|
|
|
|
|
by giobox
113 days ago
|
|
Given one can only run Apple's software on their own machines, whether we talk about OS sales or hardware sales, we are talking about the same thing. Are you really prepared to argue 25 percent of the corporate computer market userbase are sabotaging their careers? I'd argue thats absurd, personally. I'm not responding to the Samba critique because millions of people share files at work between virtually any OS and Macs, every day, just fine. Would I like Apple's Samba implementation to be better? Sure. There are many studies that prove the opposite of your point, including one from IBM, and find the modern Mac significantly cheaper to support than Windows machines in business environments with less helpdesk tickets to boot: https://www.jamf.com/resources/press-releases/ibm-announces-... |
|
Again, tell me about Samba. How do you call a machine with major problems interacting with a business network, a business computer?
(Should I answer that question? You blame the IT team, and say it's a business computer based on the sales data. It's all very illogical.)
>millions of people share files at work between virtually any OS and Macs
Right. Using cloud solutions. That's not practical in many applications, especially where medium and large businesses are concerned. You're going to make them download large files from the cloud every time they want to open them while their Windows counterparts are streaming those same files over a 10G fiber drop to the server?
Which one makes more sense here? One of these users is getting promoted. It's not the guy working the slowest, usually.
Anyway, the request to make Samba work comes from the users. I didn't go looking for a problem to solve, right? I prefer it when my phone doesn't ring, my pay being fixed and all.