Why does MacOS cost less in support in businesses than Windows

P

philb2

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 26, 2021
Messages
1,960
So here and there on these forums (e.g. https://hardforum.com/threads/micro...if-you-dont-use-bing.2034990/#post-1045885323) you read that Macs have lower TCO and support cost than Windows PCs. And there users "were happier, and more productive," quoting from the referenced post. I don't doubt the findings, but I'm wondering why? Is it:

  • Apple hardware is built better
  • Less third-party hardware in Macs
  • Mac GUI is better designed
  • MacOS has fewer bugs
  • Macs get less malware
Or it is something else?

Not trolling. I'm just wondering. Yes, I've been using Windows since Bill Gates was in kindergarten, but I'm open to new ideas.
 
Last edited:
Their hardware isn't much better than anyone else in terms of failure rates, and often if you have hardware problems you have to pay Apple to fix it if they figure out how to tell you it's not an issue covered by their warrantee. It's something like 12% hardware failure rate IIRC and the average is around 15%.

What makes them work is that you plug in your Apple account into your phone, tablet, and PC, and it just works. It works across generations of devices, it works across hardware, it works across software regardless of your updates. Your photos, contacts, your text messages, everything, it just syncs without any hassle from them.

You *can* get Windows to do this but it's a PITA and doesn't work well with phones at all. The GUIs are shit. They are better at rolling out stable updates, and they have better security and (slightly) better privacy. It's all opt-out but it's easy to opt out.

The main reason they have a lower cost of ownership isn't because they're inexpensive; they're all expensive for what you get. But they have amazing long-term support so you can keep an old device. They don't seem to have as much planned obsolescence; they want you to keep something around for a long time while giving you the option to paying a lot for the new hotness.

All of the Apple devices I have are several generations out, and they work fine, and they all work together flawlessly.
 
philb2 said:
So here and there on these forums (e.g. https://hardforum.com/threads/micro...if-you-dont-use-bing.2034990/#post-1045885323) you read that Macs have lower TCO and support cost than Windows PCs. And there users "were happier, and more productive," quoting from the referenced post. I don't doubt the findinbs, but I'm wondering why? Is it:

  • Apple hardware is built better
  • Less third-party hardware in Macs
  • Mac GUI is better designed
  • MacOS has fewer bugs
  • Macs get less malware
Or it is something else?

Not trolling. I'm just wondering. Yes, I've been using Windows since Bill Gates was in kindergarten, but I'm open to new ideas.
Click to expand...

they dont.
yes solid aluminum is more durable and shiny. the guts: look fancy but really no better than a dell. which i would rather have as we can get parts direct and fit them in house, without voiding our warranty, which includes accidental damage...
there is no 3rd hardware in them unless you put it there.
thats debatable.
lol, not true at all.
then why are we running cisco a/v? not true, anymore.

Axman said:
What makes them work is that you plug in your Apple account into your phone, tablet, and PC, and it just works. But they have amazing long-term support so you can keep an old device.
Click to expand...
lol thats what kicked this all off. only evil microsoft would dare ask you to sign into an account or change back to their search engine...
the phone sync stuff seems to work fine with apple/android, just no windows phone....
not anymore, they provide support 5-6yrs max. yes you can run your old machine but you wont get updates and apps will start refusing to install. we have had to retire all our 2017 airs due to this. not to mention the thousands and thousands of iads we turfed...
 
pendragon1 said:
the phone sync stuff seems to work fine with apple/android,
Click to expand...

Sync between Outlook on Windows 10 and Calendar and Contacts on iPhone? What's your secret? For me, it used to work, using iTunes. No longer. I've tried at least 3 third-party utilities. One requires some weird second copy of contacts or calendar. Another one completey messed up my calendar. I had repeating appointments that started and ended like in 2012. With that program, the repeating appointments continue non-stop to the present, Too many of them to hand-correct.

pendragon1 said:
just no windows phone....
not anymore, they provide support 5-6yrs max. yes you can run your old machine but you wont get updates and apps will start refusing to install. we have had to retire all our 2017 airs due to this. not to mention the thousands and thousands of iads we turfed...
Click to expand...
I'm pissed that my iPhone 7 can't get iOS16. But several of my key apps, like CNN, will not work on an older version of the app. You HAVE TO UPGRADE. Did I mention that my phone can't get iOS 16. So what am I supposed to do? Fork over like $1000 to get a new iPhone when my current iPhone works just fine?
 
philb2 said:
Sync between Outlook on Windows 10 and Calendar and Contacts on iPhone? What's your secret? For me, it used to work, using iTunes. No longer. I've tried at least 3 third-party utilities. One requires some weird second copy of contacts or calendar. Another one completey messed up my calendar. I had repeating appointments that started and ended like in 2012. With that program, the repeating appointments continue non-stop to the present, Too many of them to hand-correct.


I'm pissed that my iPhone 7 can't get iOS16. But several of my key apps, like CNN, will not work on an older version of the app. You HAVE TO UPGRADE. Did I mention that my phone can't get iOS 16. So what am I supposed to do? Fork over like $1000 to get a new iPhone when my current iPhone works just fine?
Click to expand...
no you gotta put outlook on it.
lol yup.
 
pendragon1 said:
lol thats what kicked this all off. only evil microsoft would dare ask you to sign into an account or change back to their search engine...
the phone sync stuff seems to work fine with apple/android,
Click to expand...

Sync between Outlook on Windows 10 and Calendar and Contacts on iPhone? What's your secret???? For me, it used to work, using iTunes. No longer. I've tried at least 3 third-party utilities. One requires some weird second copy of contacts or calendar. Another one completely messed up my calendar. I had repeating appointments that started and ended like in 2012. With that program, the repeating appointments continue non-stop to the present, Too many of them to hand-correct. PF

A third one simply didn't work. Pfui.
pendragon1 said:
just no windows phone....
not anymore, they provide support 5-6yrs max. yes you can run your old machine but you wont get updates and apps will start refusing to install. we have had to retire all our 2017 airs due to this. not to mention the thousands and thousands of iads we turfed...
Click to expand...
I'm pissed that my iPhone 7 can't get iOS16. But several of my key apps, like CNN, will not work on an older version of the app. You HAVE TO UPGRADE. Did I mention that my phone can't get iOS 16. So what am I supposed to do? Fork over like $1000 to get a new iPhone when my current iPhone works just fine? :rage:
 
philb2 said:
I'm pissed that my iPhone 7 can't get iOS16. But several of my key apps, like CNN, will not work on an older version of the app. You HAVE TO UPGRADE. Did I mention that my phone can't get iOS 16. So what am I supposed to do? Fork over like $1000 to get a new iPhone when my current iPhone works just fine? :rage:
Click to expand...
Replying to my own post, I feel that I've been screwed over by Apple on this issue, bad. This non-upgrade is completely self-serving, since they do both the OS and the hardware.
 
Axman said:
........ But they have amazing long-term support so you can keep an old device. They don't seem to have as much planned obsolescence; they want you to keep something around for a long time while giving you the option to paying a lot for the new hotness.

All of the Apple devices I have are several generations out, and they work fine, and they all work together flawlessly.
Click to expand...

LoL, long term? Apple is no better than anyone else..

macOS 11 was around for 3 years and 6 months, Windows 10... was released in July 2015...and is JUST ending support this year... - almost 9 years...

https://www.itechtics.com/eol/macos/

  • Before 2018: Operating systems were typically supported for around three years.
  • 2018 – 2020: Operating systems were supported for around two years.
  • After 2020: Operating systems are now supported for around one year.
Click to expand...

Apple has had plenty of "Sorry, no longer support that hardware any more" over the years.

1716178831468.png
 
philb2 said:
So here and there on these forums (e.g. https://hardforum.com/threads/micro...if-you-dont-use-bing.2034990/#post-1045885323) you read that Macs have lower TCO and support cost than Windows PCs. And there users "were happier, and more productive," quoting from the referenced post. I don't doubt the findings, but I'm wondering why? Is it:

  • Apple hardware is built better
  • Less third-party hardware in Macs
  • Mac GUI is better designed
  • MacOS has fewer bugs
  • Macs get less malware
Or it is something else?

Not trolling. I'm just wondering. Yes, I've been using Windows since Bill Gates was in kindergarten, but I'm open to new ideas.
Click to expand...
My experience working for the past 6 years at a large university, supporting a mixed environment that is probably 90% Windows, 10% Apple:

  • Apple hardware is built better - externally, not internally
  • Less third-party hardware in Macs - yes. Most 3rd party stuff out there just doesn't work, so don't even try.
  • Mac GUI is better designed - Subjective
  • MacOS has fewer bugs - No
  • Macs get less malware - Ha Ha
Longer answer.
For hardware, Apple is disproportionally represented in our hardware repairs for the percentage of computers we have here. Especially after they get a few years old. Internally, the components are very fragile, they just get encased in solid aluminum armor for every-day usage. I don't know if it is anything Apple is doing in the manufacturing process, but MacBooks seem to have an unnatural attraction to Starbucks coffee.

3rd party hardware support - this is something that has me really steamed about the Apple Silicon MacBooks. We have a number of people who were using two or three external monitors with their Intel-based Macs, until we replaced them with the Apple Silicon equivalent. Guess what? Now you have to go buy an additional special dock that won't work quite right, but at least you can use your monitors now.

GUI design - click icon, run program. That's how most people use their computer, and it works just the same on Mac as Windows. MacOS has their own version of a full screen "Start Menu" a la Win 8, and no one seems to complain about it. Of course, most people just put shortcuts on their desktop (Mac and Windows users) which tells me that Win 3.1 interface really was one of the most human intuitive interfaces around!

Bugs? How do you know MacOS got an update? Things stop working. Really, the show-stopper bugs we've encountered with MacOS are far more and greater than with Windows.

Less malware? Not since we quite handing out admin rights on Windows computers to anyone who asked. Now you have to demonstrate a business need for admin rights. Windows malware went practically to zero overnight. Still get Macs infected with malware though, but that may be due to many programs/plugins requiring admin rights to simply run on a Mac.

One more thing. It may be that Macs sometimes have lower TCO because for corporate management, you really cannot do much with the Macs. On the other hand, you can really manage and manipulate Windows devices to suite pretty much any use case you can imagine. Naturally, if you can, you will, but that requires more resources to do.
 
philb2 said:
So here and there on these forums (e.g. https://hardforum.com/threads/micro...if-you-dont-use-bing.2034990/#post-1045885323) you read that Macs have lower TCO and support cost than Windows PCs. And there users "were happier, and more productive," quoting from the referenced post. I don't doubt the findings, but I'm wondering why? Is it:
Click to expand...
I very much doubt the findings. There is a slant here for the type of users that end up with MACs. Trust me, if its a mixed environment they aren't happy. Apple also has a cult-like following devoid of objectivity in its users. Beyond that, Apple is heavily entrenched in certain niche industries were its considered the only game in town. If you are largely using a complete MAC ecosystem, you will have fewer problems than you would in a mixed environment but from years of supporting MACs I can tell you that they are just as problematic. The problems you get are different, but they are no less worse.

What is worse is that Apple's support of their own hardware has always been appalling. Dell and HP set a much higher standard in this area. I'm not saying they make better hardware, but the support of their hardware for their business customers shames Apple.
philb2 said:
  • Apple hardware is built better
Click to expand...
It isn't. Apple hardware is produced in the same factories as Dell and HP hardware often is. It's basically all the same stuff aside from their CPU's which are sometimes different. Power PC, Apple M1, etc.
philb2 said:
  • Less third-party hardware in Macs
Click to expand...
Yes and no. All of the hardware is third party. Apple doesn't design as much as you'd imagine and they don't manufacture anything themselves. However, because their hardware QVL is so small, they can afford to do it well.
philb2 said:
  • Mac GUI is better designed
Click to expand...
That's a matter of opinion, and I'd largely disagree with it.
philb2 said:
  • MacOS has fewer bugs
Click to expand...
The OS isn't less "buggy" as much as you don't have the driver issues that make up the bulk of Windows related issues.
philb2 said:
  • Macs get less malware
Click to expand...
Security through obscurity. If your aim is to create an attack vector to affect users, you target Intel and Microsoft to make the most impact. It makes no sense to develop these things to go after a tiny fraction of users out there.
 
Dan_D said:
Security through obscurity. If your aim is to create an attack vector to affect users, you target Intel and Microsoft to make the most impact. It makes no sense to develop these things to go after a tiny fraction of users out there.
Click to expand...
What is this? The 90s? Why do people keep parroting this crap? There are over 100 million Mac users. Millions of those users are on outdated and vulnerable versions of macOS. Although 100 million is a significantly smaller user base than PCs, that is still a massive target to hit. Macs get malware, with new threats coming out all the time. There isn't anything obscure about Apple's user base anymore. Although macOS has XProtect, most malware that affects users is from bad software posing as legitimate software and encouraging the user to enter their password so the malware can wreak its havoc. Windows Defender is actually fairly decent now, although it sucks horribly against Ransomware. Ransomware protection is off by default in Windows, but when it's enabled, it's a huge PITA to deal with. Common sense is obviously the best form of defense, but outdated ideas such as "security through obscurity" in regards to Macs is dangerous. Apple isn't some peddling underdog. They're one of the most value companies in the world with a sizable user base ripe for malware with a lot of ignorant users that think they're invincible against bad software and malicious attacks.

The OS isn't less "buggy" as much as you don't have the driver issues that make up the bulk of Windows related issues.
Click to expand...
I agree. macOS absolutely does get bugs, with some bugs being severe and going unaddressed by Apple for years.

Yes and no. All of the hardware is third party. Apple doesn't design as much as you'd imagine and they don't manufacture anything themselves. However, because their hardware QVL is so small, they can afford to do it well.
Click to expand...
They do control the hardware and the software that goes into their machines, though, which does make them more reliable in general. But Apple has to fix anything that breaks, for the most part.

It isn't. Apple hardware is produced in the same factories as Dell and HP hardware often is. It's basically all the same stuff aside from their CPU's which are sometimes different. Power PC, Apple M1, etc.
Click to expand...
This is nonsense. Being built in the same factory doesn't mean they're built with the same quality or have the same quality control. Lots of things are built in the same factories, but companies have their own quality control regulations.

What is worse is that Apple's support of their own hardware has always been appalling. Dell and HP set a much higher standard in this area. I'm not saying they make better hardware, but the support of their hardware for their business customers shames Apple.
Click to expand...
I agree completely. Planned obsolescence is a significant problem with owning Apple products (except for iPhones, which have a long support life). Having said that, Microsoft seems to be taking pages out of Apple's playbook with their newer versions of Windows obsoleting a massive chunk of PCs in the wild.
 
Windows also has better fleet management software that you can (and I wouldn't) purchase. There isn't much in the Mac space.

I once ran a "fleet" of 9 macbooks and apart from the initial installation (customized, then uniform for all machines) there wasn't much support to manage anything centrally. ssh'ing in to check things manually is common.
 
I get push back once in a while at work about why we're not using Macs, not by leadership but by end users. End users just don't understand everything that goes on behind the scenes. They think it's just as easy as buying a Macbook and going through that awesome unboxing experience but getting paid! (lil bit of sarcasm there if you can't tell). The few Macs we do have are just on their own and don't do much except for 1 program they were bought for.

The way I look at it is, I'd have to retrain everyone including IT staff, I'd lose access to software we need that does not have a mac replacement, I'd have to buy Mac MDM software, I'm already paying for Microsoft Volume licensing, I'm integrating my Directory Services with applications that I can't replicate on Mac without spinning up new services I'm unfamliar with, and I can barely get funding to replace the cheaper Windows machines I have let alone buy more expensive Mac machines that you you cannot keep in service for the same length of time.

If I was 100% cloud, it would be different, but I'm not and probably won't be for a while. I have 2 contacts in a similar industry. One just moved away from Macs due to the expense of having to use both Microsoft and Apple products at the same time, and another went to Apple, but still has end users running Windows in a VM which hasn't gone well for them.

Also, let's not forget. This conversation was started because of stupid shit Microsoft is doing for home users. You don't deal with most of that at a Enterprise level.
 
Last edited:
I have the same info/feedback as bigdogchris, I love it when the users ask for a Mac, then the next week I see the requests for a Fusion purchase, then a Windows VM build request
 
dbwillis said:
I have the same info/feedback as bigdogchris, I love it when the users ask for a Mac, then the next week I see the requests for a Fusion purchase, then a Windows VM build request
Click to expand...
Pardon the noob question, but I don't use Macs. What is Fusion software?
 
Having worked for a "full kool-aid" Micorosoft shop, they'd say that after you add all the extras to your MS business env, it's pretty dang costly. So, can you run Windows on the cheap? I'd say "yes", but the "experts" tell a different story about how much it really costs to have a "good" Windows environment. YMMV.

I know in our case, the cost per employee is probably about 40x (just based on my own observations).
 
philb2 said:
If that is true, why isn't Apple advertising the heck out of this fact?

Do you have any trusted case studies?
Click to expand...
Again, not my idea. Going from minimal Windows (simple AD DC + backup DC just for ids, groups, DNS, DHCP) to full o365, ATP, E5, all the bells and whistles, which, our secops team says is completely necessary to stave off "attacks" (etc.) and for full feature functionality. IMHO, it's a lot, but again, I've been told that without it, our Windows platforms are easy targets and of course, also "useless" as productivity platforms. Why doesn't Apple advertise they they are not, in no way, shape or form, like Windows? Probably because it would be detrimental to their business.
 
cjcox said:
Again, not my idea. Going from minimal Windows (simple AD DC + backup DC just for ids, groups, DNS, DHCP) to full o365, ATP, E5, all the bells and whistles, which, our secops team says is completely necessary to stave off "attacks" (etc.) and for full feature functionality. IMHO, it's a lot, but again, I've been told that without it, our Windows platforms are easy targets and of course, also "useless" as productivity platforms. Why doesn't Apple advertise they they are not, in no way, shape or form, like Windows? Probably because it would be detrimental to their business.
Click to expand...
You would still require all said security suites and software and backups and protections for a MAC environment also, so this does not change.
 
Apple doesn’t design their hardware with business management in mind whereas Microsoft is all about business management. As someone who uses a Mac for work, I think the TCO savings are overrated. With that being said, I’d prefer to continue to work on a Mac than Windows. My job is one of the areas where Macs are competitive with PCs (video producer/Adobe workflow).
 
MrGuvernment said:
You would still require all said security suites and software and backups and protections for a MAC environment also, so this does not change.
Click to expand...
No. Trust me, it's not even close to the same. Not even close. And the dozens of "extras" outside that are "required" now as well. It's insane.
 
cjcox said:
No. Trust me, it's not even close to the same. Not even close.
Click to expand...
As the OP (and a Windows only user) I am learning a LOT about these issues. Also, to be clear, I am not an IT professional, just Joe User Windows Enthusiast. The closest I come to "IT" is that I am the "IT manager" for my home LAN hardware and software,Internet connection, TV cable service, iPhone and iPad maintenance.

cjcox said:
And the dozens of "extras" outside that are "required" now as well. It's insane.
Click to expand...


Again, for my information here, was are those?
 
cjcox said:
Again, not my idea. Going from minimal Windows (simple AD DC + backup DC just for ids, groups, DNS, DHCP) to full o365, ATP, E5, all the bells and whistles, which, our secops team says is completely necessary to stave off "attacks" (etc.) and for full feature functionality. IMHO, it's a lot, but again, I've been told that without it, our Windows platforms are easy targets and of course, also "useless" as productivity platforms. Why doesn't Apple advertise they they are not, in no way, shape or form, like Windows? Probably because it would be detrimental to their business.
Click to expand...
I would not say Apple does not advertise being more secure out of the box than windows historically (and which how much more secure windows got with Vista and how much hacking is social-user attack instead of machine attack now can be quite exaggerated the importance in difference), that said is it fair to compare full on enterprise office 365 to the free iWork ?

That the type of product Mac heavy work place still sometime buy for a reason.
 
Last edited:
philb2 said:
As the OP (and a Windows only user) I am learning a LOT about these issues. Also, to be clear, I am not an IT professional, just Joe User Windows Enthusiast. The closest I come to "IT" is that I am the "IT manager" for my home LAN hardware and software,Internet connection, TV cable service, iPhone and iPad maintenance.




Again, for my information here, was are those?
Click to expand...
The whole Microsoft "required" eco-system and 3rd party products (including a ton of "security" products unique to MS) that suddenly become "required" when making the switch. It's maddening. Same business, same amount of work being done, same amount of revenue being produced, but with a 40x per employee operational increase. It's a radically different world.

Can it all be done cheaper? Yes. Can it be done cheaper and allow us to use Microsoft desktops and products? I'd say no.
 
so your trying to tell us that for ever $1 spent on a mac it take $40 for the PC side?! as in $1000 on mac = $40000 on pc?! im not buying that... we pay $1200 cauckistani pesos for a macbook air, we can get two dells for that and we dont have to dish out another $500+ for docking stations and adapters, and all our licensing's the same on both sides... and then when they break we do in house repairs that dont alter our warranty and parts are shipped direct. we cannot do that with macs.
 
pendragon1 said:
so your trying to tell us that for ever $1 spent on a mac it take $40 for the PC side?! as in $1000 on mac = $40000 on pc?! im not buying that... we pay $1200 cauckistani pesos for a macbook air, we can get two dells for that and we dont have to dish out another $500+ for docking stations and adapters, and all our licensing's the same on both sides... and then when they break we do in house repairs that dont alter our warranty and parts are shipped direct. we cannot do that with macs.
Click to expand...
I'm talking operational expense per employee, amount spent per month. Has zero to do with machine cost, which, while bigger on the Apple side, it's not that big of a difference (nothing in the high multiplier difference anyhow, especially not over the past 5 years or so).
 
cjcox said:
I'm talking operational expense per employee, amount spent per month. Has zero to do with machine cost, which, while bigger on the Apple side, it's not that big of a difference (nothing in the high multiplier difference anyhow, especially not over the past 5 years or so).
Click to expand...
hardware is part of operation expense, i also included licensing. if youre talking man-hours, our mac support vastly outweighs the pc side. although most of it is teaching teachers how to follow directions....
 
pendragon1 said:
hardware is part of operation expense, i also included licensing. if youre talking man-hours, our mac support vastly outweighs the pc side. although most of it is teaching teachers how to follow directions....
Click to expand...
Just saying. My guess is most have never had an all Mac shop, so you're used to "whatever" with regards to operational expense. I lived "the migration". I've seen the result.
 
cjcox said:
I'm talking operational expense per employee, amount spent per month. Has zero to do with machine cost, which, while bigger on the Apple side, it's not that big of a difference (nothing in the high multiplier difference anyhow, especially not over the past 5 years or so).
Click to expand...
I think most people around here know I am an Apple fanboy. But I think what you state is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.

We're a Microsoft/Adobe workflow shop. We all use Office 365 and the Macs are protected by Microsoft Defender. IT has the Macs managed rather well despite the Windows focus of the company (I'd say 90% or so Windows-based PCs and 10% Macs). The people on Windows are productive. The people on Macs are productive. If it weren't for the value proposition current Macs bring to the video workflow, I could easily see myself on a Windows-based PC and be the same level of productive (all my personal PCs are Windows). IT would be happier if I were, as Windows is easier to manage as a group than Macs are.
 
cjcox said:
Just saying. My guess is most have never had an all Mac shop, so you're used to "whatever" with regards to operational expense. I lived "the migration". I've seen the result.
Click to expand...
... and ???
 
Algrim said:
I think most people around here know I am an Apple fanboy. But I think what you state is, to put it bluntly, bullshit.

We're a Microsoft/Adobe workflow shop. We all use Office 365 and the Macs are protected by Microsoft Defender. IT has the Macs managed rather well despite the Windows focus of the company (I'd say 90% or so Windows-based PCs and 10% Macs). The people on Windows are productive. The people on Macs are productive. If it weren't for the value proposition current Macs bring to the video workflow, I could easily see myself on a Windows-based PC and be the same level of productive (all my personal PCs are Windows). IT would be happier if I were, as Windows is easier to manage as a group than Macs are.
Click to expand...
I get it, you think I'm lying. That's on you really though. I mean, the question was asked, and, though not to your expectations, I answered it. When you cuss out people or slam them without knowledge, what is that called?

I watched as the costs rose 10x, then 20x, etc. With that said, I think the team is doing Windows "right", but I'll never lie and tell people it's "same cost".
 
cjcox said:
I watched as the costs rose 10x, then 20x, etc. With that said, I think the team is doing Windows "right", but I'll never lie and tell people it's "same cost".
Click to expand...
Again, which costs rose 10X,etc? Assuming you have the numbers right,then why haven't you or your management raised this issue with the finance department. IT is usually a cost center,not a profit center, so would not the CIO want to be a hero by cutting costs? Or else keeping the budget the same, but having the ability to get more software, tools, etc.

I just don't get it. I'm not doubting you (or saying anything negative about you ...) but I'm just surprised.
 
cjcox said:
I get it, you think I'm lying. That's on you really though. I mean, the question was asked, and, though not to your expectations, I answered it. When you cuss out people or slam them without knowledge, what is that called?

I watched as the costs rose 10x, then 20x, etc. With that said, I think the team is doing Windows "right", but I'll never lie and tell people it's "same cost".
Click to expand...

If every business experienced that kind of cost, no business would ever run with Windows. Your company very well may have those extra costs but I guarantee you that if our company saw those cost differentials, we'd all be running Macs and we're not. We're very cost-conscious so TCO is a pretty big deal.

I'm not saying you're lying but I don't think you can generalize your business to all businesses out there.
 
There is a lot of bullshit in this thread because people haven't run an all-Mac shop and simply don't like Apple. I will caveat this by saying that I have no experience running multi-thousand system deployments; it is possible that Windows is superior for that. Although, IBM and Cisco have both done studies showing that their costs are lower and employees are more productive when they use Macs:

https://www.vox.com/2016/10/20/13337652/mac-ibm-business-cheaper

https://www.endpointprotector.com/blog/why-macs-have-a-lower-tco-than-pcs/

https://www.jamf.com/blog/mac-in-the-enterprise-employee-choice/

Cisco's data showed:

  • 60% of Cisco empoloyees now use Mac
  • 33% fewer IT admins are required to support Mac users compared to PC
  • Mac users experienced almost 5 times fewer cyber threats and 9 times fewer virus issues based on Cisco's Secure Endpoint detection
  • TCO of Mac hardwarewas $148-395 less expensive over 3 years
  • Employees were more productive, with 9.8% increase in deal creation, 10.9% surge in bookings, and 9.9% faster deal closure among employees that use MAcs
IBM showed similar results

  • Employees who used Macs were 22% more likely to exceed expectations in performance reviews compared to Windows users
  • High-value sales deals were 16% larger for MacOS users
  • Mac users were 17% less likely to leave IBM
  • Ibm had 7 full-time employees supporting 200,000 MacOS devices in contrast to the 20 needed to support the same number of Windows devices
Enterprise is indeed shifting to Mac: https://www.computerworld.com/artic...rprise-shift-to-macs-over-next-12-months.html

Now, that out of the way let me share my experience with a small business shop between 50-100 employees.

Going to all Macs except for engineering and a couple finance people has allowed me to eliminate the jobs of "IT professionals" like those in this thread that used to be necessary supporting a Windows environment, which is probably why they don't like it. You simply need far less IT staff to support a small business Mac environment. The statement that "Macs are not built for business deployments is hilarious to me. I have a true zero-touch deployment setup with Apple Business Manager, Mosyle MDM, and Okta SSO. I buy a Mac and it automatically appears in ABM, I assign it to a user group in Mosyle, and all of their customized apps and settings automatically are pushed to it. This includes everything from what desktop wallpaper they want to custom DNS filtering, etc. Within the MDM I can control not just Macs, but business issued iPhones, iPads, etc. When I hire or fire someone I can do it with two clicks and between Mosyle and Okta their computer can be locked, wiped, access to all systems revoked, etc. And here's the thing - the MDM was set up in a single afternoon. It's so easy it's insane.

As for users, they are happier for multiple reasons. Users generally don't even know what is inside their machines, but they do know when a trackpad or display sucks. They know when their fans are loud, the battery life is bad, and when the microphone quality sucks. These are areas where your average Mac is objectively superior to the average business laptop and if someone denies it you should discount everything that comes out of their mouth. For your average users, the human interface part of the computing experience is better on Mac, so that makes it "better" for most users.

As for multiple external monitor support, that limitation only applies to the Airs. The multi-monitor support on the Pros is superior to any windows laptop. I have a Samsung 57 @ 120hz 7680x2160 plus an Alienware 3440x1400 @ 120hz plus an ipad in extended desktop mode all running off a single thunderbolt 4 cable (Caldigit TS4 dock). If I tried this with a Dell XPS the machine would melt into a puddle of molten plastic. My Mac's fan is not even on and everything is lighting-fast.

For security, I think you already know this but if someone is trying to argue a Windows environment is just as secure as an all-Mac environment, once again they shouldn't be taken seriously.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top