Oh, the irony. That excuse has run dry and Apple knows it. New MacBook Pro details are very soon and next year for desktops. Kind of a sad day for IBM, but hey at least now they can put on their cool glasses.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
IBM Replacing PCs With Macs Within The Company
- Thread starter Megalith
- Start date
dgz
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2010
- Messages
- 5,838
Both companies are engaged in a strategic partnership, right? The explains it for the most part.
This smells like a decision made by a corner office VP who bought a MAC for his house and "it's so much better than his PC at work".
I've seen a lot of huge technical decisions made from the top by non-technical people and it makes me laugh when the projects almost
always crash and burn as their own IT staff told them it would.
Why the hell does top management hire tech people who know what they're doing and then not listen to them? lol
I bailed out on an outsourcing of IT at a large Chicago bank. We tried to tell them that we may be expensive, but we are a well oiled machine
who actually do a great job. I bailed early, but those who hung in there said it was miserable. In the end the 3 year contract was not renewed
and I believe they hired in completely new IT staff. Huge waste of time and many millions of dollars.
Having said all of that.... this MAC thing may work for them, but I seriously doubt there will be any cost savings.
What sucks is that it sounds like a major motivation is to trim back on IT staff, not just cost saving on HW/SW.
Bean counters seem to hate IT people. I usually don't like them either (I always fell asleep in my accounting class).
.
I've seen a lot of huge technical decisions made from the top by non-technical people and it makes me laugh when the projects almost
always crash and burn as their own IT staff told them it would.
Why the hell does top management hire tech people who know what they're doing and then not listen to them? lol
I bailed out on an outsourcing of IT at a large Chicago bank. We tried to tell them that we may be expensive, but we are a well oiled machine
who actually do a great job. I bailed early, but those who hung in there said it was miserable. In the end the 3 year contract was not renewed
and I believe they hired in completely new IT staff. Huge waste of time and many millions of dollars.
Having said all of that.... this MAC thing may work for them, but I seriously doubt there will be any cost savings.
What sucks is that it sounds like a major motivation is to trim back on IT staff, not just cost saving on HW/SW.
Bean counters seem to hate IT people. I usually don't like them either (I always fell asleep in my accounting class).
.
SanitaryMold
n00b
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2011
- Messages
- 15
All fun to speculate I suppose but we don't know the challenges they face or solutions they put in place. I just like how people argue that they must be lying because... Macs.
Do you guys eat your desktops or something? I'm running three Dell OptiPlex 755s running Core 2 Duos, OptiPlex 790, i5, and Precision T7500 with dual Xeon X5550. I also have a Dell Wyse thin client running 2 more networks. No real problem with them. The only problems I run into is the hdd dying, cause we use removeable hdds. Have to store them in a safe at the end of the day, so the sliding in/out eventually kills drives.
We rarely get calls about Dell hardware. It's usually something dealing with not being able to get a website, profile issues, etc. Which has nothing to do with the Dell hardware. It's because of our security posture, our profiles aren't stored on the local machines, etc. Can't built them as such, cause users can move from a thick client to a thin client randomly.
Thin clients don't really save us any time, just shifts that time elsewhere. Less being at the customer's desk, more being in your office updating the image, virtualizing apps, etc. Engineering solutions to make things virtual is taking a lot of time. If it was nothing more than just Office and a couple other programs, we'd be done. All the specialized BS is making it a big nasty chore.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
We have a few clients who are primarily Mac shops.
All because they heard that Macs are more reliable and they had huge issues with their PC infrastructure.
Never mind that they needed to keep the PC infrastructure for their business apps...
Never mind that their users had the computer equivalent of "black thumb" (not "brown thumb", brown thumb implies they slowly kill things, black thumb means they sit down in front of something and it just dies), and their environment was, thus, a meat grinder.
We had one guy running all his PC apps within a VM. The system hiccuped, and instead of calling us, took it to the "Genius Bar" who deleted the original VM files and set him up with a bare new VM. And it was somehow OUR fault he'd lost all his data...
Macs are good for those whose workloads fit within the Mac environment or are simple and straightforward (web, e-mail, video conference). Beyond that, it's a fucking nightmare. And Apple, which really doesn't want (and can't handle) enterprise support, is more useless than tits on a windmill.
All because they heard that Macs are more reliable and they had huge issues with their PC infrastructure.
Never mind that they needed to keep the PC infrastructure for their business apps...
Never mind that their users had the computer equivalent of "black thumb" (not "brown thumb", brown thumb implies they slowly kill things, black thumb means they sit down in front of something and it just dies), and their environment was, thus, a meat grinder.
We had one guy running all his PC apps within a VM. The system hiccuped, and instead of calling us, took it to the "Genius Bar" who deleted the original VM files and set him up with a bare new VM. And it was somehow OUR fault he'd lost all his data...
Macs are good for those whose workloads fit within the Mac environment or are simple and straightforward (web, e-mail, video conference). Beyond that, it's a fucking nightmare. And Apple, which really doesn't want (and can't handle) enterprise support, is more useless than tits on a windmill.
This actually makes a lot of sense. Macs are designed with top-down management as a guiding principle, some remote authority handles all of the administration so the end user doesn't have to. If the majority of your work was in the office environment, spending more up front for lower support costs would make a big difference.
That said, this would never work in the lab environments. We do all sorts of stuff that requires breaking our machines to test new functionality.
That said, this would never work in the lab environments. We do all sorts of stuff that requires breaking our machines to test new functionality.
ecmaster76
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,150
Easy
IBM is a direct competitor with Microsoft but has very little overlap with Apple. They already got out of bed with MS when they pawned Thinkpad, etc off to Lenovo
Admittedly a lot of IT depts. do shoot themselves in the foot by speccing out the cheapest of garbage from HP/Dell/Lenovo's enterprise laptop line which naturally are bug riddled junky pieces of plastic that barely suffice when brand new. The cheapest Mac costs more but will be better built. of course they could just spend more on PCs instead but justifying that extra $200 from the low end model is too much work on a day to day basis. Penny wise, pound (£) foolish.
IBM is a direct competitor with Microsoft but has very little overlap with Apple. They already got out of bed with MS when they pawned Thinkpad, etc off to Lenovo
Admittedly a lot of IT depts. do shoot themselves in the foot by speccing out the cheapest of garbage from HP/Dell/Lenovo's enterprise laptop line which naturally are bug riddled junky pieces of plastic that barely suffice when brand new. The cheapest Mac costs more but will be better built. of course they could just spend more on PCs instead but justifying that extra $200 from the low end model is too much work on a day to day basis. Penny wise, pound (£) foolish.
SomeoneElse
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2007
- Messages
- 1,965
I worked the helpdesk for the last 3 years before moving up. I don't recall a huge number of hardware related issues. 95% of the calls were issues with applications which has nothing really to do with Apple vs PC. I recall this articale a few days ago when a friend of mine posted it and was talking about how people didn't want to upgrade because something wouldn't work if they did and upgrade. Obviously this has nothing to do with PC or Apple it has everything to do with the fact they don't want to pay for the upgraded application. So the argument that someone should move to Apple because they wouldn't have to upgrade is invaild since the software they own is probably 15 years old and itself is outdate. It wouldn't run on a new Apple or PC because of the code its running.
I think this article is misrepresenting what goes into this actual cost. Apple probably gave them a deep discount and IBM is now going to layoff 1000 HD employees to factor in the cost savings.....no need for HD because Apple asks the employees to go directly to the Apple store instead of IBM's internal helpdesk.
I think this article is misrepresenting what goes into this actual cost. Apple probably gave them a deep discount and IBM is now going to layoff 1000 HD employees to factor in the cost savings.....no need for HD because Apple asks the employees to go directly to the Apple store instead of IBM's internal helpdesk.
Todd Walter
Gawd
- Joined
- May 10, 2016
- Messages
- 634
Why would they need AD? Everything that mattered at IBM was accessed through PROFS or another mainframe based backend. They used dumb terminals (and dumb-terminal applications on PCs, that would let them make the greenscreen mouse aware). They are the kings of silos and centralized management. For all we know, they may be shifting to a web UI (which would make sense, as it's the network licensing that makes MS expensive; the OS cost is trivial) or a server farm of WinOS instances and RDP.
If the IT helpdesk doesn't know anything about Macs, Mac users will stop calling and try to fix it themselves. The problem is that its better to have a $15 an hour employee fix something in 5 mins, than have a $50 an hour engineer taking time out of his day to search the internet to find a solution to his problem for an hour or two.
This reminds me of the British general that almost had his troops helmets taken away, because they saw head injuries increase when the soldiers wore helmets. Luckily, someone called him out as a retard and explained that there are more injuries, but far less fatalities due to head trauma, as without helmets the soldiers would instantly die, whereas with them they just got hurt.
By not relying on internet forums to drive their cost projections.
yeeeahh... that 40 vs 5 sounds like a very aggressive change... but hey maybe macs are the ultimate panacea, I doubt it though.
timberwolf
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2015
- Messages
- 159
Having worked with IBM on a PC rollout as a lead tech...IBM can fuckup a wet dream. Anything that isn't a mainframe or AS/400. I'd expect this project to be no different. Bonuses will be paid to the "team" (management) before the first workstation hits the desk and the poorly planned and managed rollout begins.
I just speak from our own experiences, as our IT support structure has no clue how to deal with Macs, so the execs that have Macs and are used to IT support having no clue how to deal with macs either don't call in the first place for help, or they don't call after the first negative experience where the tech obviously has no OSX experience.
Mac users in general are used to this experience over the last couple decades, at least in a corporate environment, and so don't try to piss in the wind knowing damn well they are on their own.
That doesn't mean the Mac users aren't having problems, they just don't call unless they need a password reset or have a question they know is not Mac related.
From an IT manager perspective, you see your workload go down and your costs reduced, but it doesn't mean the users are getting the help they need... it just means they are fixing it on their own time, wasting their valuable time, or driving down to the Mac store and diverting the costs right back to Apple letting one of their "geniuses" work on it.
And regarding Mac pricing, its quite possible that trying to penetrate the corporate market with a high profile customer like IBM, Apple may have given pricing that not only forgoes their massive profit margins built in to their archaic cheap products, but may have even sold at a loss.
grtitan
Telemetry is Spying on ME!
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2011
- Messages
- 1,266
I saw the keynote at JNUC 2016 and they provided plenty of data to justify this.
Here is a video of it.
Here is a video of it.
Last edited:
viscountalpha
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2011
- Messages
- 2,618
Bean counters hate maintenance costs because to them they just take money. I swear it always comes back to bite them eventually.
Oh, I hate places that go super cheap on desktops. "We just got brand new machines, so why is everyone working so slow?"
Cause you freaking only bought 1 GB of ram for their desktop. They're spending most of their day waiting for shit to open. For those places, we end up cannibalizing old systems for memory, if that memory works in the new machines. Although, I've also been places where we weren't allowed to cannibalize the outgoing systems.
fuzzylogik
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2012
- Messages
- 653
I guess we'll see how this goes after a few years? Completely agree that cost of ownership when it comes to "cheap" PC's can be quite high... but sweet deals with a manufacture certainly can help with not getting cheap workstations.
IBM I guess doesn't use an enterprise environment, right? do they just look at all the various offices/departments or individual computers as small businesses or people working from home? I can't imaging how complex it'll become managing devices that these Mac's connect to... do they have an open network/wireless that never requires password changes? do they have network printers (that require some sort of authentication)? Do people there know about clearing out or changing keychain passwords when a network account password expires? Are the Macs going to come will all drivers for everything pre-installed? or do they expect that end users will be able to figure out how to install (or even find) drivers manually that normally requires you to physically connect the device (like a printer) to the Mac they're using? what if you use a software package that isn't built in-house (or hardware) that the new OSX renders obsolete/breaks and no support is available? It doesn't have to be a big issue to cause a headache at a help desk.
IBM I guess doesn't use an enterprise environment, right? do they just look at all the various offices/departments or individual computers as small businesses or people working from home? I can't imaging how complex it'll become managing devices that these Mac's connect to... do they have an open network/wireless that never requires password changes? do they have network printers (that require some sort of authentication)? Do people there know about clearing out or changing keychain passwords when a network account password expires? Are the Macs going to come will all drivers for everything pre-installed? or do they expect that end users will be able to figure out how to install (or even find) drivers manually that normally requires you to physically connect the device (like a printer) to the Mac they're using? what if you use a software package that isn't built in-house (or hardware) that the new OSX renders obsolete/breaks and no support is available? It doesn't have to be a big issue to cause a headache at a help desk.
If they are looking at hardware, they are probably looking at workstation class equipment, which on a small scale is price comparable between a Mac Pro and (insert random PC maker's workstation model). On a large scale, and with IBM's partnership with Apple, who knows?
Since the majority of workstations are PC before the switch, how much of this just comes from the user, not the hardware? Put all those users on a Mac, how many will be calling support? Probably a lot more than 5%!!!!
MavericK
Zero Cool
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2004
- Messages
- 31,898
Who argued they are lying?
D
Deleted member 93354
Guest
I don't have to worry about computer module breakdowns on a Model T either.
In other words, of course you will have less tech support calls if you can do less with it.
I thought IBM was a largely Linux driven company anyway.
In other words, of course you will have less tech support calls if you can do less with it.
I thought IBM was a largely Linux driven company anyway.
Probleminfected
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,406
IBM is dead, god save the queen.
Really massive mistake. Good luck running patched inhouse software, if they even recode it for iOS.
I see big losses in IBM's future, less over all production and more people complaining to the help desk.
Really massive mistake. Good luck running patched inhouse software, if they even recode it for iOS.
I see big losses in IBM's future, less over all production and more people complaining to the help desk.
I had 3 IBM field engineers at my job site today working on installing a new piece of equipment. When I mentioned this they just looked at me with strange looks on their faces. 2 said "no way" and the 3rd said "I'd take a mac if anyone asked me, but no one does". All were using Lenovo Thinkpads.
I'm the only IT person for a company with 70+ users. I not only handle all the servers (Exchange, SQL, Terminal servers, Hyper-V, Backup, etc), I also handle all the desktops/laptops. (that includes everything from ordering, repairing - I only call Dell if it's under warranty, Software, system installs, etc.). We are 100% Dell, and I've been surprised at how reliable the systems have been compared to other systems I used to support years before. There's no way I could support this many systems without the reliability and having them under the control of a Windows Domain. Of course I'm also using a number of Windows and Dell utilities to monitor everything.
If you were going through Dells as fast as their warranty expired, you must have been buying the bargain basement models.
For the past 9+ years I've been buying the business line with the 3 year warranty, and I've had so few that needed repairs over the past few years, I'm not sure the warranty is cost effective any more.
I'm in the process of giving away some 8 year old Dell laptops. 80% still work fine after 6+ years of heavy use. The 5-6 year old laptops are all still working fine.
The main reason I retire older laptops is due to performance or users complaining about them being to heavy/bulky/old looking
(can't have sales/service people in front of the customer with "old" looking systems)
As for Desktops, they are usually retired due to being obsolete long before the fail. My 6 year failure rate is probably in the low single digits.
This doesn't include drive failures since I consider the Dell/Seagate drives to be consumable items
and use such failures as a reason to upgrade the drive.Price is comparable when you go spec for spec, but PCs have a wider selection, so you can easily get something that'll be $2k less than the cheapest Mac Pro. Although, if you're buying at IBM's scale, they can make lower spec versions for them to buy and give a bulk discount. Same can be said with PC too. Guess it really depends on what they're aiming for. I can't imagine they are saving money on the hardware side of things. Maybe break even.
I figure those who selected to use a Mac, know how to use the Mac and know the ins/outs and just deal with it. It's like the bad reliability of a Tesla, but Tesla owners all praise it and just deal with it. "It's just part of being bleeding edge". Bet if they actually had someone tracking any/all problems, it's probably the same amount of headaches with Macs or PCs.
I'm the only IT person for a company with 70+ users. I not only handle all the servers (Exchange, SQL, Terminal servers, Hyper-V, Backup, etc), I also handle all the desktops/laptops. (that includes everything from ordering, repairing - I only call Dell if it's under warranty, Software, system installs, etc.). We are 100% Dell, and I've been surprised at how reliable the systems have been compared to other systems I used to support years before. There's no way I could support this many systems without the reliability and having them under the control of a Windows Domain. Of course I'm also using a number of Windows and Dell utilities to monitor everything.
If you were going through Dells as fast as their warranty expired, you must have been buying the bargain basement models.
For the past 9+ years I've been buying the business line with the 3 year warranty, and I've had so few that needed repairs over the past few years, I'm not sure the warranty is cost effective any more.
I'm in the process of giving away some 8 year old Dell laptops. 80% still work fine after 6+ years of heavy use. The 5-6 year old laptops are all still working fine.
The main reason I retire older laptops is due to performance or users complaining about them being to heavy/bulky/old looking
(can't have sales/service people in front of the customer with "old" looking systems)
As for Desktops, they are usually retired due to being obsolete long before the fail. My 6 year failure rate is probably in the low single digits.
This doesn't include drive failures since I consider the Dell/Seagate drives to be consumable items
A lot of large companies dump their systems once the warranty runs out. Doesn't matter whether they work or not. Out of warranty, get rid of it. Majority of machines work fine and you'll actually find them sitting on Craigslist or Ebay.
I'm very much a Dell supporter in the enterprise market. I rarely run into one that breaks. Compared to some places that were mostly HP. Man, do I hate HP workstations and especially their servers. It feels like their systems break within months of installing them.
Software engineer or any engineering related environment is much better off using a Mac than PC. It's much easier to manage things and especially lots of stuff are related to Unix / Linux / BSD etc. Windows is just not a option or optimal for it.
dgz
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2010
- Messages
- 5,838
PC = Windows huh? Come on now
lostinseganet
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2008
- Messages
- 1,220
Maybe the savings are in software subscription fees that the company no longer has to pay MS?
D
Deleted member 245375
Guest
M76
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 14,035
Were they buying pcs with golden cases? Otherwise I've never seen a mac with equivalent hardware cost less. It's usually the other way around.
You failed hard at the math. $336 x 100,000 is NOT 336 million!! It's 33.6 million.. Literally, an actual order of magnitude in difference. This makes the rest of your conjecturing in IBM's savings pointless..
Last edited:
Maybe those machines are a lot better than the Lattitudes we were using, but yeah, it was a miracle if one of them made it past 1 year without needing a service call for a busted keyboard, broken backlight, or a new power brick.
Every work environment is different - Macs work for ours, and they save a lot of labor in IT time for us. That may not be true at every, or even most, places.
Maxx_Power
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2012
- Messages
- 134
My previous university's physics research group all switched to iMacs at some point, years ago (admittedly Apple's least reliable computer). They all work wonderfully. Previously it was iterations of Dells and IBMs. A lot of other researchers in the group doing computational stuff, myself included, all switched to Macs. As far as I know, we all never looked back because our Macbooks were dependable workhorses. I do find myself having to spend more time tinkering with my PCs than any of my Macs and at one point of time, I had over 12 working computers running simulations in my basement (all PCs), after the work was done, I got rid of them all. I now use mostly Macs for work and keep a DIY itx desktop and a gaming laptop around to play games. I also run a remote support group of family+friends+privileged users and my PC users request the nearly all of the support from common viruses/malware/adware issues to hardware failure.
westrock2000
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2005
- Messages
- 9,433
If you working in a mostly *nix based environment but do not want to deal with the bullshit user experience of a *nix environment, OSX is a great alternative. Unix/Linux is a great foundation, but the whole "everyone is free to do what they want" mentality really detracts from it.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Agreed. Simply because *I* don't fit into any category of the Mac user base doesn't mean that there aren't broad swaths of users who can find value in there.
I have two Macs on my desk at work, but for silly reasons both run Windows 90% of the time. Visio is a requirement of my job, as are several utilities that only run on Windows and haven't been updated in years.
They're fine, they do their job. A computer is a computer. As long as you can make it fit your workflow, why do you care whose sticker is on it? The biggest problem I have - glossy thunderbolt display, big ass window in my office.
And the MacBooks still have the best touchpad on the market.
They're fine, they do their job. A computer is a computer. As long as you can make it fit your workflow, why do you care whose sticker is on it? The biggest problem I have - glossy thunderbolt display, big ass window in my office.
And the MacBooks still have the best touchpad on the market.
why not?