Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 177 posts

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#161

Post by sqeaky »

jakobegger wrote: post #110
talmand wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I hear a continual litany of woe and despair from our helpdesk about drivers, and anti-virus, and AD issues etc ad infinitum Sounds like human error to me. My two young children seem to handle Windows just fine without me having to constantly monitor their machines. Edit: what? my anecdotal evidence isn't as good as everybody else?

You should know that anecdotal evidence is frowned upon on Hacker News when it doesn't support conventional wisdom.

I thought his anecdote was the conventional wisdom?

It lines up pretty perfectly with my experience swapping in Ubuntu for Mac OS. When I have a problem I can troubleshoot it down to a specific line of code or piece of hardware, on windows.... well, I would rather not troubleshoot anything on windows.

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#162

Post by sqeaky »

digi_owl wrote: post #118
knz wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chromebooks have a similar experience is you want an even cheaper alternative. Applications beyond the browser are more limited (photo management is awful on Chromebooks) but it's hard to beat the price and functionality for most users.

Was trying to sell my dad on getting a Chromebook, but he insisted on getting something with a numpad...

Tape on of these to it: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Da...

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#163

Post by forgettableuser »

kogepathic wrote: post #94
rpazyaquian wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How I would describe a MacBook is "quality". It's not especially durable, it just doesn't break down over time. I've definitely noticed the same thing. Almost every laptop (and computer, for that matter) has broken down within a year to a year and a half for some random dumb reason. Two of my laptops died due to messed up power supply connections on the motherboard, two others died due to the hinges completely snap…

> Almost every laptop (and computer, for that matter) has broken down within a year to a year and a half for some random dumb reason. Consumer hardware is crap because the market doesn't want to pay for anything above crap. The laptops break after a year because that's how long the warranty is, and the manufacturer is counting on you to come back and buy next year's cheapest model when your laptop breaks. Go look at…

Some time ago, a coworker of mine was in a terrible car rollover accident. He escaped without long lasting injuries, but the car was totaled. His Macbook Pro was loose in the car and it got bent in the middle.

Amazingly, only the DVD drive was destroyed. Everything else continued to work.

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#164

Post by Eric_WVGG »

rvanmil wrote: post #35

It's only anecdotal, ofcourse, but I used to own Windows machines and as a result so did all my relatives with me being the "tech guy" in the family. Not a week would pass without me fixing a relative's PC. Now, about 7 years later, everyone in my family including myself has switched to Macs and I can't even remember the last time I was called to fix a machine.

I'm in the same boat, and a couple weeks ago an acquaintance who runs an art gallery asked me to come out and help her reconnect her computers after a relocation. I didn't think to ask if they used Macs, and am now neck-deep in Windows hell for the first time in, yeah, about seven years.

Nothing has changed. Disregard everything you've heard about Windows 7 and Windows 10. It's just XP and a half inch deep slap of new paint.

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#165

Post by WWLink »

kogepathic wrote: post #94
rpazyaquian wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How I would describe a MacBook is "quality". It's not especially durable, it just doesn't break down over time. I've definitely noticed the same thing. Almost every laptop (and computer, for that matter) has broken down within a year to a year and a half for some random dumb reason. Two of my laptops died due to messed up power supply connections on the motherboard, two others died due to the hinges completely snap…

> Almost every laptop (and computer, for that matter) has broken down within a year to a year and a half for some random dumb reason. Consumer hardware is crap because the market doesn't want to pay for anything above crap. The laptops break after a year because that's how long the warranty is, and the manufacturer is counting on you to come back and buy next year's cheapest model when your laptop breaks. Go look at…

The Dell Precisions that are just rebranded Dell XPS laptops. They're nice at first but get annoying after a while. That said, the 5510 feels a heck of a lot more durable than the m3800 I used to have.

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#166

Post by raesene6 »

greedo wrote: post #148
raesene6 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I would say however is that some of those issue you mention are more about how organisations typically manage Windows systems than they are about Windows itself. Active Directory is a good example, there's no necessity to add a windows system to an Active Directory, and if a company is going down a less centrally controlled model, which includes things like MacOS systems, it would make sense to not force the Win…

The idea of running a decently sized corporation without AD is a non-starter. Fileshares alone would be unmanageable. I'm not talking a 50 person shop, I'm talking an enterprise with multiple locations and several thousand desktops. As much as I dislike having to use and manage Windows when it comes up, AD is an essential tool.

In an enterprise sure you need it for rights management, but then that's not really related to what the client OS is, you can run MacOS or Windows clients largely equally well if you're not using AD to centrally manage them.

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#167

Post by digi_owl »

sqeaky wrote: post #162
digi_owl wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was trying to sell my dad on getting a Chromebook, but he insisted on getting something with a numpad...

Tape on of these to it: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Da...

He already had one of those on an earlier laptop. He didn't want to have to fiddle with such a thing again.

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#168

Post by Mithaldu »

Terretta wrote: post #152
WayneBro wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only works from Mac to Mac though. You cannot do remote desktop from Windows to Mac. That's typical Apple bullshit that will not fly in the enterprise. RDP also comes built into Windows where is you have to buy this from Apple. Also for anybody suggesting team viewer… Come on that's a ridiculously expensive package that does not even work as well and it's not ubiquitous.

> "It only works from Mac to Mac though. You cannot do remote desktop from Windows to Mac. That's typical Apple bullshit" What are you talking about? Here are five ways: https://www.raymond.cc/blog/remote-access-apple-mac-os-x-via... TL;DR: Turn on the built-in open standard VNC server on the Mac, use a VNC client on Windows: Mac OS X actually comes with a built-in remote management feature that allows other computer…

VNC is pretty laggy to use when you could have RDP instead.

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#169

Post by Mithaldu »

Thiez wrote: post #159
slantyyz wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> In a decent corp environment with a gigE LAN, the data compression benefits of RDP compared to TeamViewer or Apple's Remote Desktop aren't that necessary. The performance gap is very noticeable even on GB LAN, especially as the screen resolution goes up. There were a couple of products on Mac that were almost as fast as Windows RDP, but they weren't cheap, and one of the two major companies (iRapp from CodeRebel […

> The performance gap is very noticeable even on GB LAN, especially as the screen resolution goes up. I find that hard to believe, I can play games like Rayman (that require reflexes and a low latency) over my steam link on a 100mbit network. Surely on a GB LAN there shouldn't be noticeable latency?

Is steam link VNC?

I've played games via VNC, but only visual novels. In all cases i've known real games require special transmission protocols, which operate in a specific domain, and are a lot faster than RDP, which operates in a broader domain, and is faster than VNC, which is the most general solution.

Re: Macs are 3 times cheaper to own than Windows PCs, says IBM's IT guy

#170

Post by Mithaldu »

ben_jones wrote: post #15

/r/sysadmin had a good discussion on it [1]. TLDR; the study is hardly conclusive and knowing IBM is aligned with business goals. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/58j88j/ibm_claims...

Wow, this is a nice quote:

"Yeah I was wondering about the Linux base. I was denied a Mac when they introduced this policy as I was what they call a privileged user (most sysadmins will be)."

Post reply on HN