« Apple give the boot to a friendly critic | Main | Why I switched to the Mac »
April 13, 2004
More on Apple
Wow! My post on Greg Jackson's remarks on Apple and his subsequently being asked to resign from Apple's University Executive Forum, got picked up in Paul Thurrott's Internet Nexus, and have generated lots of comments, some more thoughtful than others.
In my post, I stated that I thought that this incident didn't paint Apple in a very favorable light, and I stand by that opinion. While I don't know all the details of the UEF, it seems to me that its main purpose is to give Apple some insight into what's happening in the world of IT in higher education, not to be marketing Apple to their institutions. While many of the specific points of Greg's comments can be debated (as he himself admits, and which I'll address in a minute), Greg is an experienced and highly respected and influential CIO and his opinion and input should be valued by Apple if they care about this market. As one of my bosses has observed, the best strategy (at least in academia) is to populate your committees at least partially with your smart and articulate opponents - if you just talk to your friends you will always be blindsided.
Despite the objections from the Mac faithful that have commented so far, there is a lot of truth in Greg's comments. One of the issues facing us in the higher ed environment is how long we can maintain our long-held beliefs in open standards, support for heterogeneous desktop environments, and freedom of choice when the world we live in is overwhelmingly populated with Windows desktops - and it troubles me deeply to make that statement.
I should probably state that I am a Mac user myself - I switched my primary computing environment from Windows last year, and I like my work desktop 17-inch iMac and my new 15-inch Powerbook, and I'm about to part with a chunk of my very own hard earned cash to buy a 20-inch iMac for my home.
But here at the University of Washington, which is probably typical of large higher-ed institutions, we have seen the Macintosh installed base dwindle from what was probably around 50% of desktops a dozen years ago to something around 10-15% today. And while we have seen some resurgence of Macs in the last year, based primarily on the adoption of OS X, it is not yet enough to call it a direction-setting trend.
And there are lots of people in higher ed computing who still bear the scars from having followed Steve Jobs a dozen years ago into promoting NeXT as the coming thing, only to be abandoned after a very short while.
Now - some specific comments on Greg's specific comments:
- I do think Greg misspoke when he claims Apple charges for security updates. The patches continue to be free. But at least originally Apple announced their intent to have security updates to Jaguar only available as part of a purchase of Panther for $129. They've sinced backed off this untenable position and are issuing Jaguar security patches freely.
- While I would argue, and indeed did in email to Greg yesterday, that OS X comes configured far more securely than Win XP has, at least up till now (there's some hope that SP2 for XP will help), that doesn't mean that OS X is in any way invulnerable - last week there was indeed an announcement of a discovered Trojan for OS X. I know - the threat was undoubtedly exaggerated, but it still points out that it's perfectly possible to conceive of trojans and viruses for Macs, even if they haven't been widely observed in the wild yet. As a point in fact, there is an ObjectiveC API to the OS X Address Book, and it should be relatively easy to code up a set of innocent looking scripts that would pull exactly the kind of mass email shenanigans we've seen so frequently lately.
- As someone who hires a fair number of computing support staff, I will vouch for the fact that it has become more difficult to find people who really know Mac technology. More and more we find people who know a lot about Windows, and people who really like to get their hands under the hoods tend to gravitate towards Linux, especially college students.
- As Greg notes, the iMacs and iBooks are fairly price-competitive with Windows boxes. Just last weekend I was comparing prices between the 20-inch iMac and a comparably equipped Dell machine, and they came out within about ten percent of each other (though that's still a couple of hundred bucks), though the Dell ended up with lots more disk for the price. I'll still go with the Mac for my house. But he's right in that you can get a lot more raw horsepower (which admittedly tends not to be what Mac people value the most) for your money on Intel boxes than you can with G5s.
Posted by oren at April 13, 2004 11:50 AM
Comments
A couple of points:
> One of the issues facing us in the higher ed environment is how long we can maintain our long-held beliefs in open standards, support for heterogeneous desktop environments.
But therein lies strength, doesn't it? Different components of heterogeneous systems can carry specific loads better than can other components in the system, and a heterogeneous system helps to insulate the overall functionality of the users from catastrophic PLATFORM SPECIFIC technical issues -- like viruses and other forms of attack. If a network is ALL WINDOWS, then that network has a very good chance of going down en masse when struck.
Also, it's disappointing to see such close-minded thinking in the halls of higher learning. I'll grant you that, in private enterprise, Apple has a long way to go and they're working hard to atone for their sins of the past in corporate IT. Frankly, the rumblings in the IT world since OS X and the G5 have been very encouraging (and no; I’m not just talking about Virginia tech ;) ). Higher ed should nurture diversity, which would help to pave the way for corporations to enjoy the benefits of choice. It's not JUST PERSONAL choice that can benefit from this.
I can see that it would be difficult to recruit Mac OS experienced IT drones. As others have said, its a chicken-and-egg situation. The solution to ensuring a healthy Mac platform... is to buy a Mac. Be it a soaring triumph or the ashes of defeat, both end-results are self-fulfilling prophecies that are realized one buyer (or "non-buyer") at a time.
I say this as a general statement, but a big ol' grain of salt also needs to be ingested when hearing the opinions of have people who have invested MONEY into their MSCE training and live within THAT culture (which is every bit a "culture" as "The Mac Culture"). If Macs started making serious inroads in corporate IT, these guys would either have to sink or swim. More money and training -- especially for a platform that requires less support (meaning "less work for me!") surely looks uninviting to them. Things are great for Microsoft Certified techs these days! Why would they want to embrace change?
And Apple aint NeXT, folks. GET OVER IT AND GET WITH THE PROGRAM.
> should probably state that I am a Mac user myself - I switched my primary computing environment from Windows last year
Super! It was surely a difficult thought process to go through. I totally understand the hesitations that frustrated Windows users can experience when mulling The Big Switch. And yet, YOU DID IT! Why? These reasons may also be just some of the reasons why that choice should be recognized "out there". Let's face it; you most surely didn't do it just for the pretty boxes Apple makes, right? There HAD TO BE some pretty damned compelling reasons to switch offered by Mac OS X and many of Apple's other technological creations. So, why surrender to the status quo, when that status quo may not be the best solution. Is resistance truly futile?
As for Mac OS X’s security. I think it’s safe to say that ANY person immersed in the tech world would be insane to say that ANY PLATFORM is impervious to affliction. There are degrees of susceptibility, however, and OS X is way WAY more secure than Windows BY DESIGN CHOICE (and therein lies an interesting look at Microsoft's priorities). Those who dismiss the entire Mac platform and its advantages on account of such claims uttered by Mac zealots are actually drinking from the same barrel of Kool-Aid when they do this.
On the issue of price, when people can look beyond how much PC they can cram into their car’s trunk for how little money and start to look at the value offered by THE USER EXPERIENCE AND HOW THE PLATFORM AS A WHOLE PERFORMS, then the economics of “the cheap PeeCee” go out the “Window” (pardon the pun). People hunt for the cheapest deals for hardware, and yet the value of the OS and applications that run on it are ignored... And THAT’S when they go to hell in a hand basket. One day, they think they got a great deal. Yet EVERY DAY they’re faced with the potential and some actual negative repercussions of that decision. The dysfunctional attitudes about all this leads me to believe that EVERYBODY is driving Hyundais, willingly shop at Wal-Mart, exclusively, and dine out only at McDonalds with joy in their hearts. And we all know that this is not true. Right? My opinion is that Apple’s strengths in designing easy to use, DETAILED AND REFINED technologies is worth the premium. Given this, I’d say that a $150-200.00 premium IS WORTH EVERY PENNY. God, A SINGLE Windows PC brought to its knees can incurr more than that in consultant costs, lost downtime and data loss from ONE major attack. Put it all toegther and get some perspective, people.
> Despite the objections from the Mac faithful
Why are any rebuttals of inaccurate criticisms about the Mac platform dismissed as simply coming from crazed and deluded "Mac faithful"?? I'd like to think that ANY tech-minded person would be compelled to correct a mistake whether it came from himself or anybody else... unless they simply didn't like the platform and had an agenda to discredit it. In such instances, that person should be exposed by anybody capable of doing so -- be they tech-minded or a member of "The Mac Faithful". As such, Greg Jackson's remarks on Apple would barely rate as some idiot’s Geocities rant-page. Whose the real zealot, here?
Posted by: MacDuff at April 13, 2004 1:20 PM
Maybe this blog will settle down? Maybe \I scared the hell out of everybody? :D (no further replies to date). But here's an interesting news tidbit:
The New South Wales Road and Traffic Authority in Australia dumps Wintel as their 1,200 point-of-sale terminals at their 140 licensing offices. Said the Government agency:
"The Apple rollout is a continuation of RTA usage of open standards-based software and systems. The further adoption of open source is being undertaken to provide more choice of vendors and to guarantee RTA systems are providing value for money."
Said IT website Computerworld:
"The move away from Wintel desktops also appears to reiterate the recent strong stand by the NSW government to seek alternatives to wholly proprietary operating system kernels - and the licensing models that go with them - where cost-effective and viable alternatives exist. To this end, the RTA is making no bones about its preference for open standards and open source, with what appears to be more open source action slated for the near future... [The] cost of the machines was comparable to machines being offered by other vendors. [The] technical capability of [the] iMacs was superior and users definitely preferred the ergonomic design and look and feel of the terminal."
Heh. maybe that one-button mouse didn't bug them. And they THINK Apple is "open" -- as in GNU! Those kooky Australians! :D But hey; surely they can work a calculator as good as anybody else. Maybe they're on to something?
Details here:
http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;759393285;fp;16;fpid;0
And look at the Mac zealots gush, here:
http://www.macdailynews.com/comments.php?id=P2499_0_1_0
Aren't those little zealots cute?
Hey! the NSW licensing Offices will also benefit from using a platform that's traditionally virus-free and tougher to hack! Coincidentally, the Maryland Licensing Offices were shut down thanks to LovSan last year:
http://www.gazette.net/200333/montgomerycty/state/172595-1.html
Oh, the irony.
Posted by: MacDuff at April 13, 2004 9:57 PM
Here's what's interesting: if you read the whole of the conversation with this fella Greg Jackson (at http://chronicle.com/colloquylive/2004/03/worm/) then it's *all* about viruses and how to protect networks. That's the topic. Yet the idea of having more *heterogeneous* networks - including Linux - just doesn't appeal to him because "that's where you get into the big bucks" having support staff with different skills.
The preference is for having a homogeneous network, on which you run lots of automated tools.
Forget the stuff about OSX. There's something really creepy about this; it's almost Stepford Wives-y. Be the same. Don't differ. Our machines wil take care of you. Or if you really need to speak to someone, try those nice people on the crackly transoceanic line who only have a script in front of them.
Charles
Posted by: Charles at April 14, 2004 3:50 AM
An excellent observation, Charles!
Greg? **does not hold breath**
Posted by: MacDuff at April 14, 2004 7:09 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)