Have the bean counters do a cost benefit analysis on the two platforms.
It just flat out costs a whole lot more to run a PC based office than
it does a Mac based office.
The recent virus attacks alone have cost US firms many millions of
dollars in lost productivity just by itself.
Windoze-based machines are locked into an ever increasing spiral of M$
licensing fees just to use the machine. The (legal) cost of running XP
in the office is a per-seat license that is waaaay more than the per
seat fees for Macs. PC are also facing new DRM restrictions from M$ --
use new version of Word? It'll be copy restricted, you won't be able to
take the document home and work on it as easily.
While XP has made some strides in stability, but it still crashes a
bit, especially if you are trying to run many programs, and yes it
still is plug-and-pray to get peripherals to work right. Got something
wrong? Re-install and then wait on the phone for M$ to okay the
install. The cost of tech support is still very high.
The best graphics / video/ audio software is being built for Macs,
don't let the PC-zealot sites fool you (on the other hand don't let the
Mac-zealot sites fool you into blindly following Macs), but make some
comparisons.
Photoshop will run faster on a Mac and not crash. Not so for PC.
Illustrator is equally bad on both platforms. Freehand -- better on a
Mac. The supposed After-Effects test that showed it runs better on PCs
has been shown to be "rigged" -- turns out the default install of AE
did not use the Mac dual processors, set-it up for duals and the tests
make the "slower" Macs draw back even in some cases and blow the PCs
away in others.
Lost productivity and high tech support costs make the PCs a miserable
choice to use (I say this even though I do a whole lot of tech support)
in an office. (I get 15 calls to help someone fix their PC to every
call I get to help with a Mac).
Consider now that the real world usage types of benchmarks from the new
Macs are that flat out blowing the PCs out of the water and they cost
cheaper to buy than the current similar PCs and you have to wonder why
does the new boss want to WASTE all of the extra money on PCs.
Yes Diane, I did say WASTE.
Jerry
p.s. Is this a good enough start? Or do you need to have more reasons?
Like the fact that the set-up that Virginia Tech just bought (1100 new
dual G5s was bought because it was cheaper to buy and run thant the
same setup from Dell, HP, Gateway, IBM, etc.? There are a lot more
reasons to stay all Mac than go all PC.
On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 10:10 PM, Diane Stinnett wrote:
> The printing company I work for just changed owners, and the first
> change that he wants to make is to make our all-mac office an all-PC
> office. I don't think there is any hope of saving the macs in the
> customer service department, but he did tell me that he will let me
> continue to use a mac, and even buy me a better one, if I could
> convince him that we needed it. I do the graphic design and
> typesetting for the company. Of course, I know that macs are superior
> to PCs in many ways, especially for graphic design, but I would
> welcome any facts from all my mac-loving friends to help me support my
> argument. He seems to be blocking every argument I make, armed with
> the fact that the corporate office has told him that it is possible to
> run our office with no macs on board.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Diane
>
>
>
> | The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will
> | be September 23. The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>.
> | This list's page is <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup>.
>
| The next meeting of the Louisville Computer Society will
| be September 23. The LCS Web page is <http://www.kymac.org>.
| This list's page is <http://erdos.math.louisville.edu/macgroup>.
