6 ms·

IBM says it is 3X more expensive to manage PCs than Macs (2016)

16 points by nojito 5y ago

jrm4 5y ago
You mean "Windows?" Let's at least get THAT right, sheesh.
samstave 5y ago
uh yeah.. PCs have component level granularity... macs are black-boxes and monolithic (aside: one of my first jobs was in IT for a middle school (I was in HS) - de-soldering and replacing bad mem chips in Apple ][e machines...)
- rbanffy 5y ago
  That's not the biggest issue. Windows is built on layers, some dating back to NT. It's a much more complicated beast than a Mac, where Apple deprecates APIs every now and then. No current Mac can run MacOS 9 applications. On a Windows PC it's common to go deeper into the OS (say, to figure out why the wi-fi stopped working) and find UIs rendered with 3 different ways to anti-alias text, sometimes in the same window, and that's not even counting the vendor-specific UIs that import their own look and feel. All that speaks volumes how parts of the OS are seemingly left to rot while newer and prettier ones are built on top of the rotting pieces. The result is that every current Windows PC can run ancient windows applications (I believe 16-bit ones, at least, are no longer supported).
squarefoot 5y ago
...says someone from an article in an Apple enthusiast column in which all links are either self-referential or point to Apple related sites, and not a single one goes to any actual information directly from IBM. The fact that there's not one mention of Linux, although IBM invested a lot in it since the late 90s, speaks volumes about the credibility of this article.
- gigel82 5y ago
  How dareth thou! (you'll rile up the fanboys...)
  - squarefoot 5y ago
    Heh, I noticed:^) Privacy and other considerations aside, I'm not against Apple or their products, which are much better built than the vast majority of PCs out there, and of course cost as such, but one can't become a Mac user without being involved in the Apple ecosystem which surely means more consistency but also being more closed (the former being a natural byproduct of the latter). If this article falsely praised Linux without any reference to information that proves the contrary where it applies I would be pissed off as well. As a Linux enthusiast (not fanboy) there's nothing worse than having people that I "converted" to Linux going back to Windows and telling me that I was lying when I told them that Linux was superior in this or that. The article tells something that if true would surely make some noise, especially since two years later they acquired RedHat. I would expect a link to IBM telling us the same thing, and not an article that essentially links to other versions of itself.
- cube00 5y ago
  Apple related sites that seem to have since removed their content.
nix23 5y ago
CORRECTION: But not with our proven Red Hat Linux, then it's 4x cheaper than to manage a Mac, many things happened since 2016. (Disclaimer IBM Manager here...Not)
- rbanffy 5y ago
  I would not be surprised that, with all the fleet management tooling we have for servers, that it wouldn't be cheaper and simpler to manage a fleet of Linux machines with unprivileged users. A lot of problems on Windows (and Macs) is with programs the user decided to install.
  - nix23 5y ago
    Well it was meant as a joke, but yes your are probably right, and a windows machine should never allow users to install anything...NO especially not devs ;) PS: Don't forget to update your vm/370-image to CE 1.1 ;) http://www.vm370.org/vm http://www.vm370.org/vm
    - rbanffy 5y ago
      When I developed software for Windows, I had two machines on two different networks, on one I could read e-mails, file expenses, and so on. On the other, I was a local administrator. I had access to the internet through a proxy that blocked some websites (so, for instance, I wouldn't be able to look at patents) and nothing else.
NikolaNovak 5y ago
I wonder how much though is self selection. I. E. Would types of users who now choose apple, also require less support with pc/windows? (disclaimer / fwiw: I'm an IBMer and feels like there are potential usage generalizations between colleagues who choose apple vs windows vs rhel. IPhones have already been mandated/imposed upon us and I fear future when apples might be as well. Nothing... Wrong with those, but choices are good and apples are not for everyone)

16 points by nojito 5y ago

jrm4 5y ago

You mean "Windows?" Let's at least get THAT right, sheesh.

uh yeah.. PCs have component level granularity... macs are black-boxes and monolithic (aside: one of my first jobs was in IT for a middle school (I was in HS) - de-soldering and replacing bad mem chips in Apple ][e machines...)

rbanffy 5y ago
That's not the biggest issue. Windows is built on layers, some dating back to NT. It's a much more complicated beast than a Mac, where Apple deprecates APIs every now and then. No current Mac can run MacOS 9 applications. On a Windows PC it's common to go deeper into the OS (say, to figure out why the wi-fi stopped working) and find UIs rendered with 3 different ways to anti-alias text, sometimes in the same window, and that's not even counting the vendor-specific UIs that import their own look and feel. All that speaks volumes how parts of the OS are seemingly left to rot while newer and prettier ones are built on top of the rotting pieces. The result is that every current Windows PC can run ancient windows applications (I believe 16-bit ones, at least, are no longer supported).

squarefoot 5y ago

...says someone from an article in an Apple enthusiast column in which all links are either self-referential or point to Apple related sites, and not a single one goes to any actual information directly from IBM. The fact that there's not one mention of Linux, although IBM invested a lot in it since the late 90s, speaks volumes about the credibility of this article.

gigel82 5y ago
How dareth thou! (you'll rile up the fanboys...)
- squarefoot 5y ago
  Heh, I noticed:^) Privacy and other considerations aside, I'm not against Apple or their products, which are much better built than the vast majority of PCs out there, and of course cost as such, but one can't become a Mac user without being involved in the Apple ecosystem which surely means more consistency but also being more closed (the former being a natural byproduct of the latter). If this article falsely praised Linux without any reference to information that proves the contrary where it applies I would be pissed off as well. As a Linux enthusiast (not fanboy) there's nothing worse than having people that I "converted" to Linux going back to Windows and telling me that I was lying when I told them that Linux was superior in this or that. The article tells something that if true would surely make some noise, especially since two years later they acquired RedHat. I would expect a link to IBM telling us the same thing, and not an article that essentially links to other versions of itself.
cube00 5y ago
Apple related sites that seem to have since removed their content.

nix23 5y ago

CORRECTION: But not with our proven Red Hat Linux, then it's 4x cheaper than to manage a Mac, many things happened since 2016. (Disclaimer IBM Manager here...Not)

rbanffy 5y ago
I would not be surprised that, with all the fleet management tooling we have for servers, that it wouldn't be cheaper and simpler to manage a fleet of Linux machines with unprivileged users. A lot of problems on Windows (and Macs) is with programs the user decided to install.
- nix23 5y ago
  Well it was meant as a joke, but yes your are probably right, and a windows machine should never allow users to install anything...NO especially not devs ;) PS: Don't forget to update your vm/370-image to CE 1.1 ;) http://www.vm370.org/vm http://www.vm370.org/vm
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    When I developed software for Windows, I had two machines on two different networks, on one I could read e-mails, file expenses, and so on. On the other, I was a local administrator. I had access to the internet through a proxy that blocked some websites (so, for instance, I wouldn't be able to look at patents) and nothing else.

NikolaNovak 5y ago

I wonder how much though is self selection. I. E. Would types of users who now choose apple, also require less support with pc/windows? (disclaimer / fwiw: I'm an IBMer and feels like there are potential usage generalizations between colleagues who choose apple vs windows vs rhel. IPhones have already been mandated/imposed upon us and I fear future when apples might be as well. Nothing... Wrong with those, but choices are good and apples are not for everyone)