Using Macs In The Work Place

Kelly McNeill writes "It's been said that bringing a Macintosh into a corporate environment dominated by Windows-based PCs is not an easy task. Once you cut through the corporate red tape, then get through ignorant IT staff you still have to connect and gain access to all the services on the network. osViews editorial contributor Kevin Ledgister took on this challenge and passed the test with flying colors."

Comments

Is SMB support fixed yet?

[drinkypoo]

While running Jaguar I noticed that the smb kernel module on the BSD side which provides the smbfs share access is, well, stupid. For instance it believes that windows does not allow certain characters like [ and ] in filenames, and gives you a really meaningless error about files not being found if you try to copy them to a SMB share. (I don't remember testing copying from one.) I ended up using DAVE 4.1 to work around this.

This was also on a Blue and White G3, revision 1, which has an IDE chip bug. Many hard drives corrupt data when hooked up to a rev1 yosemite. The workaround straight from apple's support library? Buy FWB toolkit or similar, and use a slower (non-UDMA) transfer mode with non-apple hard disks.

So on one machine, to get ordinary compatibility with established standards, two pieces of third party commercial software were necessary. Thanks, Apple!

Re:I've integrated Macs into PC offices before...

[erikdotla]

If it was a Linux office being integrated, the poster wouldn't have referred to the IT staff as ignorant.

Not all IT staff who run Windows networks are ignorant. Try integrating your hot new mac onto a Windows 2003 AD network without using "Classic". Good luck.

The ignorant people are the zealot workers who love thier flavor of the year OS and disrupt a homogeneous network with a components that make it heterogeneous, and wind up costing the company money.

MAC vs. Standard Desktop

[Seldon_21]

Wrap your self in the colors and pretty presentation of the MAC. Then consider the research, design, implementation and documentation it takes to implement system into a production environment!

Next take the amount of time and effort it takes to manage, monitor and maintain a single system environment!

Why would I want to introduce a niche product for a handful of elitist who decide that they want our wire but don't want to help ensure the safety, security and reliability of our network? "Damn it Jim I am a Doctor not a Computer Technician!"

What standards do they or would they adhere too? One last thought I think the next time I go to the Dr. Office I will tell him/her that I don't like the cold ugly stethoscope and I want him to use mine, or maybe I want a cherry flavored tongue depressor!

Skewed perspective?

[t0ny]

Once you cut through the corporate red tape, then get through ignorant IT staff you still have to connect and gain access to all the services on the network.

1. I once had to give a Mac access to a network file server. It sucked- I needed to bypass a majority of the file server's security to allow this to happen.

2. Mac doesnt have any real kind of client software that allows it to attach to an NT network (much less an AD network). Quite unlike Windows, which can connect to ANY other network (Netware, Apple, Unix, etc), and still be secure.

This guy needs to learn what he is talking about, but thats a tall order. Its so much easier to just bitch and whine.

osViews editorial contributor Kevin Ledgister took on this challenge and passed the test with flying colors."

Wow, an Anti-MS website touting the abilities of a Mac. Will the wonders never cease?

Re:Skewed perspective?

[t0ny]

You once had to give a Mac access? What, four years ago? I hate to sound like a fanboy, but I've had positively zero problems getting these Macs connected to our NT network, and I didn't have to change any security policies to do it.

It was about three years ago, as a matter of fact. And it was MacOS (I *did* say Mac, didnt I?)

I'm also amused that you make the comment that Windows can connect to any network and be secure. Are you new here? Windows doesn't connect to much of anything securely. Windows also doesn't connect to AppleShare volumes very well. It connects just fine if the Mac or UNIX machine is running a Samba server, though, since that's what Samba was designed to do.

No, Im not new here, but that doesnt mean I need to tow the bullshit party line around here that everything Windows is bad and evil. Windows connects securely if you know what the hell you are doing when you configure the machine. Thats a fact. Just because Joe User cant configure it doesnt mean anything- Joe User isnt part of the IT Staff, and he isnt an IT professional who gets paid to do these things. I dont have my lawyer fix my car, so I dont expect users to configure their machines. Its called being a professional.

Ugh. This kind of ignorance frustrates me, because it's a major block in the acceptance of alternative operating systems.

Yea, your ignorance is kind of annoying, now that you mention it. Linux and other operating systems will never improve to big-time as long as you zealots keep walking around in denial.

Re:Full Text

[slittle]

My Dell is a 1 GHz unit with 512mb ram

Ooh, anecdotal evidence that Macs are 'teh win.'

I have a 2.4Ghz Dell on my desktop right now, and my old Duron 700 at home shits all over it.

Between the lame hardware (5400rpm HDD?!) and the Corporate Standard Install of Windows, it's barely worth the upgrade from the 400Mhz NT4 boxen before it.

Crap hardware and poor administration, however, are not Windows or Microsoft's fault. I know Windows' true capabilities to be contrary to what I'm seeing, so the correct course of action is to contact IT and get them to shove their ghost image up their arse and do it properly, not go running off to the happy trippy RDF land of Mac.