Corporate Mac Sales Surge 66%

syngularyx writes "Mac sales in the enterprise during Apple's last fiscal quarter grew a whopping 66 percent, significantly outpacing the rest of the PC market, which grew just 4.5 percent in the enterprise. The data from Apple's previous fiscal quarter was highlighted on Friday by analyst Charlie Wolf with Needham & Company. He said though he originally viewed success in the enterprise as a "one-quarter blip," it now appears to be a "durable platform" for Apple." What makes this especially interesting is that Apple apparently isn't looking for corporate sales, and considers them "collateral success" rather than an indication that they should market specifically to corporate buyers.

Comments

Corporate sales?

[TheRaven64]

You mean that there are now three businesses using Macs? Amazing!

Re:Corporate sales?

[Anonymous Coward]

No dummy.

Obviously the growth from 2 to 3 Macs would be an increase of 50%.

The only logical answer is Apple sold 5 Macs to business as opposed to 3 last quarter.

Re:Corporate sales?

[Richard_at_work]

Heh, its ironic - I'm currently sat in an office where all the computers (a dozen or so) are Macs - iMac 27" to be precise.

The irony is that they are all running Windows 7, not one is running OSX. Business owner bought them because they looked cool, but the business is a .Net software development house.

Re:Corporate sales?

[beelsebob]

The 27" iMac is pretty hard to beat. Consider that a 27" IPS 2560x1440 screen is about $1000 to start with (hell, dell's more expensive than apple on this one), that gets you a small, quiet, mid range i5 system with a real graphics card for $700... It's not unbeatable, but it's a reasonable price.

Re:Corporate sales?

[petermgreen]

but generally the prices are close once you start matching spec for spec.

The thing is that isn't how one normally buys computers, normally one starts with a set of requirements and then looks for a computer to meet those specs.

And when looked at in this way for many sets of requirements the cheapest mac that meets them is a LOT more expensive than the cheapest PC that meets them.

Re:Corporate sales?

[jedidiah]

...except both are still just going to the corner store.

Both adequately address the actual end user requirements. Both accomodate the use case.

You remember the end user, right?

Re:Corporate sales?

[jo_ham]

No, the reason that they're doing it this way, according to most educated guesses, is that SMART status while standard is a little unreliable sometimes, and you really don't want to be polling it all the time, and in the prior iMac (2009-2010) they used a specific special cable that was different for each manufacturer's drive (and they use about 4 different makes in the iMac line - including Seagate - they don't claim to know more than them, they simply ask Seagate and others for a drive that has specifications they can use, in this case a custom firmware that makes the drive more useful to them).

What they then did was repurpose the LED access light connector, which they don't use (there's no external LED HD light on the iMac) and used the signals for temperature sensing. What this means is that they can simply use one connector (the same connector) regardless of what drive they install, streamlining inventory and assembly. Since it was never designed for user service, they didn't see it as a downside that it was a non-standard method.

Now, having personally upgraded the HD in my own 20" white Intel iMac, I wish they'd made it possible for me to do without jumping through hoops if I upgrade to one of these machines (my white iMac simply has a temperature sensor that attaches to the outside of the drive, so you just transfer it to the new one), but I'm sure it won't be long before some third party solution comes along to cure it. Apple's own documentation mentions shorting that line out if an SSD is installed in that bay instead of a spinning drive, for example, and I'm sure they are looking at what some third party shops are doing - they released firmware for the 2011 iMacs that enabled full 6GBs speed on 2 of the 3 SATA busses, for example, despite not shipping any BTO parts that could use it, ostensibly after OWC said "hey, it would be cool to put our SATA 3 SSDs in here!"

The iMac is a big laptop, essentially, so I expect it to come with various issues like this. It's no different from a custom logic board and PSU. It will be documented and worked out soon - likely using Apple's own documentation.

If they're so determined to force the upsell, you think they'd have stuck to having the CPU soldered onto the board though, eh? As it is now, this is one of the first times in the iMac they've gone for a socketed stock CPU. I'm not sure anyone has attempted to put in anything different, but no doubt it will be tried soon. The GPU is also on an external card that is clearly a board made by AMD. It's obviously custom and thus not upgradable easily, but the door does remain open for the possibility of changing it out in the future - even if it's only for one of the more powerful cards currently in the lineup (like the one in the top spec 27"),

Collateral success vs indication of support need

[Chas]

Translation: Hope these businesses don't want actual enterprise support from Apple. Rude awakenings to ensue.

Bring-your-own platform

[tripleevenfall]

This is an interesting change. At my former employer, they piloted a program to allow developers to develop on a Linux box rather than a Windows one, but it was not utilized by many and the desktop team found the support too painful for their taste.

Now looking at a different article from TFA: http://blogs.computerworld.com/18330/apples_mac_steals_windows_enterprise_sales

"What's driving the growth? Wolf writes, "Notwithstanding its premium prices compared with Windows PCs, the Mac should continue to grow faster than the PC market, propelled by the halo effects now emanating from the iPod, iPhone and iPad along with the international rollout of Apple Stores. The cost of ownership is emerging to be another key factor. Square Group chief, Darren King, notes, "Total cost of ownership (TCO) for a Mac vs a comparable Wintel device over 3-4 years is actually lower!" Think about that."

"Eight out of 10 organizations said they are "more likely to allow more users to deploy Macs as their enterprise desktops" in 2010-2011, up from 68 percent in the 2009 survey," the researchers said."

It's interesting that the coming decade might herald, rather than the switch we might have anticipated to Linux desktops (following the Year of Linux on the Desktop of course), a switch to desktop autonomy and self-governance at work.

Not a Surprise

[TyroneShoe]

In tech companies, it's still a problem retaining good talent. To a lot of people (including where I work) being given a MacBook as their company laptop is actually a perk. I work for a software company whose products run on all major platforms (OSX, Win, UNIX, Linux, BSD, etc) and a good number of our employees (more than 100) have MacBooks. It makes sense to have some people using the platform that our software runs on also...

Government...

[Third Position]

More interesting is the figure for growth in the government segment - 155.6% isn't shabby growth there, either...

Re:Collateral success vs indication of support nee

[beelsebob]

Actually, I would bet heavily that the increase is tied strongly to one simple thing – everyone wants to develop an iOS app.

Re:Mandatory ACLs

[dzfoo]

Is that a troll question, as in rhetorically expecting an answer in the negative?

Mac OS X has ACL built in:
          http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=2005050120073947

          -dZ.

Re:Collateral success vs indication of support nee

[TheRaven64]

Here's an example of the different levels of support that we got from Apple and from Dell when a machine failed in the university lab where I used to work:

Dell sent out a technician to fix it. He brought spare parts with him, and fixed it on the spot. We weren't paying for an expensive support contract - just the standard support Dell gives to large customers - so it sometimes took a day or two before they sent someone out. The machine was out of action for a day or two, and a technician had to spend about 10 minutes on the phone to get it repaired.

Apple kept us on hold or about half an hour, before telling us that we had to take the machine to the nearest Apple Authorised Reseller. The nearest one to Swansea was in Cardiff, which is about an hour and a half's drive away (city centre to city centre), plus a little walk at each end since you couldn't park near the shop in Cardiff. The would then send it to their repair centre, who would take up to three weeks to fix it. Once it was fixed, it had to be collected from there. Machine was out of action for three weeks, and it effectively took an entire day of technician time (two round trips to another city with the machine) to get it fixed.

Somewhat strangely, Mac owned by individuals bought through the Higher Education store got much better support. They sent out a box the next day, you put the broken machine in it, and a day or two later it returned working (normally - I had one experience where it took them a month to admit that they'd lost it, then two attempts to send me a working replacement). For some parts, they send the replacement out, and you put the old one in the box and send it back with the courier when it arrives.

IT hates apple

[EreIamJH]

My comany's new CTO (a total MS drone) came in 18 months ago and the first thing he did was launch a jihad against all the Linux boxen that had been quietly sitting there doing their thing for years. Massive IT pain resulted followed by a major blow out in the IT budget as he busily wrote cheques to MS and Dell. He thought he'd won. Then along came the iPad. First the Board of Directors started asking why they couldn't read the board papers on their iPads, then the CEO wanted one and asked why he couldn't get his email working, then all the executives wanted one. Now iPads have spread down four levels of management. Then people started asking about integrating iPhone because they didn't like having to carry a blackberry just for work. The CTO kept talking about how insecure apples were compared to MS and that it'll take months of careful study to integrate. Last week the CEO sacked him.

Re:IT hates apple

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree, IT hates Apple. Not because it's Apple, but it's because they don't understand it much like they don't understand Linux. What they tend to not understand is that Windows is the one doing things differently, not LInux or Mac. Oh and there aren't any policy wizards.

Secondly, the reason users in corporate environments like Apple is because IT doesn't understand Apple. That means that you don't have to deal with silly, overbearing policies that make your computer run slow and stop you from using your applications until you call the Helpdesk who opens a ticket that will be addressed within 8 hours. Heck the best bit of news I got was the news that I could have my own Linux box at work and that IT wouldn't support it.

The worst thing that could happen to Apple is that IT start to love them. Then your Mac desktop would end up as unusable as the Windows desktop you currently have.

Re:IT hates apple

[King_TJ]

Good! Only problem is, they should have sacked him a LOT sooner....

IMO, there's really NO excuse for spending money to change out a system that's proven to work efficiently for people in a company. This isn't about "Microsoft vs. Linux" or anything else. It's just simple math. If you spend money on your infrastructure, it should always be towards quantifiable improvements (often/usually involving upgrading an existing system that works, vs. ripping it out and starting over with something else).

I remember years ago.... a couple of my friends had jobs at Ralston Purina (long before their merger with Nestle Corp.). They were one of the firms in town that used OS/2 extensively, with Lotus Notes for email. The story I heard is, the C.E.O. wound up getting "wined and dined" by salespeople from Microsoft, including giving him a fancy titanium golf club/driver under his hotel room bed as a gift, to get him to switch the company to Microsoft Exchange.

Well, the switchover was hugely expensive, and they wound up with not only no new functionality for the end-users, but MORE problems than before in certain circumstances. (There were things the administrative assistants could do with their boss's calendars/schedules in Notes that weren't possible anymore as "delegates" in Outlook/Exchange, as I recall them saying.) Additionally, as Notes allowed more UI customization than Outlook/Exchange did, it caused them some issues with things they'd developed in-house for OS/2 and Notes in the past (like kiosks they had set up with very simplified screens with, say, 4 or 6 buttons displayed on them that could be tapped to do very specific things like viewing one calendar of events, or checking one public information type mailbox).

Ultimately, I suppose it worked out for the better for them in the long-run, only because IBM wound up pretty much dumping OS/2 support. But that wasn't a factor back when this changeover was done.

Re:IT hates apple

[TheRaven64]

No, the moral of this story is that you should evaluate the best tool for the job, not just jump with your favourite vendor and expect everyone else to work around their limitations. If all of your clients are Windows machines, then a Windows server for all of the Active Directory stuff might be the best solution. If they're all Macs or *NIX machines, then a Windows server would be a terrible idea. In most environments, no single OS is the best tool for all jobs, and trying to force a single platform is usually a bad idea.

Re:IT hates apple

[maztuhblastah]

You just know you fucked up when migrating away from Lotus Notes results in a worse experience.

Re:Collateral success vs indication of support nee

[drinkypoo]

For what you pay Apple for a three year support contract which requires you to send the machine in or bring it in, you get onsite service for the same period from pretty much any other vendor. I live on a one-lane road in the back of beyond and HP sent a technician to work on my laptop even though I'm three hours away from the place from which they sent him. Of course, he did actually manage to break the laptop further, but Apple is capable of doing the same thing and I should probably thank him because I ended up getting a better one as a replacement.

Re:Collateral success vs indication of support nee

[sootman]

Which is why this is such a big story. Apple made a jump like this while having sub-par service and expending absolutely ZERO effort at marketing to corporations. They even quit making the XServe and XServe RAID. So why the jump in sales?

Anecdotal experience from my company

[david.emery]

"in the beginning", I was the one corporate Mac user (by special agreement/dispensation/employment agreement with the CEO.) Then a couple of Macs were purchased for specific projects, plus a couple other 'favorite sons' got a Mac. Once the senior leadership (including the CIO and COO) actually -tried them-, they decided that the convenience/ease of use of the software platform, along with the reliability of the hardware, was A Good Thing. So the corporate policy was still "No Macs", but they became in some respects a status simple at the VP level. Then the CFO said "no Macs". But with a significant number of VPs advocating for the Mac (including the ability to connect to the corporate Exchange server, and the ability to run corporate Windows-only applications through virtualization), is likely to result a re-look in the "no Macs" policy. A big part of that is that the hardware's lasting a lot longer. If a Dell breaks in 2 years and a Mac lasts 4, and the price for SIMILARLY EQUIPPED machines is relatively close, then the Total Cost Of Ownership argument for Macs is a strong one.

But we're talking about 20 machines in a 500 person company, so Mac penetration here is not very strong. The level of interest at the VP and senior tech staff level remains high. And typically that's what I've seen in several other companies; the 'desire for Macs' is particularly strong in the senior technical ranks. In my case specifically, and in the case of others I've talked to, it's a combination of ease-of-use for everyday tasks, hardware reliability, and the lack of IT controls and interference (e.g. corporate-injected software updates that crash your machine in the middle of working or worrying about the latest crop of vulnerabilities.) Also for many of us, the Unix underpinnings provides a lot of capabilities for tools we grew up with (e.g. grep, chmod, EMACS, etc) that are often highly productive alternatives to the Windows way of doing things.