Microsoft seems cheap

[Hamlet]

When I see large enterprise customers start using a competing product, I'll worry about Windows.

I could make a strong case for an enterprise to switch to Macs on the user desktops. You can do everything most businesses need, and the support costs would be much, much less.

So far though, almost nobody has done it.

Originally Posted by ERD50

True, far from ready for prime time, but it seems to keep making (small) inroads. - ERD50

[al_bundy]

does OSX server ship with a pre-configured LDAP authentication scheme?

windows server ships with active directory which is LDAP but has all the classes and everything built in so only thing you do is create the users. and most of the new MS server apps extend active directory for easy management. i know there is OpenLDAP, but you have to create the schema

[ERD50]

Originally Posted by Hamlet

I could make a strong case for an enterprise to switch to Macs on the user desktops. You can do everything most businesses need, and the support costs would be much, much less.

Why do you say costs would be much, much less?

Originally Posted by al_bundy

does OSX server ship with a pre-configured LDAP authentication scheme?

windows server ships with active directory which is LDAP but has all the classes and everything built in so only thing you do is create the users. and most of the new MS server apps extend active directory for easy management. i know there is OpenLDAP, but you have to create the schema

Here's a description of implementing LDAP.

Mac OS X LDAP Authorization Setup for Tiger (Mac OS X 10.4.x)

I know very little about it, but it looks straight forward, so I am curious - how does this compare to windows?

-ERD50

[Hamlet]

Because supporting Macs is going to require less work.

How often do Macs need to be re-imaged? Less than PCs

How often do Macs get viruses? Less than PCs

The simplification of having one hardware vendor would make support much cheaper as well.

Originally Posted by ERD50

Why do you say costs would be much, much less?

[Delawaredave5]

Originally Posted by al_bundy

is that a joke that linux is a credible alternative to Windows? it's great in things like stand alone applicances and a few enterprise level applications, but not on the desktop

why aren't people grabbing ubuntu PC's at best buy or wal mart?

I loaded Ubuntu on a PC. It runs great on old hardware - so I use it on a couple old procesors.

Even though Vista is a failure, Linux still "isn't ready for prime time" on corporate or general home desktops. A company would be nuts to try to save a couple hundred bucks per employee and put up with Linux.

I agree Microsoft is no longer a growth stock - but the operating system business will be an incredible "cash cow" for many years to come.

[kcowan]

Originally Posted by Delawaredave5

I agree Microsoft is no longer a growth stock - but the operating system business will be an incredible "cash cow" for many years to come.

Is it properly valued as a "value" stock?

[Marquette]

Originally Posted by Hamlet

Because supporting Macs is going to require less work.

How often do Macs need to be re-imaged? Less than PCs

How often do Macs get viruses? Less than PCs

The simplification of having one hardware vendor would make support much cheaper as well.

You were referring to the business environment specifically. When is the last time you were at a company and they weren't standardized on one hardware vendor for desktops? I can't think of the last time I've seen that. Or, at most, two vendors if one little department insists they need macs to do their job.

I fully suspect that virus infections are related to market penetration. Frankly, if I'm going to write a virus, I'm going to target the biggest market. Given the stories available, I believe there may be nearly as many vulnerabilities on the Mac, they just haven't been exploited in any large fashion yet.

On MSFT, the next few years will be interesting. I have no facts, but lots of stories. I can't find many people excited about Server 2008 or SQL Server 2008. I'm going to Visual Studio 2008 just because. If I had to pay out of my own pocket for it, I wouldn't.

One friend is a Microsoft certified trainer, he's not renewing his certification this year. Another friend is a certified dev (MCSD), he's going over to Linux and OSX and writing everything in Scheme or Ruby now. I'm probably going to start investing more of my time in Python and C for my side work just to diversify my skill set.