Mac v. Microsoft TCO

NickFitz writes "MacWorld UK has some comments from industry analysts on the question of whether Total Cost of Ownership, Microsoft's favourite metric, is lower for Apple Mac versus Windows. The MS website has no figures to refute the claim that 'An Apple technician may cost twice as much, but he comes to see you half as often.'" Bottom line: neither platform is the clear winner.

Comments

Techincian count

[goombah99]

At my 10,000+ employee facility, we have loads of overworked microsoft techs and way too few linux techs. Whenever our institution tires to force us to standardize on a platform the techs vote and of course windows always wins because there are so many techs.

if you actually normalized their numbers by number of machines they support I suspect that the mac techs would win. Hard to say about the linux techs. Linux techs tend to support giant computer farms. They have huge problems getting them all working nicely but they arent running around putting out virus and worm fires every week or searching for some stupid third pary driver.

Fishing?

[microcars]

Take a look at this catalog looks like plenty of stuff available there to me.

plus, you might want to read the story here about the NY Vespa dealer that decided to go with Mac and Filemaker Pro rather than deal with the Windows software that was "offered" by the Manufacturer.

Why did they choose to use Macs and Filemaker Pro when an existing Windows package was available?
Here's a quote from the story:

"And the default choice for their new Vespa dealership was a PC-based software package, "because that's all the manufacturer had to offer,"

"When we talked to other dealers about the Vespa software package, everyone complained of horrible setup problems, errors, crashes. We checked the software vendor's update schedule, and every few weeks there was a new update. Not to mention the huge investment -- a seven or eight thousand dollar setup cost, plus an annual fee of several thousand dollars. And that didn't even include hardware! "

It appears this shop looked very closely at TCO and even though a Windows package was available, they chose not to use it!

My wife works in Real Estate, she uses a Mac. She has no problems.

The other agents are constantly hit up to buy all these little Windows apps that will "help" them work better and more efficiently, but mostly these apps just line the pockets of the IT guy who is recommending them.

Her TCO by using her iBook is MUCH lower than that of the agent in the next station who was told she had to buy a $2000 sub-notebook in order to be competitive.

I'm not even going to mention all the time everyone ELSE wastes patching their Windows computers while my wife just keeps working.

"...Next thing I tried: Fishing? Fishing is not the most obscure hobby. You are out of luck using a Mac to enhance it: 15 titles for Pc, NONE for Mac.

No Fishing apps for the Mac? How sad.

Sigh...

[Mildew Man]

I don't know how this can be debatable.

Everything that I have heard and read show that Macs are cheaper when factoring in TCO. In addition to less support (how many times have heard "...my company has 1000 PCs with 100 PC support techs and 2000 Macs with 3 Mac support techs...") and longer lasting hardware ("...we have a SE/30 that we still use as a mail server...") to increased productivity ("...virus? What stinking virus?...It just works!)

Here's a few examples I found when googling for info on Mac vs. Windows TOC:

Macs Shine In Total Cost Of Ownership
"The TOC (total operating cost) for the Wintel machines amounts to $253.86 per year, every year until it is retired," Canterbury told Sellers. "The Macs run us $53.25 per year. Quite a difference and one our board and parents heard loud and clear."

Return On Investments between the Macintosh and Windows platforms.
[NOTE: of course this is where the Mac shines but I think that it translates to other areas of general productivity]
"This benchmark supersedes a common but misleading bench-mark: cost-of-ownership. An ROI benchmark correlates the cost of ownership and productivity of media producers to revenue and profit. Detailed ROI analysis reveals that a Macintosh-using creative professional produces $26,441 more annual revenue and $14,488 more net profit (per person) than a Windows user of comparable skill engaged in similar work."

Why most people should buy a Macintosh rather than a Windows PC
A study from technology research company, Gartner has found Apple Macintosh computers to be up to 36 percent cheaper to own and run than competing PC products. The study utilised Gartner's Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) methodology, which takes into account the direct and indirect costs of owning IT infrastructure.

And there are just so many other ones that I grow tired of providing the information

An older study from 1988:

[bob_calder]

quote found here:
University of Wollongong
In 1997, Gistics, Inc. published the following*:
Macintosh users:
spend 38 fewer hours per year 'Futzing" with files
save US $4,950 annually on support and training
use more tools (14.3 versus 8.3)
Save US $2,211 in three-year cost of ownership
Earn US $5.01 more per hour
Earn US $12.22 more revenue per hour of labor
Create US $14,550 more profits per year per person
Earn 32 percent more net profit per project and
Achieve platform payback in 7.2 months (versus 13.9)

*Page 56 Vaughan, T. 1998. Multimedia, Making it Work, Osborne McGraw Hill, Berkeley