Apple landing enterprise deployments

Apple landing enterprise deployments

Summary: For a company that's not all that focused on the enterprise, Apple is getting pretty good at name dropping with the Fortune 500.

SHARE:

For a company that's not all that focused on the enterprise, Apple is getting pretty good at name dropping with the Fortune 500.

Apple historically hasn't focused on the enterprise, but there is some anecdotal evidence that it is getting more serious. Almost every quarter, Apple has been talking about its enterprise mojo. And every quarter the customer list gets more impressive.

Some key snippets from Apple's earnings conference call. Related: Apple: We're sticking with our Japan suppliers Apple's second quarter blowout: iPhones, Macs carry the day; iPad, iPod units light

Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said:

iPhone is continuing to see strong growth within the enterprise segment. Today, 88% of the Fortune 500 are testing or deploying iPhone. With strong employee demand and custom app development fueling adoption, we are seeing great scale of iPhone deployments in businesses worldwide. In fact, hundreds of private and public companies worldwide are supporting thousands of iPhones on their corporate networks. Some examples include Cisco, Prudential, Boston Scientific, General Motors, American Airlines, Deloitte, YUM! Brands, and Xerox.

And on the iPad enterprise front:

Employee demand for iPad in the corporate environment remains strong, and CIOs continue to embrace iPad in an unprecedented rate. In just over a year since its debut, 75% of the Fortune 500 are testing or deploying iPad within their enterprises. Some recent examples of enterprises that are deploying iPad include Fortune 500 companies such as Xerox, AutoNation, YUM! Brands, ADP, Boston Scientific, Estee Lauder, Disney, Stryker, Prudential Financial, Rite Aid, and USAA.

The enterprise chatter led to a question about whether these iPhone and iPad gains were leading to corporate Mac adoption. Tim Cook, Apple's chief operating officer, said:

It clearly seems to be creating a halo effect for the Mac, and I think that's one reason we see the growth that we are seeing on the Mac. It's amazing when you see the 28% year over year versus the worldwide market on -- in PCs contracting by three points.

Add it up and Apple appears to be happy to collect enterprise sales even as it plays the consumer role. If Apple decides to put its weight behind corporate sales it's going to be dangerous to established players.

Topics: iPhone, Apple, Hardware, iPad, Mobility, Smartphones

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

24 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

    Apple could never compete with mass distributions of low cost enterprise computers. And, I doubt that IT departments would wish to be locked into a single hardware supplier .. regardless of how beneficial or superior that hardware computer product is. (I know I wouldn't make that choice and most current readers of ZDNet understand by endorsements for the Apple ecosystem.)

    However, Apple products do "just fine" on networks so I might understand an increase in the Mac population on any particular Corporate network system.
    kenosha77a
    • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

      @kenosha7777 <br><br>So they would rather trade being locked in to a single hardware vendor for being locked in to a single software vendor? Hardware is the cheapest part of the IT ecosystem.<br><br>It's a known fact that once you start down the Microsoft path they force you to buy everything from them. They don't understand the word interoperability.<br><br>Want e-mail? You have to run Exchange on Windows.<br>Want database? MS-SQL only on Windows.<br>Want Office? Windows and Mac<br>Want Systems Management? Windows only and maybe other platforms if you are lucky and only an afterthought.<br><br>I could go on but deploying Windows locks you pretty much forever to Microsoft. And that's the same as being locked to a hardware vendor. Even more so.
      itguy08
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @itguy08
        So true. There's not even third party apps for email, dbs, office, or system management.

        And you're _forced_ to buy these products. At gun point.
        crazydanr
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @itguy08 ummmmm your just plain wrong.

        want email Lotus Notes
        want DB, MySQL for linux/windows, or IBM DB2,
        want office, Open office, or google docs
        want system management, Altiris...

        These are all product my company uses, and we are considered a M$ house. so your concept about being locked to M$ if misleading...
        Until Mac gets off the quarterly update schedule, we wont see many Macs in the corporate environment, Corporations arent going to let it stand if a security hole goes unpatched by apple for 3 months
        nickdangerthirdi
  • Realizing the Value

    When you deploy Macs you have:
    1. Less IT people to support the same # of computers
    2. Easier deployment (a true image)
    3. Easier configuration (via .plist files vs a registry)
    4. Built in manageability tools
    5. Longer lifecycle.

    It's a Win Win when you look at the TCO which beats most Windows systems handily.
    itguy08
    • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

      @itguy08 <br>you also have 3 times the cost of for HW, <br>I would like to see where you got the figures that you think you can support the same number of macs with less people....<br>I can deploy 200 windows PC's in 4 hours, I would like to see that done with Mac's, <br>Longer life cycle? only because you dont want to spend 3 times as much for a mac as you would a PC... and considering Mac's are essentially nothing but an glorified expensive PC, why would anyone spend the money?
      nickdangerthirdi
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @nickdangerthirdi@... Imaging 200 PCs in 4 hours sounds pretty sweet- assuming 20GB/image, that's:

        20GBx200=4000GB

        4000GB = 32,000,000 Mb

        4 hours= 240 minutes = 14400 seconds

        32,000,000/14400= 2222.2 Mbps= 2.2 Gbps

        Or, if the image is a spartan 10GB, that's still pushing out about 1100Mbps. What networking/imaging/deployment solution you use?
        Gritztastic
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @nickdangerthirdi@...
        He probably uses Ghost, which uses multicast to send 1 image to 30-50 pcs at a time. My image deployments take about 30 minutes a pop, so I could run 8 sessions of 30 machines... roughly 240 computers. His math looks fine to me.
        crazydanr
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @nickdangerthirdi@...
        PS. A tip for ghosting too - build a seperate physical network or a seperate VLAN to keep the ghost network in an isolated broadcast domain, because multicasting is going to keep that switch very, very busy. I've got some nice screenshots of my core with maxed out traffic on all ports as proof.
        crazydanr
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @nickdangerthirdi@... Multicast must be the key then- we use unicast for our Ghost setup, so it gets exponentially slower with each additional PC (though we only image maybe 15-20 PCs a week, and rarely more than 4 at a time).
        Gritztastic
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @nickdangerthirdi@... In case you don't realize it, support goes well beyond the initial deployment and long term is where most of the support is.
        non-biased
    • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

      @itguy08 <br>I had a tough time picking which of your posts to reply to. They're well-stuffed with nonsense. <br><br>It is impossible for you to make a 'longer lifecycle' claim when so many businesses have been forced to dump PPC systems and when Apple releases OS versions more frequently than MS. <br><br>And how the heck are plist files any easier than a registry? They're just preferences/settings. <br><br>Sheesh. Nuts.<br><br>(not a platform bigot, I use them all)
      joblak2
      • plist vs. registry

        @joblak@... <br><br>plists are separate files, not related or dependent on other plists. The System Registry is a hairball.
        Info-Dave
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @joblak@... Really? Are we on OS XI now?<br><br>Agree...hairball. Actually 5 separate hairballs known as the hive. Its resulted in giving me hives several times.
        I12BPhil
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @Info-Dave@...
        Thank you for your lesson but I am well aware of what plist files are. My question was not to indicate a registry was easier than plist files. It was to point out the lunacy of thinking there is a significant difference in these computing thingys. Nothing is easier. You have a hairball whether it is a bunch of keys in a registry or a bunch of separate plist files in a filesystem. The only reason why one might perceive one to be easier than the other is if they are not familiar with the other.
        joblak2
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @joblak@...
        My 2003 Mac Pro is still working just fine (and the security updates keep coming). Granted I put a 3rd party RAID software package on it, but it's a champ! Apple supports its platforms through good architecture (both software and hardware).
        jake48
      • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

        @jake48@... <br><br>Congratulations on running an older Mac. <br><br>However, you seem to be seriously confused. <br><br>Mac Pros (Intel processors) were introduced in 2006. With your obsolete 2003 Mac, the best system you could have would be the very first generation G5 PPC processor. That's pretty weak for today's software which is now being written for Intel processors. You are certainly not working with a 'champ' with a G5 processor that old. Adobe's and Apple's apps have given up on your PPC computer. <br><br>You are the perfect example of a very limited lifecycle. <br><br>Your computer cannot run Adobe CS5. Adobe CS5 can run on a Windows OS from a decade ago. <br><br>You have done well to illustrate one of the many reasons why Apple has had trouble in the enterprise market.
        joblak2
  • Message has been deleted.

    xiaojiekyii
  • RE: Apple landing enterprise deployments

    Make way, Apple is taking over. A welcome sight.
    james347
  • Windows users

    The fact is that the iPod, iPhone and iPad's astonishing success is mostly because Windows users are buying them in droves. Mac users alone would have made the iDevice moderately successful but would not have propelled Apple to become the second largest company yet still maintaining 95% profit growth.

    The fact the iPad is already outselling the Mac in less than a year, tells you that it's not just the Mac Fanbois turbocharging the iDevice growth.
    Synthmeister