Re: 8 Money Reasons Why Macs Win the cost battle

Jim wrote:
From the CIO site.

http://tinyurl.com/2cvwvq

Eight Financial Reasons Why You Should Use Mac OS

I like this section....

"A couple of years back, Tayco, one of the world's largest makers of office furniture, reached similar conclusions upon first pricing Mac servers for use on its network.

"The initial hardware costs were pretty much the same as for Windows PCs. But Macintosh has turned out to be much more cost-effective, due partly to its scalability," according to Przemek (pronounced "Chemek") Wozniak, IT manager of the Toronto, Ontario-based manufacturing firm.

Tayco is currently running three Apple X servers, 15 Windows servers and two IBM iSeries midrange computers on its back-end infrastructure. Meanwhile, all but 15 of the company's desktop PCs are running Windows.

Ultimately, though, the IT manager eyes replacing most of the remaining Windows servers and all of the desktops with Macs. He's also considering swapping out the two iSeries, which are running Lotus Notes mail and calendaring applications,with Apple's upcoming OS X version 10.5—code-named "Leopard"—which is slated to come with its own open-source versions.

Much of Tayco's reason for switching to Macs boils down to hardware costs. New IBM iSeries servers go for $100,000 and up, according to Wozniak. He also finds IBM PC servers consume more space in the data center than Xserves, while adding extra costs for rack hardware. "You can only fit 10 of them in one rack, versus 42 in a rack for Xserves," he adds."


-------

1) "IBM PC Servers consume more space in the data center than Xserves". Is there anyone on the planet actually believe that the XServe beats out server offerings from Dell, HP and IBM in this respect?

2) He's consdiering swapping out Lotus Notes with Leopard. Yeah, right. Like that will provide anywhere near the same functionality. He might as well use Hotmail or Gmail.

3) "But Macintosh has turned out to be much more cost-effective, due partly to its scalability,". Where is that "scalability" demonstrated here?


Steve
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 8 Money Reasons Why Macs Win the cost battle
    ... Eight Financial Reasons Why You Should Use Mac OS ... Xserves, while adding extra costs for rack hardware. ... Apple has a monopoly on 1U servers! ... *specs* of the xServe to the specs of other 1U machines, ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: 8 Money Reasons Why Macs Win the cost battle
    ... Eight Financial Reasons Why You Should Use Mac OS ... Tayco is currently running three Apple X servers, ... and two IBM iSeries midrange computers on its back-end infrastructure. ... center than Xserves, while adding extra costs for rack hardware. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: 8 Money Reasons Why Macs Win the cost battle
    ... "A couple of years back, Tayco, one of the world's largest makers of office furniture, reached similar conclusions upon first pricing Mac servers for use on its network. ... Tayco is currently running three Apple X servers, 15 Windows servers and two IBM iSeries midrange computers on its back-end infrastructure. ... He also finds IBM PC servers consume more space in the data center than Xserves, while adding extra costs for rack hardware. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • [OT]: IBMs view on how chips make valued-added proposition
    ... IBM's Computer-Server Business ... global market for heavy-duty "servers" that power most big businesses. ... After regaining the top spot in servers in 2002, IBM captured 32% of the ... instead of standardizing on Intel chips as many competitors have ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Cisco 4507R and Broadcom NetXtreme NICs
    ... We are having an issue with Broabcom Gigabit NetXtreme Nics. ... Our servers are IBM 336 with the previously mentioned NIC ... We also tried different ports on the blade and switch ...
    (comp.dcom.sys.cisco)