Microsoft Vs Apple in work places

[l/l/rX]

I did a google search on this topic, but is there some sort of data base, website or something that can show you what percentage / some sort of stats of offices in NA or even USA that use windows OS vs macs OS?

I'm writing a paper right now, and I can't use my personal experience (which is every office I've ever worked in has used windows OS) to back up my facts obviously.

basically i want to show that not a lot of offices use Apples OS, so that I can show that Apple is true to their mission statement, which is basically in short, they are not focused on corporate users but more so creative professionals etc etc.

thanks any help would be appreciated.

[snoop101]

I think the only people that would us it in business is for graphics,sound and video editing and even that is going towards non mac. The biggest issue is support. Theres zero support for Macs. Most companies I have worked for have a policy that they wont touch macs.

As for exact numbers maybe someone has a website they know.

[l/l/rX]

Originally posted by snoop101
I think the only people that would us it in business is for graphics,sound and video editing and even that is going towards non mac. The biggest issue is support. Theres zero support for Macs. Most companies I have worked for have a policy that they wont touch macs.

As for exact numbers maybe someone has a website they know.

well exactly, "creative professionals" vs "corporate users."

[snoop101]

Yes and he wants to know about a office enviroment. A huge company will still have a small amount of these people, but like I said most are switching over to Windows based machines. Other things like cost of a unit and maintenance is put into factor.



Originally posted by l/l/rX


well exactly, "creative professionals" vs "corporate users."

[syscal]

I have one client with a Mac and it's only the owner that has one. Drove him nuts with the fact even MS Office didn't do what he wanted it to but he's made due and still likes it. Had to buy his own printer because the common one in their office didn't have drivers for the Mac to use TCP/IP, the Mac drivers only used Appletalk.

That being said I still purchased a Mac from a Beyond member just so I can be familiar with them should they start cropping up or if a potential client calls for Mac support.

Personally I think they are fun. My 3.5 year old can load up her own programs, take pictures, etc...but they are not business machines unless you're in design of some type. Even then it's a stretch considering how well Windows can handle those programs. I think it's called a designer's PC only because it's been that way for so long.

A common misconception that a $700 PC should perform as well as a $2000 Mac therefore Mac is the superior choice for performance. I believe this is incorrect and I'd be completely comfortable selling a DELL precision or HP workstation over a Mac for design or CAD.

If I had to build a case against Mac's I'd check partner sites like Microsoft or Lenovo (direct competition for the Air). They are taking Mac head on and would supply you with any info you needed to answer questions with. That's assuming you had partner access.

[beyondpinoy]

just watch all those "hello im a mac, hello im a PC" commercials, and you got all yoru solid facts there.. hahahah jk.. those commercials crack me up!

[syscal]

it was like when they used to sell you a new PC saying your internet would go faster.

not quite right.

[schocker]

The only time I have used macs in an office was for video editing. Otherwise, windows for all of the rest. Just more usability for windows i suppose.

[bonjoey]

Originally posted by syscal

A common misconception that a $700 PC should perform as well as a $2000 Mac therefore Mac is the superior choice for performance. I believe this is incorrect and I'd be completely comfortable selling a DELL precision or HP workstation over a Mac for design or CAD.


i agree with you, my $500 custom build pc running leopard is faster than $3000 genuine mac pro :thumbsup:

[syscal]

Originally posted by bonjoey


i agree with you, my $500 custom build pc running leopard is faster than $3000 genuine mac pro :thumbsup:

I did not say that.

[AG_Styles]

Mac's are pretty much useless nowadays. there's no more advantage in graphics and video editing anymore compared to lets say 10 years ago.
We're using all windows machines here in the studio.

[rmk]

Can't help you with your quest... but FWIW, I recently purchased a Macbook Pro and had to use it in one of our offices this week and it was brutal. At home, I love the hell out of it though.

Purchased it because I was so turned off by Vista and Microsoft. Thought i'd try something different.

[Canmorite]

It's probably somewhere around 98% PC and 2% Mac. I know Mac is trying to break into the commercial side though.

The only establishments I see Mac's in are small places like hair salons, tanning places, coffee shops, etc etc.

[ZorroAMG]

OMG this isn't 1996 people. Macs run XP better than PC's, do all creative work better, HOW are they still inferior? Cause they cost more? MB/BMW/Audi cost more than toyota/honda/nissan, they must be inferior too...

PC fanboys are almost as bad as mac fanboys like me...:rolleyes: Half of you have never USED a mac other than at kinkos....I had to use crappy PC's from 1993-2001 when I finally said eff it and went back to macs. NEVER again and I'll NEVER have to.

It's like you blackberry vs iPhone people....:banghead:

[rmk]

Originally posted by ZorroAMG
OMG this isn't 1996 people. Macs run XP better than PC's, do all creative work better, HOW are they still inferior? Cause they cost more? MB/BMW/Audi cost more than toyota/honda/nissan, they must be inferior too...

PC fanboys are almost as bad as mac fanboys like me...:rolleyes: Half of you have never USED a mac other than at kinkos....I had to use crappy PC's from 1993-2001 when I finally said eff it and went back to macs. NEVER again and I'll NEVER have to.

It's like you blackberry vs iPhone people....:banghead:


:werd:

[eblend]

Originally posted by ZorroAMG
OMG this isn't 1996 people. Macs run XP better than PC's

not sure how thats possible, intel hardware running xp or intel hardware running xp on a pc....build them to same spec and they will run the same.

[Mr. Burns]

I use a 24" iMac at home, and a 15" MacBookPro at work.

I am an IT consultant for a large consulting firm in Calgary. You would be surprised to see the number of guys using Macs in our office... there are quite a few.

I have yet to run into any major issues, and I have VMWare Fusion with XP on it if I do run into anything... so far I have not and I have been using the Mac at work full time for approx. 4 months now.

You couldn't pay me to go back to windows.

[ZorroAMG]

Originally posted by eblend


not sure how thats possible, intel hardware running xp or intel hardware running xp on a pc....build them to same spec and they will run the same.

It's not a guess, it's been bench tested...everything runs faster on the mac...sorry.

I'm fucking tired of this debate.

[syscal]

I add it up to the Home PC vs Corporate PC.

Consumer PC comes with monitor, printer, scanner, everything for $700.

Corporate PC comes with keyboard and mouse and costs $1300.

The difference?

Consumer PC is put together with parts that are purchased using the "I need a billion sound cards, who can give them to me the cheapest?" method.

Corporate PC are, for the most part, built to spec. Engineered.

Apple is the same thing. Built to spec and engineered.

You can't tell me that some memx POS build it yourself combo is going to run better than a specifically built Mac that had millions go into R&D before it was sold.

This is why I have my statement above that says I'd put, dollar for dollar, a corporate machine against an Apple and it will match for reliability.

Anyone else is entitled to their opinion.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by ZorroAMG
OMG this isn't 1996 people. Macs run XP better than PC's, do all creative work better, HOW are they still inferior? Cause they cost more? MB/BMW/Audi cost more than toyota/honda/nissan, they must be inferior too...

PC fanboys are almost as bad as mac fanboys like me...:rolleyes: Half of you have never USED a mac other than at kinkos....I had to use crappy PC's from 1993-2001 when I finally said eff it and went back to macs. NEVER again and I'll NEVER have to.

It's like you blackberry vs iPhone people....:banghead: I'm sorry, but you're flat out wrong.

Your claim that "Macs run XP better than PCs" almost made me spit my drink at the monitor in a fit of laughter. Spec for spec, the PC will run it better. And do you know why? Because you're running XP on virtualized hardware on the Mac. You can't just load up XP on a Mac like you can on a PC. An OS running on virtualized hardware will always have a performance hit simply because of the fact that it's having to share every single bit of resources with the Host operating system, which is Mac OS X in Apple's case.


And creative work can be done better on a Mac, you say??

A Mac is a PC with a fancy case and some proprietary hardware and a different operating system, please tell me how that defies an otherwise boring PC. Then explain to me how that difference somehow increases productivity. And don't start with iLife, because if you're using the iLife suite for 'creative work', then it's obviously not for any sort of professional grade work, and that makes the whole argument pretty moot.

I own a copy of the Adobe CS3 Master Collection, a software package available on both Mac AND PC. I can change ICC profiles for display, printing, etc. to get the most accurate colour display and printouts... so can you. I can buy a mouse with a ridiculously accurate optic sensor or a WACOM tablet... and so can you. There's no benefit/drawback to either. The files port from Mac to PC and vice versa rather seemlessly because it's all Adobe's format.

Anything a Mac can do, a PC can do. Anything a PC can do, a Mac can do... well, except with running AutoCAD natively, since they don't make a Mac version, and virtualizing AutoCAD can result in a big performance hit, but who needs AutoCAD? :rolleyes:


I'm a network administrator/IT project lead for an IT firm here in Calgary. Here's the long and short of it: Macs aren't any easier to use... they're just different. Macs don't crash any less, either... again, they just crash different.

In the workplace, we largely see PCs. There's one project I manage that has a Mac user connecting to the domain, and we used a program called ADmitMac, which allows the Mac to properly interfac with Active Directory. It was a pretty braindead simple process to get it working. Much easier than having to change domain security policies on Server 2003 to allow 'less secure' workgroup-style access by an untrusted machine.

We had a customer who used nothing but PCs, but decided in their infinite wisdom that they needed a Mac server. Of course, talking sense with the whole "You have an all PC network, the Windows machines will tie in better with a Windows server (and they will, Mac Fanboys)" didn't seem to sway them from their position of "There's less chance of the server getting spyware if it's a Mac." For those of you who know enough to know HOW spyware gets on ANY machine, you're probably grinning a little. Who the hell SURFS THE INTERNET on an unrestricted administrator account on a SERVER in the first place??

[ZorroAMG]

Flat out wrong? Based on your opinion vs mine, it's a little hard for you to say that. All the PCs in my office give everyone nothing but grief. My mac? No issues.

Virtualized hardware or NOT there have been bench tests running identical software between similarly equipped machines.

How can I be flat out wrong?

Anyway, this debate gives me a headache..let's just agree to disagree :)

[syscal]

Not joining that arguement...but you can boot a Mac with straight windows.

The put out Windows drivers for the mac when they went intel so people could run native windows without virtualization.

You have to use bootcamp or whatever and dual boot for it.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by ZorroAMG
Flat out wrong? Based on your opinion vs mine, it's a little hard for you to say that. All the PCs in my office give everyone nothing but grief. My mac? No issues.

Virtualized hardware or NOT there have been bench tests running identical software between similarly equipped machines.

How can I be flat out wrong?

Anyway, this debate gives me a headache..let's just agree to disagree :) I could say the same about Windows Vista. And the productivit- ...ah fuck it. Agreed on agreeing to disagree, because I deal with this idiotic argument with another friend of mine enough as it is.

You think you're a Mac Fanboy, I bet you didn't change your MSN name to "I <3 Leopard" when it first was released. The guy could be a total vegetarian and still get enough protein from sucking Steve Jobs' cock.

syscal: Okay, so basically a PC can natively boot OSX and a Mac can natively boot Windows.

So at this point, you're either opting for a pretty case that looks good in a Starbucks, or a futuristic case that looks like it's filled with aliens. Whichever tickles your fancy. I go for the third option, which is a clean, sharp looking case, like those ANTEC home theatre PC cases.

[ZorroAMG]

OMFG, I think this debate has FOR ONCE ended in a rather civilized way!!

Congrats to us! :D

Your friend IS a nerdfanboy, holy hell!!

I opt for option one, looks good EVERYWHERE and looks nice docked to my 23" apple HD display ;)

I can't stand all the blue LEDs and aliens etc all over the kiddy PC's either!

[syscal]

I like my thinkpads...people hate the looks of them but I love the looks :P

[eblend]

Originally posted by ZorroAMG


It's not a guess, it's been bench tested...everything runs faster on the mac...sorry.

I'm fucking tired of this debate.


your not really debating here, your just stating your opinion and accept people to buy it.

Sorry to tell you but I work in IT indurstry and work with every server hardware available on the market on the daily basis. Before that used to be a tech for both apple and pc platforms.

Your statement that everything runs faster on a mac so flawed that only a fanboy would ever say something like that.

[ZorroAMG]

Dude, let it go. We don't give a shit anymore today.

Oh and who's a fanboy as well? :rolleyes:

[supe]

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/selling-it/macbook-pro-fastest-windows-laptop-not-so-fast-331223.php

Macs are over rated.

[TorqueDog]

Originally posted by ZorroAMG
I opt for option one, looks good EVERYWHERE and looks nice docked to my 23&quot; apple HD display ;)

I can't stand all the blue LEDs and aliens etc all over the kiddy PC's either! I think it's silly to have LED fans and viewing windows in your case. Like I said, I opt for the case that I can neatly hide with my home theatre equipment.

[eblend]

Originally posted by ZorroAMG
Dude, let it go. We don't give a shit anymore today.

Oh and who's a fanboy as well? :rolleyes:

Considering I use Unix, Linux, MacOS and Windows platforms I don't know. Just statements that say Windows runs faster on a mac (which nowadays is a damn PC since it uses the exact same processors the desktops use) really makes you wonder who could ever believe that

[Kavy]

I own both a macbook pro and a dell

I like them both but hands down the dell eats the macbook for dinner, but thats just my opinion owning 3 studios using all mac setups so I am not a fanboy either way.

What i love about this thread is that it is all opinion because all those saying this is faster then this are unable to provide a link and until that day I will stick to PC as identical hardware for less money makes sense to me.

I may as well go out and buy monster cable CAT5 cable and HDMI cables for my computer to make them faster to because more money must mean its better.????????:banghead: