iTunes for Windows is there to make the iPod work seamlessly, not to make Vista look good, as if that could be done.

Apple will update iTunes when Leopard (10.5) is released. I am sure there will be a new Windows version when that happens, but not before then.

If you truly want an iTunes that matches the OS, buy a Mac.

Even then I can think of some areas where iTunes doesn’t quite mesh with the rest of the Mac OS…

I would dearly love to see them bin that crappy metal look and embrace Vista’s glass interface, how cool would that be.  The responsiveness of iTunes on my Core2Duo 2.13GHz + 2GB DDR2 is awful, especially with the newer 7.x features.  Wait states anyone?

Why should Apple jump just because MS finally got around to releasing Windows 5.2?

MS has been handing us Mac folk a “Carbonized” version of Office for half a decade now.

You get new iTunes when we get Cocoa Word.

Er, that’s Windows 6.0, and they should jump because Windows users are the majority of iTunes users. Office users are surely 99% on Windows?

How about you get no version of Office at all...Microsoft has already remove IE and Virtual PC. If they viewed Apple as a credible threat they would pull Office. As a company, Apple is not capable of producing enterprise level software. Period…

As for the comment about wanting to make my system blend, I should get a Mac. The problem is that I do not want to use a Mac. I actually want to use Windows, and if Apple does not change there ways I will simply go someplace else. I have no interest in running OSX (haven’t since 10.3).

What Apple really needs to do is division off the ipod, TV, and iPhone into its own company or subdivision that is PC and enterprise friendly.
Most mature business consumers have no interest in the Mac and do not want to see them posted all over the place. It is insulting. One, however, has to come to expect them for such an childish company (Apple).

[B]Microsoft has already remove IE and Virtual PC.[/B]

Thank God.

If they viewed Apple as a credible threat they would pull Office.

And probably get slapped with another anti-trust case, but what would pulling Office for the Mac do to Apple’s dominance of the downloaded music market and portable music player market? Nothing.

I think Microsoft will pull Office for the Mac in the next five years, though, or cripple it so that it’s not really valuable to cross-platform Office users.

I’ll still be able to run Office for Windows natively on my Mac, though, so it doesn’t really matter to me anymore. Personally, I think Office is garbage. PowerPoint, for example, still lacks features that was in Aldus Persuasion twelve years ago.

You really realize how bad PowerPoint is when you use Keynote.

But Microsoft has a monopoly that requires I own PowerPoint. Good for them. But my recent clients have been doing a lot of these PDF slideshows, though.

Aa company, Apple is not capable of producing enterprise level software.

If “enterprise-level software” is what you call Microsoft’s software, I hope Apple never rises to that level.

As for the comment about wanting to make my system blend, I should get a Mac. The problem is that I do not want to use a Mac. I actually want to use Windows

Apple should make quality software on all platforms they put it on. But this issue about software that doesn’t 100% support all the features of the OS it is on isn’t restricted to Microsoft or Apple. Most cross-platform applications are designed to be identical on all platforms, thus they don’t fully support all of the features of the OS it’s on.

and if Apple does not change there ways I will simply go someplace else

Yeah, go get a Zune and go out and try to find someone to share your songs with.

What Apple really needs to do is division off the ipod, TV, and iPhone into its own company or subdivision that is PC and enterprise friendly.

Ah, like the Mac Business Unit? LOL

Most mature business consumers have no interest in the Mac and do not want to see them posted all over the place. It is insulting.

Most mature “business consumers” don’t care about Microsoft or Apple and just want something that works well with few hassles. I can’t say that Windows falls under that category. But you like it, and that’s great. You just want Apple to make a quality version of their software for it. Fair enough.

Thank God.
Grow up…

And probably get slapped with another anti-trust case
Get real. You honestly think that Microsoft has to continue to produce a version of Office just to satisfy the feds. If that was the case within a couple of years maybe they should focus on a version of Office that runs natively on Linux.

I’ll still be able to run Office for Windows natively on my Mac, though, so it doesn’t really matter to me anymore. Personally, I think Office is garbage. PowerPoint, for example, still lacks features that was in Aldus Persuasion twelve years ago.

I don’t care if it doesn’t have the features that XYZ had, I personally like WordPerfect over Word. Hell, I thought Nisus had a good problem.

If “enterprise-level software� is what you call Microsoft’s software, I hope Apple never rises to that level.

What enterprise level software does Apple make. I have seen Linux solutions but nothing from Apple outside of content creation. Where is a “real” office suite, how about a true server base, and maybe a SQL server solution?

Of course you can use OpenOffice, NeoOffice, OSX with XAMP, and MySQL but will most companies run this if it does not have contract support?

Most cross-platform applications are designed to be identical on all platforms, thus they don’t fully support all of the features of the OS it’s on.

Again, you go with the majority of the market share. You don’t cut off 70% of PC users to make Apple users happy. The majority of PC users do not actually use iTunes but one of many other programs like Media Monkey, WinAMP, and Redchair.

Yeah, go get a Zune and go out and try to find someone to share your songs with. smile

I don’t really care about sharing my songs with people. I want a device that can playback audio and has video support. If it comes from Apple that is fine. I, however, am open to other options from Microsoft, Creative, or iRiver.

Ah, like the Mac Business Unit? LOL

Like rename the company Apple, Inc. and drop support for Mac products and move that over to Mac, Inc. Create a business unit and media/content unit with two different domains under two different CEOs (or at least CFO/CTO).

Most mature “business consumers� don’t care about Microsoft or Apple and just want something that works well with few hassles. I can’t say that Windows falls under that category. But you like it, and that’s great.

For once I agree, it really does not matter where the product comes from. The trouble is that it has not only have few hassles but work with third party corporate friendly enterprise solutions.

They want an iPod that supports them without degrading them. Further, they will not get an iPhone that does exchange natively or at least equally to the Blackjack.

Again throughout this response you’ve only proved my point. Your rebuttals were basically one line insults. The whole point of my comment was to just reinforce that I have other options and that the market does not have to bend to the whims of Apple when they do not even have anything close to 5% market share. I think from a personal standpoint that Apple has more to be concerned with Linux than they do Microsoft.

Grow up…

Ah, so you are the grown up - a person defensive about the electronics they use? Did I offend you?

Get real. You honestly think that Microsoft has to continue to produce a version of Office just to satisfy the feds. If that was the case within a couple of years maybe they should focus on a version of Office that runs natively on Linux.

Do you really think they will be forced to make a version of Windows without WMP?

You are either ignorant of this issue or you are in denial. Office was an issue in the last U.S. anti-trust case.

Microsoft themselves point to Apple in their current anti-trust cases with various states as evidence they are not a monopoly.

I don’t care if it doesn’t have the features that XYZ had, I personally like WordPerfect over Word. Hell, I thought Nisus had a good problem.

OK, we agree that Microsoft’s Office isn’t “enterprise-level software”. It’s not very good. To be fair, though, I hear Excel is now very good. I don’t really use spreadsheets that much, though. I do know that Wingz was much better than Excel many years ago, along with Ami Pro being better than Word. But they couldn’t compete with the business practices of Microsoft leveraging their OS monopoly.

What enterprise level software does Apple make.

What does “enterprise level software” mean and why should my OS choice be based on it? Why do you think Apple is “incapable” and why should I care if they are? Do you think Microsoft has some kind of magic wand that a hundred other companies don’t have and aren’t using? Do you think there aren’t many companies offering enterprise software for OS X?

Do I care about WebObjects or OS X Server or any of that stuff? No, I don’t. Does it affect their other software that I do use? No. Does it make their OS better/worse? No.

Where is a “real� office suite

You just said you prefer something else and now you are back to touting MS Office as “real”.

Of course you can use OpenOffice, NeoOffice, OSX with XAMP, and MySQL but will most companies run this if it does not have contract support?

Is it your belief that only Apple can provide support for other people’s products, like Oracle’s OS X Server software?

Again, you go with the majority of the market share. You don’t cut off 70% of PC users to make Apple users happy.

You aren’t getting my point. Adobe Photoshop’s user interface is the same on OS X as it is in Windows. So is all of their other software, and Cinema 4D, and Lightwave…

Lightwave isn’t glass in Vista. Is that Newtek cutting off Windows users or is that them using a standard UI for all platforms?

Like rename the company Apple, Inc.

The company’s name is Apple, Inc. Are you happy now?

drop support for Mac products

Because if Apple didn’t sell Macs, they would provide a different iTunes to Windows users? Newtek doesn’t sell Macs and their user interface is the same on OS X as it is on Windows, along with every other cross-platform application I use.

Should Microsoft split Windows and Office into two different companies with two different CEOs? They can split Xbox off too, and MSN…

The trouble is that it has not only have few hassles but work with third party corporate friendly enterprise solutions.

Oh yeah, it has a lot more hassles than OS X. You are going to lose any credibility you have if you are going to try to sell the idea that Windows doesn’t have any more hassles than OS X. Even the most fanatical of the Windows fans don’t usually argue that, but they argue the hassles are worth it to have more hardware/software choice and/or the ability to build their own PC. To me, it’s not worth it.

Why do you believe OS X has no ability to be used in a company? You do realize that it is used by many companies, right? My wife happens to use a Mac in a large corporation with Lotus Notes.

Is this where you change your argument from “Macs can’t do enterprise” to “Well, OK, but there isn’t as much choice”?

Your argument is just like a Mac zealot’s argument that Windows PCs can’t do the creative stuff.

They want an iPod that supports them without degrading them.

Really, you are taking this too personally. You really feel degraded?

Further, they will not get an iPhone that does exchange natively or at least equally to the Blackjack.

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/14/will-the -iphone-support-exchange-direct-push/

The whole point of my comment was to just reinforce that I have other options and that the market does not have to bend to the whims of Apple when they do not even have anything close to 5% market share. I think from a personal standpoint that Apple has more to be concerned with Linux than they do Microsoft.

No, your point is you are personally offended that Apple doesn’t bend over backwards to Windows PC users because Windows PCs should be all that matters. That was your point. But you don’t see that Apple is just a corporation that wants to make a profit like any other corporation. You have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to Apple and their CEO, obviously.

If you have so much choice, go get it. If you don’t like Apple’s service, vote with your wallet.

Apple should be more concerned with Linux? Why? I don’t see why Apple should be concerned with Linux. Linux has more hassles than Windows does. In the consumer market, Linux just hasn’t materialized into an impact.

Linux has, though, made roads into the enterprise/server market. Who does that affect more, Apple or Microsoft?

It’s interesting because if I go to Dell right now, I can configure my PC with Linux instead of Windows. Do you think that’s a lost sale for Apple or for Microsoft? It’s my opinion that someone who would buy a Linux PC would buy a Windows PC if Linux didn’t exist.

Which brings me back to Linux - why do you think Microsoft doesn’t offer Office for Linux? Maybe Microsoft should rename their company Office and split off Windows…

Back to iTunes - I think the thing consumers need most is competition between the developers. Once any company gets a monopoly or dominates a market, they become less concerned about the quality of their product. Any time a company has a monopoly or dominates a market, the quality of their product and the customer service usually goes down hill. Microsoft Office and Windows are stellar examples of this. Adobe got this way before Macromedia kicked them in the butt, but now I fear they will go back to those ways now they have bought their competition. Apple was that way years ago, definitely, and can easily get that way with the iTunes/iPod product line. Maybe they are already that way. Come to think of it, Apple spent a lot of time and energy on making the iPhone so good because they have a lot of competition in that market. I wonder if the iPod would be different in Feb. 2007 if Apple didn’t own that market.

->Do you really think they will be ->forced to make a version of ->Windows without WMP?
To sell a product in the EU. A market that is on the verge of a massive collapse as we speak but that is a different story. ut Microsoft did point to Mac Office but they did Linux as well.

->OK, we agree that Microsoft’s ->Office isn’t “enterprise-level ->software�. It’s not very good.

No like usual you are taking my words out of character. What I said was that I prefer Wordperfect over Word. This does not mean that I believe Office is not enterprise quality. They do not generally have the best products in Office at an individual level but they do when put into a collective suite.

->What does “enterprise level ->software� mean and why should my ->OS choice be based on it?

There are many companies offering enterprise solutions for Windows and Linux. I do not see the same for OSX.

->You just said you prefer ->something else and now you are ->back to touting MS Office as ->“real�.

No again you a messing with my words, you can read what I said above. Why an Office suite is important for Apple is it would remove the control Microsoft has over them in the enterprise market and in the business sector in general. However, it would have to be competitive with Office “i.e. database, corporate mail. Pages is not even close, and Keynote while interesting does not offer some of the key features of Powerpoint.

->You aren’t getting my point. ->Adobe Photoshop’s user interface ->is the same on OS X as it is in ->Windows.
Yes, but many of these products have evolved from very old code. It would require an entire code rewrite, which is not possible.

Still, a glass look would be kind of cool and would blend with OSX 10.5 too.

->Lightwave isn’t glass in Vista.
Good point.

->The company’s name is Apple, Inc. Yes, yes I am. I think it is good that they have decided to look more seriously at the software and device side of life.

->Should Microsoft split Windows ->and Office into two different
I think they should dump MSN all together. It is an utter waste. They should spin off the Xbox into another company, but Windows and Office should stay together because they are enterprise, business products. I think Windows Mobile should have its own division as well. I happen to think a well divided company is better prepared if it is under different management and not just different divisions.

->To me, it’s not worth it.

The problem is that this is a freedom that many of us like. It gives us the ability to not be tied to one vendor on the hardware level. Again, I am not saying that Windows is any more stable.

->Why do you believe OS X has no ->ability to be used in a company?
I rarely see it.

->My wife happens to use a Mac in a ->large corporation with Lotus ->Notes.
The world’s worst application. Seriously, how can a Mac user stand the interface. It is functional...but...never mind.

->Is this where you change your ->argument from “Macs can’t do ->enterprise� to “Well, OK, but ->there isn’t as much choice�?
Nope, sorry. The companies I see are mixed shops of Windows and Linux (not Apple). The exception of course if print media, but even they rely mostly on Windows boxes now and Linux to deliver their product to the world.

->Really, you are taking this too ->personally. You really feel ->degraded?
I think it is just unprofessional.

->No, your point is you are ->personally offended that Apple ->doesn’t bend over backwards to ->Windows PC users because Windows ->PCs should be all that matters.

I likely will not buy another iPod. I stopped buying Mac computers a while back.

->In the consumer market, Linux ->just hasn’t materialized into an ->impact.
It will. It likely will have a major impact in Asia and Europe. ou might want to take a look at KDE4, while you’re at it Songbird too.

->Linux has, though, made roads ->into the enterprise/server ->market.
True. However, why should I care, I am not on Microsoft’s payroll. I like Windows, but I happen to like Linux as well. I just don’t like Apple (at times at least).

->Do you think that’s a lost sale ->for Apple or for Microsoft?
Yes, but Windows controls 95% of the desktop market. It does not matter if it would loose 10%. Further, if I want to run OSX I can buy the same Dell Core2Duo and just install OSX. It is not legal, but when in the past has that ever mattered (for home consumers). Do you not believe that Apple loses a customer than.

Apple is actually loosing customers by not getting all companies to sell OSX. If they did offer a clone choice, however, they would be buried because other companies would offer better solutions at less cost they could. This happened before with Power Computing which offered a very superior product to their own PowerPC 604.

->Which brings me back to Linux - ->why do you think Microsoft ->doesn’t offer Office for Linux?
I think Microsoft should embrace Linux. I would like to see an Office port, maybe even an interface hack to run on X. I do realize that this is not likely to happen.

->Back to iTunes - I think the ->thing consumers need most is ->competition between the ->developers.
I agree.

->Any time a company has a monopoly ->or dominates a market, the ->quality of their product and the ->customer service usually goes ->down hill.
Microsoft Vista and Office are actually quiet good for a software quality standpoint. They are stable and have a very refined user ui. Still, Microsoft does have many problems and needs to look more at opensource standards. Adobe has not produced a good product in years. With their practices, it is amazing they are still in business.

->I wonder if the iPod would be ->different in Feb. 2007 if Apple ->didn’t own that market.
They did so because they offered a unique product with a concept: the wheel. Their iPhone is nice but they are entering into a more competitive market than portable audio. It will not matter if they patent it, other vendors will find away around it. I do give them credit for finally reentering the corporate market, but I do not believe they actually will be nearly as successful as they think.

Microsoft did point to Mac Office but they did Linux as well.

Which is why I said they would keep Office for the Mac to keep another anti-trust case from happening. I got that partly wrong, though, because they have several current cases pending against them and so Office today helps Microsoft today.

No like usual you are taking my words out of character.

Like usual? Have we met before?

What I said was that I prefer Wordperfect over Word. This does not mean that I believe Office is not enterprise quality. They do not generally have the best products in Office at an individual level but they do when put into a collective suite.

Again, what does “enterprise quality” mean? You said yourself Lotus Notes is the worst, yet it’s enterprise software.

Is it your belief that the quality a marketing communications specialist in a corporation requires is higher than the quality a designer requires?

I don’t really buy what you are implying, or what I think you are implying, that software for a corporation is some high more valuable or higher quality than software for a consumer or designer or video professional, etc.

There are many companies offering enterprise solutions for Windows and Linux. I do not see the same for OSX.

Well, like I said, your argument changed from “Apple isn’t capable of enterprise...” to “there isn’t as much choice as Linux and Windows”.

Again, you can easily run your company on Macs. Most don’t. Most people who buy a portable music player buy an iPod, but that doesn’t mean a player from Creative can’t do it, does it?

Just because Windows PCs dominate the corporate environment doesn’t mean Linux PCs and OS X Macs can’t do it.

There’s all kinds of enterprise software for the Mac. You seem to think there aren’t any SQL solutions, etc. You are very wrong.

Why an Office suite is important for Apple is it would remove the control Microsoft has over them in the enterprise market

The same control they have over Linux and Unix-based solutions?

Yes, but many of these products have evolved from very old code. It would require an entire code rewrite, which is not possible.

No, that’s not correct. It would not require a rewrite to change the user interfaces of Adobe applications to glass. You can do it already with hacks for both Windows and OS X.

Adobe, and other developers of cross-platform software, purposely make their applications as identical as possible over multiple platforms. They do this so that if you have a mixed use environment, which is common, you can jump from one platform to another and easily use their software without having to adjust to that platform. It’s also cheaper to develop and support software that is identical on both platform, IMHO.

Still, a glass look would be kind of cool and would blend with OSX 10.5 too.

Apple, and Mac users, learned years ago that just because you can do it doesn’t mean you should. I hate the glass look of Vista. It’s incredibly distracting.

I think it is good that they have decided to look more seriously at the software and device side of life.

Where have you been? The iPod has been a slight majority of their revenue for a while now. They have been making software forever.

Windows and Office should stay together because they are enterprise, business products.

But the original point was you wanted Apple to separate iTunes from Mac sales because you believe Apple would create an iTunes better integrated with Windows if they did this. My point is it wouldn’t matter because, like Adobe and Newtek and Maxon, cross-platform software is usually identical on all operating systems.

The problem is that this is a freedom that many of us like. It gives us the ability to not be tied to one vendor on the hardware level.

Right, you put up with Windows because you like the hardware choices. I understand.

But Windows fans usually state that the reason Macs are so much more reliable and have fewer hassles and issues is because Apple controls the hardware and OS.

The world’s worst application. Seriously, how can a Mac user stand the interface. It is functional...but...never mind.

It’s not her choice. They gave her a Mac and they use Lotus Notes. They could be using Exchange and she could use Mail in OS X, which works with Exchange servers.

Just because I rarely see Zunes does not mean they don’t exist.

Nope, sorry. The companies I see are mixed shops of Windows and Linux (not Apple). The exception of course if print media, but even they rely mostly on Windows boxes now and Linux to deliver their product to the world.

I see Macs all over in various businesses. My wife works at a financial institution and she has a Mac.

Macs are very popular in print, video, animation businesses too.

True. However, why should I care, I am not on Microsoft’s payroll.

Why should you care about Apple’s enterprise abilities?

Yes, but Windows controls 95% of the desktop market. It does not matter if it would loose 10%.

That doesn’t really matter. You said Apple should be concerned with Linux. My point is Microsoft has been and is very much concerned about Linux, and rightly so.

Further, if I want to run OSX I can buy the same Dell Core2Duo and just install OSX. It is not legal, but when in the past has that ever mattered (for home consumers). Do you not believe that Apple loses a customer than

Sure, if you downloaded OS X illegally. But what’s your point? You said Apple should be concerned with Linux. Apple isn’t concerned with Linux at any significant level, IMHO. Linux is a bigger threat to Microsoft’s monopoly.

Apple is actually loosing customers by not getting all companies to sell OSX. If they did offer a clone choice, however, they would be buried because other companies would offer better solutions at less cost they could. This happened before with Power Computing which offered a very superior product to their own PowerPC 604.

I agree that Apple should license OS X, but I don’t think they would be buried. I think Apple’s hardware sales would remain about the same but they would make a lot more profit selling OS X on Dells and HP computers.

How much profit does Apple make from a Mac mini or Mac Book or iMac? $200-$300? How much profit from an OS X license? $70? So that means Apple would need to sell around 4 copies of OS X on Dells and HPs for every lost Mac hardware sale. I think that’s very doable.

But also, Apple can definitely compete on pricing. The Mac Pro is less expensive than the same Dell hardware, last I checked. Compare the Mac Book, Mac Book Pro and the Mac Pro to comparable Dell and Boxx or Alienware systems and you’ll see they are competitive in price. Those companies aren’t being buried, are they?

Microsoft Vista and Office are actually quiet good for a software quality standpoint. They are stable and have a very refined user ui. Still, Microsoft does have many problems and needs to look more at opensource standards. Adobe has not produced a good product in years. With their practices, it is amazing they are still in business.

It’s my opinion that both Windows and Office would be much, much better products if Microsoft had had real competition in the last ten years.

Office 2007’s UI baffles me.

Adobe’s software is very good, IMHO. Adobe’s software got really stale when they had no competition in the early to mid 90s. Photoshop required you to type your text in a dialog instead of on the document for way too long. Macromind (Macromedia) came along and competed with Fireworks and Freehand and Dreamweaver, etc. Fireworks kicked Photoshop’s ass right off the bat with live FX and type on screen, etc. Adobe got it into gear and improved their software.

Look at Quark too for an example of how a monopoly means poor quality software for the consumer. Quark dominated and then turned to total crap. Adobe decided to compete and put out InDesign and I think Adobe now has the biggest market share.

Again, what does “enterprise quality� mean? You said yourself Lotus Notes is the worst, yet it’s enterprise software.

I agree that Macromedia has changed Adobe for the better. I just think they have a long way to go. There product is still too slow (on both Windows and OSX), a little buggy (crashes), and expensive ($799 for just Photoshop). I know you can get it for less, and there is CS suite (which is kind of nice). I think it would be nice if Adobe released Acrobat under the GPL. At least the PDF standard is somewhat open. They could still offer paid for support. The same could be said with Corel with Wordperfect (instead of the WINE mess they had earlier). Support, and not product pricing is key to most business decisions.

The ability to be used at a law firm. The product has to be feature rich, well documented, and supported by on site technical options.

On site? Microsoft Office comes with on-site support?

There are 41 titles of legal software for OS X that I can come up with in a single search.

If my company has problems I want to be able to make a call at 2am and get a response within an hour. Microsoft, Novell, and IBM can deliver this. Maybe Apple can but that has never been my experience.

Both IBM and Novell offer the same support for their Mac products.

There are many 3rd party solutions for on site support.

If I call Apple, I get a person immediately, not within an hour. Apple also offers AppleCare and maintenance programs for extra support.

Supported? Does Apple have a version of Apache that they offer direct support for. I am thinking like IIS with Community Server or MSSQL server.

Ever hear of OS X Server? You can get Alliance technical support, which covers unlimited number of incidents at multiple locations with a 1-hour response for priority 1 issues. It includes an onsite review by an Apple tech support engineer.

There are solutions from all kinds of developers like Oracle and 4D, Novell, etc.

Exactly...why not produce a version that actually works on Vista.

You aren’t getting an argument from me on that. Apple should provide quality software that works perfectly. Is iTunes the only application that has issues with Vista? I don’t think so.

If they can secure a license from vendors to do this. I am not sure if Dell and Gateway will jump at this. Still, it would be nice.

Dell publicly stated they would do it.

How about a dual core system with 2gigs of memory, 120gig HD, 256mb GPU, and a 17� WD at around $699 to $800. Do you think Apple could do this? I know that Dell and Gateway can not either, but there are a number of vendors that can.

And yet Dell and Gateway aren’t “crushed”, are they? Your point was that Apple wouldn’t be able to compete on price and would be crushed, right? Dell and Gateway are doing fine and Apple’s prices are competitive with them.

The “Quote” button exists for a reason. Use it.

That is all.

Jeff,

Here is a new article about Macs and enterprise from Network World:
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/02270 7-mac-os-going-corporate.html

Mac OS X Server provides file and print, cross-platform management, security, and collaboration features, as well as support for POP and IMAP mail, FTP, DNS, and DHCP.

Apple’s Xsan and Xgrid add storage-area networking and clustering options, and the server comes with an unlimited client license for no additional cost.

Apple also has added such open source packages as Apache, Samba, Kerberos, Postfix, Jabber, SpamAssassin and OpenLDAP; and has integrated them in a unified management interface.

OpenLDAP lets the Mac OS X Server plug into Microsoft’s Active Directory and Novell’s eDirectory. The server’s Kerberos infrastructure supports single sign-on, and the platform integrates with NT Domain services, so the server can function as a Primary Domain Controller or Backup Domain Controller in a Windows environment. That configuration lets Windows users authenticate against Mac OS X Server directly from their PC logon.

In Leopard, Apple will add a new iCal server, wiki server, content-searching features and podcast producer as proof that Apple is not playing catch-up but is out in front of the curve on providing social-networking tools.

They talk about how some companies have concluded that the cost and time required to go to Vista is comparable to switching to Macs. Also, the Intel processors and VM/Boot Camp are huge plusses for the Mac in regards to being used by the enterprise.

The biggest impediment, they claim, is Apple. Apple isn’t allocating any resources to go after the enterprise.

Didn’t Microsoft just fix iTunes’ issues with a Vista update? Did I read that correctly?