Slashdot Mirror


Apple Partners With Cisco To Boost Enterprise Business

An anonymous reader writes: Apple and Cisco announced a partnership aimed at helping Apple's devices work better for businesses. Cisco will provide services specially optimized for iOS devices across mobile, cloud, and on premises-based collaboration tools such as Cisco Spark, Cisco Telepresence and Cisco WebEx, the companies said in a statement. "What makes this new partnership unique is that our engineering teams are innovating together to build joint solutions that our sales teams and partners will take jointly to our customers," Cisco Chief Executive Chuck Robbins said in a blog post.

90 comments

  1. Making Some Changes to This Story by Greyfox · · Score: 2, Funny

    Apple partners with Crisco to make a delicious pie!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Making Some Changes to This Story by antdude · · Score: 1

      Crisco? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  2. Not surprising by phayes · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Cisco Engineers massively prefer Macs over PCs to the point that those that use anything other than Macs are rare. By improving their products on Macs, they are helping their employees even before any clients are considered.

    --
    Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    1. Re:Not surprising by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 2

      Sun Microsystems was that way too. Everyone had Macs (except for sales force). Then when we went to the Big-O, we all had to install the corporate XP image on VBox (or Fusion) to do our work...

      --
      Karma: Bad
    2. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Bullshit, then why does cisco employees hate Macs so much that their employees constantly spit at people that have them? I live not far from their headquarters in San Jose, and their employees hate me and my family for using MacBooks. They hate us. One of them screamed at my daughter and made her cry recently. They hate us. I have never seen one of their kind with an Apple product. You can just tell their employees by the eyes. They always have such cruel eyes, like a Republican.

    3. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sysadmins I know who administer cisco shops hate 'em because of limited to no technical/administrative documentation for the OS. This makes it difficult to integrate them into enterprise environments. This comes from apple's walled garden ignorance standpoint, where the answer is to buy into more of their ecosystem so it 'just works.' Corporates are not going to do this.

      Obviously an anecdote, as I assume your statement is.

    4. Re:Not surprising by kolbe · · Score: 1

      Considering we just had Cisco LIVE! San Diego, I'll call bullshit on this as well. The number of Dell, Lenovo and other laptops/tablets was conservatively equal to or optimistically greater to Macs for several reasons:

      First and foremost: Most companies do not include Mac's in their company approved machine acquisition list.
      Second: They are STILL not natively compatible with a lot of software without running Fusion or similar.

      I will admit that they are popular machines, but I digress in stating they are not "massively preferred"... At least not by the companies themselves. From a personal networking perspective, I hate Bonjour and AppleTV with a passion and find them both as bad as AppleTalk was a decade ago in useless traffic sent across the line. Here's hoping Cisco outright slaps them into shutting those services up.

    5. Re:Not surprising by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I worked at a place once where whole floors of the QA building had Sparc Workstations. I guess we know why Sun failed on the desktop, now.

    6. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story bro. But what does it have to do with iOS devices which the summary says this is about? Did you forget that Macs run OSX and not iOS?

    7. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to call BULLSHIT on your statement. We have cisco techs here regularly. none of them use mac's they use either windows or Linux nearly exclusively. (one of them had a personal mac but that wasn't for work).

    8. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Those system admins are incompetent. There is plenty of documentation for both support and development related activities, including training and certification. You can find all the training documentation for IT certification on Apple's website.

    9. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple in the enterprise is not limited right now by the network related communication and compatibility, or anything Cisco makes that can be fixed.

      When a group of 2 desktop engineers can manage 1000+ Apple computers (update and tweak trivial things, install and manage packages, patches, new software, functionality, manage encryption and removable drive access, tweaks etc) around the world from their desk, Apple will take over in the enterprise. Until then, it will be people using their Apple with Citrix or some other method to access a corporate virtual desktop or a sandboxed app delivery system remotely running.

    10. Re:Not surprising by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      Cisco Engineers massively prefer Macs over PCs to the point that those that use anything other than Macs are rare. By improving their products on Macs, they are helping their employees even before any clients are considered.

      I have no idea where you got this idea from. The vast majority of Cisco engineers that I know use Windows PCs for the simple reason that there is a much wider array of network analysis, management, and utilities for Windows. Not to mention drivers. Most of us are more interested in designing, configuring, and troubleshooting our networks and don't have time to mess around with UNIX drivers, etc. just to get a network tool to work.

    11. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? I also worked at Sun. In our division, 90% or more of us used Linux. 5 years after the Oracle acquisition, it's still roughly 90% Linux.

      On those occasions when I need to do Windows-specific testing, there's always VBox. And Macs aren't even on the radar.

    12. Re:Not surprising by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      I was at cisco during the last year and, yes, it was amazing how many silver aluminum laptops I saw 'walking around'. 100:1 or 50:1 to pc's.

      while there, I took some employee training and one class was almost entirely international exchange students (there for a whole year at a time, I'm told). 99% of them had apple laptops.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    13. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. Apple has no real enterprise support and no 'just works' solutions. They are find in a stand alone environment but I much prefer Linux to do any real work. crApple is still alive and well. Microsoft is still the easiest and 'just works' but, yeah, has its own problems. But the worst choice is always Apple

    14. Re:Not surprising by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      macs at sun? when was that?

      I was at sun right before oracle killed them and in engineering, it was all tower sun workstations. sunblade this and netra that (for those doing netra work).

      and at sgi, we had o2's and octanes.

      at DEC, we had decstations and vaxstations.

      I liked it when there was computer diversity like that. I really do miss using real unix boxes instead of (sigh) windows windows windows! in the corp world, you only get to pick win or apple, now.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    15. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a cisco employee, me and everyone I work with are using macbook pro's..

      all the best network utilities are unix based, cant do crap with windows.

    16. Re: Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to bring your own Mac, but they are fully supported by the company provided full-disk encryption is activated and some corporate software is installed.

      Aside from that, I'm sure the company would prefer OEL running on every employee computer over Windows...

    17. Re:Not surprising by kolbe · · Score: 1

      "I am a cisco employee"... Because "Anonymous Coward" would never lie, right?

      Further, even if you were "a cisco employee", you would most likely have been at Cisco Live! San Diego in July and guess what? For all the black and white fedora wearing network nerds that were there, they were not all using "Macbooks" there, not even close. Heck, even Mike Rowe was sporting a Dell laptop the night of the Aerosmith concert outside the gate at the VIP entrance!

      To further down your comment: Cisco isn't the end-all-be-all of networking... You've had too much Kool-Aide.

    18. Re:Not surprising by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      How many were running OS X though? I know a few people who buy Apple hardware, but run a different main OS, just because the Apple hardware is better than 99% of what you can find in the PC notebook market and the 1% that is in the same league as Apple is just as, if not more, expensive.

    19. Re:Not surprising by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      what is big o

    20. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who knows if the OP was there or not but Cisco has like 70K employees around the world. I HIGHLY doubt that "most likely" a large percentage of them were there. If Cisco Live is anything like VMWorld or EMC World, a lot of the people wearing the company logo shirts are direct hired hands to support the conference. I'm not talking about the people handing out food and cleaning up the garbage either.

    21. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tons of unacknowledged wireless issues in their forums suggest otherwise. If something doesn't work with a dell or lenovo, they're usually quick to fix.. If they cant/won't, it's at least possible to swap out the misbehaving component for something that does work.

      Apple doesn't want the public to know the details of its systems. It wants people to buy into their complete ecosystem. That's just not going to happen because it doesn't scale to large deployments. This attitude is also found in mystery media format support (their answer: use itunes/quicktime to reencode), making it difficult for the rest of the world to encode video that won't end up being reencoded.

    22. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why the ones who know anything use linux or bsd on their portable 'admin' machines.

    23. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous or not, he could lie. Anonymity has nothing to do with it.

    24. Re:Not surprising by phayes · · Score: 1

      Everyone in my experience that uses Macs at Cisco also uses OSX as rMBPs are the most popular model used and only OSX has stable support for hot plugging thunderport devices. The people who prefer Linux/Windows use Dell/HPs. That said, everyone uses VMware so if they need Linux/windows its there too.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    25. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oracle - they acquired Sun Microsystems in 2010.

    26. Re:Not surprising by mab · · Score: 1

      Funny, at Cisco LIVE! Melbourne Macs seemed to be in the majority. Our sales rep and engineer also use them

    27. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous or not, he could lie. Anonymity has nothing to do with it.

      Heck, if he worked for Cisco Sales, we know he'd lie.

    28. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. Apple has no real enterprise support and no 'just works' solutions. They are find in a stand alone environment but I much prefer Linux to do any real work. crApple is still alive and well. Microsoft is still the easiest and 'just works' but, yeah, has its own problems. But the worst choice is always Apple

      But the thing is I don;t know anyone who's actually used Microsoft support. Even the most tech savvy admins I've worked with have at one time been willing to run a script that modifies the registry despite the fact that it came from a 14 year old. Anytime I've suggested contacting Microsoft, I get a look of horror from the very people extol the virtues of Windows.

      That being said, there are a lot of lazy IT people who just want to deal with Windows and nothing else so they talk crap about other operating systems.

    29. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft has top-notch support for their business products available by phone. Especially if you use Microsoft's business-critical support team. They don't mess around. If you declare an outage and go to business critical support they will stay on with you 24 hours a day (they have a process for switching engineers) until things are resolved one way or the other. This is true even at smaller companies (I've used it at companies with 50 people and 1,000).

    30. Re:Not surprising by Macrat · · Score: 1

      I guess we know why Sun failed on the desktop, now.

      SGI took over the desktop?

    31. Re:Not surprising by Macrat · · Score: 1

      Huh? I also worked at Sun. In our division, 90% or more of us used Linux.

      You're the few. Even the Solaris team used Macs running Solaris x86.

    32. Re:Not surprising by Macrat · · Score: 1

      macs at sun? when was that?

      Right after Apple switched from PPC to Intel. There was so much demand for Mac laptops that IT spun up a program to provide them internally.

    33. Re:Not surprising by kolbe · · Score: 1

      The San Francisco based "Cisco-ians" all use MacBooks for sure, but as I said, there were just as many official Cisco employees using Dell laptops to host sessions. I actually asked someone this morning why Cisco has a love for Apple and their response actually doesn't surprise me now that I know:

      "Because they (Apple) have a non-compete with us and they make good hardware, duh! Unlike, say Dell w/ NetGear & HP with 3Com/ProCurve, Apple doesn't make switches and routers that compete with our product lines. That's why".

      I also found out that almost half of them run Linux lol.

    34. Re:Not surprising by macs4all · · Score: 1

      The sysadmins I know who administer cisco shops hate 'em because of limited to no technical/administrative documentation for the OS. This makes it difficult to integrate them into enterprise environments. This comes from apple's walled garden ignorance standpoint, where the answer is to buy into more of their ecosystem so it 'just works.' Corporates are not going to do this.

      Obviously an anecdote, as I assume your statement is.

      Your "sysadmins" need to learn to read. I found this "front door" Business/Educational Deployment Support page in two minutes of searching on Apple's website, with no idea where to start looking.

      And having tried to find (most times without success) ANY information in the morass that is Microsoft's "technical documentation", and the NON-EXISTENT Linux Technical Documentation (man pages don't count, and BTW, OS X has them, too), I MUCH prefer Apple's "Library-like" approach. Most of the time, I can find the answer to a technical question about OS X or iOS within about 5 minutes or less. Sure, there are exceptions where I have to cast out to the interwebs; but as I said, most of the time I can go to either support.apple.com or developer.apple.com and get a clear, cogent and on-point answer within a few minutes.

      In stark contrast to Apple, in the Microsoft world (where I have to work as an a Windows Application Developer), I dread it every single time I have to TRY to find something in their shitty excuse for documentation. Most of the time, all you get is articles that refer to other articles that refer to other articles that end up in a dead fucking link! I can count on one hand the number of times in over 30 years that I have encountered a dead link on Apple's support site (even when they switched over from the old tn-based support system a number of years ago).

    35. Re:Not surprising by macs4all · · Score: 1

      When a group of 2 desktop engineers can manage 1000+ Apple computers (update and tweak trivial things, install and manage packages, patches, new software, functionality, manage encryption and removable drive access, tweaks etc) around the world from their desk, Apple will take over in the enterprise. Until then, it will be people using their Apple with Citrix or some other method to access a corporate virtual desktop or a sandboxed app delivery system remotely running.

      You're in luck! That day is Today! (or actually, about a decade or so ago).

      ARD (Apple Remote Desktop) is a SPECTACULAR way to manage a group of Macs. I think it actually started more as a way to monitor/manage classrooms-full of Macs (in fact, they used to have a view (maybe still do) in the ARD Management Console that shows a real-time view of however-many Macs you want at a time, and you can "zoom in" on one to do stuff/chat with its User. Think the old-skool "Language Labs", where the teacher could monitor/talk with each student directly over their headsets); but, over the years, ARD has grown into a full-fledged remote management and deployment system that the Windows and Linux admins should be so lucky as to have at their disposal.

      Take a few minutes and really explore all the tabs on the above-linked Page. I think you will agree that this is a very robust and well-thought out management system. BTW, the ARD Client is free, and the Management Console is only $60, IIRC (in previous years, it was more like $299, which still isn't bad for a management system targeted at business/education).

      And combined with technologies such as NetBoot, I can't see why the IT world in general is so Mac-hostile. ARD is a sysadmin's Dream!

      Oh wait! It's called "Protecting the Computer Priesthood". Which is the same reason that IT guys generally LOVE Linux.

    36. Re:Not surprising by phayes · · Score: 1

      As I said elsewhere in this thread, I'm a Cisco partner & work regularly with their engineers & people sent from the US for workshops here in Paris. The users of non-Apple hardware are rare enough to be remarkable. As for your uniformed opinion that we don't have the tools on OS X to do our jobs, lets chalk that up to your ignorance of just what tools are available and an assumption on your part that if it isn't the same tool as under windows then it doesn't exist.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    37. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's been around for years, it is MAINLY for remote support and what limited functionality it can do with software packages and changing, locking down, and management settings is very minimal. No doubt it works great in a small environment like a classroom or maybe even a small campus where support is the main goal but it is no comparison to what is available in the world for managing Windows machines.

      When you are part of a team of 2 that manages (not talking about tier 1 and 2 support when users have problems) 1000 desktops and laptops around the world, let me know which methods you think are better.
      Try seamlessly moving the location of their network synchronized home directory to another storage/network location for practice

    38. Re:Not surprising by macs4all · · Score: 1

      That's been around for years, it is MAINLY for remote support and what limited functionality it can do with software packages and changing, locking down, and management settings is very minimal. No doubt it works great in a small environment like a classroom or maybe even a small campus where support is the main goal but it is no comparison to what is available in the world for managing Windows machines.

      When you are part of a team of 2 that manages (not talking about tier 1 and 2 support when users have problems) 1000 desktops and laptops around the world, let me know which methods you think are better. Try seamlessly moving the location of their network synchronized home directory to another storage/network location for practice

      I mentioned that it had been around for years; but I don't agree with one other word of your post.

      It is precisely designed to admin huge numbers of Macs, as well as Windows and Linux machines, anywhere they can be reached, including over the internet. It even includes switchable AES encryption for network traffic; so even if a VPN is not available, you can safely admin remote systems. That's a far cry from your assertions.

      Also, far from your claims that ARD is mainly for "remote support" (which is actually such a broad term that I cannot discern what you really mean); but assuming you mean like Citrix' "GoToAssist", which us so wonderful you can't even cut and paste between the admin and the target, and only works between one pair of endpoints per session, or something like Goverlan, which is nowhere near as capable as ARD, and is far more expensive, or Microsoft's RSAT, which is only for Servers, or DameWare, which seems about equal to ARD, at least for Windows systems; but which would be $700 for your hypothetical two-technician setup, vs. $160 for ARD for the same two licenses, I would say that, with these specs, and a price of only $79 for unlimited Client systems, ARD neatly wins, hands down.

      But since a video is worth 1,000 x 30 x VideoLengthInSeconds words, here is a nice 939 second video (that's 28,170,000 words-worth) showing ARD in action.

      And, finally, addressing your "challenge": Since you can setup an Account for Remote Admin, and because you can either Remotely Run the Terminal App and/or Run Command Line scripts on the Remote machine, moving someone's Home Folder should be as simple as this.

      Next!

    39. Re:Not surprising by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Sorry for Replying to my own Post; but here is a TWO HOUR VIDEO (!!!!!) of a Seminar on ARD given by Penn State's IT Department.

      I think this will neatly belie the allegation that ARD is some sort of lightweight Remote Admin tool with "limited functionality".

  3. If they are giving it away, fine. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but why should anyone have to pay more extra for Apple products?

    1. Re:If they are giving it away, fine. by macs4all · · Score: 1

      but why should anyone have to pay more extra for Apple products?

      Because there is actually a real difference between price and value. Something that is sadly misunderstood among some of the Slashdot crowd.

  4. Apple givin-away-givin-away by turkeydance · · Score: 0

    Cisco don't need no Apple badges.

  5. Walled garden dynamic duo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/match_made_in_hell

    The allure of making even bigger bucks shouldn't always dictate infrastructure designs. This is a worse idea than Apple partnering with your gas/electric utility companies.

    I like this type of cooperation better.
    http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/solutions/collateral/data-center-virtualization/openstack-at-cisco/linux-containers-white-paper-cisco-red-hat.pdf
    https://www.lpi.org/cisco-networking-academy-adopts-course-aligned-to-lpi-linux-essentials-certificate/

    In the long run you have a totally better situation with Linux over Apple. (noteworthy is Windows 10 has the global end-user-spyware dept. covered.)

    1. Re:Walled garden dynamic duo? by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      It's a rough news day. This press release is another meaningless Apple Tries To Wear A Suit And Tie tome. Coming just behind the "Oh Gosh I loved Windows 95", post, it must be another dozer week-before-a-US-Federal-Holiday Monday.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    2. Re:Walled garden dynamic duo? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      In the long run you have a totally better situation with Linux over Apple.

      Until you want support. Then its RHEL or ???

      And RHEL sort of defeats the whole idea of Linux as a F/OSS OS, doesn't it?

    3. Re:Walled garden dynamic duo? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      This press release is another meaningless Apple Tries To Wear A Suit And Tie tome.

      I don't know how long, or how closely, you have been following Apple news. But to those who have been watching, this is one of the extremely rare times you will find an "Apple in business"-type story. In fact, if you wanted solid proof that Steve Jobs has left the building, this is it.

      Under Jobs, Apple blatantly ignored the business-end of its business. Witness the fact that Jobs basically starved the Server version of OS X, and the hardware to run it on, until the hardware was killed-off outright, and OS X Server became just a package of utilities to be added to OS X "client".

      But Apple isn't stupid. The massive influx of iOS devices (and Macs, too) in business environments has (finally!!!!) made them sit-up-and-take-notice.

      Under Jobs, one of Apple's mantras was that "IBM was teh evilz!" and represented everything that Apple was not. However, as I said above, the BYOD movement in corporate America (and in other places, too) has caused many, many, many Apple products to spend at least part of their days being part of corporate networks, working in Exchange-Based email/calendaring environments, and so forth.

      So, while not exactly enjoying that suit-and-tie, Apple is finding ways to make their products work, and even excel, in the business world.

      Bottom line: Watch out Windows; because Apple has quietly been displacing your foothold in business, and in an increasing number of small businesses, there isn't a Windows computer to be found. Don't believe it? Watch Shark Tank, The Profit, and other "Millionaire-Maker" type shows, and just pay attention to the percentage of (usually covered-over) Apple Logos and OS X Desktop screenshots there are. It's truly amazing. And because the Logos are covered over, you can be assured that Apple isn't providing those computers as "set dressing".

      So, there really is change in the air, particularly in "young" businesses. And that change is moving solidly in Apple's direction.

      And BTW, I don't think I have EVER seen a Linux system on TV, other than a program that was specifically about Linux, or when they wanted to show a "Hacker" system (like on Mr. Robot). Never. And never on one of the "Millionaire-maker" shows.

    4. Re:Walled garden dynamic duo? by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      This release is a bag of foam and goo. It's for the PR, and maybe the stocks of both won't slide any more than they have.

      Apple risks plenty, as does Cisco, by implementing still more proprietary protocols--- and the details if you'll notice, are scant.

      Apple's relationship is fanatically tied to its users. Users count. It's all about the users. The genuinely laughable business response is to take orders. That's it. Apple's Xserve and Xsan, nice as they might have been, are now filling dump sites across the world.

      Both of these companies make great stuff, don't get me wrong. Unless they go proprietary and this event is unlikely, this was all for the analysts, 'cause not a thing is going to show up that's meaningful or tangible. For better and worse, Microsoft's AD is what binds businesses together. It's a reality. I don't like this reality but show me something that might break that lock. Sun, Apple, Novell, and many others have tried to break that lock. Do it and you can have the keys to the enterprise kingdoms.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    5. Re:Walled garden dynamic duo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the long run you have a totally better situation with Linux over Apple.

      Until you want support. Then its RHEL or ???

      And RHEL sort of defeats the whole idea of Linux as a F/OSS OS, doesn't it?

      http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=slashdot.org
      http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=www.google.com
      http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=www.yahoo.com
      http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=www.microsoft.com
      http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=www.apple.com

      https://www.linux.com/news/featured-blogs/200-libby-clark/787161-how-amazon-web-services-uses-linux-and-open-source

      I see literally none of them bitching. I'm not trying to make this a mirror of netcraft.com either. Keep looking.

      No, not even dickhead Red Hat Inc (symbol: RHT) defeats the "whatever the shit you said" about defeating the whole idea of Linux. You can take a distro of even Redhat and modify the living piss out of it. You can. It is just not the best distro. (openSUSE and Debian you can't go wrong) Companies that are not especially tech literate go to Redhat because they SELL SUPPORT. For a home user? This means dick (+/- 0.00). Nothing. Zilch. Solution? Hey, get a better distro. Just because one distro has a microsoft-revenue-wannabe version of Linux, never means all Linuxes suck. Truly, even Redhat is infinitely times better than Windows... and when you say Windows 10... it is the difference between taking deep breaths of fresh ocean air, and taking deep breaths of air on Mars with no space suit. Windows 10 is absolutely YOUR ASS IS HACKED BY DEFAULT.

      Apple appealed to people who have hated Windows over the years but weren't technically literate enough to use actual FreeBSD. So Apple grabbed at everybody else's free-to-share code from FreeBSD and others... sorta jammed it into an OS and a Fisher Price GUI... and sold it on ONLY PROPRIETARY HARDWARE. So, for desktop users wanting to escape Windows-ignorance but who didn't have tech skills to configure BSD... Mac's were born. Then they branched out for the sake of profit margins into small device markets. This may have saved their ass? Intel PC's were so much bang for the buck better performance than Mac's for so long... consumers largely took the hit in performance JUST TO GET AWAY FROM STUPID ASS WINDOWS. (not even talking Windows botnet 10 either). Then Apple wised up and opened up one gate to their walled garden.. they let Intel CPU's into their ecosystem. This was not for the benefit of customers, this was to continue to even have customers in the future. This was for Apple's benefit. Steve Jobs loved the cash but what about now? How's that working out? Tim Cook may think exactly the same who knows? Go watch the movie Pirates of Silicon Valley. http://www.amazon.com/Pirates-Silicon-Valley-Noah-Wyle/dp/B0009NSCS0 ... at the very least read the reviews.

      at a glance.. "12 of 13 people found the following review helpful
      3I worked for Steve Jobs
      ByBarryon January 8, 2014
      Format: Amazon Instant VideoVerified Purchase
      Kutcher captures the look and mannerisms really well. He falls a bit short on how charming Steve could be, which is how he got away with being such a jerk so often. "

      Bottom line? Linux and KDE is just awesome. Other Linux window managers are really cool and have their uses. Lightweight ones are available if your PC or laptop is old and slow. For any modern machine, Linux with KDE is very cool.

      Anybody can go find a live DVD of Linux and FOR FREE just slap it on a USB stick or DVD AND TRY IT. It will take less time than [trying to disable] Windows 10 spyware features... and in fact... you won't be disabling Windows 10 spyware features in your lifetime.

      Like this, try it.
      https://en.opensuse.org/SDB:Live_USB_stick
      You don't even have to bother using their USB method if you are in Windows just grab Rufus Portable from portableapps.com, burn the ope

    6. Re:Walled garden dynamic duo? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Excuse me; but did you run out of your meds, or just decide to stop taking them?

    7. Re:Walled garden dynamic duo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask this guy.

      https://gitlab.com/windowslies/blockwindows

      Please submit any updates
      https://blockwindows.wordpress.com/
      PS There is a highly concerted effort by Microsoft Employees to harass websites that link to this. I'm tired of constantly trying to convince website admins it's not spam.
      Please repost these URLs many places on social media, blogs, etc. I'm in it for the long haul.

      https://blockwindows.wordpress.com/

      https://github.com/WindowsLies/BlockWindows/

      https://github.com/WindowsLies2/BlockWindows/

      https://gitlab.com/windowslies/blockwindows

  6. Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about, well, learning to support an enterprise? Stop treating every device like it is a consumer toy. Offer some real management tools, don't require an Apple account to do everything on your computers, etc, etc, etc.

    It always amuses me when I see Apple talk about the enterprise space because they have done such a shit job supporting OS-X for the enterprise for so long. You can make it work, of course, and there are plenty of 3rd party tools, many very expensive, to help but it is all your own doing. Apple themselves seem to view each device as an island, property of a single consumer to be used as a toy and thrown away when the next shiny toy comes along.

    Of course what they really mean here is "We want big businesses to buy our stuff, but we don't want to actually go through the trouble of supporting them."

    1. Re:Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by nine-times · · Score: 2

      Offer some real management tools, don't require an Apple account to do everything on your computers, etc, etc, etc.

      Or honestly, you know, just... fix the broken crap. Take all the stuff that Apple does offer for business, and fix the bugs.

      Like take care of the bugs in Mail that cause it to not sync properly when mailboxes hit a certain size. Fix the bugs with Open Directory, Profile Manager, and mobile user account syncing. Speed up access to file servers, and fix the SMB problems that cause files to become locked and Finder to crash. Some of these problems have existed for years, and they're just not getting fixed.

      If they can lock that down, here are some more things they can do: Start supporting server hardware again. If they don't want to make their own server hardware, just provide some licensing route to allow you to run OSX server on ESXi or HyperV on non-Apple servers. Throw some money into OSX server development. Either forget about providing email/calendar/contact/chat, or invest enough in it to make it competitive with Exchange and Google Apps. Integrate something like Munki or Casper to provide configuration management and updates for 3rd party applications.

      They're want to partner with Cisco...? Fine. Partner with the Meraki division, and make co-branded Cisco/Meraki/Apple networking equipment. Create an integrated cloud management platform that manages routers, wireless access points, switches, servers, NAS devices, virtual machines, MDM, and really the whole network to be controlled from an single-pane-of-glass. Have Apple assist in the hardware and UI design, and integrate it with the now-fixed Profile Manager, Open Directory, and Munki functionality that's been added to OSX server. Then have it support Windows, too.

      But of course, they're not going to do any of that. They won't do anything as mundane as fixing the bugs in the SMB support, and they won't do anything as ambitious as trying to make Mac OSX Server competitive with Windows or pushing cloud management forward. Instead, they're going to continue making incremental upgrades to their consumer-centric features while striking buzzword-friendly deals with Cisco and IBM to provide the illusion that they care about the Enterprise.

    2. Re:Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by kolbe · · Score: 1

      You forget that they have already seriously burned their customers by dropping the ball the way they did with the Apple Xserve and Xserve RAID... A good example of this is "The Tennis Channel" in Los Angeles. They bought millions of dollars worth of Xserve RAID and got severely burned on them when their promised "dual redundant" Xserve RAID's started failing left and right, without any recourse for recovery. I was working for a VAR when that went down and I can tell you that a number of customers would never give them a second chance after that whole debacle.

    3. Re:Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by kolbe · · Score: 1

      Apple will not be able to achieve proper support in the enterprise world... Enterprise/Federal customers didn't want a relationship with a "product", which is what Apple makes their money on. Enterprise/Federal customers want a relationship with a company, and they were willing to pay for that. On call, 24/7. I just don't see Apple doing that, ever.

    4. Re:Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 0

      The problem was that the prophet Steve (peace be upon him) hated the business market for some obscure personal reason and did everything he could to keep the company out of it. Now that Apple has fallen into secular hands, a revival of interest in the enterprise market may be in the works.

    5. Re:Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by seoras · · Score: 1

      They don't want it. Why would they? They are a consumer electronics company.

    6. Re: Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When they rolled out the Xserve originally this wasn't really an option(virtualization in general was markedly less mature, and PPC on X86? Haha, not so much unless you really don't mind overhead.)

      What is frustrating now, though, is while they have (probably sensibly) stopped pretending to make server grade hardware, they still won't 'bless' one of the commonly used hyper visors to run OSX for any price.

      No, Mac minis with two HDDs are not 'servers'. Just keep the damn toy and we'll pay you the same to be able to run what we need on our e siting VM setup.

    7. Re:Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by macs4all · · Score: 1

      It always amuses me when I see Apple talk about the enterprise space because they have done such a shit job supporting OS-X for the enterprise for so long. You can make it work, of course, and there are plenty of 3rd party tools, many very expensive, to help but it is all your own doing. Apple themselves seem to view each device as an island, property of a single consumer to be used as a toy and thrown away when the next shiny toy comes along.

      Then explain, for example, THIS and THIS (the latter having existed for well over a decade, and which can not only be used to admin however many Macs you can throw at it; but also Windows and Linux systems). Oh, and the Administraton Console for ARD (Apple Remote Desktop) costs a whopping $69. The Client-side is free. Hardly "expensive".

      So, the only reason your think there isn't any "corporate" support for Apple systems/devices is because you haven't bothered to look for the two minutes it took to find them.

    8. Re: Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by macs4all · · Score: 1

      What is frustrating now, though, is while they have (probably sensibly) stopped pretending to make server grade hardware, they still won't 'bless' one of the commonly used hyper visors to run OSX for any price.

      Actually, they have; they're just REALLY quiet about it.

      There is ONE (and only one) version of OS X that is licensed for virtualization, and it just so happens to be OS X 10.6.8 (Snow Leopard) SERVER. In fact, they still offer a Retail version of that on DVD for $19. You just have to call Apple Support and know what to ask for; but I know someone who has ordered it as recent as a few months ago, and it is still listed with their Customer Service persons an an Active, Order-able part.

      The Apple Part Number for this magic is: MC588Z/A . Call 800.692.7753 and tell them you want to order that Part. $19.99 and its all yours. And legal.

    9. Re: Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by Rockets84 · · Score: 1

      Actually, they have; they're just REALLY quiet about it. There is ONE (and only one) version of OS X that is licensed for virtualization, and it just so happens to be OS X 10.6.8 (Snow Leopard) SERVER. In fact, they still offer a Retail version of that on DVD for $19. You just have to call Apple Support and know what to ask for; but I know someone who has ordered it as recent as a few months ago, and it is still listed with their Customer Service persons an an Active, Order-able part. The Apple Part Number for this magic is: MC588Z/A . Call 800.692.7753 and tell them you want to order that Part. $19.99 and its all yours. And legal.

      Sorry but you're wrong there isn't just one verison of OS X that's licensed for virtualization, read Apple's SLA docs for OS X & OS X Server http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/

      OS X Snow Leopard Server is allowed to run as a VM on Apple hardware as long as you have a license for each VM. It doesn't actually state virtualization however. From the Snow Leopard SLA "You may also install and use other copies of Mac OS X Server Software on the same Apple-branded computer, provided that you acquire an individual and valid license from Apple for each of these other copies of Mac OS X Server Software. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so."

      The OS X Lion SLA does state that each license is entitled to 2 additional VM's on Apple hardware - "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."

      The Yosemite SLA even restricts the VM roles for you - "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, for purposes of: (a) software development; (b) testing during software development; (c) using OS X Server; or (d) personal, non-commercial use"

      The problem big problem with all the different versions of the SLA is that statement of Apple Branded computer or Mac Computer that must be the underlying hardware. That's fine if you're an end user wanting to run up a VM for those purposes on your iMac or Macbook. However if you want to run up OS X Server as a back office server to manage your OS X clients Mac Mini's, iMac's & Mac Pro's are not server class hardware with redundant power supplies, RAID controllers, out of band management, rack mount etc. Xserve had all of that. If Apple was serious about the business market they should sell companies a version of OS X Server that has major VM Enterprise level Hypervisor support like VMware ESXi running on non Apple hardware or partner with Dell/HP/IBM to allow OS X Server to run on some of their server hardware.

    10. Re:Hey Apple if you want enterprise business by tim_q54 · · Score: 1

      Of course what they really mean here is "We want big businesses to buy our stuff, but we don't want to actually go through the trouble of supporting them."

      That strategy has worked really well for Dell...

  7. iOS or IOS? by asimons04 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What OS are the routers going to run? iOS or IOS?

    1. Re:iOS or IOS? by cosm · · Score: 2

      +5 Experience. How much you wanna bet the userbase today doesn't even get the joke.

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    2. Re:iOS or IOS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      www.soylentnews.org

    3. Re:iOS or IOS? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      You have to have an above-average level of Apple-hate to latch on to that particular wrinkle in your panties.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    4. Re:iOS or IOS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Useless. It's just a parody of slashdot, with the same stories. I get better tech news from YCombinator's Hacker News. Soylent is worthless.

    5. Re:iOS or IOS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was the first thought that came to mind on seeing the headline. I'd be disappointed if I came in this late and nobody else had said something about it.

    6. Re:iOS or IOS? by seoras · · Score: 2

      I worked on IOS for 12 years and iOS for the last 3 years.
      Head hunters love me. T
      They skim my Linkedin profile, failing to read the details, and get into a frenzy thinking I've been writing Apps for iPhone since 1994. :)

    7. Re:iOS or IOS? by CaptSlaq · · Score: 1

      They're going to put iOS on their IOS so they can...

  8. Why? by acoustix · · Score: 1

    These devices don't belong on an enterprise network anyway. They're allowed on a guest network and that's it.

    Who in their right mind is going to allow these personal devices on a company network? Haven't we seen enough bad things happen with stuff like this?

    --
    "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who do you think makes the network infrastructure gear for the guest networks, Netgear? I'll give you a hint, it rhymes with Crisco...

    2. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your CEO is. Because he just bought a shiny new mac, thinks he is hip and wants to work with it.
      He just tell you 'I don't care, fix it'.

    3. Re:Why? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Funny, you seem to think that products can only be bought for personal use.

      What, I wonder, do you think this deal is designed to address? Perhaps it has something to do with wanting to make iOS devices more enterprise-friendly (they already have rudimentary enterprise support with curated app stores and local app deployment, but you think this chicken and egg problem shouldn't be solved because they're "consumer devices".

      Whoever would buy an automobile! The roads are designed for horses and carts! There are hay stops and water troughs for the horses! Cars are nit designed for that! Pity the thought!

  9. I wish they'd just fuck off with the enterprise by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    I would be perfectly happy if they just said "Know what? OS-X is a home user OS. We don't support the enterprise. We are going to remove support for these enterprise features with the next version. Use something else." That would be great because then I could tell all the Macheads to suck it up and use Windows or Linux.

    However Apple likes to play at enterprise support, they've played at it for years. They act like they care, but as you note they half-ass it to the extreme.

    Even internally. I remember not long after Apple stopped the Xserve I was talking to one of their engineers and I ask him what they were going to do. Apple had started doing the MS thing of "eating their own dogfood" and was heavily using OS-X on Xserve for their own stuff. He said "I have no idea. They didn't tell us this was coming. We'll probably start using IBM hardware again."

    It drives me up the wall as we waste an inordinate amount of time dealing with Macs because people want a shiny toy and can't understand they are unsuited for enterprise use.

  10. Apple partners with Cisco and the NSA ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please let us put that in every article.
    E.g.,

    Google (and the NSA) rolls out new mail service

    IBM (and the NSA) etc etc

  11. Apple will never rule enterprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless Apple comes up with some real give away hardware deals. They will never gain much in enterprise as a whole. Sure, companies with nice technology budgets can buy Apple products, but most do big deals with Dell and HP and Lenovo. I do think some businesses want Apple products because they feel that they are struggling with Windows products in security. Google did this a few years back making all but a few areas use Mac's in order to stem the security problems.
    This is where I don't see Microsoft doing enough, but I still do not see enterprise leaving Windows for OS X or IOS in droves.

    1. Re:Apple will never rule enterprise by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Unless Apple comes up with some real give away hardware deals. They will never gain much in enterprise as a whole.

      Since a lot of companies now have BYOD programs, Apple doesn't have to suck corporate cock like Dell and HP do. The employees like their Apple products so much THEY pay for them out of their OWN pockets.

      This is where I don't see Microsoft doing enough, but I still do not see enterprise leaving Windows for OS X or IOS in droves.

      Actually, it's much more quiet than that. More like a steady drip. But just like those steady drips that you see on nature-based TV shows, when enough time goes by, you look up and that little drip has carved a thousand-foot canyon. Except in this case, the canyon is only going to take about a decade, and its well underway even as I type.

  12. None of that is Apple's Enterprise Problem by rshol · · Score: 2

    Most people who work in enterprises don't work in IT so they don't care about admin tools etc. Most people work in marketing, sales, accounting, finance, logistics or manufacturing and all the software for all those departments runs on Windows. Middle market accounting software for Mac? Does not exist. Manufacturing/inventory control software for Mac? Nope. Contractor estimating/job costing? You get the picture.

    1. Re:None of that is Apple's Enterprise Problem by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Right, but who said anything about changing that? They just want to make iOS devices work more effectively in an enterprise setting - that means tablets, phones etc.

      There's no reason that iPads (for example) couldn't be used as handy video conference devices, especially at remote/off-site/smaller sites alongside all the current IT infrastructure.

    2. Re:None of that is Apple's Enterprise Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point. iPhones are the recommended phones where I work.

    3. Re:None of that is Apple's Enterprise Problem by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you know what would be really nice? If Apple wrote some good apps for other operating systems.

      Licensing 3rd party software for AirPlay and AirPrint services in a Windows network is stupid and on top of that it doesn't work all that well.

      Microsoft makes really good apps for Apple products, it would be awfully nice if Apple returned the favor.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    4. Re:None of that is Apple's Enterprise Problem by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      You can get iTunes & Quicktime for Windows ...

      ducks!

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    5. Re:None of that is Apple's Enterprise Problem by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Most people who work in enterprises don't work in IT so they don't care about admin tools etc. Most people work in marketing, sales, accounting, finance, logistics or manufacturing and all the software for all those departments runs on Windows. Middle market accounting software for Mac? Does not exist. Manufacturing/inventory control software for Mac? Nope. Contractor estimating/job costing? You get the picture.

      ORLY?

      Twenty years ago, that was definitely the case. Not anymore. Here are but a few examples:

      Productivity/Project Management BTW, this has been around for many years.

      Contact Management/Planning/Marketing

      Accounting (also has been around for DECADES)

      Manufacturing/Inventory Control/ERP (VERY Robust, been around for years. Cross-Platform, Semi-Open Source) I write ERP software for a living, and this is GOOD stuff!!!

      Job Costing. XTuple does that, too; but here is but one example: A highly-rated Job Costing/Estimating package that is cross platform. Job Costing software tends to be more "vertical"; so I would have to point you to an agregator site, like this one.

      Now, don't think these are the ONLY solutions in each of these categories; because they aren't. They are just ones that were easy to find, and/or that I was familiar with on some level. A bit of poking around will quickly show that there are many other alternatives in most, if not all, of these categories.

      Does Windows still have the upper-hand when it comes to business Applications? Without a doubt; but that picture has seriously been changing over the past decade, and as Macs start to encroach more and more in the business world, there will certainly be more attention paid to the platform by business Application Publishers. And in another decade, your post may very well be simply a joke.

      Times change; a few decades ago, CP/M was supposed to be the "business" OS but there was no "business software" available. A couple of decades ago, businesses, including Apple itself, ran primarily custom-built business software on AS/400s and the like. Who's to say what the future holds?

    6. Re:None of that is Apple's Enterprise Problem by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      So Apple is a software company now?

      Also, what do you think this partnership is, exactly, if not to improve third-party iOS integration?

  13. Just the apps ma'am by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Basically, Apple wants better versions of Movi, AnyConnect, and WebEx for their systems.

  14. Enterprise Business? *GUFFAW* APPLE? by Chas · · Score: 1

    Hold on. Is it April first? Because that's GOT to be a joke.

    Apple doesn't want, and cannot handle enterprise business.

    Because enterprise customers, spending millions, aren't as forgiving of Apple's little "oopsies" the way their fanboy userbase is.
    And having technicians constantly going "Well try this piece of software and see if it does what you want" would get old quickly.

    The Mac developer base couldn't support it (bless their eclectic little hearts...)

    Now the elephant in the room. Apple's inherent undependability.

    People have been throwing a shit fit for the past few years about Windows 8 and the lack of a START MENU. The reason Windows 8 didn't take off was because enterprise was NOT willing to absorb retraining costs.

    What happens when Apple decides to go its own way again and literally changes PLATFORMS (a'la PPC to x86) at some point in the future? You think enterprise customers are going to take a risk like that?

    FUCK NO!

    Apple's cut themselves a foofy little niche amongst cool kids, artsie-fartsie types and people who don't know any better. They simply aren't equipped to deal with anything at the enterprise level.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!