I haven't checked everything, though).

    PowerPoint: It launches without a problem, but the first time I use a menu command the installer dialog appears. I am also unable to open templates.

    Word: The dialog appears when launching, as with Excel.

    Access, Outlook: I don't use them so I don't really care.

    The shortcuts in the Start menu, the launch bar, and the desktop invoke the installer dialog and don't launch the application if the dialog is cancelled.

    We can argue that the programs anyway appear to be operative after dismissing all the dialogs, and that everything will probably be corrected by running the installer from the CD. But this is a far cry from what MacOS X (apparently) offers: they can (apparently) simply move their directory to a CD-R or a FireWire disk (or an iPod) and the first time the programs are run they heal themselves automatically.

    There is even a story of a kid pirating MS Office from a display Mac in a store by copying it to his iPod. Some tech reporter saw him, I think.

    PS: I returned the directory to its location and (thank God) everything returned to normal.