3 ms·

I think that's just marketing. As a decision maker, I care more what works. 80% of my tech support tickets for desktop help are from my Mac users which are onl

I think that's just marketing. As a decision maker, I care more what works. 80% of my tech support tickets for desktop help are from my Mac users which are only 8% of my endpoints. In my research, and experience, forcing Windows reduced calls and decreased costs because questions like "how do I send this file to..." and "how do I connect to this server" were eliminated. Further, SMB doesn't work very well for Mac users. Try opening a network share with hundreds of thousands of images. And last but surely not least, it's hard to secure company data on Macs because Active Directory integration is also broken. Sure, you use Apple's MDM solution, for added cost, complexity and training. Anecdotally, I've seen Windows users quickly move to the top of the company while their seniors using Macs stay at the bottom because they constantly have difficulty being part of the team. Problems with sharing files, joining meetings, color schemes and profiles that don't match their counterparts', etc. All these little things add up and make for a difficult career path to advancement when you're constantly the odd one out having problems sharing and showing your work product. Or, on Windows, I can deal with Google searches to find where a setting has moved to. I'll take the Google searches.

cubefox 2y ago
I guess the increasing popularity of macOS is mainly due to private use while Windows still has advantages in company environments.
- trimethylpurine 2y ago
  I think that's true. For private use, it's fine, except for the added cost. But overall, even there, I don't particularly see the benefit aside from the glamorous appeal. As an analogy, a Rolex is a great watch. Is it objectively a functionally better time keeping device than a Tissot or most any other time keeping device? Not really. But I'll concede, it looks great and it makes a statement that a lower cost device doesn't make. There is value in that. It's just that, for me, that justification doesn't weigh against practicality when considering the importance of a tool so critical to one's success and happiness in the modern world. I was a big Apple fan in the 90s when Apple's Motorola chips really did have a big advantage in productivity for graphics and video production, and even just raw computational prowess. Especially when coupled with the superior UX of OS 7 compared with the competition of the time. But, the modern hardware and software landscape is very different. I try to be objective enough to embrace the best utilitarian solution, regardless of brand or marketing. And, if I care about looks, Asus, for many years, was using the same manufacturer that Apple was. They were even sued over the similarities. Even today, several brands make Windows and Linux purposed hardware that meets or exceeds the optical appeal of Apple devices. I think Windows today fulfills the need for both personal and enterprise computing, while Linux fills the need for privacy and professional tech development. And each one does so in that respective category separately better than Apple does in either one. And that's considering all the flaws and glaring shortcomings and long running issues of both Windows and Linux (referring to desktop usage only), sadly.

cubefox 2y ago

I guess the increasing popularity of macOS is mainly due to private use while Windows still has advantages in company environments.

trimethylpurine 2y ago
I think that's true. For private use, it's fine, except for the added cost. But overall, even there, I don't particularly see the benefit aside from the glamorous appeal. As an analogy, a Rolex is a great watch. Is it objectively a functionally better time keeping device than a Tissot or most any other time keeping device? Not really. But I'll concede, it looks great and it makes a statement that a lower cost device doesn't make. There is value in that. It's just that, for me, that justification doesn't weigh against practicality when considering the importance of a tool so critical to one's success and happiness in the modern world. I was a big Apple fan in the 90s when Apple's Motorola chips really did have a big advantage in productivity for graphics and video production, and even just raw computational prowess. Especially when coupled with the superior UX of OS 7 compared with the competition of the time. But, the modern hardware and software landscape is very different. I try to be objective enough to embrace the best utilitarian solution, regardless of brand or marketing. And, if I care about looks, Asus, for many years, was using the same manufacturer that Apple was. They were even sued over the similarities. Even today, several brands make Windows and Linux purposed hardware that meets or exceeds the optical appeal of Apple devices. I think Windows today fulfills the need for both personal and enterprise computing, while Linux fills the need for privacy and professional tech development. And each one does so in that respective category separately better than Apple does in either one. And that's considering all the flaws and glaring shortcomings and long running issues of both Windows and Linux (referring to desktop usage only), sadly.