Linked by David Adams on Sun 22nd May 2011 02:26 UTC
Apple Mac sales in the enterprise during Apple's last fiscal quarter grew a whopping 66 percent, significantly outpacing the rest of the PC market, which grew just 4.5 percent in the enterprise. The data from Apple's previous fiscal quarter was highlighted on Friday by analyst Charlie Wolf with Needham & Company. He said though he originally viewed success in the enterprise as a "one-quarter blip," it now appears to be a "durable platform" for Apple.
Thread beginning with comment 474179
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

While it is true that PCs tend to be on the cheaper side, if you are developing with C and C++ then actually Macs are cheaper then a PC + MSDN license.

But if you are mainly coding in Java, .Net, Ruby, Python, etc, then the price of the included developer tools does not count that much.

Reply Score: 2

danieldk Member since:
2005-11-18

While it is true that PCs tend to be on the cheaper side, if you are developing with C and C++ then actually Macs are cheaper then a PC + MSDN license.


It depends on how much of Visual Studio you need. The express edition is free, and provides more or less the same functionality as Xcode. Besides that, most companies do not mind to spend a few hundred dollars on development tools if it makes programmer productivity higher. And if you are targeting Win32, you may be out of luck on OS X if you have to use the Win32 API.

Edited 2011-05-22 08:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

While it is true that PCs tend to be on the cheaper side, if you are developing with C and C++ then actually Macs are cheaper then a PC + MSDN license.

But if you are mainly coding in Java, .Net, Ruby, Python, etc, then the price of the included developer tools does not count that much.

Is there some written licensing rules that forbid use of the free Visual Studio Express tools for professional development ? They don't sound so crippled compared to "sell your arm" professional editions.

Edited 2011-05-22 08:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

Yes there is but who cares?

Then 6 months later.

"Knock Knock"
"The BSA. Open up we are doing an audit"

After they've gone.
"Now what idiot persuared me to allowd those Express Editions to be used? You are FIRED"

Reply Parent Score: 1

Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24


Is there some written licensing rules that forbid use of the free Visual Studio Express tools for professional development ? They don't sound so crippled compared to "sell your arm" professional editions.

Nope, but the express edition is crippled though. No openmp, no profile guided optimization and no link time optimization (perhaps there are more features removed but these are the ones I know of).

Reply Parent Score: 3

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The professional editions are actually quite cheap.

Only the academic versions of Visual Studio you can deploy production code with.

We had two Copies of VS 2010 ultimate for £100 each. Sql Server 2008 R2 Developer Edition is just over £100.

The most expensive software we use is usually from Adobe.

Reply Parent Score: 3

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I use them, but they are quite crippled:

- No ATL
- No MFC
- No ALM tools
- No 64bit compilers (you can get them on the free SDK though)
- No Sourcesafe
- No optimizing compilers
- No VS Plugins
- ...

But you can go a long way with the Express editons + Windows SDK.

Reply Parent Score: 4

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

I'm sorry, you're comparing VS to XCode? Seriously? Then Eclipse C/C++ on Linux will beat you on price.

In any case, if you're developing for Windows you'll need MSDN and Windows, unless OSX comes with MSDN subscription and a Windows license.

Reply Parent Score: 4

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

You are right in the sense that I was speaking about different target audiences, maybe I should have make it clearer.

I was just discussing it as a concept.

On the Windows world, if you are doing development usually that means buying VS. The free SDK + Express editions won't be enough if you need ATL, MFC, and many other Microsoft specific tools.

While on Macs the full development environment comes with them.

So when comparing PC with Mac prices this is something that is usually overlooked.

Now, I am a Windows/Unix developer so don't take my argumentation as blindling defending Apple.

And I agree with the majority here. Most likely those Macs are for developing applications for iOS devices.

In Europe most ads I see for Objective-C developers are for mobile application developers, not desktop.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

No you are wrong.

A Mac is about £1100 for the cheapest iMac.

The dev machine I do not use for Legacy development is a Core 2 with 4GB of ram and Windows XP cost the company about £300.

Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate is £100 from our licensing partner, Sql Server 2008 R2 Developer is approximately £100 as well... £600

Only if I was developing on a Mac Mini it would be cheaper.

Reply Parent Score: 2

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

I don't understand how you can pay just £100 for VS.

Nowadays I develop mostly in Java, but back in the day I was doing heavy Win32 development, we needed to pay at least €500 per year for MSDN licenses with the volume license programme, if I remember correctly.

Reply Parent Score: 2

t3RRa Member since:
2005-11-22

Wow you are comparing core 2 system with i5/i7 iMac for the price? And top of that Windows XP? Come on. be serious.

Reply Parent Score: 2