"Apple Tax" ? Macs cheaper than Windows PCs

[ilev]

TCO: New research finds Macs in the enterprise easier, cheaper to manage than Windows PCs

Shocking: A recent survey of enterprise IT managers that administer both PCs and Macs finds that Macs have a better TOC (total cost of ownership) than Windows boxes, and require less user training and help.

The respondents were given the option to select from a range of cost differences. Not only did the administrators across the board say that Macs were less expensive, in all but one category the majority of administrators who said Macs cost less said they were more than 20 percent less expensive to manage than PCs. Of those who asserted that PCs cost less, the majority always asserted that PCs were between 0 and 20 percent less expensive to manage than Macs.

The figures that pop out from the chart are those for the time spent troubleshooting problems (16 vs 65 percent, PC and Macs, respectively), dealing with help desk calls (16 vs 54 percent), training users (16 vs 48 percent) and managing system configs. (25 vs 50 percent).

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=6294&tag=wrapper;col1

[+LogicalApex MVC]

Seems Apple funded that report. As I know a lot of admins who have had to deal with Macs and they wouldn't agree at all. Macs are far hader to manage than Windows boxes. Especially when those Windows Boxes are in an AD setup with Group Policy and etc.

[argonite]

Can't you just "set it and forget it" these days with a Windows box?

[Berserk87]

on the windows side I bet they added **** like photoshop and adobe premier pro to the total cost of the pc and stated things like "macs include similar tools for free!" or some other BS.

I KNOW they included $70/year for anti virus, and other garbage costs of computer maintenance because I saw this same study years ago.

[Vice]

Seems Apple funded that report. As I know a lot of admins who have had to deal with Macs and they wouldn't agree at all. Macs are far hader to manage than Windows boxes. Especially when those Windows Boxes are in an AD setup with Group Policy and etc.

So you see the facts, but because you don't agree with them you say Apple obviously paid for the study. What kind of backwards logic is that?

[c3ntury]

Umm yea, Linux in the Enterprise is much better tbh.

[Gocom]

Umm yea, Linux in the Enterprise is much better tbh.

Only if you have specific reason to use Linux; certain machinery, house distro, application development etc, otherwise not really.

There really isn't a reason for a designer, photographer or taxes person to use Linux. There is also reasons why those software houses that do OSes use also other products than Linux; for example Microsoft and Nokia that do main development with their own build, but also use Windows and OS X to do stuff that can not be done with no-GUI.

[Growled Member]

Interesting article. However, I think TCO is different in every organization. It's hard to say that Apple is better except in a general way. I think one advantage for Windows is it's well know and well used so generally administrators find it easy to use since that is what they are use to. However, as the article pointed out, users are driving the Mac in the workplace, as they continue to buy them.

[Raa]

I agree in principle, but in practise it's not quite that easy.

[Solid Knight]

Something tells me this is only true if you have about a hundred or less computers to manage.

[DavidM]

This from the EDA's web site The Integrated Mac and Making it easy to deploy, integrate and manage Macs in a Windows environment.

Sounds like a completely unbiased report, from a completely unbiased company....right? They wouldn't have an agenda would they?

[Dashel]

Same BS, different year.

[XerXis]

whahahahahaaaa, right ;). Come back when macs have anything that comes even close to AD/group policies

[thealexweb]

In the table on zdnet they missed out a cruicial part, the cost of buying the equipment in the first place, without that it can't be taken seriously. Also this was Apple funded so it's gonna say what Apple wants.

[Elliott]

whahahahahaaaa, right ;). Come back when macs have anything that comes even close to AD/group policies

They do. I've worked with both Windows Server 2008 R2 and Mac OS X Snow Leopard Server. Open Directory on OS X Server is extended to manage clients on a computer or user level. Anything you can manage with a plist on OS X, you can manage with an OS X Server, which means it's pretty damn powerful.

In the table on zdnet they missed out a cruicial part, the cost of buying the equipment in the first place, without that it can't be taken seriously. Also this was Apple funded so it's gonna say what Apple wants.

Do you have proof that it's an Apple funded report or are you just throwing around claims?

[Growled Member]

In the table on zdnet they missed out a cruicial part, the cost of buying the equipment in the first place, without that it can't be taken seriously. Also this was Apple funded so it's gonna say what Apple wants.

To be fair they all do that. I've seen Microsoft do it to.

[Hell-In-A-Handbasket]

i dont see where it was apple funded ?

or are people just making up an excuse that doesnt fall in line with their opinion ?

now if it was apple funded ( Proof ), then the "research" was just as pointless as a bunch of others

[Mr. Gibs]

i dont see where it was apple funded ?

or are people just making up an excuse that doesnt fall in line with their opinion ?

now if it was apple funded ( Proof ), then the "research" was just as pointless as a bunch of others

I don't think it was an Apple funded survey. However, if you go to the website that actually ran the survey you can see it focuses mostly on Macs.

Guess who their target market and research demographic is then. Corporations that use Mac.

[markwolfe Veteran]

...

Guess who their target market and research demographic is then. Corporations that use Mac.

Corporations with 0 Macs would not be able to compare one versus the other at their facility, would they. ;)

[Mr. Gibs]

Corporations with 0 Macs would not be able to compare one versus the other at their facility, would they. ;)

But the sites primary focus is getting Macs into enterprises.

So, in a way, it's like a Windows Partner doing a survey on how great windows in corporations is, and the results coming out to show it's the best; You take the results with a grain of salt.

[SkinAddict]

Heh... nobody noticed it says "TOC" in the post, should be "TCO".

Only if you have specific reason to use Linux; certain machinery, house distro, application development etc, otherwise not really.

There really isn't a reason for a designer, photographer or taxes person to use Linux. There is also reasons why those software houses that do OSes use also other products than Linux; for example Microsoft and Nokia that do main development with their own build, but also use Windows and OS X to do stuff that can not be done with no-GUI.

Have you ever actually USED Linux? Ever heard of KDE or GNOME? Don't get it confused with Unix (which Mac OSX sits on top of too btw).

Personally, I find Linux's GUI to be far superior to any other available (except MAYBE Windows 7).

[AgentGray]

anyone on any serious corporate level that doesn't have some decent mac antivirus on their networks should be fired...so ... lets add that $70/year back in... ... hmmm... Lets see, Keeping in mind Office is still defacto standard, and is needed to be competitive and apple still forces you to buy their iWorks included in the cost of purchase... MORE expensive for office software...

[markwolfe Veteran]

I would seriously likewise doubt comparisons from institutions that have zero Macs.

I guess that no study is reliable, eh?

[Mr. Gibs]

I would seriously likewise doubt comparisons from institutions that have zero Macs.

I guess that no study is reliable, eh?

I would seriously doubt that too. But it isn't the corporations that run mac that i'm talking about ;) It's the company thats running the survey that's the problem. If it was an independent group, not affiliated with either Microsoft or Apple the survey results would be more "accurate."

Also, the bias in the article itself:

the company’s focus on hardware quality and technological advances in a time when PC makers have raced to the bottom of the market with netbooks and crappy low-cost systems; support for Intel processors and Windows virtualization; the halo effect of the iPod and iPhone platforms; the terrible introduction of Windows Vista; the Apple Store strategy; or others.

Few points that are wrong about that quote:

1. Apple's computers are usually upgraded far later than other OEM computers. For example the Macbook Pro is still on old C2Ds while pretty much every other OEM has been offering i5 or i7 processors for a while now.

2. Low cost doesn't always mean crappy.

3. Netbooks are certainly not the "bottom of the market"

4. Terrible introduction of Windows Vista? Vista certainly had it's flaws but it wasn't anywhere near as bad as the media and Apple made it out to be.

[Gocom]

Have you ever actually USED Linux? Ever heard of KDE or GNOME? Don't get it confused with Unix (which Mac OSX sits on top of too btw).

Point is in the applications that those ppl use. I'm not confusing anything. Im saying that you need to get the right tool for the job.

Neither I'm saying Windows is somehow better or W7 gui is awesome compared to KDE, eh. I'm saying that none of those is best, all of those are good for the right job.