Justifying Mac vs PC for business

Heh, not trying to throw water on this Mac parade, but let me contribute from my perspective as an employee of a very large corporation who has company-issued Toshiba laptop and MacBook Pro.

The MacBook pro was not anywhere near the cost of our standard PC-compatible laptops. In fact, the Mac cost more than twice the price. I don't know where you guys buy laptops, and granted we are a large buyer and get deep discounts, but our PC-comptible laptops run around $1000.

If your company is all Windows PC, you take an additional cost hit from a support perspective. Not a smaller one. I will guarantee this will be a big deal to the people responsible for the support budget. It's much easier to absorb the support costs of an additional "homogeneous device" that it will be to support a rogue Apple product within your company. The skillsets that support PCs will have to supplemented to support the Mac. And the Mac will require support, especially if used within a corporate infrastructure that has been built to accomodate Windows-based devices. Lastly, take a look around the MacBook Pro forums and tell me that users don't have issues that need to be resolved. Macs are not trouble-free.

The MacBook Pro is far less efficient for accessing coporate shares and resources, relating again to an infrastructure built for Windows machines. That does not go away if you use Windows in a virtual machine, but it is a lesser issue for sure if you use Bootcamp to run Windows on your company network. But that begins to negate some of the added benefits to having the Mac in the first place, having to boot and reboot into the different OSes.

Oh, and anti-virus, etc, software cost here is negligible, unless you buy retail for each machine. Many companies have corporate licenses that cover more devices than are in use. Total cost for AV would typically be unaffected by adding or removing a few PCs.

You want to use a Mac at an office that's exclusively PC, give it a shot. But don't be surprised if the possible justifications being thrown around here aren't warmly received by all your IT guys (who will frankly admit that the Mac is a better machine and that they "wish" they could move an OS other than Windows).

Message was edited by: DBrooks

Two points which should help your business case:

TCO: Total cost of ownership..... As it's likely you'll have less problems, it will cost less than a PC
Productivity: You'll get more done on your mac as it just works and you'll spend less time rebooting / booting up, etc!

Hope that helps

Don't forget to add in since they would give you a PC anyway, Windows can run in Boot Camp (Free) just need the windows lic, or in a VM setting (Fusion or Parallels). I use Fusion to do my work PC stuff as they don't have the Mac software for my needs.

while the files are transparent you can aregue that you can be more productive on the mac due to not only the less down time but also the UI being easier and more directed to what you need to do.

you need to be able to show how much less down time apples have though, not sure how you will show it well enough for the higher ups to agree.

-matt

I agree with the other posts that productivity is probably the big advantage. The price difference between a MBP and PC based laptop with similar specs is negligable, but the man hours you will gain in productivity on the Mac will be much larger. From a business stand-point, I'd put together some data showing the price of the two machines (demonstrating the small difference if any) and then show some data demonstrating the productivity gains. Basically, show them the business case for buying the Mac. It's a better investment for the business in this case.

I would say that the issue of support and whatnot depends on the environment. Clearly, an MBP will cost more than a typical PC (though, Macbooks, probably not). Also, if there are only a few non-Windows systems, it won't impact the software license budget much either.

Support should not be too much of an issue in most organizations, but it depends on the quality of your IT organization. If Microsoft technologies and methods predominante over standards and best practices, there could be the occasional problem, and it's also true if the business relies on platform-locked applications.

Platform support, however, ought not be a problem. My employer has 4500 people and is heavily invested in Microsoft product on the desktop (I think the license costs per basic system image is $2500 which includes the OS and various pieces of MS software plus the client licenses for services and whatnot). 1 in 11 (about 400) of the desktops are Macs, however. They employ one half-time person for Mac support, and 15 full-time people for Windows desktop support. The IT help-desk SLA for Macs is a response within 4 hours and for Windows PCs it's 24 hours. You can assume that most of the difference is that the Mac users are all in R&D, where one might expect the users to be more technically inclined.

In our case, the Windows support people are generally not technically competent in dealing with non-Windows technologies. In research, most of the technology is UNIX-based (be it Linux, or what have you), so IT generally doesn't service the research part of the business and is largely unaware of research IT resources and technologies. In that environment, there's essentially no difference between a Mac and everything else.

One thing that we have noted, however, is that access to corporate shares and resources is actually FAR more efficient on the Linux workstations than the Windows or Mac systems (given that the system is configured by a competent administrator).

my brother was in charge of a creative department and the only issue the company had with the macs was that they had to set up more stuff on the network to keep the macs from browsing through the pc's (which came about when one of the creative guys got annoyed at having to wait for another group to give them stuff so they just went in and took it and completed it better.

-matt

Most CFOs say productivity cannot be measured and therfore is not a justification standard.

Laptop Macs are competitive with PC laptops on price. The MacBook Core2Duo starts at $1,100. Geesh! Come on you can do better than that! 😉

I had a recent discussion with our CIO. He pointed out that he cannot support two different computer baselines. I responded by saying to him he doesn't support the laptops anyway. I asked my CIO to describe specifically the support he provides. He couldn't. As an example, if a PC breaks they call Dell. If my MBP breaks, Apple fixes it. If I have a problem and I can't part with the computer I walk into the Apple store and ask them to look at it. Although I will add that hasn't happened in about 4 years. The support our CIO does provide is infrastructure related (i.e. the network, servers etc..) anything else is outsourced.

I've observed that the problems most CIOs have experienced with PCs and Windows have predisposed CIOs to mitigate their risks, read fears, by not allowing Macs into the business place. Definitely misplaced fears and risk mitigation practice.

Most applications are web based. therefore there is no proprietary software to run natively on my PC or my MBP. As an example, I can use salesforce.com or Webex interchangeably on my PC and my MBP. Other applications like Oracle are supported on the Mac. Our Juniper VPN is also supported on both platforms. Office 2004 and 2008 for the Mac is interchangeable with Office 2007 for Windows (with minor exceptions). All files are inter-changeable, however. Our software engineers use PPC Macs and Intel Macs for software development. I can even access our PC/Windows U: drive or Sharepoint servers to access files; either over our intranet or over the Internet via VPN. Geesh!

We also use iChat video to bring people into meetings without the need for our unreliable Polycom equipment. I travel alot, and its really nice to video chat to boys at school or talk to my wife while I am in Germany, Hong Kong, Boston, or Denver.

I guess the point I am making is that there is no reason not to bring Macs into the office. Rather than trying to justify using Macs, I think there should be a justification for staying with PCs and Windows in light of the Virus risks. I can't see any reason.

I think IT departments should focus on the real issues, like improvements in network security, fighting SPAM, network bandwidth, and storage. I am certain that no one is happy with their wireless bandwidths in their respective offices.

I think the support argument is specious and has gone the way of the dodo!

BTW, I got my MBP after this discussion.

hmmm i was going to put in a witty comment about pcs being cheaper if you dont consider all the fixes (mostly using my fathers experiences as the base for repairs) but once i looked up prices i found out that PC laptops have gone up a lot since i last noticed so wow the prices are pretty comparable now. interesting how the pc laptops have seemed to get more expensive and apples have stayed pretty much consistent

-matt

KILL THE INFIDEL whoops i mean i guess you could call it that

ALL HAIL THE GREAT JOBS, where are these over consuming thoughts coming from, i cant stop having these thoughts DEATH TO VISTA

-matt

I use my MBP for archaeological based geophysics (seeing into the ground without digging). I had to put XP on the MBP b/c some software wasn't developed for macs. I've never been happier. Tell the Boss that you're getting 2-computers for the price of one, but ask for a larger hard drive upgrade (unless you use a big external HD). It really is a nice dual option.

In my experience, the best way con get (senior) managers to make the decision you want is to present them with a proper costed TCO model.

For most managers, money talks!

Of course, this means that you have to include everything, not just the initial purchase price, but licenses (if you want Windows in bootcamp/virtual environments then there are 2 OS costs!), maintenance, support, training etc.. Then you have to estimate (realistically) how much faster the average user would be given equivalent training and experience and try to cost that in as well. Don't forget the learning curve for all users, including those that join the company over the TCO period, because, like it or not, most people are familiar with Windows and there is often a drop in productivity for even the simplest things while switching over (where is the cut and paste in finder.....)

Then you have the software 'compatibility' issues (Office 2008 has dropped VBA support and Office 2004 VBA is a version or 2 behind the Windows equivalents). Of course, This is exactly the same situation as if you are doing an OS upgrade for the organisation (I remember well the issues when I ran a project to upgrade from Windows 98 to XP for a 3000 seat company!!!)

I think the bottom line is that, unless the CEO/CFO/CIO is already a Mac user, or the Macs are only to be used in a small (?isolated?) section of the company with a manager who has enough influence to 'go their own way', this can be a very tough job.

Susan

Another note I'd like to add to this discussion is that it is difficult to engage Apple from a corporate level. I'm the IT Director for a large'ish company (3500+ global employees). I recently contacted Apple to get a pilot machine to do some testing on the feasibility of switching to Macs. While they will send me a machine that I can return in 30 days, I have to put this on a credit card (I understand they don't want to lose money).

Also, when it comes to dealing with other vendors discounts are key (particularly in the corporate arena). I bought $500,000 worth of laptops for the US portion of my business last year from Dell - and I get a decent discount from them for my business. When I inquired to my new Apple representative about discounts I got the "we don't really discount things here at Apple" speech. Unfortunately for us, cost is going to be a real issue.

Now to those of you that say that the Apple machines are cheaper for TCO - you may be right. However, that's a tough model to accurately produce if you don't have prior Apple experience.

Anyone have real data on the costs of Apple vs. PC in corporate environments?

You can also mention that Mac have a lot less (if any!) viruses. For a company, purchasing virus protection can be expensive. And as mentioned earlier, Mac can run windows if needed.

Productivity!Productivity!Productivity!
I've just bought my first PC and I don't think I can remember a time when I've got so little done.

The Mac can also run Windows if things don't work out.