2009 was the worst year in IT spending. Ever.
I’ll let that sink in for a minute.
Now, 2009 was a bad year for many aspects of business — sales, capital management, making a profit — but IT departments had it especially bad. Because IT is a support organization, everyone wants to use it but no one wants to pay for it, which means that IT almost always gets the budget leftovers. It’s hardly a surprise that IT got the seriously short end of the stick in 2009. According to a report by Gartner, spending on IT declined 5.2 percent overall last year among all verticals, and the fall was even worse in enterprise businesses, where spending fell 6.9 percent.
Naturally, that kind of drop in funding completely changes how IT departments prioritize their spending. For one thing, in the face of such spending cuts, standard hardware upgrades go right out the window. According to the same Gartner report, hardware spending dropped 16.9 percent in 2009. To make matters worse, IT departments also reduce headcount to save money — in 2009, fully 62 percent of companies cut IT headcount — which makes matters worse because there are now fewer people to support more work on the same hardware.
This is not a recipe for success.
[inline-ad align="right"]Fortunately, now that it’s July 2010 and most companies are fully embracing the second half of this new fiscal year, IT budgets are slowly improving. IT budgets across the board are expected to gain 3.3 percent by year’s end. This leaves IT departments in the interesting position of having a reason to change their operations, and a little bit of money to make it happen. This is unusual.
As a service organization, IT’s performance is measured on things like uptime, cost and so on. As a result, IT departments tend to be very risk-averse and resistant to change. Whereas IT organizations typically resist change to avoid breaking things — if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it — now there are some interesting pressures in play that make the way things are look broken already. Because IT headcount is depressed, IT corporations need to be focusing on reducing the need for support because there are fewer people around to do it. And, because of the clog in the hardware upgrade pipeline, there are more upgrades vying for the same dollars, which means that CIOs will be looking for upgrades that are either cheaper or serve multiple purposes. In short, IT departments are in the uncommon position of reevaluating their long-term direction in earnest.
Apple, being the savvy company that it is, has positioned itself well to capitalize on IT departments looking to make a change. Some of the largest organizations in the world are taking another look at Apple products, and with good reason. There’s good data indicating that Apple computers cost significantly less to support than Windows PCs, both in terms of TCO and simple ease of support. And this is no theoretical result. According to another report from Gartner, Apple is gaining market share in laptops and desktops faster than anyone else, beating out competitors like Hewlett-Packard, Lenovo and Dell. And companies are adopting Apple’s devices, especially the iPad, for positions like sales because they have the flash and panache to seal a deal, but are simple enough that workers can use them with minimal training and robust enough that fairly little technical support is required. And if an iPad does break, it’s simple and straightforward to fix: just send a replacement. All of these factors are making Apple products look more and more attractive to struggling IT departments.
That’s why large enterprises like Wells Fargo and SAP are adopting the iPad for jobs ranging from sales to simple paper replacement. Mercedes-Benz is so pleased with the results of using iPads in 40 of its U.S. dealerships to handle credit applications that it’s considering using iPads in all 350 of them.
However, Apple’s latest foray into corporate America is ostensibly only the inroad of a much grander scheme. Gartner makes the excellent point that, as virtualization and cloud technology matures and companies gain experience with them, such services will gain adoption very quickly because of the dramatic cost savings they offer organizations. Among the technology providers in this space, it will be the companies that develop these technologies into the most robust and easiest-to-use products that will win the day, and Apple’s track record combined with its new $1 billion data center show that Apple is positioning itself well to accept the mantle of leader in this burgeoning new field.
There has been much speculation about Apple’s new toy, but it’s fair to say that it’s building server capacity for something. Popular theories include a music streaming service because of Apple’s acquisition of Lala, and theories that the facility is for video hosting seem a lot more credible with the introduction of FaceTime and the iPad’s apparently impending camera. Data heads see a different picture, though: one that has Apple positioning itself for a strong enterprise presence. And ultimately, with Apple gaining such traction in the enterprise market, it would be foolish not to build cloud offerings for those customers, like simple file hosting or a virtual hosted Mac, to be delivered via its devices, like the iPad. And Apple’s no fool.
So, with Apple making solid gains in the corporate and enterprise markets, what’s next for technology’s golden child? You should expect to see more big-name customers adopting the iPad, and more iPad development shops springing up to fill the resulting need for corporate applications. However, ultimately, the real surprise will come when Apple reveals the purpose of its new data center.
For now, I like to think it holds the ghost of Newton.
Apple doesn’t get enterprise though. Seriously. Can they legitimately think they can compete with RHEL/JBoss on the server side? What about their front end? Adobe’s Flex front ends many Java back ends and the Flash player has 99% penetration. Safari and iPhone are less than 5% of all enterprise clients. Do you actually know one single company that uses XServe and admits to it?
This is only one of the new directions being explored. Currently Apple doesn’t have an answer to thin clients which are often cheaper to support than even iMacs and cost a third of the price to deploy.
Obviously these don’t work well in branch offices with poor internet connections, but in a well conencted office with a cluster of TS servers a hundred dumb terminals is a beautiful thing.
This isn’t to say that Macs aren’t a solid solution for small offices without servers or users who are on the road constantly (remember to encrypt your drive), but from my experience at least it still isn’t a cost effective solution for most central offices because even Mac minis are just too damn expensive. iPads might change that, but I don’t like hooking anything to a network that can’t be managed.
@Darth Null:
This sounds vaguely familiar…
Apple doesn’t get smartphones. Seriously. Can they legitimately think they can compete with Blackberry/Nokia on the handheld side?
Apple doesn’t get laptops. Seriously, Can they legitimately think they can compete with Dell/HP/Lenovo on the portability side?
I don’t write this to sound like an a-hole (though I’m sure I did), but seriously, hasn’t this company proven more than enough times that they can “get” any part of the business they want to?
@Maybe
I work in the largest county hospital in Texas which has a (GIANT) cluster of servers and a “hundred dumb terminals” and let me tell you, it is the FUGLIEST setup ever. The doctors sit around waiting for the apps to open, images to load, vital sign tables to populate. It’s ridiculous.
Thin clients with a back-end cluster sounds like a good idea in theory, but all I’ve seen is disaster.
Our company will never buy Macs because they won’t run our software from the 1980s.
Apple did a great job, many third-party software provide video converter and other software to apple fans, for example ifunia video converter to ipad.
Yes, the iPad is an ICT revolution packaged in an “I-want-one” device. Which is true for any tablet with a fit for purpose OS, by the way.
The iPad is an information centric device. And since most corporations make internal information available through web-services, the iPad fits in easily. Next to this it also functions beautifully as a transition device between the old document (paper!) based age and the information centric age closing in rapidly. Because it handles documents quite well!
Apple sometimes ago had an enterprise strategy and was used by big corporations to for example connect to databases better than regular PC’c.
Apple has the best hardware they are just missing manageability, security software and centralized administration and they will have the best tco (total cost of ownership) and end-users satisfaction.
They just have to decide to do it.