I have a a lot of streaming video I backup and also some basic desktop PC, music and photos. Cool machines, but very inefficient to manage from an enterprises standpoint since exisiting management systems do not support Mac and Windows together so you need mutiple systems.I've been using them for over 5 years now and I've had outstanding experiences. This is a very key reason why they are not widely adopted. You will find Macs are often standlaone boxes that IT does not touch in corporations. One of the keys to any large scale computer system deployment is manageability. Corporate America will dictate what the company will use and employees generally follow suit. People have at home for the most part what they use at work. This is one of the reasons Windows sells well. Requires a lot of management infrastructure to effectively manage the computers. Patch management, Anti-Virus, Firewalls, Software updates, databases, ERP systems, manufacturing, etc. It is not just about the apps on the box, it is about managing a large numbers of hosts in a corporate environment. You will have to look long and hard to find them used in business.Ĭlick to expand.From an enterprise standpoint, you will find software to manage thousands of Apples extremely lacking by Apples own admission. Shows you the direction they are heading. I bet more folks are familiar with iPOD than Apple computers. The thing about market share, once you lose it, if have to work 10 times harder to get it back. You will have to look long and hard to find them used in business. The thing about market share, once you lose it, you have to work 10 times harder to get it back. You can get some software for them, but offerings are no where near as extensive as the Windows systems have available. Now they are basically college student novelty toys. I remember watching their market share dwindle from 15%, to 10%, to now around 3%. :thumbup:īill Gates (Microsoft) advanced when Apple and IBM were asleep at the switch. To gain market share, one must not necessarily be the best, just the smartest. So Microsoft and Intel swooped in and took market share. However, they were both greedy and arrogant with excessively expensive computer equipment. We have two companies to blame for the computer predicament we find ourselves Apple (Steve Jobs) and IBM.Ī long time ago Apple had the front end (GUI) and IBM had the backend (Servers). In order for BMW to get their arms around this issue, they need to start thinking like a software company and not an automobile manufacturer, at least from an iDrive perspective. Just like a home computer, people want to have not only the latest software, but any enhanced features, and more stability in some cases. and going to the dealer armed with information. Now owners are comparing notes/software versions, etc. However, BMW traded simplification for increased service costs that they have to pay, and iDrive gremlins that require some folks to go to the dealer monthly to work out issues.īMW opened a can of worms with iDrive. The system was designed to simpify things, less knobs/buttons, etc. Once by me, and twice by the dealer (manager's car). My car was built in April 2005, and I bought it from a dealer in November. This does not include iDrive issues that some folks are having. If the average consumer gets their iDrive updated one time per year over the course of 4 years, and the shop time to do it costs roughly $300, that is $1200 just in upgrades to fix bugs. So essentially, they deferred the cost of iDrive development to the service side of the business instead of the development side. Yeah, maybe development was cheaper, but now we get to take our cars to the dealers for software upgrades 2-3 times per year. I can't believe for a second that Windows was a cheaper route for BMW. The fact that Windows is so pervasive, it has become a hackers target, virus target, and system driver nightmare. I just don't think Windows is the right tool for automobile applications. However, it is a question of the right tool for the job. No company, especially a manufacturer with tight timetables can afford to apply patches to critical servers as often as Microsoft requires, and I won't even get into the numerous virus issues that affect the windows world. All I know is Corporate America runs their mission critical apps/servers on UNIX, not Windows.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |