I have been allocated funding at work for a new laptop and have decided that I would like a Mac. However, IT services have decided that I would be fine with a Windows laptop (despite it being my money to spend not theirs).

I need to present a case explaining why I should have a Mac and wondered if the STW collective can help me generate a list of things that a Mac is better at, quicker at or that Windows laptops just can’t do.

I make quite a few multimedia resources in my work and so anything relating to imovie / garageband would be particularly relevant. E.g. the fact that imovie is much more flexible than Windows Movie Maker at controlling the sound levels.

thanks in anticipation.

My sister’s work IT bods don’t have the first clue about trouble shooting with Macs.. probably a good reason your IT bods would prefer you get a PC.

Can cause problems with peripherals like video conferencing cameras, the esoteric stuff not run of the mill. Everything else is fixable but will cause panic in IT people as most of it can be fixed by the user, including networking. If I can do it anyone can!
Ask IT to itemise why you should not have the Mac, it’s your spend after all not theirs. Then you can shoot them down point by point. If you want to be nice you could offer to run a windows partition on it.

Once you’ve had Mac, you’ll never go back

Sandwich – unfortunately, I think that it will end up being the other way round: that I will have to justify why I want a Mac rather than a Laptop.

Simple: buy a Mac. The new ones allow you to run Windows through programs like Bootcamp.

Best of both innit.

I was in exactly the same situation a couple of years ago. My Mac laptop got nicked at work, and my workplace kindly replaced it… with a Dell.

It seems that IT people everywhere just default to what they’re comfortable with.

Buy a PC and run a Mac on the likes of VMware

Stand aside, stand aside…

iMovie (HD compatible) and Garagebaynd are excellent bits of software; very easy to use, and stable. And come free with a Mac.

Most peripherals just plug in and work straight away, no messing about downloading buggy drivers; diji-cams, vidi-cams, printers, mice, USB keyboards, hard-drives, etc just plug and play.

Excellent, and very easy to use networking capabilities.

The best OS going.

Stuff like projectors work perfectly without faffing about downloading buggy drivers.

Antivirus not needed (Never had a problem in 9 years of owning Macs; my PC is fecked even with AV)

Macs tend not to become obsolete as quickly as PCs.

Macs are better built than most other machines out there.

Less crappy buggy free software, that **** up yer machine, available.

Less games available = more work will get done.

Propriety software shits on owt Microsoft can produce (Safari V IE; no contest).

Easier and more intuitive file management and navigation.

Very easy to use Time Machine back-up facility.

Quick Look makes browsing files a doddle.

Spaces creates multiple desktops, which avoids one desktop getting all clogged up with multiple app windows.

Boot Camp allows for Windoze to be installed, if you must. VMWare allows Windoze to run in OSX, without the need to reboot.

IT won’t have to worry about fixing stuff, as things seldom go wrong enough to warrant IT getting involved. Loads of stuff is fixable without needing a degree in computing.

Really and truly, if you consider the value of the bundled software, Macs aren’t really significantly dearer than PCs. something like iMovie bitch-slaps Windoze Movie Breaker.

And best of all, Macs have the same start-up chime as Wall-E!

Wow! thanks RudeBoy 🙂

Pretty much what RudeBoy said.

Macs don’t get viruses; their OS structure is much more innately secure (although Vista is starting to get there). More or less all the basic multimedia stuff you need comes with OS X anyway, most of the high-end stuff started life on Macs in the first place.

Macs hold their value much better and Apple’s “Applecare” 3-year no-quibble warranty really is excellent (however, never buy a Rev.A product) – have a look at three-year-old Macs on eBay vs 3-year-old PCs. The obsolescence rate on Macs is much lower.

It’s a cheesy cliché, but a Mac “just works”, and it keeps on working. Willy-waving PC users will always find extremes where their Vista boxes outgun Macs, but generally if you buy a new Mac you’ll have a computer that will work well for at least three or four years with minimal updating or system faffing and will stay secure for that time. You’ll never get that from a Windows PC.

: P

Wow! thanks RudeBoy

You’re welcome, mate! 🙂

I feel quite passionate about the usabiity of computers; these things are everywhere, and we most of us have to use them at some time, so why not make them pleasant to use? PCs have evolved from the things techno-geeks used to mess about with in labs, whereas Apple actually looked at how ordinary people would want to actually use a computer, for everyday tasks.

My mum, who is racist*, really, really does not in any way like computers. I have tried to get her to be able to do simple things, but she’s not having it. I have got her to have a brief play, with a Mac, and a PC. The Mac, she conceeded she could learn to use, and admitted things did seem quite intuitive and straight forward. The PC, she gave up with after 2 minutes (some window popped up asking her some quite technical thing). She found the visual aspect of OSX a lot more user friendly than Windoze.

She was able to navigate through iPhoto, and found it a pleasure to use. iTunes flummoxed her a bit, but I don’t think she’d even attempt Windoze Media Player.

Her verdict was, that the Mac was a lot easier to understand, and she felt she could learn how to use on. She said she woon’t even try to learn how to use a Windoze PC.

My mum is 72. She is extremely intelligent, but grew up in a world where computers existed in labs, not in every home. Different generation. But if someone like her should have to learn how to use a computer, then she should be able to use one without feeling intimidated and alienated. Apple are a far more inclusive manufacturer than any other.

*This is a disgraceful lie. My mum is praps the least prejudiced person I know. She’s a wonderful human being, and I love her to bits.

I’m not going to say anything bad about MAC’s here on this thread because it’s not what you want but taken from an IT services point of view, MAC’s are hard to support. It’s not your IT function’s fault, they work with PC’s and everything they have is geared up to supporting PC’s. When something completely different is introduced, a whole new set of support processes have to be inserted. New skills, new monitoring, new training, new software.

It’s just as easy for me to slate MAC’s on here as people are slating your IT bods but for a huge part their hands are tied and they will suggest the most cost efficient option to them. They’re not being blinkered or awkward, they’re providing the service they can with the facilities they have.

samuri – Member
…from an IT services point of view, MAC’s are hard to support.
…they will suggest the most cost efficient option to them. They’re not being blinkered or awkward, they’re providing the service they can with the facilities they have.

I used to have a software business, and worked cross-platform. Most of my clients with IT departments ran PCs, those without IT departments ran Macs. The Macs virtually never needed support, and the user almost always was able to fix it themselves.

When I buy a computer for myself or family it is a Mac because I don’t want to be hassled by “this doesn’t work” queries in my free time.

Mac hardware is usually of above average quality too.

PCs suffer from 2 problems – often cost-cutting hardware, and the OS is built on ancient creaking code. Windows will be a good OS when they sever the ties to heritage code and rewrite the basics in a flavour of Unix. I won’t criticise Microsoft over this because their operating system does an amazing job considering its wobbly foundations.

BTW you can get VirtualBox free from Sun, and run Windows in that on your Mac.

http://www.sun.com/software/products/virtualbox/

That’s fine for you and obviously I don’t know what the OP’s IT infrastructure looks like, I can only answer based on my own experience. In any large enterprise though, the metrics change considerably. There’s a point where supporting unusual devices whatever they may be, no longer become economically viable. As I said, I’m not trying to knock MAC’s, just trying to explain why an IT department might decide to encourage PC’s over a MAC.

Take my company for example. We have ooh, 20’000 desktop devices to support. I’d say, at a rough guess, about a hundred are MAC’s. So now the desktop support team have to include a whole set of skills, resources, support agreements, software delivery tools, monitoring tools for what is effectively a tiny proportion of users who claim a MAC can do something a PC can’t. Should they invest many hundreds of thousands providing this support or should they encourage another PC? It’s all very well suggesting virtual machines to run the windows software but then there’s another set of skills needed to support a tiny minority.

And a large infrastructure needs server resources. Email, domain control, network control, security controls. None of these resources are provided by Apple, they all come from Microsoft and Unix vendors. Do apple plug their devices into these? Sometimes, but not always. And it’s a huge royal pain in the arse when they don’t work. This takes massive effort from the teams involved to get things working and they’ll get no help from Apple, trust me.

I know from experience that the MAC users we have take hugely disproportionate amount of effort to support and it all costs money. It’s not their fault granted but unless Apple can supply a full business model for large enterprises then these issues are always going to pop up and the IT departments will suggest a PC over a MAC.

MAC’s are better, great, I don’t care if they are but there’s a massively bigger picture to look at.

Had a Mac, went back to a PC “BIG MISTAKE” pile of she-ite, overlycomplicated slow malware virusprotecedted contantly failing crashing piece of junk. And am now saving for the next mac. 😥

What does your job entail? That might be the deciding factor. I run Mac in my company but I also have a cheap PC laptop for when I visit client site and need to run either Visio or MS Project.

I completely agree with samuri on this. My section supports 800+ workstations and laptops. Nobody gets to buy anything without supportability being considered, and any purchase has to look at lifecycle costs. Nobody will get to choose a Mac without a business case. You must be aware that in an enterprise environment the support cost for any device dwarfs the purchase price after the first few months.

I don’t care whether Macs are better or not as an individual user experience, they’re not as easily supportable in an enterprise environment. In specialised areas they may be worth considering if there’s genuinely no alternative, in that case the IT support should/will be resourced accordingly.

As far as longevity goes, Windows-based machines of reasonable quality will work well for years together with their necessary security software. Taking Admin and Power User rights from users works miracles in that regard.

Samuri is spot on.

The fact that Mac users sometimes trouble shoot their own machines is neither here nor there. What this means is people are recruited to do a task then waste time “playing” at IT when they should be doing something else!

Standardisation is key to good support. Unless another device adds something a PC doesnt then I wouldnt touch one. As far as them never failing this isnt true, do a quick google for Mac OS support and suprisingly lots of forums show up!
The thing with Macs is people love “niche” and overlook their faults when they are evangelising.

PC’s have lots of faults and sometimes fail but in general they do a good job.

Remember Apple is a business created to make money, they are not your friends!

And Johnners!

And Microsoft are?????

If IT bods weren’t so busy fixing broken PCs all the time, they might have a bit of time spare to learn how to use Macs. 😀

The OP needs a machine he can work with easily, which allows him to do the stuff he needs to do. He needs it to be reliable and effective. The machine will used as a stand-alone unit, as far as I can gather, and probbly won’t need to integrate much, with the entire rest of the system. For his particular needs, as he’s outlined, a Mac would be perfect.

Macs all the way. I have been brought up with PC’s, but 3 years ago I bought my first macbook pro and haven’t looked back. OS is so much nicer, much more comfortable to use, and overall more stable than windows.

Only bad thing about macs is the lack of games, but if you are like me and leave games for gaming consoles, you will be fine.

IT guys will say otherwise, and will try to convince you how limited macs are.

And Microsoft are?????

No and they even be enemy number one!

PC’s are a tool and I dont want anything on my network that cant be re-built/restored in less than an hour, and remotely to 30 locations in the UK by anyone in my team. Mac’s would add nothing but a headache.

That can be done using Macs, and Apple Remote Desktop. Apple have a range of tools/solutions for managing network systems. I’ve sorted out a friend’s Mac, via RD. Easy-peasy, and I’m not an IT bod.

That Macs will be ‘nothing but a headache’, is a myth. If you can sort out a PC, you can sort out a Mac.

The skills arent readily available in the market. re-training is a waste of resources for no return.

My mate fixes Betamax machines. He thinks they are great as well!

Many of the grade A geeks I know and work with love MAC’s and would wholeheartedly recommend them as personal devices but even they would draw the line at suggesting it’s easy and supportable to bring them into enterprise environments. This may well be where the OP is experiencing resistance. Is it too difficult to understand that there are much more important things to consider than a bit of user experience?

The machine will used as a stand-alone unit, as far as I can gather, and probbly won’t need to integrate much, with the entire rest of the system. For his particular needs, as he’s outlined, a Mac would be perfect.

He’s not said any of that.

I work in an IT department and there really is a case for reducing the number of different systems down as much as possible. It’s bad enough trying to support all the applications, never mind multiple OSs. So, an IT department is always going to encourage you to stick to their ‘standard’, whatever that might be. In our case, that’s Vista and it’s actually pretty good when fully managed.

Having said all that, I use only Macs at home. At work, every time some weird issue comes along, it reminds me how MS keep me in employment. At home, I don’t want issues, I just want to ‘do’ things…

So, seeing as how Macs are computers, same as PCs, and ultimatly work on the same principles of binary digitty stuff, what problems would Macs create, that someone with a knowledge of computers, woon’t be able to sort out? I’m not an IT bod, so I don’t know. But I’d be inertested to hear why Macs are a Bad Thing.

And as for the OP, he’s stated that he needs the machine to help produce multi-media stuffs, and already stated that iMovie and Garagebaynd are ideal. And, he’s said that he will be getting a laptop, so I’m assuming he’ll be working in different locations, rather than having a machine permanently linked into some database system or whatever boring thing lots of computers do in offices.

Seems like a Mac will be the best tool for the job.

That can be done using Macs, and Apple Remote Desktop. Apple have a range of tools/solutions for managing network systems. I’ve sorted out a friend’s Mac, via RD. Easy-peasy, and I’m not an IT bod.

And if it’s a network or hardware problem how do you suggest they do that?

same as PCs,

They are not the same as PC’s and if you think that then you have little understanding of how this would intergrate in an enterprise environment as Samuri has explained.

Its also not stand alone and there is the main issue!

It’s just as easy for me to slate MAC’s on here as people are slating your IT bods but for a huge part their hands are tied and they will suggest the most cost efficient option to them. They’re not being blinkered or awkward, they’re providing the service they can with the facilities they have.

You’re right in what you say samuri, but I find it totally dismissive and exclusive that differences aren’t incorporated so easily in a working environment these days because Microsoft (also a big company created to make profits, they are not your friends!) has more than a 90% market share so nobody can be bothered to deal with anything else! It’s like saying “you’re left handed, sorry you can’t work here, you’re different to everyone else therefore we can’t support you”…

In a world when Mac’s and PC’s wouldn’t/couldn’t/didn’t talk to each other, this attitude was partly understandable. These days, Macs and PC’s do everything the other can (only Mac’s do it all better pretty much!), and can talk to each other etc. Why the hell are the world’s IT departments not incorporating this and becoming Mac friendly? Because they are lazy that’s why! People and businesses the world over are not adapting to change, it’s as simple as that. IMO you shouldn’t be able to call yourself an IT technician unless you’re familiar with both operating systems (well, and Linux too to be fair!) as otherwise you’re just a Windoze bod really…

Really not looking forward to next week myself, have just started my new job and am about to be given my new laptop and phone… So of course it’s going to be some horrid, poorly designed, un-ergonomic piece of shite running Vista, possibly the worst OS out there (for god’s sake, I can at least deal with XP, at least it lets the machine run a lot quicker), and no doubt a bloody Blackberry (don’t get me started here!). Why I can’t just get given say £50 a month on my salary instead, and be allowed to use my own laptop (I only need it for emails and presentations at work, and I’m going to be working remotely, so will have sweet FA in terms of IT support, not that I’d need it with a Mac, anyway!) and my iPhone for work purposes beats me!

I don’t think they’re saying Macs are a bad thing, but variety is. More variety means more support skills required. I think it’s a fair point.

I bought my first Mac on Monday after a lot of thinking and 12 years as a PC user.

I’m finding it pretty good. To be honest, At the price I got it, I felt the hardware was the best option for me. I like Aperture for my photos (of which there seem to be millions) but most of the other tools are available cross platform. I am also running into issues with compatibility, I can’t use my Satmap with it or my mapping software without buying a copy of windows (for another £100). I could happily use either, that might change as I get more used to the Mac.

Seems like you PC lot are just looking for arguments against the Mac, rather than appreciating that this particular user may actually have a good case for having a Mac rather than a PC. He’s asked advice on how to argue why a Mac is better. I’ve given my onions, but you PC lot are just moaning about tech support.

He needs: Video and audio creation and editing software. These come standard with all new Macs, and are fantastic, well-integrated and highly efficient bits of software. I know people who work professionally with such stuff, and they woon’t dream of using PCs for this task, as Macs are simply better tools for these jobs. The OP has not said he needs the machine to link to some complex network/database/company system thingy, so won’t need those features.

Maybe, just maybe, a Mac would be a better solution for this particular case, eh?

The OP has not said he needs the machine to link to some complex network/database/company system thingy, so won’t need those features.

Where did he say this? How do you know this?

Sorry to have opened up the old Mac vc PC debate, that was not the purpose of my OP.

I can understand the perspective of my IT services at work as it must make life easier if there are fewer different systems to work with and support. However, there are several other colleagues who have Macs (we are a HE institution) and we have a dedicated Mac lab so they are not an unknown species.

I have gathered some interesting points to support my case; this is what I need, I don’t think that I will be refused a Mac point blank, but that I will need to justify why a Mac will be better for me than a PC. Like I said earlier I make a lot of multimedia teaching resources and I am anticipating that imovie and garageband will make the creation of these resources easier and that I will end up with better products.

If there are any other specific examples of things I might refer to in my in my argument, I would be very glad to hear them. Anything about specific features of the software (ilife vs movie maker etc) would be very welcome.

Thanks for all the comments so far 🙂

What are the users of these “multimedia teching resources” using?

No point in developing stuff on a Mac/PC if you’re customers can’t use it properly on their PC/Mac.

Think of it like Tubes(PC) vs Tubeless(Mac) argument. 😉

Life’s too short to be arguing about effing computers. ‘specially when the sun’s shining.

Sorry to keep distracting from the point from the OP, that wasn’t really my intention. I’ll add this and say no more.

To answer Rudeboy’s question about integration. And again, this is from my own perspective in a large enterprise environment. To support a large desktop estate it’s impossible to manage each device individually, you have to have remote software that can manage patching, availability, domain access (like it or lump it, a centrally access controlled estate is going to be run on Windows active directory), software delivery, Anti virus (yes, MAC’s need AV too), remote access tools, bespoke applications and day to day email, office and web access. There are many vendors providing software to do this but if you need to include Apple devices that list dramatically shrinks and there are some components that simply aren’t going to work. It’s not necessarily right but microsoft dominate this arena and we could equally argue that it’s Apple’s fault for not providing the enterprise architecture that Microsoft do (and actually do quite well). As I mentioned above, it’s not because the IT people don’t want to, some of them will be extremely Apple pro (my boss and a number of the big IT movers and shakers in my company are very Apple Biased), but when they approach the board for capital to try and make it happen, they will ask why they aren’t going with microsoft which is a lot cheaper. You can provide some frigs like virtual machines but they’re far from perfect, even my boss admits this.

Add on top of that you need to develop new relationships and support arrangements with your hardware suppliers, you need to skill your support teams up (anyone doing it properly will need certified staff) and you will need to build processes for your 1st line support teams who cannot be expected to be able to automatically understand the difference between a MAc and a PC.

I agree totally that there are things MACs do better but for wholesale integration into large environments, it’s a no brainer and until Apple start making headway into that arena nothing is going to change.

And for the record, I’m reasonably anti-microsoft. If I were creating a large scale environment I would make it as Unix/linux based as I could but i’d be the first to admit the failings that those OS’s have and would have to include windows for all the same reasons I’ve highlighted above.

And for the record, I’m reasonably anti-microsoft. If I were creating a large scale environment I would make it as Unix/linux based as I could but i’d be the first to admit the failings that those OS’s have and would have to include windows for all the same reasons I’ve highlighted above.

While I get your thrust, Samuri, and I can agree with some of what you are saying, I disagree with this. I do support a humungous number of UNIX servers and clients and, with some well thought out scripts and set-ups managing a large estate of linux/UNIX is a hell of a lot easier than managing a large amount of Windows machines (and *much* cheaper!). If anything adding a Windows machine into a large group of Linux/UNIX machines would increase support requirements exponentially.

Adding Mac/UNIX/Linux to a large base of Windows would incur some skills (though usually large organisations have a UNIX team already). Adding Windows to a large base of UNIX/Mac/Linux would do exactly the same. If you have a mix then there is nothing to worry about, and this looks as if where the OP is coming from.

If I was to create a large scale environment there would be a large sticker on every door with a ‘No Windows’ sign on it. Save me a massive amount of moolah in software fees and support!