Forrester: Forget Macs. In business, it's still all about Windows

By | March 31, 2008, 1:32pm PDT

Summary: In spite of the continual noise around Macs gaining marketshare, Windows still totally and completely rules the enterprise roost.

In spite of the continual noise around Macs gaining marketshare, Windows still totally and completely rules the enterprise roost.

That’s another of the findings of the Forrester Research report I cited earlier today — “Enterprise Desktop And Web 2.0/SaaS Platform Trends, 2007. 

Consumer love aside, Macs still just don’t matter in the business world. From the report, released by Forrester on March 31:

“Enterprises’ share of Windows users dropped by nearly 4% during the year, but Microsoft’s monopoly remains undisputed: Some 95% of business users run Windows. While 2007 was a big year for Apple, with its enterprise share growing threefold to 4.2%, uptake remains limited to enthusiasts and small workgroups. IT departments crave standardization, and Macs pose too many problems for IT departments. The verdict for enterprise-focused vendors is clear: Unless your market is a niche business group, Windows is the only desktop you need support.”

Before you ask, I already did: Did Microsoft fund or influence this study in some way? A company official told me plainly that “Forrester doesn’t take vendor funding” for its work.

Next question: Does Forrester think Microsoft walks on water? What about Windows Vista — a Harvard case study about which MUST be in the making? (Possible title: “Microsoft’s Vista: How not to develop and market a product”.)

For the record, Forrester is none too bullish about Vista’s uptake in the enterprise, either:

“Adoption of Vista among Windows users increased by a little more than five percentage points during 2007 to end at 6.3%. But, much to Microsoft’s dismay, even this conservative growth cannot be attributed to upgrades from XP, which remained fixed at 90% throughout 2007. Upgrades are likely to have come from Windows 2000; its drop of six percentage points mirrored Vista’s growth. “

Microsoft is increasingly worrying about Apple in the consumer space. In fact, Microsoft is increasingly worrying about the consumer space, in general, which isn’t too surprising since the Redmondians already have sewn up the enterprise and needs new markets to conquer in order to keep its growth rates up.

But in the enterprise, Apple isn’t tops on Microsoft’s list of companies to watch. IBM is. And given that the lion’s share of Microsoft’s revenues still comes from enterprise, not consumer, sales, I’d argue that Microsoft shouldn’t let itself be distracted by all the noise around Apple’s consumer market-share gains.

The part of this equation that is less cut-and-dried is the extent to which consumer success translates into business success. This is the reason that some Softies are increasingly worried about Apple’s consumer laptop/notebook, cellphone and digital-music-player markets. Microsoft wants to emulate the Apple halo effect in the worst way.

However, more than one business user I know has said that s/he couldn’t care less about which cell phones are popular among consumers. Instead, the focus should be on which cell phones work best in syncing up with Exchange Server and other corporate e-mail products/standards. And do warm and fuzzy feelings about an Xbox or a Zune really portend whether an IT buyer will gravitate toward Windows PCs, SharePoint Server or Microsoft-hosted CRM? Again, I’m not convinced….

What about you? Should Microsoft be worried about Apple’s, Google’s and other companies’ consumer-market triumphs? Can the Redmondians afford to stick to their business knitting and just let the consumer chips fall where they may?

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

Topics

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Disclosure

Mary-Jo Foley

Freelance journalist/blogger Mary Jo Foley has nothing to disclose. WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). I do not own Microsoft stock or stock in any of its partners or competitors. I have no business ventures that are sponsored by/funded by Microsoft or any of its partners or competitors.

Biography

Mary-Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley has covered the tech industry for 25 years for a variety of publications, including ZDNet, eWeek and Baseline. She has kept close tabs on Microsoft strategy, products and technologies for the past 10 years. In the late 1990s, she penned the award-winning "At The Evil Empire" column for ZDNet, and more recently the Microsoft Watch blog for Ziff Davis.

Got a tip? Send her an email with your rants, rumors, tips and tattles. Confidentiality guaranteed.

208
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Forrester: Forget Macs. In business, it's still all about Windows
dfwekrwe3201-24353670632082971688064999491555 11th Nov
ngkugn,good post!
0 Votes
+ -
Canna get a big Duh ?
BitTwiddler 31st Mar 2008
NT
0 Votes
+ -
Market Niche?
zclayton2 3rd Apr 2008
Does Forrester ever do real research or do they just specialize in the market niche of showing the obvious popular opinion? Everytime I read one of their pronouncements I want to repeat the "Duh!" sound.

Must be nice work to get, how do I sign up?
0 Votes
+ -
I assume that the research focuses on
LARGE companies. Apple's best shot is
small companies that do not have or
want and IT dept. There are millions of
such companies. They really only need
an office suite, web and email.

For such companies, OSX is pretty
trouble free and is easy to manage.

As for "enterprise", I assume that the
research again focused on large
companies and government. In
colleges, a large "enterprise" market,
Macs are becoming far more common,
with some schools hitting almost 50-50
parity with Windows.

If Apple could make further inroads in
the 2 areas mentioned, their growth
would be enormous.
0 Votes
+ -
business and enterprise
sackbut 1st Apr 2008
>>If Apple could make further inroads in
the 2 areas mentioned, their growth
would be enormous

But it's not. We who are in small business could care less about what you fanboys get your rocks off by.
0 Votes
+ -
Mac Envy
aussieblnd@... 1st Apr 2008
My My you should see a doctor about your Mac envy problem! They are just computers you use what ever get the job done.
0 Votes
+ -
well,
evilkillerwhale@... 1st Apr 2008
that's why he uses Windows. And Not Mac. Because Mac just can't get it up long enough to get it done.
0 Votes
+ -
Well put
hasta la Vista, bah-bie 1st Apr 2008
But it's not. We who are in small business could care less about what you fanboys get your rocks off by.

grin
0 Votes
+ -
Smart
theoxygenthief 1st Apr 2008
0 Votes
+ -
I hope your not talking to me
hasta la Vista, bah-bie 2nd Apr 2008
You don't tell me what to do. Nobody appointed you policeman here.
0 Votes
+ -
wish granted
Hogleg 3rd Apr 2008
first of all, it's "you're". There is a difference between bad grammar and bad spelling. Secondly, he replied to something which you quoted word for word with a smiley face. I'm going to go out on a limb and say he wasn't talking to you, but you can think that if it makes you feel better.

Now back to the point: The study reflects reality, not what reality should be. Any tech can and probably will tell you that it is possible to support ANYTHING in a mixed environment. That doesn't mean it's preferable to having a universal shop. If they have a use I'm all for supporting them, but if you're just going to say "well technically, with some hax, it CAN do this," well, that doesn't provide me with any unique benefits.

Since MS is established (and with good reason...they occasionally do something someone can us, you know) right now they represent the bright line standard for unique benefits.
0 Votes
+ -
Grammar police (?)
hasta la Vista, bah-bie 3rd Apr 2008
first of all, it's "you're". There is a difference between bad grammar and bad spelling.

Oh boyyyy.... When one types in haste...

Secondly, he replied to something which you quoted word for word with a smiley face.

So that's what really put you off, isn't it. Well I happened to agree with the sentiment and the way he put it, so I think it's my attitude you have a problem more than anything.

I'm going to go out on a limb

You do that. And while we're on the subject, calling people trolls who don't agree with you isn't my idea of anything beyond the typical fanboy response. Just so you know.

and say he wasn't talking to you, but you can think that if it makes you feel better.

Totally irrelevant. But I think you already know that.
0 Votes
+ -
If I was
Hogleg 4th Apr 2008
You'd be under arrest. Language is an abstraction layer that allow us to represent thoughts. If you don't use proper grammar, which is the syntax error of the human world, I have less certainty that I know what you really think. Typing in haste is a reason, not an excuse. I type 100 words a minute and still make the attempt, and I'm not alone. Show me any everyone else some respect. That's just lazy typing. It says not only do you not want to think it over, you're unwilling to pause long enough to straighten out what you really think.

Feel free to have a problem. I like Macs, I don't like supporting a mixed environment. You didn't say anything about that, so that makes you as much of a troll as him. In case you missed the big letters this whole article was about Mac at the enterprise level. Whether they exist is a matter of fact, not conjecture. People don't just make a study like this up. Address the issue.
0 Votes
+ -
Well maybe you shouldn't be wasting your time then..
hasta la Vista, bah-bie 4th Apr 2008
Know what I mean..

You didn't like the attitude of my response, so you decided to become board policeman, wagging your finger at those who don't share your view, nitpicking at every "i" that isn't dotted, every "t" that isn't crossed.

If you consider me a troll, then by all means, please don't bother responding to me anymore. I'm still going to post in anyway I see fit, as long as it's under the guidelines of what ZDNet will allow. You have no control over that. I suggest you accept that.
0 Votes
+ -
From my research...
Komplex 2nd Apr 2008
The mac might be a better solution for small business than Windows.

For 3 grand you get a server and an unlimited user Mail, group Calendar, Wiki, Podcasting, and unlimited Client Access licenses.

Microsoft's SBS will screw you over on the CAL's.
0 Votes
+ -
scary
Hogleg 2nd Apr 2008
a personal attack from a mac user? How uncouth.

I have 750 computers running windows in a medium sized business. How many small businesses would you say that amounts to?

Additionally, I'm in charge of technology for a hs. Do I want kids to have exposure to macs? Who wouldn'?. I don't want them totally clueless. Do I want to teach them a semester long computer apps class on a mac? Not on your life. I'd like them to be able to use two fingers when they grow up.

Our superintendent, who is essentially the ceo of a district in which I comprise onnley a fifth of the students and computers, agrees.

Let mac do what it does..one or two users in small shops, and stay the hell out of my school. Talk about your small business all you want, it would take 100 of them to brush the number of windows machines here and 530 to make up the number in the district. There's your market share. Macs are a pain to support in a mixed environment, period.
0 Votes
+ -
Why?
ladyirol 4th Apr 2008
"Macs are a pain to support in a mixed environment,
period." So, expand and tell us why...

I hear these statements all of the time and I am so curious
because I am a home user and only do "personal" IT for
very small businesses (all use Macs - but, don't let the fact
that they are my specialty delude you into thinking I don't
know pc's).

On a small scale Macs are a very viable alternative to
having an "IT" department (server easy, networking a cinch,
no need to hardly ever reboot, very user friendly, very hard
for the inept user to mess up... etc.) they are much more
affordable in the long run.

These continual statements only make me think that the
fault would be with a lazy IT department rather than a
problem to support - they need very little support, if any,
and they play very nicely with Windows networks - have for
a very long time.
0 Votes
+ -
Lazy IT
Hogleg 7th Apr 2008
Well, us lazy it people could tell you that as a small workgroup there is nothing better, but as a enterprise wide solution they are a pain. Macs work fine a dozen at a time. When they don't work is when I can buy a full PC Lab WITH sw and 5 years next day parts (and repair them in generally 15 minutes or less). I can deploy image, manage security, and have seamless integration with AD. I can, for example, control via group policy restricted applications or push bookmarks. If permissions or software changes change dynamically I can adjust them with a policy change instead of touching 750 machines. Even if everything works, the amount of centralized administration you can reasonably expect from Macs is a fraction of what I can do with a 2003 AD environment. I got my macs working with AD, and still the most you could do was map drives and authenticate, which was better than a kick in the pants, but not as nice as a squeeze.

I am not arguing macs are worthless. What I will argue is that all our Mac labs served a specific purpose and by and large were setup and forget jobs. Any deployment, permission changes, and the like remained difficult. I don't doubt there is a Linux solution or two you can use to hack it together, but then instead of one os I have 3. If you haven't done tech support for a medium or large business, I genuinely think you might not get it. In a large environment, unless you are specialized, you just dont have the time to toy with 3 OSs and the user support, interoperability, and substitution for "Standard" programs you have to do. In your environment, macs may be swell, in mine they simply introduce a new headache.
0 Votes
+ -
The plain facts are...
Mr_Wizard 1st Apr 2008
...I don't believe Apple is making any serious inroads in small and mid-sized businesses either. I haven't seen an Apple in *any* business in at least 10 years. Schools and homes only.
0 Votes
+ -
designers.
lostarchitect 1st Apr 2008
apple is in every design office i have ever been in (not counting architecture, though it is in a fair number of those, as well). also, any video production outfit.
0 Votes
+ -
Serious video production...
DCMann 1st Apr 2008
...has gone to Windows machines. Final Cut is a good consumer program, but nobody in the video production industry takes it very seriously now. At one time Apple had some good partners with serious video applications (Adobe Premier, Avid, etc.) but those have moved over to Windows based PCs.

Yes, Apple still has market share in design houses, but even those are shrinking. I've never heard of a design house switching form PCs to Macs, but I've heard plenty of the opposite lately.
0 Votes
+ -
Getting the job done
Geotopia 1st Apr 2008
"I've never heard of a design house switching form PCs to
Macs"

1. You probably aren't a designer and have little contact
with design houses or agencies.

and

2. If there aren't any PC design houses to begin with, it's
very unlikely that you'd hear of any switching. They're
generally all mac to begin with.

Rhetorical blunders aside, no designer would be satisified
with the bulky workflow a Windows or Linux PC imposes
on the design process.
0 Votes
+ -
Serious Video Production?
edward.arnold@... 1st Apr 2008
"Nobody takes Final Cut seriously"? So, I guess all the mentions of Indy and Hollywood film-makers using Final Cut successfully that we see on the Apple website are just more Steve Jobs Koolaid?
The swing to the use of Wintel boxes in design and video production houses is probably due to the fact that when they hire IT support people, they mostly get hard-core Windows fanatics who would rather die than admit any advantage to using Apple hardware. Since the IT guys are the 'experts', management believes that Macs can't be networked, have no software, are too expensive, and crash all the time, and switch to the low-priced spread, thereby guaranteeing lifetime job security for the IT guys.
0 Votes
+ -
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN edited
100% in Final Cut Studio.

Or the Oscars themselves. Or CNN,
ESPN, and just about every other news
outlet. Take a look at the Macbook Pro
(s) in just about every satellite truck.
I suspect "No Country for Old Men" won for a lot of reasons other than the fact it was edited in Final Cut Pro.

I'm pretty sure the movies for the last fifty years were done in other systems or a mix of systems - or without computers at all.

Stargate SG-1 - the longest running and one of the most highly acclaimed SF series ever is done on Dells and PCs. Most production houses I know use PCs and Macs (in fact, they tend to use a lot more PCs than Macs overall).

One of my TV writer friends just changed from being a long time Mac user to a PC laptop because she was having problems staying compatible with her colleagues.
0 Votes
+ -
So...
djchandler 1st Apr 2008
That probably accounts for the total 4.2% market penetration mentioned in the article. How many offices do you think do design work and video production? Most of us consider those kinds of tasks to be hobbies at best. Plant your feet in the REAL world. Number crunching rules!

Do Apple fanboys even read these articles before they start foaming at the mouth?
0 Votes
+ -
So...what?
cuba_pete@... 2nd Apr 2008
Serious production companies only comprise a small portion of the market to begin with, so the low numbers make sense. This isn't a Mac bashing session, 'cause we all know how that goes. We are talking real business here, in a specific sector if you want. Windows platforms don't have the speed and power with the big crunching needed for graphics and video production. Is the US government a big enough example for you? Virtually all graphic and video production at the TOP end of the gov't happens on a Mac, period.
0 Votes
+ -
Visit our office
007baf 1st Apr 2008
Let's see, the CEO, IT VP, and I use OSX every day. We are
the 95th fastest growing consultancy in the US. We do
develop on Vista, because our main client is the
government.

I think the key here is that small and medium businesses
are using OSX. As the majority of jobs are held by these
businesses, it's nothing to sneeze at.

I think the missing link is Outlook. In our firm, we agree
this is the biggest problem. Mail and iCal work fine, but
Outlook is Microsoft's best product.
0 Votes
+ -
You develop on Vista
ericgbailey 1st Apr 2008
Really? For the government? Which one?
My experience (yes I work for the government) is that they are still firmly entrenched with XP since it actually has an approved C2 compliancy checklist, been fully qualified, and is not ?new?.
0 Votes
+ -
HUH?
xuniL_z 4th Apr 2008
You are saying Macs own the SMB space?

Do you also wear a tinfoil hat?


That is so very far from wrong that it's not even humorous.
0 Votes
+ -
facts are...
aussieblnd@... 1st Apr 2008
You must not get out much Mr. Wizard!
0 Votes
+ -
Huh...
cgapperi 1st Apr 2008
I recently moved from an medium sized retail operation that
was all Apple and Linux. The Linux machines were only used
for servers.

I know several retail organizations that are mac based.
Amazing at it may seem to most Windows users, there ARE
Mac compatible applications for nearly, if not all, small
business needs.
0 Votes
+ -
check out planes and airports
ruprick_z 1st Apr 2008
as an extensive business traveller I spend lots of time in airports,
airplanes and exec lounges surrounded by business travellers. I
have noticed a marked increase in MacBooks.

While not statistically significant, annecdotally it appears that Apple
is making headway with road warriors and exec's
0 Votes
+ -
Apple != Big Business Friendly
DotNetWill 1st Apr 2008
Apple won't break into major corporations because of there business strategies. Large corporations like road maps and the ability to virtualize mixed environments etc on any hardware. These two as an example are the things Apple aren't doing / won't do but need to
0 Votes
+ -
That's good and bad...
olePigeon 1st Apr 2008
That's good and bad. While you won't be running or virtualizing OS X on non-Apple branded hardware, support
and maintenance just got a lot easier.

Be it hardware or software support, there's only one
number you need to call. Only one company you need to
deal with should anything go wrong with your server
or client systems.

There are only two real major drawbacks to using Apple
systems in business: 1; Apple's lack of volume licensing
system, and 2; lack of a reasonably priced, expandable
workstation. The Mac Pro is too expensive to buy in bulk
for a general workstation, the Mac mini is too confined,
and having a combination screen/computer like the iMac is
a bad idea for a business (if one goes, so does the other.)
0 Votes
+ -
to them that's restrictive, and pigeon holes them.
0 Votes
+ -
I don't see the difference
notsofast 1st Apr 2008
Most people run windows without problems. If all you're doing is running an office suite, then you don't really need an IT department. You do need to back up your data, but Vista can do that.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't use a Mac, but I don't see many companies going with the more expensive niche computer over a PC.

It might be easier in major cities, where there's an apple store, but if you live in a smaller city, who will you get help from when you have a problem? Yes, you can call Apple, but I know people who've made the switch who flat out told my mother not to switch to a Mac, because they said the switch from Windows to OSX was not as easy as most imply and my mom does not with 200 miles of an Apple Store. For the record, those that dissuaded her like their Macs.

The point is that the business will either have to pay for training so users can learn their way around a Mac, or stick with a PC, which most people have used regularly for years. Vista may be different than XP, but it's not that different.

Apple may get there some day, but it will be a very slow move.


As for the slow uptake of Vista, I wish they'd pass a law that required these bloggers to post what percentage had moved to XP after 1 year. Every time I see these types of statements, I'm forced to recount how the fortune 100 company I worked at was in the process of migrating to windows 2000 when XP had it's first birthday....and all the articles talked aobut how businesses couldn't come up with a reason to switch to XP.
0 Votes
+ -
Parity in colleges
cburkitt2 1st Apr 2008
Parity in colleges is useless as a predicter of adoption in business and enterprise. Colleges have Macs for their graphic arts programs, where Apple still has a decided edge. For everything else, they have Windows. The college my daughter attends has Macs for their film-editing and graphic arts classes, but you can't get on the student network without XP or Vista.
0 Votes
+ -
anybody else?
If you are going to discuss a subject - at least make the
smallest effort to be informed - Apple has not sold the "one
button" mouse for years. They have supported the multi-
button mouse for over a decade... Grow up!
0 Votes
+ -
But
rtk 4th Apr 2008
it's not like it's ancient history or anything, it's been a little over two years since apple started shipping multi-button mice.

It took Steve a full decade to admit he was wrong.
0 Votes
+ -
The mouse already does click and hold-click. With the keyboard, it makes a 17-
button mouse. The one button is proof of how retarded Windowser complainers
are.
0 Votes
+ -
interesting.
rtk 8th Apr 2008
You can probably bang a nail into a board with your forehead, but that doesn't make it a good idea.

Thankfully, someone schmart came up with the idea of the hammer and saved your forehead.
0 Votes
+ -
Take the buttonladen Microsoft keyboards which ye consider better than Apple's.
0 Votes
+ -
companies will still use non-Apple brands or build their own, since the cost savings is still 2x or 3x. (The PC I built cost me $1000. The same hardware in a "Mac", quad core CPU and all, would cost over $3000.)
0 Votes
+ -
build their own PC's. Once you remove that false argument
you find that Macs are not all that more expensive and
sometimes even cheaper than their competitors like even
the vaunted Dell or GateWhy. It does happen every now
and again a Mac is less expensive. Still even if not they
are not prices so far out of the ball park that they can't be
considered. I've even heard claims from folks like NonZ
(The guy who only posts on Apple sights) that people he
knows have purchased Macs for the sole reason of putting
and running WIndows on them. So there must be a reason
behind this? Since to do so would require the purchase of
a Windows license and the Mac being a little more
expensive to begin with perhaps that reason is that they
see a superior value in the Macintosh hardware? I can't tell
you I simply do not know.

Pagan jim
0 Votes
+ -
you are correct
lostarchitect 1st Apr 2008
i do a test every few months where i build a comparable dell and mac pro online, and they are always pretty close. usually the mac is slightly more, but occasionally the dell is higher priced.
By starting with a Mac and then desperately trying to configure a Dell to be the same, you conveniently ignore the Mac's biggest weakness: complete lack of customizability. Contrast that with how an SMB would do the comparison by starting with what they need (instead of what Apple is generous enough to offer) and then doing a price comparison. Let's listen in!

---------

It is time to do a general PC upgrade and here are our requirements:
1. Low end Core 2 Duo: these have proven to be more than fast enough for general day-to-day tasks.
2. 2GB of RAM: RAM is cheap and some of our client applications work with large amounts of data.
3. 7200rpm hard drive: we ran tests with the 5400rpm hard drives and they were pathetically slow.
4. No monitor, mouse, or keyboard: don't need 'em, we already got them. This order is simply to upgrade some of our older computers so they are faster.

From Apple, we would be forced to get an iMac with a RAM upgrade. Total cost: $1,299

From Dell, we have the Vostro 200 Mini Tower with a RAM upgrade and a CPU upgrade to a 2.2GHz Core 2 Duo. Total cost: $469

We need 100 of these so the Apple solution will cost us $129,900 and the Dell solution will cost us $46,900. The Dell solution will save us $83,000. Gee, I wonder which one we will pick?

Just for giggles, let's relax the rules and pretend we are willing to budge on our 7,200 rpm drive. The Mac Mini with a RAM upgrade will cost us $699 for a total solution price of $69,900 or $23,000 more than the Dell and the Mac Mini will be significantly slower due to the hard drive and the slower CPU (1.8GHz vs 2.2GHz).

To make the pain even worse for Apple, I artificially chose the more expensive Vostro. There are instant savings available right now so the same Vostro with a 19" monitor is $449 or $20 cheaper than the one I priced out above without a monitor. However, I want to avoid the "yeah, but that is the price this week, what will it be next week?" apologies so I won't even count it.

-----------

So no, Macs are not cheaper. Not by far.
0 Votes
+ -
--desperately tries to configure a Dell (or whatever) to be
equivalent to a Mac. I've done it myself and they were
both much the same price.
0 Votes
+ -
Did you not read his pricing?
hasta la Vista, bah-bie 1st Apr 2008
Or did you choose to ignore it...

For enterprise environments, Dells are about 40% of the cost of a Mac.

Try as you might, you can't escape that fact.
0 Votes
+ -
Tell us where you can buy that 20" lcd monitor and that Dell
Vostro Mini Tower for $469? Please...

I know a hefty number of people that will beat a path to that
door with cash in hand!!!
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Forrester: Forget Macs. In business, it's still all about Windows
dfwekrwe3201-24353670632082971688064999491555 11th Nov
ngkugn,good post!

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix