Not to mention that I have seen Linux running NATIVE on Macintosh hardware as well... so with a Linux rather than Windows solution, they wont lose their hardware (sorry, but 386 speed emulation is NOT real compatibility, LOL) Craig White wrote: > > "David P. Schwartz" wrote: > > > > uh, did you mention to them that sticking with Apple and upgrading to OS-X _IS_ switching to *nix? Filemaker Pro will undoubtedly port > > their stuff over, so what's the issue? > > > > I'm not being "pro-Apple" here, just pointing out what might not be obvious to some folks. I understand that OS-X has a pretty complete > > *nix implementation under it's skins -- I seem to recall it might be a FreeBSD derivative -- with a Mach microkernel at its core. > > > > You want to remember, the real VALUE in your clients' situation is in their current applications. If you don't need to recreate these > > apps for any other reason, don't force them into a solution that leads to unnecessary expenses just because of the move. > > > > Also (and this is addressed to ALL so-called "consultants"), consider that your opinion of the "long-term viability" of one company or > > another, and Apple in particular, is totally irrelevant. For instance, everybody "just knew" that Borland was going to shrivel up and > > die because the big bad Borg (Microsoft) was going to kill them (or assimilate them). Well, a little consideration leads one to the > > conclusion that it's not in Microsoft's best interest to have all of their key competitors die. MS settled a lawsuit and then invested > > further in Borland mostly to keep them alive, just as they invested in Apple before that. > > > > Apple fans also need to remember that Microsoft has a very LARGE software division that earns SIGNIFICANT revenues through the existence > > of Apple Computer, and it's far cheaper for them to make another investment in Apple to keep them alive than to let them die and loose a > > few billion dollars of income. Similarly, Borland is the ONLY independent software development tools vendor left in the market place, > > and it behooves MS to help them stay alive if only to make things APPEAR like they HAVE some competition! It also helps that Borland > > has TERRIFIC tools, just as Apple has some great products, too. > > > > If your clients would be willing to invest in Microsoft stock rather than Apple, tell them that their stock would take a big drop if > > Apple closed its doors because Microsoft makes so much money selling software to Apple customers, and see what they think of them > > apples... > > > > Not to mention the fact that, if all their competitors died, that would be a very clear signal to the powers that be that MS is, in > > fact, a huge monopoly that poses a very large threat to competition in the market place -- so strong that even their strongest > > competitors couldn't survive. Not good. > > > > Finally, my experience in these situtions is that if you start getting clients to question their fundamental business decisions, they > > start rethinking just about everything, including what the heck they're doing talking with you (a lone ranger) instead of a larger more > > "established" firm that won't go out of business due to an unfortunate car accident one night. You might find that you've won the battle > > and lost the war. > ----------- > I think that you missed my point. > > I have migrated a lot of my customers from Macintosh to Windows already. > As for the war, it's already been lost. The only thing that remains to > be seen is whether OSX will get enough traction to give Apple enough > impetus to grow - their 4% market share makes them insignificant to the > point that only those who are already invested in Macintosh > hardware/software can afford to continue on with Macintosh. To grow in > market share, they will have to attract new customers with OSX and it is > falling way behind linux development. > > To debate the viability of Macintosh though...is way off topic here. > > I'm just getting ahead of the issue - they are still invested in > Macintosh and will remain so at least for the next year. I am doing long > range thinking. I am looking at the viability of using fat server / thin > client for linux desktop use and wondering how well it will scale for 10 > users. I see the dividend in Windows 2000 terminal services - low > maintenance requirements on client workstations. I have a number of > non-profit clients and I see this as a terrific alternative. I am > fishing for actual installation - rather than anecdotal information. > > Craig > ________________________________________________ > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- jkenner @ mindspring . com__ I Support Linux: _> _ _ |_ _ _ _| Working Together To <__(_||_)| )| `(_|(_)(_| To Build A Better Future. |