AAPL Stock: 113.29 ( + 0.37 )

Printed from

Intel Macs won\'t help Apple in business

updated 11:25 am EST, Mon January 16, 2006

No Macs for business

Apple's transition Intel chips may help the company in the consumer market, but it is unlikely to . For the most part, government contracts require that companies use Windows, and many companies find that there is insufficient software compatibility and availability with Macs, according to InformationWeek. Even though debuting the Intel-based Macs six months ahead of schedule will help Apple keep sales up as customers will not have to wait for the upgrades, Apple is focusing more on a "living-room"-styled computer, according to the report.

Businesses switching from Windows-based PCs to Intel Macs must consider cost. Companies choosing the new Macs would need to factor in the higher cost of the machines as well as training and transition of applications and the need for Mac-compatible Oracle and SAP applications.

While Apple currently holds only 2-3 percent of the worldwide PC market, the company sold 1.25 million Macs sold last year, 200,000 more than 2004--though much of Apple's growth has come from iPod sales. With the upgrades to its consumer content-creation suite iLife, Apple has shown that as far as software is concerned, the home-based computer user is their priority.

Some businesses do, however, choose Macs for a variety of reasons. "It's not necessarily a pro-Mac thing, but it's an anti-Microsoft and -Windows thing," explains Interstate Screw VP Eric Seiden, whose company uses five Macs and two Windows computers. "Windows is prone to viruses and security flaws. My whole goal is I want the computer to work for me, and I don't want to spend my whole life fixing the damn things."

by MacNN Staff





  1. automorrow

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Your Tax Dollars at Work!

    Isn't that great.. to know that your tax dollars keeps Microsoft in business, and the future of our so-called great country is dependent on Windows! I would like to know the ball park figure that the "oficiall" USA spends at MicroSoft .. including the "unproductivity" assesment due to buggy software.

  1. Jesda

    Joined: Dec 1969



    But you cant be productive to begin with unless you have the software to do it.

  1. jscotta

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Productivity and Costs

    You are correct, in that you have to have the right software to be productive to begin with. That said, the Macintosh platform has a huge amount of software - many people fail to factor in the open source applications. And, yes, you have to factor in those applications because the "businesses" in this article are large enterprises urning Oracle and and SAP. So having IT staff around to download and configure open source alternatives is available.

    The next thing to consider is what software will be available to run Windows inside a window on a Mac. This is not a new thing. Today's OS X Mac is not much more than a NeXT machine. Steve Jobs and company have experience moving from non-Intel products to Intel ones. Software to run Windows concurrently with another operating system (a virtual PC), was one of the first things to be released for that combination. So expect to see it on the Mac soon. In fact, I'll bet that people have been working on just that since the Intel transition was announced.

  1. itguy05

    Joined: Dec 1969


    SAP and Oracle - Check

    They both run on Macs. IIRC Apple uses SAP internally and I doubt that they are running it on Windows, AIX, or AS/400....

  1. jimothy

    Joined: Dec 1969


    I disagree

    I predict that the Intel Macs will help Apple in business, particularly once Virtual PC (or some competive product) is available. Sure, there are some businesses and organizations that won't but a computer if it doesn't come slapped with a Dell logo and holographic sticker from Microsoft, but there are plenty of companies that aren't such sticklers.

    Many businesses and individuals would love to move to the Mac, for reasons cited in the article (security, etc.), but need to run a handful of Windows-only programs from time-to-time. At my work, my primary machine is a Mac, and I work with plenty of people would love to make the Mac their primary machine, but a few applications hold them back.

    So, smart business will look at it and say, "We could get a Windows-only laptop, or, for not much more, we could get a MacBook which will run Mac OS X and Windows." As more and more companies do this, more and more developers will port their software to Mac OS X (or, better yet, other developers will create compatible alternatives, since so much Windows software simply sucks). Which makes it easier for even more companies to migrate. Before you know it, the Mac market has grown enough that even those Windows die-hards will give it a second look.

    Of course, we're not there yet (still need Virtual PC to even let us step down that direction), but with the right moves, marketing, and a healthy dose of luck, it could happen.

  1. eldarkus

    Joined: Dec 1969


    The article is Moot

    Apple didnt switch to Intel to make inroads into corporations, like this article implies. it did it cause they were unhappy with IBM.

    Just because they switched processors, that means businesses were more likely to go to Mac? I would buy a mac, but it has an IBM processor... was that the line of thinking? hmmm....

  1. Feathers

    Joined: Dec 1969



    Government contracts cannot insist on the use of a particular operating system, that would be illegal, but contractual requirements MAY necessitate the use of software not available on the Mac platform, which isn't the same thing by a long shot! Disinformation is so...informative! It is also well known that there is a significant installed base of Mac OS platform machines in, of all places, the Pentagon! Also, to suggest that Government contracts dictate the decisions of the wider business community (the majority of whom do not necessarily have any Government contracts) is a non sequitur!

  1. cbr600f4

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Numbers are wrong

    Did anyone else notice this story claims Apple sold 1.25 million Macs last YEAR. This seems a bit off to me, in fact I think they may mean last quarter. This website just is not what it used to be. Check the facts before publishing MacNN.

  1. bhuot

    Joined: Dec 1969


    re: rubbish

    That is not true that Macs can be bought for government jobs even if they *require* Macs to be used for their work to run software that is *only available* for Macs. In this case it was a US Forest Service funded research project. The problem is they have contracts with the likes of IBM and HP and cannot buy from whoever they feel does the job best even when the software they need is not available for Windows. Remember Microsoft has so much power that they successfully pressured the NSA into stopping their development work on Security Enhanced Linux.

  1. tron12

    Joined: Dec 1969


    Sales are way off

    I noticed that as well. They sold 1.25 million in the last quarter alone. These people who write these articles should really get their act together and stop kissing Microcrap's butt. Apple sold over 5 million Mac's last year alone and almost 2 million of those who bought them were people switching from windoze to MAC.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines

Follow us on Facebook


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

ZTE Spro 2 Smart Projector

Home theaters are becoming more and more accessible these days, but maybe you've been a bit wary about buying a home projector. And h ...

MSI Geforce GTX 970 100ME

When Nvidia announced a new line of video cards in September 2014, many people thought things would continue to be business as usual i ...

Wren V5US Wireless Sound System

If you're a music fanatic, chances are you are, by extension, a bit fanatical about what you listen to your music on. If you're like ...


Most Commented