General discussion


PCs to Replace Mac?

By ChrispyCookey ·
We have a few Macs in our office specifically for our graphic design and publications group. Our IT Manager mentioned to the group yesterday that once we implement Vista, there won't be a reason to use a Mac for anything as Vista will do it all and be compatible with everything. I skeptical. I must have missed something...

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

IT manager needs a drug screening.

by fungus-among-us In reply to PCs to Replace Mac?

Does the IT manager know the difference between an Operating System and applications? Vista (beta) is a new operating system for IBM PC based systems, that does not magically change the way the applications work. PCs have their strong suits and MACs have theirs, but I doubt one will replace the other in the near future.

Collapse -

I don't think the IT manage needs a drug screening

by labarker In reply to IT manager needs a drug s ...

... he's just protecting his job. The more Windows boxes he has
to look after, the more work for him and his team. Replace all
the PCs with Macs and he'd have to get rid of some of his team.
You really have to be an idiot not to be able to both use and
look after a Mac. I'm the IT person for three Macs (have been for
over 10 years) and I taught myself. But none of my friends can
look after their PCs. They have to go running to a dealer when
software goes sour, and it seems to me they are always having
trouble. Also, they don't use their PCs nearly as much as we use
our Macs, which are on all day every day, yet these PCs break
down within a few years.

Collapse -

Bluring the lines

by esalkin In reply to IT manager needs a drug s ...

Apple is moving to the Intel chip-sets. Fire-wire, USB; etc. make parts swappable. Mac OS already does Windoze. Redmond get all their "wow" ideas from Cupertino. In a few years there will be very little difference and besides everyone will be on Linux anyway :0)

Collapse -

Linux then under fire??

by crayolakidd In reply to Bluring the lines

Keep in mind that there is little security difference btwn XP SP2 and most Linux distros in the way of security - the real difference is that Windows makes a much more sizable target due to its popularity. Now consider consider the reprocussions if what you are saying actually happened. If a mass exodus to Linux did occur, not only would it then be a more prime target, a large portion of hackers are Linux based making it very easy prey. Given also that Windows also has a massive head start by way of available antivirus software, and you start to see the ugly picture....Linux siply wouldn't be prepared to fight off such an onslaught.

Before all you Linux fanboys keep encouraging ppl to abandon Windows, you may want to take the time to consider the consequences of such advice :)

Collapse -

Linux Security Mac security

by janjop In reply to Linux then under fire??

Everyone moving to Linux is unlikely due mainly to the
applications that are unavailable. Graphic designers want Adobe
apps, Macromedia applications, and apps like Quark not the
free replacements like Gimp for those apps. They want native
versions not "WINE" emulations of their apps. To date Linux and
Unix works with the 3D community, Some high end 64 bit apps
like Discreet Flame (now Autodesk Flame), and the technical user
/ server community but not the graphic design community or
the general computer user community. Apple OS X is the
exception because of the apps available, the nature of the Mac
community, and the fact that OS X doesn't require Unix tech
abilities to operate.

The security issues are not on par with Windows because of the
design of the system. For example executable files in Windows
don't need much user intervention to launch. Microsoft
continues to ignore this issue! if a virus hits a Linux or a Unix
box the likelihood of it doing much damage to the system
is far less and the likelihood of a Unix user being unable to cope
with the situation is far greater because Linux/Unix users have
to be more tech savvy to install, use, or upgrade their systems at
all (OS X users are the exception). Also some of this has to do
the way user accounts are setup in Linux or Unix. Most Windows
users have full admin access to a system most Unix users
reserve a Super User account for risky admin stuff. Much of the
security issue has to do with the invisible running background
applications in Windows, virii and spy ware can run as
background applications leaving Windows users unaware, this
doesn?t really happen in Unix. Lastly most virus writers are
familiar with Windows vulnerabilities in Internet Explorer.
Internet Explorer hasn't been ported to Linux, exists for OS X but
is no longer available for OS X and is unavailable for other
versions of Unix. Existing Mac viruses are generally Word Macro
viruses (designed for the PC user), and Windows viruses that Mac
anti virus software detects as a courtesy to the Windows
community. (Mac users don?t want to spread Virii)

Collapse -

Get a list of applications

by JamesRL In reply to PCs to Replace Mac?

See if the same applications are available on the PC (don't guarentee they will be available for Vista on release day either).

I used to do desktop publishing on the Mac, and have done the same on the PC. Not every program has an exact equivalent. Some of the equivalents have the ability to import files from Mac programs - test to be sure it doesn't mess up the files.


Collapse -

Not just applications...

by shardeth-15902278 In reply to Get a list of application ...

But also who you interact with. We have a MAC in-house. I will admit, I am not a MAC user - nothing agianst them really (well now that their maouse has more than one button) just can't justify the more expensive hardware, personaly - so I don't remember the precise details but, we work closely with a publishing firm, that is MAC-only. We have found that some documents are not 100% compatible between windows versions and MAC version of the software (don't remember now if it was Pagemaker, or something else). As a result, it has been more cost effective to keep the MAC around to ensure that we get the desired end result.

Just one more gotcha to keep in mind...

Collapse -

...And backups...

by MikeMoyle In reply to Not just applications...

If you have backed up/archived any of your projects onto disks
(Zip, JAZ, CD, etc.), were they Mac-formatted disks, or Windows-
formatted? Macs, after all, can read Windows disks, but the
reverse is not necessarily true. (I think that there may be a
program available that adds that capability for Windows but,
again, will it be Vista-ready?)

...And fonts...! Do you use any specific fonts on the Mac(s) that
you don't own on the Windows side? (Don't tell the IT guy about
TransType, make sure that he "understands" that you'll have to
buy all new fonts! And make sure that you give him the
INDIVIDUAL font prices - no bundle discounts, here!)

We'll give you enough ammo to keep those Macs!

Collapse -

Is there a business case for this?

by mr.macadam In reply to PCs to Replace Mac?

Some designers have switched to PC. More power to 'em. If one of our designers wants to work on PC, then they get one. If they want to work on MAC, then they get one.

I don't see any of our designers switching to Windows EVER. And I wouldn't make them.

Collapse -

'Reduced Support Costs'

by JulesLt In reply to Is there a business case ...

As always, the business case for reducing standardising the hardware and software in organisations is 'reduced support costs'.

There is some truth - support staff that are capable and comfortable on working with PCs, Macs and Linux systems cost more. Historically speaking, getting them all to play together has also been harder than picking one and sticking with it.

On the flipside, I do think many organisations now lack anyone with enough knowledge of the alternatives to perform meaningful cost/benefit analysis. (When you see people buy a Windows server to run Apache or JBoss, you do have to wonder if they've costed it against a Linux machine running the same).

Related Discussions

Related Forums