On 3/24/11 11:21 AM, Mike Copeland wrote: > Good point. Unfortunately, this client has never put a toe in the water > to see what it's like...he's head-first or nothing.
I've had clients like that, too. I call it "leap, look, and think". > My comment about "apologies in advance" was because I've had folks who > were Mac-o-phobs get really crappy when they suspected any kind of > challenge of their choice to use Apple products instead of Microsoft. > Maybe that is no longer the case. Mac enthusiasts had lots to be embarrassed about in the 1990's. The OS was historic, didn't even do preemptive multitasking, and Windows seemed to rule the world. Games, business apps, whatever you wanted was better on Windows. And Apple couldn't even keep their supply lines fulfilled for their slice of the pie. I thought Apple was doomed, and sold all my shares of AAPL for $7 in 1998 or so (hey, I made a decent profit because I bought them for $3.50 a few years earlier). > I have noticed that the iPhone has done more for Apple's "validity" in > all aspects than anything they ever produced... Apple regained their validity with OS X, which is about 10 years old now. They strengthened it by cutting loose from Motorola and SCSI and embracing Intel and USB. Today, their computers, including their servers, really are the best you can buy. > and the iPad seems to be > similar in its effect...to not only make it "okay" for Apple products in > the workplace, but those who use an iPhone or iPad are actually the most > forward thinking. Kudos to Apple for the wisdom to identify Microsoft's > weakest points and exploit them. iPhone and iPad are amazing. They are bridging the gap between "personal" and "business". > On the other hand, Microsoft hasn't > done themselves any favors with their horrible efforts at smartphone > technology...and it seems like no one is taking MSoft serious at all > with any pad technology. Microsoft is becoming irrelevant. More and more so as time goes on. Okay, Win7 is way better than any OS they've put out to date, but it isn't any better than 3-year-old versions of Ubuntu or Apple OS X, and will be playing catchup to the newest versions of the alternative OS's for years to come. We don't need Microsoft technology for anything anymore; you couldn't make that claim in 1998. > As for my query "Anyone else on here swallow the red pill..." I was > simply trying to elicit response from someone else who may have made the > same choice to "go Apple all the way" like my client has. I'd really > like to hear why they would spend 2 to 3x the price of other available > solutions to get what I perceive is less...less choice, less > flexibility, less options. If they are going to swallow the Apple pill 100%, then why are they talking about an exchange server? They should purchase an XServe which comes with a mail server. They should set up Apple networking, take classes hosted at Apple, and switch 100%. I guess I don't know anyone that fits such a pigeonhole. I use a Linux server, and Linux/Apple workstations. Once in a while I fire up Windows XP, Vista, or 7 to test my applications on the most common deployment targets. After 20 years experience configuring desktops and laptops of all flavors for clients and family, I wholeheartedly recommend paying the 20-30% more for comparable Apple hardware and software. It is well worth it, in reliability, performance, security, and sanity. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
