I just saw this floating around FriendFeed as several folks linked to different reports of the same thing. That being that Salesforce.com is rumored to be ditching the PC platform and moving all their 4,000 employees onto brand new Macs. Apparently this is being done for the singular reason of security with the thinking that it will be cheaper in the long run to be using Macs without security related software than to run PCs with security software.
Gee can anyone out there spot the total stupidity of this move by Salesforce.com?
Not only have they not seem to have taken into account the inherent cost of having to get people up to speed using a completely different operating system; but what about all the cost of the other types of software used. However the stupidest assumption being made in my opinion is the one where they won’t need security software.
I realize that Macheads like to beat their chests and brag about how secure their Macs are but that is only a temporary situation at best. Mac has been a secure platform only due to its relatively insignificant market share. There has never really been any real incentive for script kiddies and other malware authors to target the Mac. That landscape will most definitely change as Mac increases its numbers in the desktop and laptop workspace.
This also raises the question that if this is the primary reason for Salesforce.com shifting to the Mac do you really want to entrust them with your data – even if by a round about way as their workforce comes into contact with it. The idea that this company thinks that supposed costs savings can justify a reduction in security of any kind would scare the hell out of me.
Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?
Tweet
If they're using the same security set up as their unix base then they should be inherently more secure because you aren't running as administrator – ever.
It's really hard to do long term damage to an OS without admin access, although you can still trash all the user data.
But yeah, that's kind of boneheaded move. There probably going to be at least two months of lost productivity because of the new OS… I wonder how many of those 4000 have never used OSX?
I don't doubt that currently Macs are to some extent more secure out of the box than PCs because of their unix history. However while damage to the underlying OS install maybe harder the fact that the user data can be gotten at alone should suggest that at some point once Mac's market share proves attractive to malware authors that it to will need increasing better security measures.
It isn't a matter of if it will happen to the Mac but more of a matter of when.
Straw man arguments. (Post something untrue, then argue against it).
If the rumors are true…there won't be significant problems with “learning another OS”, as it is relatively painless for switchers.
…and the post stated the move was to “increase” security, not to decrease security as you claim.
Suggesting “retaliation” is the sort of thing that we have learned to expect from Microsoft loyalists and bullyies.
oooo I'm a Microsoft bully now … wow … maybe if you read more than just
one post you wouldn't be prone to making stupid generalizations either
and exactly what did I post that wasn't untrue?
there is an inherent cost when there is any major change and as for the
change being to increase security well time will tell on this one as Macs
are still in the minority as far as corporate desktop work environments.
I don't know any half serious Windows deployments where users are allowed to run as administrators.
That point has been irrelevant since the arrival of Vista anyway… at least if you are not stupid enough to turn off UAC.
can you imagine the IT department of a Forune 500 company letting everyone
run as admins .. not bloody likely if they want to keep their jobs
can you imagine the IT department of a Forune 500 company letting everyone
run as admins .. not bloody likely if they want to keep their jobs
Steve,
Vista is the Titanic and it's going down. The iceberg? As Balmer might say, ” Security. Security. Security. Security. Security. Security. Security…”.
Yes, we know Mac security isn't magically fool proof, but what are you comparing it to? How do you respond to your users when they come in and tell you their HOME PC (The one they didn't know how to or care to protect.) is trashed. That has got to be a bummer, expecially if it's the CEO or his reports.
True Story: In my last job, we assigned a $100,000/yr level 3 administrator to take care of the CEOs HOME PCs! He had to leave work and visit the guy's home! He quit within 2 months. What's right about that?
You see where this is going? PCs are road kill. Sorry, but it's true.
Of course, msft could get it's old mojo on and, get off the mat, and make a surprise comeback. If so, we'd all celebrate!
Steve,
Vista is the Titanic and it's going down. The iceberg? As Balmer might say, ” Security. Security. Security. Security. Security. Security. Security…”.
Yes, we know Mac security isn't magically fool proof, but what are you comparing it to? How do you respond to your users when they come in and tell you their HOME PC (The one they didn't know how to or care to protect.) is trashed. That has got to be a bummer, expecially if it's the CEO or his reports.
True Story: In my last job, we assigned a $100,000/yr level 3 administrator to take care of the CEOs HOME PCs! He had to leave work and visit the guy's home! He quit within 2 months. What's right about that?
You see where this is going? PCs are road kill. Sorry, but it's true.
Of course, msft could get it's old mojo on and, get off the mat, and make a surprise comeback. If so, we'd all celebrate!