Law firm decides to upgrade Macs instead of moving to PCs

“The law firm Brookfields has undertaken a $165,000 Apple Mac upgrade as an internal IT audit over-rules a carefully considered move to PCs. Brookfields, a Mac user since 1995, has just bought 64 iMac machines and will upgrade the rest of its 145-strong network of machines in the next year,” Peter Griffin writes for The New Zealand Herald.

“It remains one of the larger Apple users in the country, running a network of Macs for all of its desktop computing needs,” Griffin writes. “For years the domain of desktop publishers, designers, trendy advertising agencies and schools, Macs are beginning to pop up more in the corporate environment.”

“Their price has dropped along with those of PCs, more software is becoming available that is Mac OS compatible and the aesthetics of Apple, which many consider to have the best looking product line up, is now more affordable,” Griffin writes. “Brookfields general manager Kevin Hall said the cost per desktop unit was lower. ‘Our IT staff numbers would need to double if we were to run the equivalent amount of PCs. “It is very easy to maintain a Mac network, we have just four staff who manage the website, intranet, staff training and support for 145 Macs.'”

Full article here.

26 Comments

  1. Looks like I got the first post.

    But anyway, look at that. Four people to manage 145 Macs. On the other hand, it would take 290 people to manage 145 PCs. I always laugh when my IT friends are like, “Dude, I don’t know why you use a Mac. PCs are better.” But they are constantly on call and stressed b/c the networks they manage are plagued with worms/viruses and downtime. Yet, my network has yet to fail me.

    I’m sticking with my Macs.

  2. “It is very easy to maintain a Mac network, we have just four staff who manage the website, intranet, staff training and support for 145 Macs.'”

    Wow…only 4 people. You’ll never hear a company that has a PC network of that size with only 4 support people. Very cool article. Also nice ammo for someone’s argument that major business “don’t use Macs”.

    Riiiiight.

  3. I concur…my friend who works for Samsung’s IT department in Jersey is ALWAYS, and I mean ALWAYS on call cos’ either the network, desktops, or something is going down. It amazes me how much I don’t see him since he started that job. Of course they are running everything Microsoft (Windows XP, SQL, Exchange) and etc.

    tsk, tsk, apparently, the only machines that don’t give him trouble are macs. I’ve never heard him complain about a mac yet.

  4. Since this is an Austrialian story it deserves an Austrialian reality check: http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=103391&catId=100494&tid=100008&p=1

    According to this study, 86% of Macs did not require repair in the last year, followed closely by Dell at 83% and IBM at 82%.

    Consumer Reports seems to back this up:
    http://www.consumerreports.org/main/detailv3.jsp?CONTENT<>cnt_id =305449

    I’m not sure if a 3% lead really deserves the criticism in the above thread.

    I find this whole post rather comical–here’s a tiny company in Austrailia (yet with “one of the larger Apple users in the country”) who’s owner likes Macs and therefore thinks that everyone else should be using macs too. Hardly newsworthy.

  5. It’s not about hardware failure rate, c–although Apple is the leader there. It’s about problems overall–hardware, software, viruses, and user-generated. Macs take far less time and money to keep running, and cause far less downtime and lost productivity.

    Any case study is of interest–even ones that demonstrate things some would rather ignore ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” /> And the reason it shows how valuable Macs can be is genuine concrete business reasons–not someone “liking” Macs.

  6. “find this whole post rather comical–here’s a tiny company in Austrailia (yet with “one of the larger Apple users in the country”) who’s owner likes Macs and therefore thinks that everyone else should be using macs too. Hardly newsworthy.”

    Actually they are in New Zealand – it’s actually a different country to Australia….. check your geography.

  7. In response to “c”… Its NOT an Australian company.

    The story is from the New Zealand Herald and is about a New Zealand law firm. When you consider that NZ has a population of just 4 million, a non-IT company that has 145 computers on on desks is quite a large user. The basis of the story is that despite pressure to move to Wintel the company decided to stick with Apple because of total cost of ownership.

    If we were to use c’s reasoning then obviously no story about anything Apple would be newsworthy as their marketshare is considered to only be about 2% – hardly worth bothering about in the larger sheme of things.

    The only thing comical about this is the inability of c to read.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.