“Macintosh has now ‘crossed two of the three barriers to enterprise computing,’ says Scott Parkin, a product manager at LANDesk Group Ltd. in South Jordan, Utah. Parkin says the first barrier was the need for a Unix-based operating system, which Apple Computer Inc. provided with its Mac OS X software. The second was, of course, the need for Apple to build Intel-based hardware — mission accomplished with the dual-core laptop and iMac systems it announced this month. The third barrier will be crossed when end users can run Windows on Macintosh machines, Parkin says. No one expects Apple to ship and support Windows,” Mark Hall writes for Computer world.
“But, Parkin says, ‘market dynamics will mean someone will come out with a hack to run Windows on the Mac.’ The likely scenario will have one of Intel Corp.’s processor cores running OS X and the other running Windows, he says. LANDesk has already ported its client code to the Intel-based Macs and will make the expanded software available this week for users of its systems and security management suites. Parkin says any company with 5,000 or more PCs has plenty of Macintosh systems on its network. Most of those Macs are ‘self-managed,’ he suggests. But in the new era of regulatory compliance, Parkin thinks IT managers will want to keep a closer eye on their heretofore unfettered populations of Mac users.”
Full article here.
Advertisements:
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iMac and MacBook Pro owners: Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using dial-up service. $49.00.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Third “barrier”? I don’t think so!
So according to Parkin, the only way these UNIX based Intel Macs are acceptable for Enterprise computing IT managers is if they run Windows.
Oh dear.
“self managed” …. bet that phrase makes IT departments cringe.
The only barriers that should be counted are:
1 – Specific software and/or services available to Macintosh clients
2 – Moronic CTOs and IT guys who wouldn’t know a good thing if it bit them in the …
3 – Only if applicable.
It’s funny how all these Windows-on-Mac hopefuls are looking forward to the day when they can HACK their way onto a Mac with Windows when they turn their heads the other way in regards to perfectly legitimate alternatives and workarounds to using Macs in enterprise.
I guess hacking their way into it makes them feel more comfortable sicne that’s what they are accustomed to doing anyway.
Need for Unix, yet also the need to run Windows. Huh? Come again?
Meanwhile, enterprise IT decision makers face only ONE barrier to making the next great leap in enterprise computing: Lose Windows.
Ironic, isn’t it?
Well, I kind of like the first two, but the last one is not really that essential for me.
Yes I want to be able to boot or run applications like AutoCad, I will be starting soon in Architecture schools and AutoCad is kind of a given. Sure I will try programs like TurboCad etc…, but just in case these don’t work as I need, having the option of running AutoCad is helpful.
It would really be great to run these natively, and I can’t wait to see more apps ported. If more important applications are ported or created for OS X, the need to run MS applications will decrease! So far after years of using both platforms, what I see coming from the MS world really don’t impress me at all.
Metryq, You just nailed the central conflict in this press release, which reflects the same flawed thinking in “forward thinking” IT departments everywhere.
Critics on this thread aren’t getting it. I think what Parkin meant was that Macs need to be able to run Windows WHEN NECESSARY (e.g. a mission-critical Windows-only app), NOT that the Macs should be running Windows as their default operating system. In an enterprise environment, what he is saying is reasonable.
Jake
While this list sound like crap, it might be somewhat correct. I consult for small businesses and non-profit organizations, and I have found that because of the difficulty in converting databases from Access to Filemaker Pro or MySQL, most C.E.O.s or executive directors are not interested in the Mac. Virtual PC is not good enough to bring most of these people around, so maybe the move to Intel and possibility of Windows and native speeds in a virtual partition will do the trick.
Make a Mac Mini with the Core Duo processor, make sure that all of the common business software is Universal Binary, and make sure that Windows can be used to run all of the specialized software that most companies need at native speeds and you have a winning solution.
First barrier break: Supply Unix based system
Third barrier break: Possibility to install Windows on Mac
Don’t those two kind of exclude each other. In sense of barrier breaking wouldn’t it be easiest to build a Mac with Windows sticker on it and welcome all the security hazards.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
“Parkin thinks IT managers will want to keep a closer eye on their heretofore unfettered populations of Mac users.”
Note to I.T. Managers: Keep your stinking, filthy paws off my Mac!
I will continue to “self manage” my Macintosh.
Rock on Steve!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cool mad” style=”border:0;” />
is that macs will START to be accepted–in a big mainstream way–only when they can run windows.
he’s right, that will start the ball rolling where it wouldn’t roll before!
but that doesn’t mean that running windows is the only way they will be used. its what makes them acceptable to MS-trained IT people. its a foot in the door for the REAL deal: OS X.
Running each OS on one core each seems silly to me. Why let Windows have full control over all hardware assets? Mac users don’t like viruses. I don’t like that option at all.
What I expect is a Windows virtual machine that had hardware access through proxies controlled by an OS X application like VirtualPC. I wish Microsoft and Apple would announce the features and availability of the product they are working on. It’s painful to hear about all these weird and broken ideas.
1) Bochs running on a Universal Binary is no solution.
2) Dual-booting Windows is only good for playing games, not for real work in a Windows environment.
Sure, running both OSes at the same time is the goal, but how about we let them both run on both processors? It’s unlikely that both will require one whole processor all the time. Most likely they will perform best time-sharing the whole system. Mac OS X controlling when the virtual machine has access to which resources.
I think this is what Apple and MS are doing with the VirtualPC technology Microsoft bought from Connectix. That was a dark day.
Since none of Microsoft’s OS’s are Unix-based I suppose Microsoft does not qualify as an “enterprise computing” company.
Essentially, this guy has said that in order for Macs to break into enterprise computing, they must simply become Windows boxes.
(Obviously, as Windows is NOT Unix-based, Barrier #2 means nothing for his case.)
When automobiles were first introduced, I have no doubt that there were people who strongly believed that the best way to steer them was with leather reins rather than that new-fangled wheel thing.
Human nature is such that the familiar always seems like the only way of doing things. When people actually start using OS X instead of Windows, they will understand why it’s such a good idea.
Personally I can’t see much point in running Windows on a Mac, except for those people who need a specific PC only app. If somebody buys a Mac and only uses Windows on it, I would imagine that they’ll be disappointed, but that may be exactly what IT staff want to happen.
All you people wonder why the hell people would run windows on a mac: LEGACY! If you have invested millions in software built for windows and you are looking to upgrade and in the long run ditch the windows platform then running xp on a mac for the time beeing would be a good alternative. Why are you so damn stuborn and just state that os x is better at everything!?!
If one could run windows on a mac then the potential switchers would have a much easier decision to make.
I’m so sick of people questioning the obvious.
To end this on a friendly note, for 95% of home users who don’t have specialmade software a Mac is clearly the better alternative
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Anyone running MS Access for a business database must be running a small business indeed. Serious business DBs are on SQL and Oracle.
As far as Autocad, no problem. Just get the unix version and run it in unix on your Mac under the Terminal application. It should run faster and more reliably.
Intel should buy Apple then license its OSX to any and all compter makers
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cool smile” style=”border:0;” /> Apple OSX on every computer in the worrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrld!
I like the line of thought that you don’t have to run Windows, but that a program can be run to convert Windows apps to run on Mac using the Intel chip… or something like that. Pull that off, and it’s perfect.
“Most of those Macs are ‘self-managed”
Boy, did he hit the nail on the head!
Rather than some person sitting in front of their PC yelling to the IT guys, “I’m pushing the button and it doesn’t do anything!”
Us Mac workers manage our own computers and GET FAR MORE WORK DONE!!!
Now where is Microsoft in all of this? Can’t they make VPC run natively on a Mac, or didn’t they get the developers kit soon enough?
I would think that they would be the first to port this program over to the mac. They could only sell more software, on what I would think would very little in development costs. Maybe they hate to want to compare the two on the same machine.
mdn “support” (Funny how the words seem to go with the comments.)
Just speaking about how things work at my place of employment of course.