Slashdot Mirror
Apple Forcing IT Shops To 'Adapt Or Die'
alphadogg writes "Many IT departments are struggling with Apple's 'take it or leave it' attitude, based on discussions last week at MacIT, which is Macworld|iWorld's companion conference for IT professionals. Much of the questioning following technical presentations wasn't about Apple technology or products. It was about the complexities and confusions of trying to sort out for the enterprise Apple's practices. Those practices include the use of Apple IDs and iTunes accounts, which are designed for individual Mac or iPad or iPhone users, and programs like Apple's Volume Purchase Program, which, according to Apple 'makes it simple to find, buy, and distribute the apps your business needs' and to buy custom, third-party B2B apps."
He actually made computing cool.
First, who gives a shit? Second, he didn't make computing cool - he used cool to sell consumer electronics. That's not 'computing' any more than watching TV is 'computing'.
an iTunes account have to do with the business workplace and enterprise computing - no iTunes on company computers - problem solved!
Linux mentioned, CHECK. Claiming King Geek in front of a nation of geeks, CHECK. Apple Fanboi posing as a Geek, priceless.
So you think because a few million people run Apps that the entire corporate infrastructure, the existing mainframe, unix, windows, and linux systems, and EVERYTHING ELSE is going to change to make ROOM for Apple in the enterprise?
Sir, you SERIOUSLY underestimate your importance to North American enterprises. Even Microsoft isn't that ignorant of their REAL place in the IT industry.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
But you have not said anything about how this applies to IT shops. How do I buy 30 licenses for (lets say OmniGraffle). How does one then assign those licenses to the 30 people that need them? Then later I fire #14 and hire a new person? So far the options are: 1) Buy the app under the employee's own Apple ID. But then #14 takes a copy of the software when he leaves. 2) Buy the app under the employee's corporate Apple ID. But then #14's Apple ID isn't in the company anymore, and nobody has that license. 3) Buy the app under some anonymous corporate Apple ID. (emp14@example.com). When I replace #14, the replacement gets _all_ of the Apps that #14 had. And #3 has another problem that IT would have to retain (and manage) the passwords to all of the emp## accounts as the App literally has to be bought under that account, so IT would need to change the password, attach a credit card, buy the app, detach the credit card, change the password back. Previously, one would buy 30 licenses of OmniGraffle, download the .dmg file, install on the appropriate 30 machines.
You forgot something, eventually IT shops have to do what their users want...
The problem with Apple is there is no customization in either hardware or software.
Lets say I want a phone with a physical keyboard running iOS. I can't have it. On the other hand, I can have a wide variety of phone form factors on Android and even Windows Phone 7. Want a really thin phone with no keyboard? They've got it. Want a phone with a sliding keyboard? They've got it. Want a keyboard just on the face of the phone? They've got it. One size does not fit all.
Lets say I want a cheap computer for web browsing, e-mail and office use. If I get a PC, I can get a laptop for about $330, sure it isn't really high end, but it will do what I want. On the other hand, if I wanted to get the same thing running OS X it would cost me, what? $600 for an iPad which isn't close to a full fledged computer? Or $1,000 for a cheap Macbook?
Or lets say I want a minor customization, putting the window buttons on the left side like most people are used to. With Linux, switching the window buttons are easy, a quick Google search will tell you how to rearrange them. On the other hand, there seems to be no way to do it on a Mac. Lack of customization is what keeps me away from Chrome and also Mac OS.
Yes, Mac OS is nicely designed, but there is simply no customization. Even Windows offers more customization. After all, the operating system is there to stay out of the way, part of it being that I should be able to customize it how I want to, something that OS X doesn't give me.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
Not in regulated environments, they don't. Users who try to do what they want in those environments can find themselves being escorted out of the building by security with their last paycheck and a promise to have their belongings shipped to them in hand.
No... IT shops have to do what their users need. If you did everything what your users wanted, you'd never get off the support line.
"Take it or Leave it"?
I would choose to leave it. Apple products, while "cool" and "neat" for the individual user, don't often work well in large enterprise environments.
This is just a fact of life.
Until better management tools are made to "manage" the apple devices / environment, they will still be a secondary (or greater) choice for enterprise environments.
Apple markets their devices to consumers first, and they provide enough support for businesses so their stuff is accepted. This is why Apple paid Microsoft and licensed the ActiveSync protocol, so their devices would get past the corporate blood/brain barrier (which before that, only Blackberries and Windows Mobile devices could cross.)
It is just not in Apple's model to do that much for the enterprise. The XServe did not sell well so it got pulled. Same with Apple's SAN hardware. Even the old Mac Pro doesn't seem to be selling well, and has not gotten a refresh in a long time.
Apple knows that it makes its bread and butter selling to the dedicated fans who have been camping out for days at their stores for the latest iGadget. They know that trying to pitch to the enterprise will have a "meh" response at best.
Another example of this is how Apple handles product releases. As an IT person, I can sign a NDA in blood, and get a roadmap from IBM or Oracle about what they plan to do for future products, when to make sure funds are available for model refreshes, and timing budget constraints. Apple doesn't offer this. There is no way to time when to have funds ready for a product refresh when it comes to Macs or iDevices.
[1]: Ideally, Apple would make a Mac Pro case that could work as a tower, but also fit horizontally into a rack with just a simple drawer style mounting kit (similar to the venerable Ultra 450s.)
I took the plunge and replaced my PC for 2 months with a Mac. My conclusion was that OSX was easily as fine as the Emperors New Cloths.
Recently I had to deal with Apple's App Store. Our agency's purchasing people had no idea how to handle the App Store as the purchase has to be done from the user's computer. I spoke with an Apple government rep and he admitted that things are not set up for companies unless you're buying at least 30 (?) of something. Our purchasing folks ended up giving me the department credit card (now, there's trust!) and let me make the purchase from my cubicle. Not that hard to deal with, but certainly not standard procedure...
I not only "tried" Apple gear and products, I have and still support them. I probably know a lot more about Linux and about MacOS than you. I guided a professional organization through the transition from MacOS9 to MacOSX and on. I know Apple intimately. I can tell you that what people think Apple is, often isn't the case. Most of it is hype and misplaced perceptions.
When you break a computer down to how it serves the interests and needs of a user, even you have to admit that Apple more or less requires that the user shift their needs and interests to fit within the Apple framework of products and services rather than the other way around. Apple is not particularly adaptable nor is it flexible. And if you disagree with this view, then you already disagree with Apple -- they say the same things themselves. "We tell users what they want" sound familiar?
Seriously, try one of Apple's products. It's not hard to see why they're so popular.
Of course you can see why they're popular, but it's not price or ignorance that keeps people from owning them, it's that it's never a one-size-fits-all solution.
And for Linux devs - try to make your stuff more like Apple's products.
Why? If you want stuff that's like Apple's products buy Apple's products.
Until better management tools are made to "manage" the apple devices / environment, they will still be a secondary (or greater) choice for enterprise environments.
While I agree that Apple is very much sitting on its hands here, there is no way to ignore iDevices. It's almost like an "Occupy IT" movement. And the users are relishing our squirming and cursing. And while I'm an sysadmin myself, I'd almost say we deserve it to be on the receiving end this time. It's a comically reversed situation to how it usually works: Users are requiring simple things, you know they aren't that simple and you can't do anything really but learn and work and adapt and curse. Wow, that *hurts*. *They* are the ones who traditionally had to swallow what we rained down on them.
Now *they* are smug and wave their iPads ("it just works") and we have to find a way to make them work and to manage them. How unfair is this? Now *we* are clicking through iTunes for *them*! What goes around comes around, really.
Apple is still a niche player. IT shops can easily buy elsewhere, and bring in policies that lock out employee-owned devices. How is this a good business model for Apple?
Apple is not a player in business and enterprise period and it's far too easy to buy elsewhere.
Apple products get met with one word from my department, unsupported.
When a user complains about not being able to use their Macbook because it cant log into half the systems we use the problem is theirs because the platform is unsupported. Having done mac support before, I'll quit before having to touch another mac. Mac solutions came in three types, 50% of the time it cant be done, 40% of the time it's a hack, 10% the feature was there but so poorly implemented it's still a pain to use let alone administer. Support was a pain, it took those "geniuses" at Apple a week to fix a blown PSU in an Imac, they didn't do collect and return let alone the on site next business day support I got from Dell, Lenovo, IBM and Toshiba. Worse yet are the users, when a virus makes it onto the network, most of the time it came from a Mac user forwarding Adobe_CS3_Crack.exe to someone.
So I have a very long list of reasons why Apple products are on the unsupported list.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Let me share my experience with OSX and "how great" it is.
Last summer, as part of some volunteer work I was doing, I was tasked with locking down about 100 user laptops. About 60-70 were Windows based, 1 was Linux, the rest were Apple.
The tasks were to set up full disk encryption (or as close as possible with the host OS), some kind of email encryption, set up the mail client, set up a Cisco (or equivalent) vpn client, and make sure the computers were generally up to snuff (updates and whatnot).
The Windows machines took maybe 3-4 hours each, if that. I spent the better part of a day and hashed together a program that automated 90% of the work, including the installation of many of the programs (through AutoIT scripting), which made most of the process hands-off. There were about a bazillion options for automation, forcing updates, scripted certificate installation, etc. We could have used a WSUS server, if we had desired (though we did not). The various OSes (XP, Vista 32/64, 7 32/64) basically worked the same; though there were some "if {os}=" clauses that had to be used, it was mostly for picking the proper executable (32bit Cisco vpn vs 64 bit).
The Linux machine was of course a PITA, since we did not know ahead of time we would be dealing with it.
Then there were the OSX computers. They were a gigantic PITA. How? Let me list the ways:
And there were various other quirks which branded OSX in my mind as "decent, with a decent CLI, but vastly overrated"; but the big issues were that the system really wasnt designed to be administered quickly in batches, and the documentation was very often less than stellar. For all the flak Windows gets for its registry, at least every bit of it is documented, and you can find articles out the wazoo about how to automate X on windows.
People talking about the new wave of OSX boxes on corporate networks are either bad admins, way more clever at this kind of thing than I am, or ignorant reporters. It might be a different story if there were a capability (on both the Windows Server, and the OSX client side) to launch logon scripts, and if those scripts could install printers and map network paths; call me when that happens.
'more accessible' is just a new speak term for "hide messy reality from user". this is not more accessible, it's LESS. it builds up a fantasy of expectations not inline with reality that blow up later when the user tries to interface with something/someone outside the apple garden. Of course, he blames that item/person for not playing by the rules he was sold when he bought is iThingy, but reality is NOT the apple garden. apple's assumption that correctly designed devices don't require user-configurability doesn't take into account the unrealistic input/expectations it breeds in its users. even the best engineered and objectively marketed equipment just breaks sometimes and an accessible way to service/fix the issue is needed. such garden mentalities can be ok for short term/extremely limited use items that have low expectations associated with them, but things like phones and computers are trending AWAY from such status.
the fallacy of equating an assumed incomprehensible complexity with unneeded complexity is what's killing growth in technology, especially in the consumer space. By all means, offer an easy to use interface for simple functions, but oversimplifying complex operations does nothing for the user when the designer's assumptions about said complexities fail the user. not only is the user left without what he needs, but he has no way of learning how to get it, and anyone he might ask for help is denied access to what they need. this is why apple sells the attitude along with the product.. it pushes the 'blame/pressure' from apple/its users onto everyone else to get into compliance..ie buy an apple. this is good for apple obviously, but bad for technology/society as a whole.
[The 2007 Mac OS X 10.5 Server EULA] permits OS X Server to run in a virtual machine (VM) as long as each VM is stocked with a different license and the physical system is Apple-made. The new rules don't apply to the client edition of Apple's operating system, which is still barred from being virtualized.
The Golden Master version of OS X Lion (10.7) just released to developers includes the final end-user licensing agreement (EULA) which reveals that users can run up to two additional instances of OS X Lion on their same machine without a need for extra licenses. From the 10.7 EULA:
(iii) to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software.
So apple needs to make a license change so you can use VMware on any hardware useing any base OS with out getting in license issues.
First, let me point out that Apple's model isn't even a fantastic fit for a family, using my own experience. In order to buy music through iTunes, which we do a fair bit of, we need an AppleID. For all the convenience features (like automatically downloading music that any of us buys, for instance), we have to use the same AppleID on all the computers/devices that we use for storing the music, listening to it, or loading it on the phones/iPods/etc. And even with iCloud, this works reasonably smoothly, because you can set one AppleID for your music and another for everything else, so that you can still share music but not, say, email.
OK, but that means that our playlists are shared (which we can deal with by using folders for our individual playlists), but so is the metadata. Mostly, that's a good thing, but what if my wife and I and my sons want to all rate the same song differently? Out of luck: the rating is shared. I could go on about what should be shared and what shouldn't, but the point is that Apple does not make it easy to share some things and not others even within a family. I imagine that trying to work AppleIDs and iDevices into an enterprise must be quite the nightmare from that point of view.
There are solutions to some such problems, and certainly different IT shops have different ways of doing things, which means that for some (including my current one), it's easy while for others it's a complete nightmare. Fundamentally, if you have an IT shop where integrating is easy, there's little reason not to do it. If you'd need Apple servers, or more control over devices (say, if you're regulated, or a government entity), then you're probably out of luck and should tell users — yes, even users like the C-level types — that they're welcome to use whatever they want, but IT cannot support it.
In some cases, this means that IT shops as we are used to them will have to dramatically change to accommodate their users. And in some cases, it means that the users will have to live with the restrictions. I can see some shops moving to a model where internal users are treated like external users, except that they have access to different resources through their (untrusted) network connection to the servers. VPNs would be unnecessary: just connect to resources directly over the network, "local" or remote, and be done with it. In other words, I could see some shops moving to a model that protects the data, but not the desktop. But I think other shops will likely have to dig in their heels, not because they want to be difficult, but because they cannot allow the kinds of practices that Apple would require. (Think of trying to manage a bank's customer data when you couldn't properly audit the machines used to access that data, and then think of trying to explain that to a bureaucrat.)
But in the end, I think that the general purpose computer in a decade or so will be far less common than today. Thin client devices, tablets and the like will replace a lot of computers simply because of cost, maintenance, training and business utility advantages intrinsic to the types. And that means that IT shops will lose a lot of the control that they have now over the user experience. They'll still keep control of the centralized data stores, certainly, but that may be the extent of it for a lot of shops. And that's not necessarily a bad thing: in truth, how many users really need something as powerful and flexible as a laptop? Maybe 10% — maybe? Well, why not make things cheaper and easier for the other 90%, even if it does make IT's job harder in some ways?
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
Apple's struggles in the mid 80's were on a couple of fronts. They didn't have a compelling set of business software, and botched the launch of the Macintosh Office with everything from slow availability to a terrible ad campaign. The Apple ][ and Mac divisions fought each other internally. And they built more expensive computers and demanded higher margins on them than their competitors, during a period where there was a massive price shake-out in the home computing market. The fundamental issue wasn't ignorance of what business users expected. It was failure to execute on delivering it, which went from product strategy mistakes to massive inventory mismanagement. John Sculley's "Odyssey" covers this period of Apple's history closely. The tried to win over the business market but just didn't do a very good job of it.
Nowadays, Apple is selling to consumers in droves and doesn't care at all about whatever traditional business IT departments want. They're not trying and failing this time; they're not even trying. The demand is coming up from individual people and pushing toward IT. In the 80's, there just wasn't enough demand to offset their production and R&D overhead.
Note the "lets say OmniGraffle".
That's why I gave you info on Omnigraffle.
Pick an app which is only distributed via the App Store. Say, the Blink SIP soft phone.
It looks like Blink will even give you a pre-configured and branded version if you want to approach them for a volume licence.
http://icanblink.com/inquiries.phtml
As I say, the Mac is no more a walled garden than Windows or Linux. Software vendors can supply you with software any way the choose to on any of those platforms. Some obviously choose to only do so via the Mac App Store, because if you're an indie developer it's so much easier. But any app that's got the potential for enterprise use is going to be supplied by the company in a form that is accessible by the enterprise.
Um... so define "regulated". Until five months ago I worked for a Federal Government Contractor, held a security clearance, and did work day to day on classified machines. My workplace was piloting the use of iPhones for e-mail and corporate access when I left. Of course you couldn't put classified information on them, but you couldn't put classified information laptops either, so that's not saying much. There's all kinds of rules for what you can and can't do regarding classified, but for unclassified uses, iPhones are likely as common as Blackberries and laptops there now.
My brother works for a hospital. Out side of the government, probably the most regulated industry in the country. He has a work issued iPad. Again, it's not allowed to contain patient information but neither are any other phones or portable devices that leave the hospital. I currently work for an international security company. We use iPhones for e-mail and corporate messaging.
Indeed, the only "regulated" industry that I can't claim at least some insider knowledge of is finance, so maybe that the one you're thinking of... Otherwise "regulated industry" is caving to user desire to use iDevices and Android in the workplace.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
I actually own some apple hardware. It's really nice stuff but then it costs a lot of money so it should be. What bothers me is that the OS isn't what it could be. It's better than Windows in my opinion but really I remember putting Snow Leopard on my Dell 1545 just for kicks. It ran well on there and everything worked well and I played with it a week and then wiped it and went back to Linux. I had a Powerbook at the time that I used for iMovie and a couple of other Mac applications, I loved the hardware it was really nice but I really didn't like Leopard that much. I can buy nice Intel hardware a lot cheaper for similar equipment without the apple on the case and after I wipe the malware it comes with off and install Linux I'm much happier than I am with OS X. I'm not sure what's up with the interface but it seems sluggish to me....like their is lag in it or something. I still use OS X occasionally as I picked up a 2008 macbook for iMovie but with Openbox getting better I'm thinking of selling it off. I want to like OS X but it's so hard to. Maybe I'm just spoiled.
It does not take great genius to detect an obvious shill.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I think the point is that the King User (i.e. CTO), if they become an Apple user, will dictate that the IT shop *will* support Apple products.
So what you're saying is that you have experience administering Windows boxes, but not much for other OSes? Excuse me if I can't take your experience as neutral, fact based review of Apple products (or Linux for that matter) if you were unable to find the FileVault encryption options in the Security Preference pane. In = 10.6, that's user home folder encryption, in 10.7+, it's one-click full disk encryption. And the Registry being less arcane than plist files...? And apparently you haven't looked into Automator at all...?
Bitten Apples are still better than dirty Windows...
You really sound like someone who's supported Windows for years, learning the little details like hashing together a program to automate your workflow.
Yet you don't have any clue about the Mac, and that makes it hard. Somehow, that's OS X's fault.
VPN issues are VPN company issues. Ask them to write the software?
There is full disk encryption. http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4790
What the hell is launch on startup? Google shows nothing. Launch at login is a user preference that's been around for a decade. It doesn't make the computer slow.
Never had any issues importing certificates across all those versions of OS X.
defaults settings are well documented. http://secrets.blacktree.com/
There's also things like radmind that would probably be much better at doing what you want. But your ignorance led you astray.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
The built in encryption on OSX is FileVault, and in Lion it does full disk encryption.
The preferences vs registry thing just sounds like Windows was easier for you than OSX because you know Windows. The registry is a the very worst feature of Windows, and I don't know anyone that didn't learn computing on Windows that would dream of praising it.
All of that stuff is included in a modern Linux distro by default. I'm on Fedora and for the Cisco VPN client, all you need is to "yum install vpnc".
:. Ultimate Control Dedicated/VM Servers
It was the whole "general good" thing which was waaay too flowery IMHO. ya ever notice what trips the shills is always buzzwords? its like there is some script written by a PHB and they have to get "enhanced experience" or "synergy" or "vertical integration' in there or the shocky monkey hits them with the cattle prod.
As for Enterprise and Apple? no, is that clear enough? Apple made it clear when they killed their X-Serve server line and made FCP into iMovie Pro that they didn't give a flying crap about the enterprise they are a CONSUMER company, okay? CONSUMER, not business. Not that i blame them, its a smart move as their financials show quite clearly. they are THE consumer electronic maker to beat, much like Sony was with Walkman in the 80s with everyone trying to whip off knockoffs just hoping to pick up some of the scraps. But they gave up on the enterprise awhile back folks, if their stuff works there? Fine, but don't expect them to really give a crap one way or the other as you're not the target market anymore than IBM is gonna waste time trying to sell mainframes to high schools. Frankly business is small fry compared to the worldwide consumer electronics market and that is why MSFT is getting ready to shoot themselves in the face with Win 8, aka WinTab, because they are so desperate to get some of the action.
So the bottom line is if you manage to get that iPad or iPhone to work for your enterprise fine and dandy, just don't expect Apple to waste any real effort to make you happy, you just aren't a big enough fish. Sorry.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Right, because buying a third party accessory that connects via wireless that needs its separate charger that makes the phone more bulky is really the most elegant solution! Plus an extra price tag!
No thank you, I'll stick with my nice Android phone with things like that built in standard.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
I dunno, how many people wanted voice commands on their phone before the iphone 4s came out?
I think Apple tells people what they want quite successfully.
Its not that these people secretly wanted it but didn't know it - more like they didn't want it until they saw it, and then they wanted it.
Its clever, and it seems to work very well for Apple.
This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
Apple's philosophy is that they control the devices they sell. Enterprise customers insist that the enterprise control all of the devices on their network. Apple refuses to design/sell devices that they do not have control over. This is an irresolvable conflict.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
OSX machines can be administered via. OSX admins or Unix admins. Trying to admin a Unix, be it Solaris, AIX, Linux or OSX like a Windows machine is genuine a load of suck.
1) OSX versions have a 2 year lifespan. You cannot write your instructions in typical Windows "click here" style.
2) FileVault included does Full disk encryption on OSX. Prior to 10.7 PGP WDE worked fine.
3) The way to script changes in you would click through is using the AppleScript browser and automater. You can read off from there the various changes possible. Other than that, yes you need to use defaults and you can google that stuff.
4) The way you are supposed to do what you were trying to do is with OSX server which offers automatic admin and config.
Abstract: Apple is making boatloads of money selling stuff to people. Reconfiguring the company into an enterprise services firm is an unacceptable risk.
'Waaaay back in the day, I was invited to an Apple roadmap presentation for the various big Mac users in the greater LA area (mainly aerospace corps). Dating myself, the main heads up was the upcoming Mac IIfx. The current sealed lips paradigm wasn't always graven in stone.
But, that was before Windows 95 almost ate Apple's lunch, and Macs got kicked to the curb across "the enterprise"... almost simultaneously across North America. Almost as quickly, the ecosystem of Mac-related enterprise solution vendors ditched the platform. When Jobs returned to refocus the company's direction, the focus was on what he had left to work with: consumers (with bones thrown to graphics/video/audio pros). You could see this in his original product mix: iMac, iBook, the restyled G4 mini-towers, and eventually the iPod.
This ended up working so well that quite a few consumers really wanted to haul their Apple gear back to the enterprise... which is how Apple first got there, one MacPlus at a time. Now, with the iPhones and Pads, people aren't just sneaking their toys in, they're putting in purchase orders, and the IT departments are forced to adjust.
It's not completely unreasonable for them to ask Apple to rework their products to make this a bit easier. It may happen, but I wouldn't hold my breath: Apple isn't equipped to service the enterprise, and doesn't want to spend the money to make it happen. The boys and girls in Cupertino would need to spend tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars to set up the hardware/software/people infrastructure - more or less from scratch - to provide reasonable enterprise marketing and support.
And why? There's not all that much profit in selling to the enterprise, except in services. Virtually *all* of the non-Asian computer vendors have reconfigured themselves into enterprise services companies that just happened to sell some hardware/software for them to integrate, and the Asian companies are on the same path.
Apple, meanwhile, is making a boatload of money selling hardware/software to people. There is plenty of foreseeable risk and little known upside to reengineering themselves into the likes of IBM/HP/Dell.
Luke, help me take this mask off
It's really nice stuff but then it costs a lot of money so it should be.
1996 calling, it wants it's mime back. I dare you to configure Dell, HP, and Leveno products so it will have similar specs to a Mac then compare prices. I did precisely that before ordering the MacBook Pro I'm typing this on. Of them the cheapest was a brand I hadn't heard of before, it was $50 cheaper. The Dell, and I tried Alienware which Dell bought out, cost about $200 more. HP's offering cost more too. Because I planned on installing Ubuntu to dual-boot I also checked out compatibility. The one thing that makes it more difficult to install Ubuntu is using EFI, the GUID Partition Table (GPT), and installing Ubuntu on an HFS+ formatted partition. I'll install Lucid Lynx (Ubuntu 10.04) onto the internal HDD, Oops, there another problem I'll install Oneiric Ocelot (Ubuntu 11.10) onto a USB external drive which presents it's own problems.
What bothers me is that the OS isn't what it could be. It's better than Windows in my opinion but really I remember putting Snow Leopard on my Dell 1545 just for kicks.
That's your personal opinion, others love Snow Leopard. My MBP came with Tiger and it was about 4 months after Leopard came out before I upgraded. The only reason I did was because Java 6 would only run on Leopard, at least without a bunch of hacking. And as I was a member of Apple Developer Connection (ADC) Leopard was free. When Snow Leopard came out it took me a couple of months before buying it, heck it only cost $29. But it took a few more months before I actually installed it. Although Lion has been out for a while, released on 20 July 2011, I still have not bought or upgraded to it.
I want to like OS X but it's so hard to.
I do like OSX, what I have a harder tyme with is liking Apple. It makes, er designs, terrific hardware a programs great software. With the exception of the Mac though it only takes others ideas then releases its own products. And even with hardware Apple is falling behind. While consumer Macs have had more than one revision since the summer of 2010 the Mac Pro has not been upgraded. Try looking for a Sandy Bridge Mac Pro and you won't find one. One rumor has it Apple will Kill Mac Pros just like they did to the XServe. Since they did they've pushed shops to use Mac Minis for servers, but a Mini can't handle tasks the Pro has no problems with. Of course other rumors have it that Minis with Thunderbolt can have external graphics cards as well as storage attached enabling them to be used instead of Mac Pros. As it is now I'd like to get another MacBook Pro but I don't think I will buy any other Apple product.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
People have been wanting voice for years. I have used voice recognition 10+ years ago. It sucked. It's an option in Windows (I gave it an honest try a few times, and it was mostly unusable, as there was always too much background noise or such that I couldn't ever get to the level where dictation worked better than 50%). People have been wanting it for a long time. My 5 year old phone has voice dialing. People want voice. They knew they wanted voice. Everyone who's seen TNG and watched characters effortly ask the computer to do something wanted voice (and voiced my Majel as well). They know they don't want voice as done by anyone else previously, as "call home" worked less than 50% of the time for me, and calling "Nick" got my home number more than "home" ever did. But lots of people have used voice commands in some manner or another (or at least owned a device capable of it). Taking "old" ideas that failed from poor implementation previously and doing them right and selling the idea that Apple does it right is what they succeed at. They target wants that nobody else is addressing, and try to then convince people that it is what they were missing. Since voice was done so poorly before, people wanted it, but didn't really want it anymore, as it could be as bad as the last time they tried it.
Learn to love Alaska
I took the plunge in 2004 and replaced my PC for four years with a Mac.
I mostly use PCs now because I mostly use laptops now, and my current desktop runs Linux (it's just a server these days).
OS-wise?
I prefer Linux for my server goodies (unless I really want it locked-down hard, then it's FreeBSD all the way). I recently put Linux on my laptop (HDD crash, gave me all the excuse I needed to get rid of Windows on it, etc).
Sometimes, I miss using OSX: It gave me a slick-assed UI coupled with a nice and powerful terminal environment. It's efficient as hell. I can get good apps for it (and until recently, OSX or Windows were your only real choices for CG hobby work).
But...
OSX has its disadvantages (file/folder merging, anyone? And yes I know about ditto - it sucks. Also, a dual G5 tower makes an excellent (and literal) room-heater in the winter, but a lousy one in the summer). It has its advantages (e.g. running OSX 10.3 for six years straight without bit-rot or needing a re-install, and still having the latest apps to that time run just as snappy on it).
Linux has its disadvantages (for the love of all that is holy - WTF will it take to get a DECENT .pdf editor!?). It has its advantages (I can modify the unholy shit out of it to my tastes - BTW, I'm installing fluxbox on this thing when I get a few spare hours this week).
Windows has its disadvantages (...do I need to count them all? Really? That's like 3 hours of typing...) It has its advantages (you can get apps for anything in it, and they generally work if you need them to).
Long story short? The OS wars are pretty much over. Your OS is just about as exciting as the engine in your car. Nobody outside of a few hobbyists really give a shit anymore about what's under the hood, as long as it runs.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
This is probably a big problem in big IT shops. They hire Windows experts by the truckload at a large discount. They don't need to know much, they just need the right certificates and be able to play politics (ie, don't rock the boat). So they end up with people who know all the right stuff about Windows that they learned in night school, they've been constantly bombarded with MS marketing literatures about the right solutions to use, etc. Ask them to do something with Macs or Linux or BSD and they're completely baffled, this is outside of their realm of comfort (not to mention the looks of horror when someone is using DOS or Windows 3.1 for legacy purposes).
To be fair they do learn a lot of Windows skills and are instantly able to take these skills to the next company they go to and instantly be productive. Learning about Macs does not help their lateral mobility that much.
It happens in management too, we had the only IT people who knew Macs well laid off despite a significant chunk of our company using Macs exclusively.
Of course Apple support is ludicrous as well. Bad hard drive means you literally take the machine to an Apple Store ($TM) and wait for a replacement, and Apple Stores ($TM) are not set up to deal with enterprise users and are more suited to trying to up-sell accessories.
Dude, the whole job of software is to "hide messy reality from the user", otherwise the user would still be doing everything by hand. We have a fantastic device that can do many millions of things faster than a human can do one. Don't get me wrong, Apple certainly errs on the side of over simplification and preventing power users from configuring what they want. But building in systems that permit users to avoid worrying about external(to them) complexities is nearly the whole point of what we do.
I also disagree with your statement that the "fallacy of equating an assumed incomprehensible complexity with uneeded complexity is what's killing growth in technology". On the other hand, I totally agree with your subsequent statements surrounding what Developers *should do*, however I see no evidence of the drain on growth in the market.
If there is a market (money) need for the power user UI, the market will eventually produce it barring severe ongoing shortage of qualified engineers. When there is a shortage of workers, they will pick to work on either the most exciting, or the most profitable targets.
Power-User UI is what you expect from internal tools. The software industry's infancy was basically *internal tools* packaged and dumped into the market. The fact that power-user UIs are disappearing (are they? -- at least in relative concentration vs simpleton UI) is a symptom of the maturation of the software industry, for maximizing breadth of reach. The unnecessary sharp edges of Power tools are what gets polished and removed as various products improve.
Physical analogy: Circular saws usually have a finger guard around the blade these days. The finger guard does sometimes get in the way of work. Is this a sign that the tool has been dumbed down? Or that the design was polished for market appeal? Internal tools get the job done at the expense of such polish. Published tools in a mature industry have exactly the sharp edges they need for the people they are selling to.
Gravity Sucks
suicide death at foxconn apple factories is LOWER than at foxconn factories for Dell, HP, and others the NYTimes reports.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
OS X 10.5 and later on Intel is official Open-Group-certified UNIX. It's not "built on top of UNIX", it is UNIX.
Apple is still a niche player.
Yes it is, so long as your definition of "niche player" is "the biggest maker of PCs in the world".
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/30/apple-becomes-worlds-biggest-maker-of-computers-thanks-to-ipad/
Thanks for falling into the trap AC.
Chevron 2011 profit = $26.5
Apple 2011 profit = $25.9 B
The difference is, Chevron will consistently post high profits, Apple is a bubble waiting to burst.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
This is ridiculous. You can manage that amount of iOS devices with a single account and using the iPhone configuration utility can push settings and security policies to the phones themselves. You haven't done your research as this is a simple matter to read up on apple's own website. I know this b/c we use it here at work!
I tried Mac. They suck.
We thank you for your informed, reasoned, and thorough commentary.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
And when he visited Xerox Parc, he stole a box of raisins.
I was there in 1996 when Apple abandoned the server market. We had just bought 2 of the re-branded IBM/Apple servers for our graphics department. They ran AIX and a bunch of third party apps to make the Apples talk to one another in some sort of reasonable fashion. They abandoned those servers within a year, and pretty much screwed us and our $250,000 investment. I have never again even thought about Apple for an enterprise back end (despite their trying to get me to look on occasion). That's almost 20 years of a no-sale from me, and I have since bought millions and millions of dollars worth of I.T. equipment.