Mac vs PC

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Just read this article from silicon.com saying that some CIOs are considering switching to macs because of the cost Windows Vista.

Here is a link to the article:

http://www.silicon.com/ciojury/0,3800003161,39167825,00.htm

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

so let me see if I have got this right, these guys wana move over to Macs cos Vista costs too much? Hmmm, considering a Mac Pro (Power Mac G5) would set u back a good £2000+ and if u want to use Boot Camp for Vista you would still have to shell out the odd £250-£300 for it. Yet buy yourself a well kitted out PC for about half the price of the Mac Pro and get Vista Ultimate thrown in with it...what is the problem?

And lets not forget that with a Mac, you get a 30 or 60 day trial version of MS Office 2004 (maybe now 2007) and then u still have to fork out £450+ for the full version afterwards (Apple ads take note!!). Where as MS have allowed PC users to download the trial version of Office 2007 instead of adding them onto the PCs (unless I am mistaken so please feel free to correct me).

So if these CIO's think its gonna be better switching to Mac just cos Vista is costing too much, they need to look further under the bonnet cos Macs are way more expensive than PCs.

Rant over.

 

CIOs do indeed consider more factors than the initial cost, hence why no one has actively gone and purchased a bunch of new macs

there are usability and training considerations
application compatibility
ongoing support costs
all of these are considered part of OPEX not CAPEX

the initial cost (CAPEX) is still more than a similar specced PC

some of the OPEX costs would still be felt with an XP to Vista migration
application compatibility, although perhaps not to the same level
training and usability, again not to the same level

the license costs of vista across 10000 desktops sure adds up though
saying that, I cant see how the upgrade to the new OSX will be any different, Apples enterprise support and management offerings are also substantially poorer, increasing long term OPEX costs

The article is pretty accurate though, in that it will indeed give CIOs pause for thought, if there going to have to shell out a ton of money then they have options, part of Microsoft's lock in involves the usual low cost of upgrades, meaning it doesn't give must justification to 'shopping around'

 

I don't get why they would go to OSX when Linux is cheaper still...

 

Accurate and to the point as always!

The ongoing training and support costs would be prohibitive especially

 

Still, MS should really take a look at things (I'm sure they have). Have you seen Apple's Enterprise system, with the upcoming OS-X version? Right now, it's pretty elementary (read:NT4), but their new Directory Services setup looks very good. As with everything else Apple does, they will examine things like Netware and Active Directory, use the BSD architecture, and design a UI for the whole thing.

A couple of months ago, I spec'd out a full blown Apple XServe versus a similar Dell, and it came in cheaper!

 

What he said. Rep given.

CIOs who choose to take that step deserve the heartache and hassle they will receive. Not to mention... go find a tech who can (or wants to) support Macs... they're few and far between.