Slashdot Mirror
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.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
So here's a story that outright says "we have no idea, and the whole thing is bogus anyhow".
Well, at least it's honest.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Is a Mac cheaper to run and does a Mac make a user more productive?
... just ain't gonna happen now.
If the answer is yes, does it really matter?
More importantly, does ANYBODY in corporate America consider this when buying their machines? I'll betcha, TCO means buying a "reliable" PC that's not made of crappy generic parts, and nowhere does a Mac come into the equation, even though it might very well be the better choice.
ROI means handing that machine down the line from programmers to office support, to milk as much out of it until it heads for a landfill, and nobody figures out how productive their people are on the thing during its lifetime.
Why? Because there's really no choice. Not in any practical sense.
So, it's really about how well a machine runs Windows, not how Windows compares to any other OS. That's because the market perception is that "the battle is over and Windows won." We feel enough anxiety about upgrading our machines, adding new software. To open up the decision process to worrying about entire platforms again
So Apple finds itself in a tough spot, appealing to those who want to "switch" in hopes that if it can gain enough market share and mind share, it can pry open the door of possibility eventually.
But it's going to be almost impossible, not because Apple can't offer a better product, but because people have become so shellshocked from the PC/Internet experience that they just want to settle down and go with the flow... the Windows flow.
So when I saw the above article, I thought to myself that even if Apple were to offer irrefutable truth to lower TCO/higher ROI, how much would it really, really matter?
Not much, unfortunately. Not right now. But perhaps, little by little...
You're right! There's no version of HotBar for the Mac. For some strange reason, the Klez worm has yet to sprout a Mac version. How can my users live without these vital applications?
But at my company, all people do is read email, write email, browse the web (including use of my custom web application), and create documents. Maybe 10% of our employees use a Windows-based accounting package my custom web application manipulates.
Since the Mac supports Microsoft Office, there's nothing our people don't do that couldn't be done with a Mac.
Most people don't need, use or want a huge amount of software.
Unless they have a HotBar addiction, that is.
D
I'm tired of all these slashdot stories that all have the same answer. The right tool for the right job. If you are screwing in screws you need a screwdriver. If you are hammering nails you need a hammer. If you want to buy hammers to screw screws it will probalby work, but with all the screws you bend it will cost more money and vice versa too.
There is a best selection of hardware and software under a given circumstance. There is no way to say that linux is cheaper than windows, period. There might be a guy who gets linux for free, but he runs weird hardware and would have to hire someone to write a driver. Windows might be cheaper for that guy. There might be an artist who already has a copy of photoshop for mac, but not for windows. A G5 might be cheaper for that guy. TOS can only be determined on a case by case basis.
The rule of right tool for the right job applies to so many slashdot stories I don't know if it's still worth posting it every time I see it. So next time someone says "my programming language is better than yours" or "this wireless protocol is better than that one" or "this software is cheaper/better than that one" point them here.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
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.'
Yeah, and the article was no figures to support that claim.
"In this coooorner, Anecdote, ladies and gentlemen! And in the opposite coooorner, Another Anecdote! Truly this will be the inconclusive fight of the century! Roarrr! Yeaaaaarrg!"
Sure Microsoft sucks, but it doesn't suck so much that I'm going to sacrifice honestly reasoning from real evidence for the sake of becoming a zealot able to bash Microsoft even in the face of no conclusive evidence one way or the other.
But, uh, thanks for offering me the chance.
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
Apple hardware doesn't depreciate in value like windows stuff does. Companies could actually sell their old hardware, instead of chucking it in the garbage! However, I doubt most companies, when considering a hardware purchase, consider their next hardware purchase.
The test is biased by the presence of Microsoft's Office software. Are their any similar studies for Mac sites where Office is not a factor? It seems to me that more than half of support questions usually involve application software, so I'd like to see a study where Microsoft Office was not a factor.
"Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
Trust me, my Wiha tools are FAR better than the "junk drawer" tools I lend to my neighbors. As both a Mac fan and woodworker, I've learned that it does not pay, in terms of time, hassle or quality of work to use "any old tool." If I'm shaving a piece off the bottom of a door, I'll grab a decent Stanely hand plane. For fine furniture, nothing beats my Lie-Nielsens, which at over 8x the cost, are well worth it.
Mac and Windows PCs do essentially the same things. There are a jillion more crappy games available for WIndows, but the good ones are on both. My G4 is an excellent gaming platform, plus it lets me talk to my friends, family and even get work done. My G4 Powerbook, even more so. I could do the same things my Dell, but the experience just isn't the same. Ergo, the Mac is a "better quality tool" for me.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
It's funny that this debate still rages on and I'm sure it will for some time to come. While some may say "ok, it's time to stop talking about it", I disagree. I'm sure the TCO race is much closer now than it was a decade ago when Macs were rather flaky and there's wasn't as much hard core business and research software for the Mac, thus making it rather useless for non-creatives and such.
Now for the sanity issue...time definitely has a value that nobody seems to take into account here. Same with sanity. For instance, with the PC you're constantly looking for drivers and DLLs that you need, that break, that disappear, that need to be updated, etc. With the Mac...it just WORKS. Any of you have a girlfriend that has a PC and it's constantly not working and YOU get all the abuse because of it? Then you suggest using a Mac because it simply works ("Look, all you gotta do is plug in your digital camera, and it works. And now you can view the pictures with no additional software. And check this out...you can burn them onto a CD now with no additional software..."). It really is that easy. I know if my gf had a PC, I would be a lot more sane from not having to listen to "great, I can't use my camera now because it changed the settings to HP instead of Sony and I can't find the software..."
Sanity...it's a good thing. Just as "goodwill" isn't a concrete number to put on a company's spreadsheet, it still has a value. Same with the value of time and sanity. Let's not forget that.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
So what is missing?
If there is a lack of overall interest in the platform, why does Microsoft Office exist for the Mac OS?
What exactly ARE these unmet software needs that "the majority" is clammoring for?
The latest first person shooter?
Your generalizations are completely unfounded.
I like microcars
not only is that fix easy, it is impossible to do with windows. there is no 'extensions off' in windows. There are always two sides to the argument, but having mac be so dynamic in install/uninstall/extentsions and system folder 'stuff' is just awesome... no registry or similar crap to deal with.
If you take off your tinfoil hat, you'd find that the both the Quark Word Filter and Internet Explorer use the Mac version of ActiveX. Obviously something was not interacting well. (It wouldn't surprise me if you were running some 8 year old version of XPress either.)
Furthermore, you apparently never noticed that "Most Applications Crash If Not, the Operating System Hangs" -- system stability problems on the classic OS were in no way unique to MS or Quark.
Now while i don't work in the corporate scene, my experience with them shows me why they choose windows. Corporations don't really care about saving money, they care about making it look like they're saving money.
A recent engineering department of a corporation cost reduced a a bearing, that will save them $6 on every $30 bearing. While this sounds like a good idea, the new bearing fails about 3 times under the warrenty period while the old bearing lived well beyond the warrenty period.
Corporations wouldn't care if it costs $1000 per machine to set up and maintain for the first year, as long as they can say they're buying a $600 dell and saving a fortune.
I truely believe that macs have a lower TCO, as i support all the windoze machines in my house. The only work my mac requires is the occasional software update. Windows requires updates weekly, reinstallation every 6-12months with heavy use. And i'm probably going to have to reinstall my mothers copy of XP home and my dads XP pro, as both are becoming incredibly glitch in recent weeks.
Linux probably beats windows in the long term, but loses in the short term, which is the only place where businesses care about. Linux takes longer to install, setup and get running smoothly, especially in a custom environment.
Mac are far more universal, as you can run X11, OS9, windows via VPC in addition to the Native OS X apps. This does not mean that Macs do not have their downfalls. Internet browsing still lacks the 'snap' that IE has on Win2k. But as i don't see MS doing much to innovate their os, i will stick with mac.
Personally, when i have to use windows, i use Win2k as i find it much better in the long term for stability. But unless i have to use windows, i keep linux and os x running on everything i can, as my time is worth more to me than a few hundred dollars now.
Mac myth #10:
"No one needs specialized applications. A generic spreadsheet/DB app that requires the user to program something from scratch is sufficient"
Yeah sure. Let's tell Farmer Brown: "Get the Mac. It's much better. You'll have to learn database design in order to use it for your farm, but it's really worth it!"
The "There are no programs for this, but users can write programs if they need them" is a real cop-out, and ludicrous if you are claiming that Macs are easier to use and "just work".
Apple limited the places that sell Macs because so many of them did it so badly. Put one old Mac up on display that doesn't run, and all the sales people steer people away from them, if not insulting you if you insist on a Mac. That's worse for sales than having them available in few places.
But I do wish they weren't so picky about where they open their Apple Stores. Many US states don't have one yet, and the one that's local to me is in an upscale mall filled with yuppies and high priced stores that I'll never set foot in. That sort of thing reinforces the stereotype that Macs are the playthings of the rich and stupid.
"Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
You can be sure that if there were Mac clones being sold (non-Apple), they'd have these ports because the users want them.
Clones were sold. They didn't have them. Customers didn't want them.
No, it hardly runs any software unless you run an emulator. That shows a problem.
We have ONE example so far of software that it will not run without the emulator. I don't call that "hardly running any software"
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
First of all, Miscrosoft didn't bail out Apple, they settled a longstanding lawsuit concerning how M$ blatantly copied the "windowed" point and click environment of the Mac. A lawsuit that they of course knew they would lose. Do your homework. Secondly, there are thousands of free open source applications that are available for OSX that you cannot even find a commercial solution for on a Windows PC. Hmm you couldn't find much Mac software at download.com, a overtly windows fanboy site, try a Mac software site, like versiontracker.com or macupdate.com. Again, do your homework. I use both PC's and Macs in Educational and Corporate settings and there is nothing I can do on a PC that I cannot also do on a Mac. The reverse cannot be said. As far as terminal applications, you have got to be smoking crack. And lastly, sheer numbers of programs does not equal superior programs. If windows has 300 programs to handle midi files I would be willing to bet that none of them does it worth a shit. And that several Mac programs work marvelously, thus there is no need to have 217 different programs that do the same damn thing. But you know what, keep using your windows machine, you and your kind keep me paid handsomely:) If the world switched to Macs I would be out of a job.
every time a republican dies a queer angel gets his wings
1) If your "loads" of ms techs are overworked, then I would say that you also have "way too few" of them. 2) Does "way too few" Linux techs mean they are also overworked, or that there are just fewer of them than the ms techs? 3) What kind of organization allows the techs to VOTE on strategic decisions? You're in serious need of a competent CIO.
Actually, I was trying to be Insightful, not Funny.
Actually, the clones very selling very nicely... at Apple's expense. Which is a big part of the reason they were killed off.
When it came to my own personal computer, I bought a Mac, just because I don't want to make support@home! Obviously I use nearly the same tools I could run on a dual boot Windows-Linux PC (DVDPlayer/VideoLan, iTunes, jEdit, MsOffice, JBoss-PHP-Apache, tcsh, Mozilla/kHtml). But it works find, nothing more than drag/drop to install an application, no OS upgrade issue, a perfect statefull firewall included). In two years, I had no system or software issues. When came the day I wanted a laptop, I took another Mac, because I liked the first one, because it was cheaper than the same class of computer from Dell.
I understand I overvalue my $/hour (I'm a bit more expensive than a 1st level support guy), but what can be compared to nearly $0? I helped some friends with their Macs (switchers, newcomers) and they were amazed how simple it was, how useless I could be for them (I love that because phone support at 10PM isn't my preferred friendliness).
I also worked at my office with Macs (Os9), and of course when a user had a problem, and the support team answered, "oh, it's a Mac", they called me. It's not a statistical study (5 samples), but each problems were solved in 5 minutes and were caused by "not connected" or "not switched on the VLAN", things that can exist on a PC and that really should not happened. The "no-support" reason was always "I don't know macs" which shouldn't happen with MacOsX (open a Terminal, remember your Unix for beginners 1st class, solve the problem). Still the $0 comparison.
With OsX, I believe there is a really good office alternative:
- a real user/admin isolation
- a realistic user rights limitation (you can install an funny screen saver with no possible impact on other users/ system files). Yes, don't tell me you plan to use the "no rights to the user" policy on windows, it's just not the job of sysadmins to forbid everything.
- a good multitask behavior (I'm ripping a DVD right now and don't feel any slowlyness on a 2 years old entry-level computer)
- all the classical usefull applications (Mozilla, Office, Mail, Calendar, Images management...) plus all the open-source world apps/tools.
- a wide adoption of standards and a real work on Windows connectivity
But a lot of people just don't compare anymore, are just too scary of innovation/new solutions (which is a real problem concerning technology). Too many people a ready to lie by not comparing Windows/Linux/Mac/Other before saying to the boss "here is the way". The scariest thing is the best way is certainly somewhere between those choices.Isn't it the entire "keep with the standards to keep the choice in your hands" lesson in first year of CS grade?
ClaudeBBG
He meant customers didn't want the ports. Not that they didn't want the clones.
Incidentally, the main reason for this was that most of the clones were direct copies of Apples' motherboard designs (liscensed of course). Part of the reason clones were undercutting Apple is that they weren't paying for the R&D. I guess the liscensing fees were supposed to cover it, but Apple aparrently decided that they didn't.
If it's not on fire, it's a software problem.
Right, because that $300 copy of photoshop makes the difference between a $1200 and $2500 machine. Nice math.
Also, the problem with your analogy, is that all these tools perform the SAME JOB, largely. So it's basically asking which screwdriver is better. Certainly, in some cases, you'll have to buy a Phillips head, because your shop deals only with Philips screws. But if you have the choice of platforms, you can still compare them - screwdrivers or computers. So these stories are fine.
And yes, I own a powerbook.
It's true, Mac has had their share of problems recently. But "parts" in general are less dependable now than they were years ago. From RAM to hard drives to logic and graphics boards, they're much more complex than ever before. And at the same time, the cost of a new Mac has actually decreased-- don't forget that the 8500 you may have running in the corner, that's run without a problem since 1996 cost more than its G5 equivalent now (and that's with two years of Applecare included.) The 12" iBook G4 with Applcare is about $1250-1300... I seem to remember paying at least 1 1/2 times that for a 5300 Powerbook (and don't get me started on the problems THAT thing had...)
Then there is the Total Cost of Sanity that many have mentioned. The Macs just work, but more importantly they are pre-installed. At a conference spanning several days, the first day and a half it looked any participant with a note book computer was runing either an iBook or a PowerBook. By the end of the week the ratio of Mac to Windows had droped to about 1:1 -- the Windows users had averaged about 20 minutes each with a technician to get the wireless cards working.
Mac just work, but more importantly they are pre-installed. The common Linux distros are very easy to install and maintain since about 4 years ago, especially compared to Windows. But having OS X work out of the box beats even Linux and really creams Windows. When you start talking about corrective maintenance, then you couldn't pay me to put up with the garbage that I've had to watch Windows technicians deal with. However, the end user, not the technician is the real benefactor of OS X. They can use the computer for their job rather than having to call twice a week about problems which prevent daily activities.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Just because the Extron Button Label Generator doesn't work on the Mac does not mean my staff should all have to use Windows. 99% of them do the things that can be done on Mac just as well, if not better than Windows (or Linux or Solaris, for that matter).
VERY limited examples of providers of Mac software to your specific areas of interest:
Business-oriented - Microsoft, Intuit, AEC, Nametschek
Development tools - GNU, Borland, Sun, IBM
Databases - MySQL, PostgreSQL, Sybase, IBM, Oracle
Except for extremely limited examples of very specific software (like turning in certain IRS forms), platform is irrelevant (which makes their platform-specificness all the more appaling).
Mac is a better tool for the things that most users do most of the time.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom