Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Tools That Manage Both Macs and PCs

Posted by kdawson on Tue Jun 12, 2007 05:18 PM
from the one-tool-to-rule-them-all dept.
Software IT
johannacw writes "Ryan Faas takes a look at nine tools that handle system management tasks in both Mac and Windows environments for both clients and servers. The tools span a range of tasks such as remote installation, license management, and helpdesk functions. The author gives opinions on each tool's strengths and weaknesses and does not pick an overall winner."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Tools That Manage Both Macs and PCs 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • I'd appreciate... (Score:4, Funny)

    by theantipop (803016) on Tuesday June 12 2007, @05:39PM (#19483907)
    if you didn't call me a tool. Thanks.

  • This link actually works: (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Tried to RTFA but didn't succeed (good thing I can read an address)...

    http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?com mand=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9024079 [computerworld.com]

    -Anony Mouse
    • As there are a bunch of key tools actually missing - I failed to spot any FLOSS tools that do the same, and most of those actually perform way better then the ones listed in the article. YACR (Yet another clueless reporter)......
  • A set of screw drivers shoud be fine do "manage" both Macs and PCs!

  • As computing environments become larger, particularly those that are multisite and multiplatform...


    Are you sure this article isn't from the mid-1990's? It seems that most people have been connected to a computer for a while.

  • For those that hate paged articles (Score:5, Informative)

    by drpimp (900837) on Tuesday June 12 2007, @06:01PM (#19484157) Journal
    Especially those with a list of apps, mashups or what ever the buzzword is today on top of that without links. Make your own decisions. BTW I only count 8.
    There is also the printable version [computerworld.com]
    - FileWave [filewave.com]
    - NetOctopus [netopia.com]
    - LANrev [lanrev.com]
    - Radmind [umich.edu]
    - ManageSoft [managesoft.com]
    - LANDesk [landesk.com]
    - Timbuktu [netopia.com]
    - NTRsupport [ntrsupport.com]

    • Missing (Score:4, Interesting)

      by kandresen (712861) on Tuesday June 12 2007, @06:13PM (#19484277)
      They missed Webmin... http://www.webmin.com/ [webmin.com]

      Can simplify management tasks quite well for Windows, Mac, Linux, and most other flavors of Unix...

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by AdamWeeden (678591)
        And Altiris [altiris.com] also, which I use to manage 1500 boxes (with about 1% of that being OS X and the rest Windows).
        • And for those of you who want to look at OSS tools (that may not meet all needs on OSX quite yet) you ought to look at a combination of OCSNG and ZenOSS (with GLPI integrated to OCSNG for a full helpdesk/inventory etc database, License tracking and more).

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by phillymjs (234426)
          "Altiris: Now Part of Symantec"

          No thanks! After seeing how Symantec acquired, ruined and then discontinued other good products that at one time supported the Mac, I'll pass.

          ~Philly
          • To be fair to Symantec they didn't just destroy Mac products, they've ruined a fair few PC based products...
  • ...that a hammer works quite nicely.
  • I havent tried any of these but after looking by most of them it didnt seem like there were to many differences between these applications and Windows System Management Server. I understand that these allow for cross platform compatability but aside from that are there a lot of differences?
    • Sorry if I sound like an ass, but I'm really struggling to figure out how your comment is even slightly relevant. A feature comparison means little if a core requirement is cross platform support.
    • To answer a question with a question:

      Sorry, I haven't read TFA, and I'm having trouble thinking straight cause I been hitting my own melon head with a 15 ounce adjusting tool, but I fail to see the difference between the local take away and Bob's Big Beef Burgers. I understand that vegetarians can't eat at Bob's, but aside from that are there a lot of differences?

  • Macs and PCs? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Macs aren't computers for personal use anymore?
    • Nope, They've always found a place in digital arts and publishing, and I'm happy to say that I've been allowed to enjoy the use of one at my workplace, in chemical engineering research. It just frustrates a little less than a windows machine and is therefore a little more productive to use.

      B.
  • Wow. Learn something new every day. Where do they keep it? :-P
  • We have an Apple and an NT server at work since our page designers and editors use OS X and everyone else uses Windows. (The apple server covers just about everything but accounting and subscriptions)

    Some of the tools I find extremely useful are VNC, and PuTTY (I assume any SSH client will work, but my workstation is Windows at work)...I also use Hamachi for some things (when I need to do stuff from home)

    Aside from them, I have a few Shell scripts for the Apple Server, and web services turned on for the Int

    • Re:Obligartory... (Score:5, Funny)

      by CrashandDie (1114135) on Tuesday June 12 2007, @05:44PM (#19483987)
      Do they even need management tools for Windows ? Isn't it supposed to be easy ?

      I mean, put the CD in, install, reboot, install, reboot, the use it, reboot, use it, reboot, then after the weekend's over, install, reboot, inst...

      brb, gotta reboot...
    • Our desktop folks (used interchangeably here with "idiots") recently purchased LANdesk, and they're quite pleased that it can reportedly manage linux/unix, and immediately asked to test it on my (BSD) desktop.

      So supposedly it can, but damned if I'm going to let the monkeys screw with my BSD desktop...
      • Landesk is a tool, nay, a suite of tools, of impressive breadth and depth. It's also impressively flaky and even borders on the zany. I'd have been more impressed with TFA if it was more than just a list of apps, you can get that much from a few hours with the Google.

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The title says "PCs" so that means Linux included because Windows isn't the only OS to run on PCs.. so why not?

    • Re:Obligartory... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fsmunoz (267297) <fsmunoz AT member DOT fsf DOT org> on Tuesday June 12 2007, @05:58PM (#19484135) Homepage
      Actually, it does, but as usual the article's title is wrong. Somehow "Manage Macs and PC's" translantes to "Manages OSX and Windows", as if OSX runs on some different hardware - it doesn't - and Windows is the only non-OSX OS to also run on it - it isn't.

      This isn't the 90's. They're over, go listen to "Ace of Base" in iTunes while reading the PowerPC Assembly Manual to relive it, and stop with this "Macs and PC's" crap. OSX, Windows, Linux, BSD, etc all run on "PC's" now. What's more it's condescending to assume PC==Windows. Seing that in /. is even more embarassing.
      • This is insightful? Really?

        You do realize the term "PC" has evolved to mean more than just "Personal Computer", right?
        It even evolved beyond just being "IBM Compatible PC".

        You do realize that context and usage can change the meaning of a word?

        PC, in that context, means "Windows running machine".
        Mac meant Mac OS running machine.

        The usage is clear, it's concise, it's useful, it's obvious, it's not harmful.

        Pedantry is not a good thing =-)

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by cyphercell (843398)

          Um, no the term "PC" has not evolved.

          http://www.google.com/search?q=PC [google.com]

          More than likely the term "PC" was used to fit in the title space, no other reason. When dealing with cross-platform anything it's beneficial to be specific about platform. Confusing "PC" with "Windows" is analogous to confusing "The Internet" with "Internet Explorer".

          • The first hit is Wikipedia, which has been criticized for being too pedantic.
            I'm pretty sure I saw a Slash on it, but can't find it. I did find this article [epidemix.org] though.

            If I choose to go to Urban Dictionary [urbandictionary.com], the third definition is:
            "a personal computer (only refers to Windows, not Macs)"

            Sorry, we're going with first definitions? Look up pc at Merriam Webster [merriam-webster.com]
            It's first definition is "parsec", second is a latin abbreviation for "post cibum".

            And yet, in the midst of all that confusion, everyone knew exactly what t
              • >News for Nerds...

                So, only computer experts are nerds?
                I currently work as a SysAdmin. I grit my teeth every time I hear it, but I normally hear PC used as this article is using it.
                Maybe I just work with hundreds of stupid people.
                I hear it referred that way at conferences regularly (both Dev and Admin)
                It's a common usage.
                It's annoying, but it's common. (Kinda like ATM machine)

                >Your urban dictionary definition doesn't even mention windows, neither does the Merriam Webster definition, maybe you should

                • That's different, if you worked in a shop with only Macs and Linux boxen, then the term PC would be equally synonymous with the Linux machines. In a a truly mixed environment (kinda like slash) where you come in saying you have "such and such" that will work with our Macs and PCs, you might do well to mention it won't run on the Linux boxes. Point is, you hear the word the way you want to hear it, Linux is not really a consideration for you so PC automatically refers to Windows, and yes it does bother peopl

        • And *that* is insightful? Really? If I cared one bit about moderation I wouldn't even be touching the Mac articles.

          You do realize that redifining words just to maintain the sense of diferentiation of a community is all well and nice but it doesn't mean that the rest of us have to play along with it? PC, in that context, means almost nothing. *Once upon a time* it did mean something, when Mac fans talked at lenghts about the beaty of PowerPC, so different from the Intel PC garbage (kind of true, but irrel
        • "PC, in that context, means "Windows running machine""

          Yeah, sure. Because everybody knows that Linux doesn't run on PCs... It runs in boxen!
          • To borrow from another post:

            If I choose to go to Urban Dictionary [urbandictionary.com], the third definition is:
            "a personal computer (only refers to Windows, not Macs)"

            Look up pc at Merriam Webster [merriam-webster.com]
            It's first definition is "parsec", second is a latin abbreviation for "post cibum".

            Yours is not the only definition of PC /Ask McDonalds about McJob, and how they're doing with policing the language
      • Yeah. Those stupid jerks don't list ANY tools to manage my Apple ][, Commodore PET, or TRS-80. "Personal Computer" my ass.</sarcasm>

        Seriously, you're the one stuck in the past. "PC" hasn't been a generic term for "Personal Computer" for 20 years. Language changes. Accept it.
        • Oh, right. So, in your opinion, a x86 running Linux or BSD bought from Dell *isn't* a PC? Since apparently it isn't a generic term for a kind of IBM compatible personal computer (this is the narrowest sense), or a general usage personal computer of any architecture (the wider sense).

          So, what is a PC in your opinion? I'm quite ready to accept whatever newspeak you've got, just spell it out for me. What precisely is a PC, how do you define it? You've got my two previsously assumed definitions above.
          • I could talk about this all day but I'm not going to waste my time. Short version: word meaning comes FROM CONTEXT as much as anything else. Therefore, there is no single universally-accepted definition of what construes a PC any more than there is a single list of criteria which determines if a car is a "sports car" or not. It is a generally accepted convention that PC = a computer running DOS or Windows. I doubt anyone was confused by the article's title, and it seems like hardly anyone is getting worked
            • could talk about this all day but I'm not going to waste my time.

              Yes, that usually works.

              It is a generally accepted convention that PC = a computer running DOS or Windows

              Ok, at least you answered my question directly, thanks. If that's what passes for "PC" on /. articles nowadays this place could serv as a support forum for AOLers.
      • While doing a school project at Lucent, they asked me whether I wanted a workstation or a PC. Because I was a n00b at the time, it took some seconds to understand that they meant "do you want Solaris or Windows"

        I answered: "I'd like a Linux workstation"

        After which total confusion ensued.
        • Yes, that "confusion" is still present today with Linux... for example, many companies have teams that take care of Windows planning and other that take care of Unix planning (i.e. architecture, proposals, etc). Since historically Windows runs on ix86 and proprietary Unix in custom hardaware (dubbed workstation when for PC use, as you noted) the hardware division is also made along those lines. Now, with Linux the expertise is on one side - Unix - while the hardware resposability on the other - since it's a

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by poopdeville (841677)
      You're better off selling them, especially since they don't depreciate anywhere near as fast as generic PCs.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.