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. | <s>
(text/plain)