Why Consumer Macs Are Enterprise-Worthy

cyberkahn tips us to an article in Computerworld that makes the case for Apple's consumer machines moving into corporations. (The article dismisses Linux desktops in the enterprise in a single bullet item.) With the press that Vista has been getting, is Apple moving into a perfect storm? Quoting: "There is no comparison between Apple's 'consumer' machines and the consumer lines of its competitors. All of Apple's machines are ready to move into the enterprise, depending on the job at hand. The company's simple and elegant product line, which is also highly customizable, will be Apple's entree to the business market — if IT decision-makers can get over their prejudice against equipment that's traditionally been aimed at consumers."

Comments

Re:Enterprise-ready? Hardly.

[DDLKermit007]

Uh, yes they do that. Investigate Macs a little before going off trolling. Apple's Pro Care plan gives you on site service with their entire desktop line. If thats not enough, Apple like everyone else has corporate support contracts available. Want group policies? Have you ever heard of Active Directory? Yeah, Macs can support that. Lastly, about centralized updates, (OMFG!!! Say it with me!)they support that too! Just because you were born with your head up your ass doesn't mean something doesn't exist. Fucking tool...

Re:A little off base

[adfour]

"While the "all-MS shop" allows you to change the (hardware-)horse whenever you want, once you're using the "mixed environment OS X", you're bound to one supplier (Apple) once and forever. There's no way you can change that - if you find out that Apple's support isn't as good as you were expecting, you'll face the high cost of changing back your IT to the Windows world." Linux also is hardware agnostic compared to Apple. In fact, Linux is hardware agnostic compared to windows. By this argument, Linux is the best choice for IT. Given the availably of thin-client (win terminal servers aside) and low power-consumption workstations for Linux, as well as the lower cost of software doesn't that make Linux seem to be the best option, in general terms?

Re:Who wrote this crap?

[be-fan]

All the ones you mentioned (ext, reiser) are Linux-specific. XFS and JFS aren't, but they are very rarely used. No distro ships either as the default FS. And yes, you can mount ext filesystems on Windows, but then again you can mount HFS+ on Linux and Windows, and NTFS in Linux and OS X. However, despite this capability, these OSs still all use their native filesystems as their primary ones. OS X is really no different than Linux or Windows in that regard.