April 24th, 2008Saying “No Macs” is no longer an option for *Church* IT
I recently read an excellent article on InfoWorld titled “Why ‘no Macs’ is no longer a defensible IT strategy” which made some very good points on the topic. Having supported the IT environment in many churches for over six years, there has been no shortage of Mac users. Up until the last few years, however, this was limited to key individuals in media-driven ministries. Even within those ministries it was not 100%, but those times are changing. Not only are these ministries rapidly approaching 100% Mac adoption, it is spreading to pretty much any individual within the organization who works with these departments.
Why do my users want/need a Mac?
My rule has always been “Use the right tool for the job.” Looking back 4-5 years things were very different. Within the Audio/Video production end of the ministries, as well as the Graphics ministries, any perceived need was actually just platform preference. Most of the tools used by these professionals not only existed on both platforms, but in most cases were released with a preference for the PC platform. Mac users and PC Users could easily exchange files with each other, but even then a mixed environment created support issues. For this reason it was easier as a support department to force the issue and keep them on a PC platform.
Apple has continued to work heavily to recover their strength in media-production. While some would argue this with me, most people we work with have run screaming from the cross-platform Avid for the Mac-only Final Cut Pro. We’ve seen this particularly as they’ve transitioned to High Definition for broadcast. Additionally, other tools that are cross-platform (Adobe CS3, ProTools, etc.) have reached 100% release parity with the PC platform, or shifted the other direction to a Mac preference. It has become clear that in a media-driven church the production ministry cannot do their job effectively without standardizing on the Apple platform.
Several legitimate factors are beginning to drive demand outside of the A/V and Graphics ministries. Some, or all, of these likely apply to somebody within your organization.
- More users outside of the traditional media groups are putting together content for inclusion in services or broadcast. The availability of the less-expensive Final Cut Express has allowed a subset of the tools used by media to be put directly in their hands.
- ProPresenter has established a strong presence and is quickly displacing EasyWorship and MediaShout even in the small churches. If you’re using the Mac platform to present, many prefer to develop their content on the platform as well.
There are other factors driving demand within the church and it is very important to be aware of these.
- The “Peer Factor” – Simply put, Mac users love to show off the cool toys they’ve found. This can create a lot of buzz around the cool factor. Unfortunately it often creates demand within users who would rarely, if ever, use the functionality they’ve been shown.
- A “Free” Experience – In most organizations the Mac users have traditionally been completely self-supporting and are not integrated at all into the network. This means that the user experience often appears unencumbered by all the inconveniences that the average PC user has to deal with.
- Excellent marketing – Face it… Apple has created a phenomenal marketing engine which is driving unheard of growth in the market. People see it, and believe it, even if what they’ve heard isn’t the whole truth. Don’t believe me? Tell a barely technical user you are giving them a new computer with MS Vista on it. Nine out of ten times you will get an immediate negative reaction from a non-technical user with no direct knowledge of Vista.
Where does this leave you for support?
If you don’t provide help, they will do it without you!! Often, the media group will go this route without any support from IT at all. This can immediately create a huge rift between IT and media. Other groups within your organization won’t typically “break away” like this, but it is not in your interest to immediately say “NO” without working with the department to help them figure out what they truly need. I’m going to steal directly from Clif Guy here on this one… Users rarely come to you with the actual problem, but rather their perceived solution to the problem. Your default answer to a problem should be yes, assuming that it is in-line with the needs and strategy of the ministry. We don’t want to be in the habit of providing toys to anyone who asks for them, but you must provide tools when truly needed.
Do Macs cost more… to buy?
I have seen every possible argument on why a Mac is cheaper than a PC, but the reality of the matter is that if I take a typical PC user in any church and replace the PC with a Mac I have spent significantly more. This typical PC user has a glorified terminal which is used to access their email, run MS Office, and run their ChMS of choice. Assuming you are even buying a brand new system from Dell/HP/Etc this is an $800 system at most including the monitor and a 3-year, full-service, on-site warranty with priority support. The reality, though, is that the machine they are using today is likely more than adequate for their needs, even well beyond the typical 3-5 year lifetime of a system in business.
Assuming you go with the cheapest option from Apple you are looking at $599 for a base model Mac Mini plus the cost of the monitor, keyboard, mouse, and AppleCare. While more expensive already than a comparable PC it is close enough at this point you could justify it… assuming this user can work 100% within OSX. If, like most churches we work with, you are bound by one (or many) Windows applications, the cost does not end here. The biggest hurdles in this segment are the ChMS (Shelby, ACS, etc.) and any applications (hosted or otherwise) that require Internet Explorer. Since dual-booting is not a reasonable option to inflict on your users, often you are looking at the cost of virtualization software (Parallels or VMWare Fusion) plus a copy of Windows XP/Vista for this user on top of the cost already invested in the machine. Then, if a user demands Outlook (Not an Entourage fan, eh?), you now need to invest in another license for the Windows version of MS Office for your Mac user as well.
This rift grows even greater when you enter into the iMac and MacBook/MacBook Pro. While these systems have incredible style and grace, a feature-for-feature comparison to other hardware vendors rarely lands in their favor.
Do Macs cost more… to support?
As we’ve said above, in the past, the Mac users were a self-supporting island. As the Mac user base expands, even within isolated departments, the need for proper support and integration grows. Would you drop an XP or Vista computer on somebody’s desk in workgroup mode with no password on it? In a typical church environment that is exactly what every single Apple system on your network is. Beyond the support issues of these users having to access domain resources or change their domain passwords, the security risk in this scenario is just unimaginable. This brings about the issue of integrating your Mac users into your existing network properly. There are multiple options to do this, but that is a topic for another article.
Another support issue is warranty. While this is irrelevant for comparison to the 5 year old donated PC your user may be on today, we have to compare to new to be a fair comparison. A new Dell/HP/Gateway/etc. is going to likely be purchased with a three-year warranty that includes next business day on-site service. This goes for any system… desktop, laptop, server, etc. With AppleCare the standard support is mail-in or in-store. Per Apple’s current Terms and Conditions state “This comprehensive plan includes expert telephone technical support, global repair coverage, on site repairs for desktop computers, web-based support resources, and powerful diagnostic tools.” This is dependent on you being within 50 miles of an Apple service center and is clearly limited to their desktop products only. If your MacBook or MacBook Pro is broken you *will* be without it for a while as it is being repaired. You need to plan for this in your support plan (spare machines, etc.) if you plan to shift to a largely Mac-enabled workforce.
As a side note to the warranty issue, please be aware that Apple does not currently offer an equivalent to the “CompleteCare” option that Dell and others often include to cover accidental damage. Even with AppleCare you will be paying for the repair if you drop your MacBook or spill your Caramel Macchiato on the keyboard of your MacBook Pro.
How do I decide if a user is a good candidate for a Mac?
My number one rule is to ask if the user can do 100% of their job without loading Windows on the machine (Bootcamp or virtualization). There are multiple ways around this issue (Terminal Server, etc.), but if they cannot perform their duties without Windows there is a good chance they are not a good candidate.
Additionally, you need to know what they truly want/need the Mac for. What is their role within the organization? Will they need applications that are Mac only? Will they be working with your media ministries and exchanging content? Will they be sending work output to third parties that prefer/require the files be in Mac versions of their respective file formats?
I thought you said we should say “Yes”?
Ok.. I know. It sounds like I’ve given a TON of reasons NOT to use a Mac, but as I said before you must allow the right tool for the job. The goal of the above was to lay it all on the table up front. The fact of the matter is that the reasons to use a Mac in your environment often outweigh the disadvantages. If you are truly allowing the right tool for the job, it is no longer a question of “Should I allow Macs in our environment?” but rather “How do I best support my Mac users in a heterogeneous environment?”
I know that this is only the tip of the iceberg, but I hope that it has provided some value. This is only the first of many posts on the topic. I hope to continue digging in at both the when/where/why of the topic at a CIO level as well as some extremely detailed technical articles going forward.