[HN Gopher] Business Essentials
___________________________________________________________________
Business Essentials
Author : judge2020
Score : 466 points
Date : 2021-11-10 15:03 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| supernovae wrote:
| I wish they had a better MDM for kids... All I want to do is
| ensure that NextDNS is installed/forced and that they can't
| remove it. Somehow, if you block store, block adding apps and
| block removing apps and hide the icons, kids still figure out how
| to remove the damn thing and the only thing you can do to block
| it is set a 1 minute time limit (why can't you set 0 minutes? wtf
| apple?) and hope they don't stay up until midnight to click
| through in 1 minute and slide the slider to off (or figure out
| how to get into settings/network/dns and disable - which why
| can't the limits limit that??)
| vineyardmike wrote:
| I still have a lot of resentment for the internet restrictions
| my parents put on my devices. They didn't usually work, but
| made whatever i was doing significantly more annoying.
|
| I still remember discovering a bug in the iphone parental
| controls where i could go to the amazon app, leave a comment
| for google.com, click it and open that in a webview, then open
| that into safari with restrictions disabled. How i discovered
| that, i have no idea. But there's always a way.
|
| Later i just wasted my money on a crappy android phone and
| forced their hand.
|
| Edit: please, please, parents do not do this to your child.
| Learn trust, have conversations, and let them explore. If you
| trust your child (truly trust them) and they know it (believe
| you, not just hear you say it) then they will mostly try to
| make good decisions. Controls will just be bad for your child
| in the long run, even if it makes parents job easier in short
| run. Once a child isn't in eg. middle school, you have to start
| letting them access tech on their own.
| bradstewart wrote:
| So I haven't completely thought this through as my kids are
| still too young, but I'm leaning towards doing both.
|
| Some level of controls feels like a way to encourage
| exploration and learning and the "hacker" mindset. If they
| escape the controls, great! We also have the conversations
| about what's out there, how to handle it, etc.
| subhro wrote:
| Can't you do that with Apple configurator by creating a profile
| and installing it on their phones? It is clunky though.
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| All you are doing is teaching your kids to hack into their own
| device (speaking from experence) . Try a different strategy
| than attempting to lock down a device . When your are dealing
| with an individual who has a large payout if they succeed in
| getting around security and a long amount of time to circumvent
| it's an extremely lost cause.
|
| Instead you should limit the amount of time for device access
| or even just take the device away.
| drcongo wrote:
| The ScreenTime feature for family members on iOS is an
| absolute car-crash. Not only is it almost impossible to find
| (it's not in Settings -> ScreenTime), but I'm endlessly
| impressed with the ways around it my daughter is able to
| find. I've recently noticed that she can use WhatsApp without
| limits just by launching it from the share sheet in Photos.
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| I wasn't clear I mean physically take the device from them.
| jwineinger wrote:
| Training them for a career in tech/security ;) Parent is
| playing the career long game.
| curt15 wrote:
| >All you are doing is teaching your kids to hack into their
| own device (speaking from experence)
|
| That doesn't seem like a bad skill to foster.
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| Never said it was bad just pointing out the original
| posters false conclusion.
| foobarian wrote:
| > All you are doing is teaching your kids to hack into their
| own device
|
| Ha! Lock down everything and casually leave a printout on the
| kitchen table titled "How to bypass home network security"
| with a bunch of Python exercises that lead up to disabling
| the filters. Presto, now they know Python :-)
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| I would not leave books on the table so they can figure out
| how to google.
| Damogran6 wrote:
| I figured, when my kids were a certain age, that if I took that
| route, they'd ALWAYS get around whatever control I put in front
| of them. Either at home, or at school or at a friends house.
|
| Told them there was stuff on the internet that could harm them,
| that there was stuff they could NOT unsee.
|
| They're 18 now, the results of the science experiment are still
| out, but they seem to have turned out okay.
| ec109685 wrote:
| I don't understand why it's healthy to provide one click
| access to the hardest core pornography to a 12 year old.
| Putting _some_ restrictions in place are better than nothing
| in my book.
| dolni wrote:
| Because when you are an adult, your choices have real
| consequences. Kids have to learn that lesson.
|
| All told, a 12 year old kid seeing porn they sought out is
| small potatoes compared to the consequences of some other
| decisions.
| newsclues wrote:
| Porn isn't harmless.
|
| Source: maladjusted, mid thirties virgin, who grew up
| with on instant and infinite access to online porn
| _fat_santa wrote:
| When I think back to when I was a kid, getting around school
| internet filters and helping my friends remove parental
| controls from their devices, I can't help but think the
| Streisand Effect was hard at work in my brain. The adults was
| determined that I wouldn't see a thing so I was determined to
| see it because what could they be hiding?
|
| Now approaching the age where the thought of having a family
| and kids is on my mind more and more, I always wonder how I
| will approach this problem. I can't think I would do it any
| differently than you. For young children sure, throw up DNS
| filtering at the router level and the kiddos' will be none
| the wiser. But if my future kid ever turns out like me, that
| will probably only work until 7 or 8 (when I figured out how
| routers worked), at that point I would think it has to be an
| honest conversation about all the crap on the internet. Even
| when I was a kid I knew when the adults were feeding me a
| load of crap.
| mlyle wrote:
| What do you think schools should do? I teach at a school
| (K-12), and there's definitely circumvention of technical
| controls at the high school level. But I can't help but
| think we're a whole better off because of the filtering.
| Damogran6 wrote:
| You're obligated to block, because you're responsible for
| giving it to them and you have to deal with the
| population as a whole. I based my decisions on my kid's
| temperament. You don't have that luxury.
|
| It doesn't mean you'll be in any way effective.
|
| By the same token, we block this kind of traffic at
| work...all it ended up doing was pushing the negative
| traffic to employee's cellphones. Which is fine, because
| it makes the office network safer.
| anonAndOn wrote:
| DNS filtering (pi-hole is great here), scheduled vLAN
| time of use shutoffs (no after school shenanigans),
| obvious blacklists and ip request logging + pop-up
| warning are probably good enough for 95% of kids.
| mlyle wrote:
| We use Meraki (huge wireless deployment, so it makes a
| lot of sense to just use their gateway and call it good)
| with their blacklists. Biggest problem is it considers
| too many things "gaming" and needs exceptions-- e.g.
| lichess and chess.com are OK. Authentication and logging
| are pretty good.
|
| Rateshaping students to have enough bandwidth to do
| schoolwork but not to have _wonderful_ connectivity
| (campus has a 2gbps symmetric connection, but we only
| give students 4-5 megabits /sec over wifi most places on
| campus) is also a part of the picture.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Whitelists. It's kind of a pain, but might help reign in
| the teachers that send kids everywhere on the internet
| without much thought about the surveillance dangers.
| mlyle wrote:
| MS and HS students are expected to be able to
| independently browse the internet to do research-- this
| doesn't work with whitelisting. (And in elementary,
| there's good human supervision of technology use).
| oriki wrote:
| This, not to mention it seems somewhat unproductive to
| lock off 99% of the internet because of information
| collection instead of teaching how to defeat those
| collectors. The kid's going to grow up and leave
| eventually and will have to contend with the full
| internet, it doesn't feel like a good idea to leave them
| without any experience of the kind of things you can run
| in to.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Kids don't get any "experience" contending with
| surveillance. It is all done behind your back, on
| purpose. Results are never deleted.
|
| Certainly schools are not even attempting to teach
| countermeasures. They tend to dabble in the "be aware of
| bullying and self-esteem" issues, but are completely
| outmatched in the security arena. Ignore at your peril.
| mlyle wrote:
| We, at least, spend a fair bit of time on:
|
| - Advertising and dark patterns
|
| - What else can be inferred about you from seemingly
| innocuous information, and potential misuse
|
| - Durability of your digital footprint
|
| - Security, file types, etc.
|
| Education doesn't fix these issues, though. Even well-
| educated developers would often give up and click 'Allow'
| on a modal privilege escalation box that pops up
| repeatedly in research. And if I need to get something
| done and it doesn't work I'm pretty quick to re-enable
| scripts and tracking.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Knowing these thing exist is a great first step, and glad
| to hear you are helping out.
|
| But, it doesn't become a concrete, visceral thing until
| you inspect a no-script menu while browsing a news site.
| Or run Little Snitch on a freshly unboxed Mac. Or going
| to a "white pages" site and see the last four addresses
| of your family members. Salary info, current whereabouts,
| criminal history, are a fee away.
|
| It's a different world.
| mlyle wrote:
| Yes, but the whole world won't be developers. And many in
| the know just don't care.
|
| You're talking about a population of 12 to 18 year olds.
| Even among the most responsible and least-easily
| influenced of them, social pressures absolutely _dwarf_
| any abstract concerns about corporations knowing a bit
| more about broke-ass you to try and sell you things.
|
| Most of this population will take a short term gain for
| an uncertain consequence a few minutes later. You're
| talking about short term gain versus consequences that
| they may view as inevitable and occurring decades away.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| I can only affect my kingdom, what others do is mostly
| not my concern. Reminds me of the corporate garbage
| "food" products most people consume. I speak out but not
| going to steal their doritos.
| rnotaro wrote:
| Then they will probably use their Data Plan if they have
| one to get around it.
| kiryin wrote:
| This is the right way to go. Teach, don't block. You fuck up
| your relationship to your kids if you force them to keep
| secrets from you and constantly "fight" against you. Because
| trust me, that's how it'll end up.
| omnicognate wrote:
| It doesn't. I have a whitelisting transparent proxy for my
| primary school-age kids. It's not controversial and they
| don't attempt to get round it or rail against it. If they
| want something they ask. If I say no (and explain why) they
| accept it. They're interested in internet safety and we
| discuss it frequently. Teaching vs blocking is a false
| dichotomy.
|
| As they get older I'll remove it in stages: blacklist,
| logging only, then direct access with no proxy. The opening
| up will be done when it seems appropriate and in full
| discussion with them. I don't have a schedule for it.
|
| When they're old enough to have phones I can initially give
| them managed devices with always-on wireguard and the same
| transparent proxy. (I've tested this setup and it's not
| circumventible without wiping the device.)
|
| The claims often made on hn about this stuff, that:
|
| * Kids will resent any attempt to limit their access, and
|
| * Kids are NSA-level hackers who will circumvent any
| attempt at limiting their access.
|
| are empirically false, at least in my experience so far. I
| expect they become more true in the teenage years but
| that's when things can start to open up.
|
| Even if the restrictions have to be entirely dropped or
| become irrelevant the second they enter senior school,
| they've already benefited a lot from this over the years.
|
| The other argument, that other kids will have phones etc so
| there's no point, is just an abdication of responsibility.
| I feel like I should do my best here, whatever everyone
| else is doing.
|
| The one thing that is true is that it's quite technically
| demanding. A managed phone with an always-on wireguard
| connection to a network with a transparent ssl-bump mitm
| proxy and a domain-based whitelist with an admin UI to
| browse logs and block/unblock domains is not an easy thing
| to set up.
|
| It's possible, though, and it has value. It should be much
| easier.
| Macha wrote:
| > * Kids will resent any attempt to limit their access,
| and
|
| > * Kids are NSA-level hackers who will circumvent any
| attempt at limiting their access.
|
| There's plenty of people in their mid-20s now on HN who
| have been the kids, either working around their parents
| restrictions or their friends parents restrictions. I had
| an internet enabled phone as a 12 year old in 2004, so
| it's not a post-iPhone kid experience only.
|
| And yes, parental control software has got smarter to not
| just be a matter of changing your DNS or using an
| alternative browser, but tunneling over SSH still defeats
| much of it, and yes the audience here is more tech savvy,
| but there's a hundred new web based proxies that open up
| every day that your chosen solution may not be up to date
| on blocking - whitelists avoid that but it's something a
| lot of people here are opposed to on moral grounds once
| kids reach a certain age. Certainly if you let them go
| out unsupervised that's not enforcable, and honestly you
| should be able to let a 12 year old go out unsupervised.
| omnicognate wrote:
| To what extent this applies to 12 year olds is to be
| determined in my case. My kids are younger than that
|
| I think a lot of the "try and restrict and you'll just
| harm your relationship" stuff comes from 20 somethings
| whose memories are primarily of their teenage years.
| There's 12 years _before_ you get to twelve, and we 're
| in a situation where clueless parents are allowing
| (knowingly or not) their preteen kids to have their own
| youtube channels and watch Squid Game. (And much worse
| besides no doubt, those are just a couple of things I
| know particular kids have been doing.)
| fatnoah wrote:
| >I figured, when my kids were a certain age, that if I took
| that route, they'd ALWAYS get around whatever control I put
| in front of them
|
| My son is 14, and when my wife proposed blocks and access
| control, I made this very point. Even if we were able to
| perfectly lock down our home and his phone, we can't control
| every other place he can access the Internet. So, we also are
| in a talk about it, occasionally check on what he's been
| into, talk about anything "interesting" that comes up, but
| NEVER make a big deal of if. As long as we're able to discuss
| it (and no, he doesn't love talking about it), I'm OK. By
| keeping it low stress and low key, there's no incentive for
| him to hide.
| jupp0r wrote:
| You should still do some blocking to make sure he learns
| how to circumvent them. Those are valuable skills to have
| later in life, I still profit from the lessons I learned
| circumventing high school internet restrictions.
| vishnugupta wrote:
| Through Norton's suite I had filtered out YouTube app
| from being installed. It took ~10 minutes for my 5 yo to
| figure out use it via Safari :-| Since then it's been
| education over enforcement as OPs have mentioned.
| r00fus wrote:
| Does the Norton suite not have website/URLbase filtering?
| Weak sauce.
| Damogran6 wrote:
| My kids learned all about that in schools...by the
| teachers...so they could bypass the blocks to see youtube
| videos for class!
| jacurtis wrote:
| As someone who grew up in an extremely religious (arguably
| "cult-ish") home. I can tell you that your approach to
| parenting leads to healthier children (at least mentally).
|
| Hiding children from facts of life (sex, death, drugs, abuse,
| alcohol, etc) does not in fact help them, it helps you (the
| parent). It makes parents feel good, but leaves children
| scarred and unprepared for when they will inevitably face
| those facts later in life.
|
| There are stages of life when children will (or should be)
| exposed to those things. The brain naturally regulates these
| things. If a child is exposed at the proper time, their brain
| regulates the amount of information they are capable of
| understanding. As they re-experience the same thing later in
| life, they will understand more and their progress towards
| understanding that concept is more gradual and healthy. By
| contrast, if you shelter a kid, they will still inevitably
| face reality later in life, but the experience will be more
| difficult because they have to face everything at once.
|
| Parents should not be afraid to discuss or even introduce
| difficult concepts to children. The children will inevitably
| face these. It is better for them to face them in a
| controlled manner early in life so they can build healthier
| relationships with these hard ideas. It also gives parents
| better control over the introduction of these ideas. If you
| turn sex, alcohol, and drugs into a taboo in your house, you
| might think you are helping your children, but the reality is
| that you are actually setting them at higher risk to abuse
| these things later in life.
|
| Back to the original comment. If your kids are going through
| all this effort to subvert your DNS and controls in order to
| see something on the internet. It would be better to allow
| the child to confront their curiosity in a controlled way.
| Their curiosity is clearly very strong if they are willing to
| go to this extreme to satisfy it. Letting the curiosity pent
| up, will ultimately have the reverse effect than you desire.
| It could lead to overindulgence of that curiosity, or
| potentially abuse of that curiosity later in life.
| novok wrote:
| I think there are good cases to be made about pre-puberty
| vs post-puberty controls. Strong fences for the 4-8 age
| group is pretty different than than 9-11, 12-14 or 15+
| ronyfadel wrote:
| Can you DM me? I'm working on something along those lines.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| If your kids are intelligent enough to bypass locks... give it
| up. Seriously.
|
| Better, prepare them for the worst of what they will experience
| on the Internet: violence, pornography, abuse of all kind, and
| guide them in their use of the Internet. Place yourself as the
| person your kids can come for help instead of the person they
| have to be afraid of. That is an _incredibly_ easy and common
| thing for groomers to exploit.
| ryanianian wrote:
| The "at your own peril" strategy is effective for some.
|
| Or go the panopticon route: "I have software on the router that
| can see everything you do, but I don't usually look at it."
| noway421 wrote:
| Unless you're running a MITM proxy for SSL traffic with root
| certificates installed on the home devices, this statement
| can not be true. And if you're running such a proxy, you
| would need to have a guest WiFi for people coming into the
| house who would like to use internet without installing the
| certificate. At that point, circumventing the tracking is the
| matter of connecting to the guest WiFi.
| nanidin wrote:
| 16 year old me bypassed this and all other monitoring by
| running a patch cable from the cable modem directly to my
| machine when up to shenanigans.
| thealistra wrote:
| This sounds like fueling anxiety in the kids that they are
| being watched. Doesn't sound okay
| ryanianian wrote:
| > kids that they are being watched
|
| They already are though. Usually by tech companies without
| the kid's best interests at heart.
|
| Tailor it to the kid. Certain amounts of anxiety in
| developing minors around surveillance seem healthy,
| especially given the risks associated with unfettered
| access to the dangerous fire-hose that is the internet
| which itself has tracking at every corner.
| Hackbraten wrote:
| Still, lying to your kids is not ok. If you don't have
| software on your router that tracks everything they do,
| don't pretend that you have. Being surveilled is a
| feeling that sticks. Being tricked, too. Don't assume
| your kids will forget eventually.
| gwright wrote:
| > kids that they are being watched
|
| Not sure that "kids" is well defined here. But it seems
| completely normal that "kids" would be watched by their
| parents.
|
| I realize that the appropriate nature of "watching" is
| going to change with the age of the "kid", but oversight
| and watchfulness by a parent shouldn't be viewed as
| inherently problematic.
| m_st wrote:
| Did you try setting the device up with the MDM app from a Mac?
| It's called Apple Configurator or so, can't remember now. But
| as far as I remember it came with many options.
| m_st wrote:
| Also, first time i read about NextDNS. Looks rather
| interesting. Thank you!
| cbushko wrote:
| You can setup NextDNS at the router level.
| radicaldreamer wrote:
| Kids will be kids...
| gnrlst wrote:
| This is really cool, and a very necessary offering from Apple.
| But dear god their promo video (at the end of the page) is
| unwatchable. Is it just me or have these videos gotten worse? For
| example, despite being impressed with the new MacBook Pro
| announcement (which I have purchased), I had to mute their live
| Apple event because of all the cringe over-edited script. Maybe
| I've just become allergic after working for a corporation for
| years. Sorry for the rant.
| ag56 wrote:
| Does this mean I can finally have multiple user accounts on my
| iPhone?
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Unlikely. Current MDM works with just one account on a device,
| I don't think this will be changing.
| nlh wrote:
| So just to make sure I'm reading this correctly (this is not my
| area of speciality so bear with me):
|
| This is Apple-hosted MDM, yes?
|
| I took a brief spin through this world on a consulting project a
| few years ago and I found it SUPER weird that Apple didn't do
| this already. You had to do this weird dance between Apple
| Business Manager and the MDM solution (we ended up with SimpleMDM
| but looked at a bunch). I kept saying "Am I missing something?
| Why doesn't this service come directly from Apple?" and everyone
| was as puzzled about this as I was. So I guess they're finally
| closing the loop here.
| jordanbeiber wrote:
| Business use is a collateral win for apple.
|
| There's a lot of effort that goes in to support and partner
| channels for enterprise offerings. Making servers seemed easy
| enough? Look where that ended up. It's a completely different
| business.
| alexchamberlain wrote:
| Is it? Apple is the go to solution for all media types
| (photography, film making, design, architecture). The
| alignment with Adobe products has existed longer than either
| was cool.
| jordanbeiber wrote:
| Yes, but that is a completely different setting than an
| enterprise one.
|
| Having supported large enterprises and pieces of the movie
| production industry I can tell you there's a vast
| difference in how end-user IT is treated.
|
| The users you are referring to are power users that get to
| select their own tools, more akin to developers (at decent
| places at least).
|
| Currently a dev manager, about half of my dev team want to
| use mac. They can, with zero support from central IT.
|
| That's not a choice our sales org have, for example.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| They already have Fleetsmith. This is their response to
| Jumpcloud and what not who are offering lower per user plans,
| as fleetsmith was around $8/device/mo.
| mike_d wrote:
| > This is their response to Jumpcloud and what not who are
| offering lower per user plans
|
| They couldn't care less about a few dollars. This is about
| heading off business adoption of Chromebooks, and "winning"
| small-medium businesses as primarily Mac shops before they
| become big-enterprise.
| xyzzy21 wrote:
| Yes. But this is nothing new for even Apple.
|
| Just go an look at WWDCs for the last 10-15 years. There have
| been regular MDM sessions to talk about featured added to iOS
| and MacOS for this.
|
| This is also related to agreements made years ago between Apple
| and IBM to provide exactly this primarily because Apple has
| never wanted to compromise their customer connection (which in
| business is IT and NOT the end user), and IBM has needed the
| opportunity (despite IBM transitioning from Fail they are still
| not to a level of revenue expected for their stock price and
| heritage - so they are "hungry").
| roody15 wrote:
| Agree I manage 500+ Apple devices and have been in disbelief
| that Apple recommends using JAMF to manage their own devices.
|
| I use profile manager included with the Server App of MacOS and
| it is functional but limited in scope. I have expressed for
| years frustration that Apple recommends using MDM/ profiles to
| manage their devices ... and then doesn't even really offer an
| enterprise version of the software.
|
| Google by contrast offers a great admin console to manage
| chromebook and google devices. Surprised apple has dragged
| their feet here for so long.
| throwaway894345 wrote:
| We used JAMF at my last place of business, and it would
| occasionally kill apps with a 15 minute warning. Normally
| this was fine, but it really sucked to get JAMFed (as it came
| to be called) in the middle of a presentation.
|
| At my current company, we use something that _destroys_ CPU
| and battery (unused 2019 high end MBP hangs sporadically for
| tens of seconds on any file system syscall, computer gets
| uncomfortably hot, battery lasts ~1hour on a full charge--
| happens to everyone I've talked to). Not sure what it's
| called, but this falcond process always seems to be the
| culprit. I know nothing about MDM, but I would love it if
| Apple Business Essentials would be a viable alternative (hard
| to imagine Apple shipping _such_ miserable software, anyway).
| FiloSottile wrote:
| falcond is CrowdStrike's endpoint antivirus thingy, not
| device management.
|
| As usual, antivirus is an exercise in trading performance
| for increased attack surface (and compliance).
| user3939382 wrote:
| JAMF is the leader here, but I found it to be too expensive
| and unfriendly. I eventually settled on mosyle. When I
| originally learned about MDM I was quite surprised they had
| this third-party architecture.
| PinguTS wrote:
| For me this "offer" sounds like that the Sever app with the
| includes Profile Manager now basically becomes obsolete and
| will not anymore supported.
|
| That will become an expansive solution for small business
| like the one I manage with 15 employees.
| radicaldreamer wrote:
| This gives some services an opportunity to offer an even
| lower cost offering.
|
| The thing I worry about though is that this first-party
| solution will have "special" features that are not possible
| via MDM using private APIs or some special entitlements.
| arianvanp wrote:
| If you can use the Managed Apple ID as an OIDC server (what Login
| with Apple essentially is) then this would be a pretty nice
| complete solution
| Gentil wrote:
| Heavy blow to JAMF folks! It would be interesting to see how
| thing go from now onwards for them.
| simoncrypta wrote:
| So, is a rebranding of Fleetsmith with the Apple magic
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| You'd think if they were going to rebrand it, that they'd
| redirect you to the new site. Instead, now they are managing
| competing products.
| dylanz wrote:
| I just signed up for Fleetsmith yesterday, so this is pretty
| timely. I'm interested to see if/how this changes things.
| intricatedetail wrote:
| Do they also help setup tax avoidance structure?
| Thaxll wrote:
| So enterprise is the next target for Apple?
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| I hope not. You can see from Microsoft that it is hard to do
| that without tainting the consumer side.
| acdha wrote:
| It makes sense given that this is both an area where they've
| historically had to deal with the competitive disadvantage of
| Windows having a large "built-in" market and one where they've
| made huge inroads with iOS.
|
| For a small business this is especially interesting since an
| iPad / ChromeOS device is a better call for an awful lot of
| workers and this makes that switch even easier.
| eyelidlessness wrote:
| Given the pricing, this strikes me more as "we're confident
| enough that we're going to grow the Mac business, that we need
| to offer something to enterprise to check a box so we don't
| artificially limit sales."
| justusthane wrote:
| There are already plenty of Configuration Management and MDM
| solutions that can handle MacOS and iOS. This is targeted at
| small businesses that don't have an existing MDM solution.
| jhickok wrote:
| Seems like a work in progress over the past year-ish:
|
| https://www.techradar.com/news/apple-buys-mdm-specialist-to-...
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Even roll your own apps to your employees, bypassing the AppStore
| review?
|
| Upd: the video suggests that there are 'collections' which
| distribute apps to users, but it is not clear if own apps can be
| included in these using Enterprise certificates.
| sigzero wrote:
| Not enough information on that page but...doubt it?
| syspec wrote:
| Already possible
| skoskie wrote:
| You could already do that. Facebook notoriously abused the
| process.
| Nextgrid wrote:
| As far as I know you can already do that with enterprise
| certificates?
| joshstrange wrote:
| You can sign apps without Apple being "in the loop" and
| distribute them via the web with an enterprise cert. As far
| as pushing out updates I think you have to build your own
| system for that. My company uses enterprise certs and our app
| will notify the user when there is an update, redirect them
| to a web portal where they click a link, are prompted to
| install the app, and then the app is installed.
| cpg wrote:
| Ahhhhhh. Ohhhhhhh. A film!
| drfuchs wrote:
| It is curious that on this page, Apple says "Watch the film to
| learn more" and "Watch the announcement film" whereas they
| always use the term "video" (or "movie" where appropriate)
| everywhere else in all their messaging, as far as I've noticed.
| I wonder what they're thinking?
| teddyh wrote:
| That's how it starts. Later there's running and screaming.
| vxNsr wrote:
| I can't tell exactly but this seems to be going down the compete
| with Active Directory route.
|
| Which honestly, isn't a bad thing. AD is getting long in the
| tooth and AAD is a mess, we can absolutely use a few clever apple
| innovations to this space.
| nkotov wrote:
| If I'm not wrong, I think this is the Fleetsmith acquisition that
| happened last year.
| alberth wrote:
| Agreed though it's weird you can still purchase Fleetsmith
| directly.
|
| https://www.fleetsmith.com/pricing
| barelysapient wrote:
| 2TB of storage for $12 a month? Plus the multi-device management
| options? Sign me up.
| amelius wrote:
| What are the costs for the bandwidth?
| gruez wrote:
| consumer backup/storage services typically don't charge
| bandwidth.
| pavs wrote:
| Google One has 9.99/ month for 2TB Option. Which also comes
| with a VPN.
|
| If Price is the differentiator, I think google provides the
| best value, but also provide additional services with their
| storage plans.
| dexterdog wrote:
| Google One only works for gmail.com accounts
| zylent wrote:
| Allowing an advertising company to scan all of my traffic is
| extremely unappealing
| asdff wrote:
| Google drive business also offers infinite storage
| scoopertrooper wrote:
| Entirely different product though. Apple is providing a MDM
| solution for SMEs in addition to the storage.
|
| The value of a VPN that doesn't allow you access to a
| corporate network is... dubious to a company.
| airpoint wrote:
| Apples and oranges.
|
| Google One is a consumer product for sharing holiday pics
| with your family mate. The closest offer in the same target
| market from Apple is iCloud+, with same services for same
| price! Or as part of Apple One which is slightly pricier but
| includes a an array of additional consumer entertainment
| services.
|
| Apple Business Essentials is a set of business services with
| guaranteed SLA's.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| Sounds like a huge upgrade to Apple Business Manager. Two big
| complaints here:
|
| 1. Apple Business Manager refuses to work in Firefox due to an
| arbitrary user agent block, and they apparently still haven't
| fixed this.
|
| 2. "If accepted, your existing Apple Business Manager account
| will be upgraded with additional functionality that cannot be
| undone." - This is a really good way to ensure we _don 't_ try
| this. What if it causes our organization new problems? Why would
| your beta product be impossible to roll back out of?
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| The first thing I thought when I saw that block was wtf, apple?
| You have non-standard compliant html/css there?
|
| Utter disgrace.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| It works entirely fine if you set Firefox to lie about the
| user agent. It's probably one of those cases where someone
| just didn't want to have to take the 'risk' they had a
| browser issue with a browser they don't directly support.
| odshoifsdhfs wrote:
| This will be huge.
|
| There is a product I have been wanting to make, there is demand
| (customers have been asking for it), but would never work with
| the distributed personal iCloud accounts before. This will allow
| to consolidate all of it under businesses accounts.
|
| Interesting enough, have other people in my circles that also
| have wanting to port somethings to be native like this and
| haven't due to being business apps and the 'individual accounts'
| being a show stopper to share licenses.
| wejick wrote:
| Wow, company where I work just rolled out kandji what a timing.
|
| However I don't think online storage is necessary for most
| business that already using either Google or Microsoft office
| products.
| vxNsr wrote:
| Happy to see they came up with a use for their HQ: largest and
| most expensive sound stage ever.
| alberth wrote:
| Tough day for Jamf.
| tyingq wrote:
| The announcement is a little light on details around directory
| integration for things like AD. I'll be curious to see a
| feature comparison with Jamf.
|
| Edit: Ahh, I see. _" small businesses in the U.S. with up to
| 500 employees"_
| rbanffy wrote:
| So, every day will continue to be a tough day for all Jamf
| users...
| aejnsn wrote:
| It's like Apple has started listening to customers again.
| teeray wrote:
| All I want from Apple is a separate environment for corpware and
| all of its associated baggage to run. I'd love for that profile
| to even acquire its own EPS bearers so that its traffic is
| distinct from personal traffic.
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| There's a few headlines talking about backups - does apple
| finally have a cloud based time machine replacement? I'd be so
| excited to see that as a general consumer too.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| I think that's unlikely to be a thing they're working on. You
| can get that from storing your files in iCloud already, and
| these days is there any good reason to back up the rest of your
| system? If I had to rebuild a system due to hardware failure
| the absolute last thing I'd want to do would be restore all the
| accumulated system cruft!
| binaryblitz wrote:
| I agree and disagree. For my gaming desktop, I'd just
| reinstall apps to get a fresh start.
|
| I started my own software consulting/contracting thing this
| summer and if my machine crashed, every hour I'm not working
| is costing me money. So setting up all my apps again to get a
| fresh start isn't worth it. With TimeMachine on my NAS, I
| just get the replacement computer and let it restore while I
| sleep. Then I'm good to go the next morning.
| derefr wrote:
| iOS devices do full backups to iCloud+, restorable onto a new
| device just like macOS full Time Machine backups are.
|
| So why not macOS backups in iCloud? If anything, you'd expect
| it to be the other way around--in iOS devices, you/apps can't
| litter your homedir with random garbage, while in macOS you
| can. So it's _more_ useful to back up macOS.
|
| + You can also make an iOS backup onto a local macOS computer
| running iTunes, which is, _I believe_ , what they do for you
| when transferring your data to a new device in store. I
| haven't looked at them lately, but if they're just plain-old
| Time Machine backups, that's even more damning, as that would
| imply that iCloud is already perfectly set up for receiving
| Time Machine backups.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > iOS devices do full backups to iCloud
|
| Right but that functionality dates back quite a few years
| now, back from iTunes and before cloud computing. I'm not
| sure they'd build that functionality today.
|
| Exactly as you say - what _is_ the point of a full phone
| backup when you don 't normally store any files on your
| phone? They could back up the metadata of what apps you
| have installed and where you've put them on your home
| screen. I'm not sure it's worth doing much else?
| aspenmayer wrote:
| It's worth it for the device migration functionality
| alone. If I switch/upgrade iOS devices, I can perform
| iCloud or device-to-device recovery, which is much more
| useful to me than simply restoring which apps I had
| installed and their data.
| dwaite wrote:
| > So why not macOS backups in iCloud? If anything, you'd
| expect it to be the other way around--in iOS devices,
| you/apps can't litter your homedir with random garbage,
| while in macOS you can. So it's more useful to back up
| macOS.
|
| This is somewhat the reason why no full macOS backup to the
| cloud. iOS naturally normalizes the content due to its use
| of iTunes Store content (apps, movies, television shows,
| books, music).
|
| On macOS, you can't necessarily just ignore apps and say
| you'll download from the store - not only can you move
| applications around, you can delete parts of them and
| _many_ devices have apps which were not downloaded from the
| store.
|
| So a 1TB Mac backup will take 1TB of iCloud Data and
| require 1TB of data to be uploaded/downloaded to their
| storage account.
|
| This also affects the speed of restores on higher-speed
| connections - a lot of the iTunes content winds up being
| cached by CDNs.
|
| Apple's solution so far has been to back up just the user's
| Documents and Desktop folders to iCloud, since these are
| the two most important "general purpose" locations on the
| Mac.
| derefr wrote:
| > On macOS, you can't necessarily just ignore apps and
| say you'll download from the store - not only can you
| move applications around, you can delete parts of them
| and _many_ devices have apps which were not downloaded
| from the store.
|
| Sure, but they're by-and-large the _same_ apps. You can
| delete parts, but the parts that are there will
| inevitably be parts someone else also uploaded before.
| Apps are a highly backend de-dup-able kind of data.
|
| As such, couldn't Apple just treat .app bundles (and a
| few other bundle types, e.g. .framework, .kext, .plugin,
| etc.) specially for purposes of iCloud backup, by e.g.
| content-hashing all the files in each bundle, shoving
| those files into an object store keyed by content hash
| (i.e. a Content-Addressable Store), CDN-mirroring that
| CAS, and then saving the .app bundle in your backup as a
| BOM for reconstructing the bundle from the CAS CDN?
|
| Keep in mind, Apple have never promised E2E encryption
| for iCloud backups, only "encryption in flight" and
| "encryption at rest." (See https://support.apple.com/en-
| ca/HT202303). And even then, that's never included an
| implied encryption of your applications, only of "your
| data" (since, as you say, the apps are being turned into
| symbolic references to ITMS CDN objects.)
|
| So they could have an explicit policy that certain
| filetypes that aren't "user-generated" would be "backed
| up in the open, to the commons"; while all other
| filetypes would get individual treatment. And presumably
| you could also set some Finder xattr to override that
| policy one way or the other, if e.g. you had some
| proprietary binaries you were under NDA to not release.
| natch wrote:
| Small nitpick, they are not full backups. I am continually
| discovering new gaps in what gets backed up.
|
| One example: apps that you built onto your device as a
| developer. Get a new phone and restore from backup? That
| app is gone now.
|
| I do understand the reasons why. But understanding does not
| make it a full backup.
| Timothee wrote:
| > these days is there any good reason to back up the rest of
| your system
|
| From experience, there is definite need. I spilled some water
| on my work laptop and it died. I was able to get a
| replacement in maybe 3 hours, but setting everything up again
| was a major pain.
|
| A Time Machine backup would have let me continue more or less
| where I left off in a matter of an hour or two, vs. many
| hours/days (and some lost work). (not that Time Machine is
| perfect either, but much better than just iCloud)
|
| I agree that getting rid of system cruft can be good, but
| it's better handled proactively than on machine failure IMO.
| dewey wrote:
| Storing files in iCloud Drive is very different from a backup
| I would argue.
|
| What a business would want in this case is Backblaze like
| functionality with versioning / restore. iCloud drive also
| doesn't really help you with restoring a full system like it
| is possible on iOS where all your settings, passwords and
| apps are just like you left them.
| lostgame wrote:
| To be fair, iCloud has a password manager on MacOS / iOS
| that works great.
| minimaxir wrote:
| Pages/Numbers/Keynote do support versioning in-app when the
| doc is stored in iCloud Drive, albeit not as efficient as
| true versioning.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Doesn't iCloud Drive have a revision history? For example
| DropBox does, so Apple could add the feature.
|
| > all your settings, passwords and apps are just like you
| left them
|
| Now that most of these things come from the cloud anyway,
| do we need the rest of the system backed up?
|
| I don't need to restore my system from a backup - I just
| log back into Creative Cloud, Jet Brains, etc.
| dewey wrote:
| It probably very much depends on what you are using your
| computer for. If you are just living in Chrome and use
| Google Docs and Mail there this will work just fine.
|
| If you are someone who has tools set up, apps not from
| the app store, come custom dot files, your shell history
| and environment variables this will not help you at all
| and getting up and running after a device got lost /
| destroyed will take you a day. Even if it's just simple
| things like your system theme / Dock positions of your
| apps.
|
| You could probably fiddle and symlink things and hope
| everything works but it's not a "log in and have your
| device be in the same condition as before" like you'd get
| from an iOS "Restore from iCloud" functionality.
| kube-system wrote:
| > What a business would want in this case is Backblaze like
| functionality with versioning / restore
|
| Maybe. Some businesses just back up just their user's files
| and just reimage machines when something goes wrong.
| jhickok wrote:
| Honestly as an end-user that's my preference.
| selykg wrote:
| I use Backblaze, and aside from the cost, it's great. It's
| fine for 1 computer, but oof, there's no multi-computer
| discount. Most of my machines aren't backing up terabytes
| of storage either. We're talking like ~100gb a machine and
| there's two of them.
|
| Businesses like to talk up "unlimited" but it's a pain when
| you're using less storage but have to subsidize those using
| a ton of storage.
| majou wrote:
| A few years ago Backblaze started offering B2, a storage
| API priced at $0.005/GB/month, and dirt cheap egress fees
| unlike the big cloud offerings.
|
| You'd save money switching to a client that supports B2,
| they have a list on the site, though I'm not sure which
| provide decent version management.
| skoskie wrote:
| That really depends on the user.
|
| As a developer, I've modified quite a few system files and
| would like those things backed up. It's one reason I don't
| use Backblaze - they refuse to backup system files.
|
| As an employer, I can imagine a situation in which those
| "cruft" files contain information about the actions of an
| employee that might be valuable in legal proceedings, or just
| providing they were terminated for cause.
|
| But 98% of the time you're totally right about not needing to
| backup every little config file.
| Leherenn wrote:
| I used to have a repo with scripts that "encodes" those
| change. Stuff like "setup-zsh.sh" and so on. On a new
| computer, I could just install git, clone the repo then run
| the scripts.
|
| I stopped doing that because I don't use new systems often
| enough to be worth it, and as someone else said it's also a
| good time to examine and improve your workflow.
| xoa wrote:
| > _As a developer, I've modified quite a few system files_
|
| I do as well. Given that such things tend to be more
| fragile between OS releases though and easy to forget I
| usually prefer to recreate them for upgrades or reinstalls
| anyway. Also provides an opportunity to reevaluate them. So
| these days I think the better way to go about it is with
| automation as much as possible rather than backups. That
| said:
|
| > _It's one reason I don't use Backblaze - they refuse to
| backup system files._
|
| Well, you can use something like CCC to image your startup
| disk to a file somewhere else, and regular BB will
| cheerfully take care of that. Makes restores mildly more
| work but not much given that a failure which nukes the
| system files means having to do some level of
| reinstall/recover anyway.
|
| I use Backblaze B2 though, which has maintained decent
| pricing vs S3 and is much more natively flexible. Having
| local systems backup to TrueNAS (or have data folders that
| just live there) then that go to B2 is another way to
| handle things. With Apple making custom restores ever more
| difficult though all that might need some reevaluation too
| :(. I miss how powerful and pleasant their tools were at
| one point with no subscriptions or WAN required, and will
| always be a bit bummed things didn't go the way of adding
| your own signing to the system image utility, Net Boot/Net
| Install etc they already had going. Macs were really great
| to run heavily off a LAN back around 10.5.
| rsync wrote:
| "There's a few headlines talking about backups - does apple
| finally have a cloud based time machine replacement?"
|
| Apple doesn't, but we do.
|
| You simply do a "dumb" 1:1 mirror to an rsync.net account with
| 'rsync', which you already have.
|
| Then you set up an arbitrary snapshot schedule in your account.
| rsync.net will then create, and rotate, _immutable_ snapshots
| of your dataset. [1]
|
| The only difference is that our ZFS snapshots are bit-wise
| efficient whereas the time machine snapshots are still (I
| think) file-wise efficient ... which is to say they are less
| efficient.
|
| We used to advertise this ... the notion that you could clone
| your time machine config to rsync.net ... but we came to the
| conclusion that there's a pretty insular hackers-on-osx bubble
| and, in reality, 99% of mac users don't drop to the command
| line _for any reason_.
|
| Which is too bad ...
|
| [1] https://twitter.com/rsyncnet/status/1453044746213990405
| beermonster wrote:
| Would you say that this is the most time machine-esque way of
| using your service? I'd imagine using borg (pulled from
| macports/homebrew) and using MacFUSE to local mount would
| seem pretty time machine like whilst offering other benefits
| over rsync such as client side encryption, compression and
| deduplication (the dedupe might be irrelevant since you're
| using zfs)
| rsync wrote:
| Yes, I would say that.
|
| It's also the simplest method - again, just a dumb rsync
| command that you re-run every day.
|
| If you are using borg you would probably handle the
| retention and versioning yourself with the borg tool and
| perhaps set just one or two daily snapshots at rsync.net.
| These would not be for your backup schema, but rather, for
| safety in case of mistakes/ransomware/mallory.
| bengale wrote:
| Looks good, roll it out to the UK and we'll switch from Jamf
| pretty quickly.
| m0llusk wrote:
| Though the whole setting has changed, this harkens back to NeXT's
| stated mission prior to merging with Apple: To be the preferred
| business alternative to Microsoft.
| jonathantf2 wrote:
| On-site repairs sounds interesting, although their computers are
| all glued together and every component is soldered to the board
| so I have no idea how they'll manage that.
| CaptainJustin wrote:
| I have no evidence for this but I expect the experience would
| be similar to visiting an Apple store.
| stefan_ wrote:
| Make an appointment 2 weeks from now, go there to hand it in,
| return in another 2 weeks to be handed a refurbished machine
| with your data gone?
|
| Sorry to say, that's not competitive with what other vendors
| offer as business support.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > Make an appointment 2 weeks from now, go there to hand it
| in, return in another 2 weeks to be handed a refurbished
| machine with your data gone?
|
| Every time I've visited an Apple store with a problem I've
| left within 30 mins with either it fixed or a replacement.
|
| What you're describing sounds more like the traditional
| Dell or HP approach!
|
| One of the best things about Apple is being able to visit a
| store in almost any major city and getting your problem
| fixed.
| loginatnine wrote:
| Dell business support is pretty awesome in my experience,
| had to fix something 3 times in the past 4 years with my
| work precision laptop and it took less than 24h to got a
| technician to my house to do the swap.
| asdff wrote:
| If you have a more serious issue the default procedure is
| to just wipe the device and replace the logic board for
| the flat rate repair fee. I have a macbook that just
| shuts off randomly and turns on with CPU1 halt error
| messages. I bring it to the apple store and they told me
| flat out they don't know what is going on with the
| device, gotta replace. Also had macbooks with gpu issues,
| same deal send away wipe the device and replace the logic
| board and hope that fixes it. I had a macbook where the
| flex cable to the screen was going and same thing, wipe
| and send away. All they do in the store is software based
| solutions, they scan for hardware issues and they send it
| away to be repaired.
|
| I wonder what sort of issues you had that could have been
| fixed in 30 minutes or what sort of replacements you've
| been given? That's not been my experience at all at apple
| stores and I've been bringing them screwed up laptops to
| fix for ten years. I've never been just handed a
| replacement laptop that day, its always been send away
| the computer for at least a week and they try gutting it
| and putting in all new parts vs troubleshooting the
| underlying issue and replacing the perhaps one bad
| component that is the root cause.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| I'm not some kind of power-customer - just a normal
| consumer. They always say 'sorry we'll fix that' and fix
| it then and there or they say 'sorry can't fix it
| immediately we'll swap it' and I walk out with a new one
| in minutes. If they wanted to keep it over night I'd be
| extremely surprised.
| asdff wrote:
| You are getting macbooks swapped out at apple? I'm not a
| power customer either, they just take the laptop away and
| tell me its ready next friday. Sounds like the fixes they
| do then and there aren't hardware issues in your case.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| I've definitely had at least a battery swapped then and
| there. If it's anything more than that yeah I guess
| they're defaulting to swapping it. I'm not complaining
| about the policy!
| criddell wrote:
| My daughter's Alienware laptop had a keyboard problem.
| Contacted support over phone and it went nowhere.
| Contacted support via Twitter and after a bit of back-
| and-forth they scheduled a next-day on site repair in
| Toronto even though we live in Texas (where the computer
| was purchased).
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| I can't speak to the Apple store, but I do have years of
| experience with on-site repairs for both Dell and HP.
|
| Both Dell and HP business on-site repair service is
| really good (though I prefer Dell to HP). Depot
| warranties for consumers are horrible, no matter the
| company. I've been advising friends and family to
| purchase business-oriented equipment and pay for on-site
| warranties (for the intended duration of the lifetime of
| the product). It makes life ridiculously easier.
|
| Consumer warranties on PCs are universally awful in my
| experience.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| Good luck getting an appointment within 4 hours at Apple
| stores near here. The three nearest me have no
| appointments until November 19.
|
| Dell laptops I can get serviced with an onsite tech
| within 4 hours if I want that level of service.
|
| Experience 1: MBA wouldn't charge battery. Machine
| functioned just fine on AC power. Expected maybe $300 in
| parts and labor, out of warranty. No, "this will be $870.
| Maybe we can look at getting you into a new Mac today?".
|
| Experience 2: reproducible kernel panics on demand from
| GPU (later acknowledged as an issue by Apple, over a year
| later). Despite the tech being able to cause the panic
| too, "our diagnostic tool says there's no problem,
| nothing we can do".
|
| Experience 3: screen adhesive delamination. "Within
| normal limits, expected/not abnormal behavior". That one
| was belatedly acknowledged by Apple, too.
| [deleted]
| binaryblitz wrote:
| Depending on the size of your business, it's easier just to
| have a few (or even one if you're really small) spare machines
| for when one breaks or is having issues. Just turn it on,
| restore from the latest backup and give it to the user. Then
| send the old one off for repair if needed.
| rbanffy wrote:
| Watching the Apple employee come to the office to repair a
| glued together MacBook Pro can have an extremely high
| entertainment value.
| hda111 wrote:
| The newer MacBooks have easy repairable battery and
| connectors.
| rbanffy wrote:
| I was being facetious.
| TakuYam wrote:
| True but how often is the battery the issue in an
| enterprise environment? In my experience devices are seldom
| in circulation long enough that they require a battery
| swap.
|
| Port damage and clumsy or messy employees are far more
| likely to cause issues.
| tshaddox wrote:
| Your parent commenter mentioned connector as well. What
| else couldn't be repaired on-site that _could_ be
| repaired off-site? I 'm pretty sure anything that for
| anything that couldn't be repaired on-site they're just
| going to replace the whole computer.
| tadbit wrote:
| In my experience the battery was the issue for most
| MacBook users.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > In my experience devices are seldom in circulation long
| enough that they require a battery swap.
|
| MacBooks can easily last four to six years in a corporate
| environment - and heavy load on the battery drastically
| impact it in two years.
| kube-system wrote:
| > Onsite repairs apply only to some iPhone models and are
| subject to availability in specific cities.
| _fat_santa wrote:
| I wonder if it will be an actual "repair", or will they
| just come and give you a refurbished iPhone and transfer
| all your data to it.
| Navarr wrote:
| When you click the box it seems like it applies only to iPhones
| fsflover wrote:
| "Privacy"? Sounds like false advertising to me:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28309202.
| smoldesu wrote:
| At this point, I think Apple's PRISM compliance is common
| knowledge. I hope.
| fsflover wrote:
| Looking at the downvotes, it seems, it isn't. More info:
|
| https://www.cultofmac.com/230358/everything-you-need-to-
| know...
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)
| sbuk wrote:
| The downvotes are coming because this has nothing to do
| with the topic at hand and you are both blatantly trying to
| start a flame war. You both have form on Apple threads. If
| they bother you that much, stop reading articles about
| them.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| One of the main cards was explicitly about privacy and
| security. Find out more...
| smoldesu wrote:
| Clicking through your comments, I think you're setting a
| double standard. I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm
| holding a trillion-plus-dollar company accountable for a
| claim they made on the webpage this thread was based on.
| You're welcome to refute these claims or ignore them
| altogether, but arguing that people shouldn't post about
| Apple's history of privacy abuse only makes _you_ look
| bad. Tanking the downvotes is just the cost of making a
| subversive claim on Hacker News.
| roody15 wrote:
| Wonder if an education version of this product will be released?
| numbsafari wrote:
| The challenge for Apple is going to be their unwillingness to
| integrate with others. Business Manager only integrates with MS
| Azure Active Directory for IAM. The vast majority of small
| business do not have Azure Active Directory. They either have
| nothing, or they have Google Workspace.
|
| Apple needs to not just launch a competitor for AD. They need to
| properly support integrated directory services with a broader
| range of systems.
|
| Aside from that, they don't have an endpoint security solution,
| which is a necessary part of this package, ultimately, if they
| care going to replace JAMF, who is the real target/loser here.
|
| If Apple can do those two things... well... I'd switch in a
| heartbeat. Why? Well, their support story is going to be way
| better than JAMF. Also, I hate having multiple vendors when I can
| have just one.
|
| For those saying that Apple has no room left to grow... I expect
| this isn't the end of this for Apple going after business users.
| They need to roll Claris into the mix, stop acting like Numbers
| is a spreadsheet, and finally launch a cloud platform.
|
| There's many billions for them to make here.
| easton wrote:
| > vast majority of small business do not have Azure Active
| Directory
|
| Where are you from? On the east coast of the US, I find it
| uncommon to find small businesses who aren't still all in on
| Office, which if you've bought it in the last five years, was
| probably via a subscription that gives you Azure AD (and
| Exchange, Teams, etc). GSuite is still very uncommon in my
| experience outside of schools.
| jonathantf2 wrote:
| At the MSP I work at every single customer we have uses Azure
| AD. G Suite isn't a proper business e-mail solution for a
| business with any more than 3 users - Exchange and Azure AD are
| the gold standard for cloud based office for SMB.
| borski wrote:
| I suspect integrating with Google is just a v2 feature.
| r00fus wrote:
| Not to mention Okta, etc. Though for Apple's target market
| Azure was probably the best initial integration.
| Someone1234 wrote:
| So they advertise AppleCare+ features (24/7 support, on-site
| repair) but they don't currently offer that nor do the prices
| reflect those services. Page seems deceiving (have to read the
| small print to _really_ understand the offering).
|
| With those two removed, you're paying for an MDM solution and
| cloud storage.
| jedberg wrote:
| Ah! I thought it was way too cheap for the AppleCare part. I
| was about to sign up for just my devices at home just for that,
| because it seemed like a really cheap way to get iCloud and
| AppleCare!
| lelandfe wrote:
| The small print, for posterity:
|
| > Plans with AppleCare+ for Business Essentials will be
| available in spring 2022.
| benrockwood wrote:
| In 2020 Apple bought FleetSmith (https://www.fleetsmith.com/), we
| all knew that would become the basis of an Apple MDM, this is the
| result.
| wpietri wrote:
| Wow, what a change! Apple spent many years holding the corporate
| market in mild contempt. Given the dominance of Windows, I
| totally get that; Apple was right to focus on the niches where
| they were successful. But it's amazing how much circumstances
| have changed to make this plausible.
| samstave wrote:
| A few comments:
|
| 1. I was paying for iCloud and apple service for *YEARS* but then
| suddenly when I lost my phone, iCloud had no record of it.
|
| 2. I have had multiple employers in Silicon Valley who had the
| BYOD (Bring you own device) policy implemented but then they
| attached a SECONDARY DEVICE to my iCloud account and were
| slurping all personal records from that.
|
| 3. Show me a way to FUCKING MANAGE WHO IS ACCESSING MY DATA.
|
| 4. I have too many more issues at level 4 that @dang will get mad
| if I share (and FB and others will sue me again if I dare)...
| think paul stamets on the secrets of mushrooms -- If you have any
| sort of work phone, know they are slurping ALL the deets..
|
| Never take a personal phone/device into a workplace environment.
|
| In my case - I was going through a verry messy divorce, and my
| employer had been surveilling my texts and everything because
| when I joined I made the mistake of adding my apple ID -- and
| then the employer added a fucking device to my account and was
| surveilling everything.
|
| Yeah - if you get a job in tech these days, the ironic thing is
| to be an off-grid person.
|
| #KazinskiWasRight
| [deleted]
| j16sdiz wrote:
| > 2. I have had multiple employers in Silicon Valley who had
| the BYOD (Bring you own device) policy implemented but then
| they attached a SECONDARY DEVICE to my iCloud account and were
| slurping all personal records from that.
|
| I don't think MDM allow the admin to hijack your icloud
| account. Are you sure it's your employer, not some other?
| samstave wrote:
| Positive. Its happening everywhere, and by dog-years and
| internet standards, this is _ancient_
|
| Never EVER trust ANY HR department. They are not your
| friends.
| lostlogin wrote:
| HR? They are 'People and Culture' now.
| N_A_T_E wrote:
| Looks great. I recall Apple held out for a long time to play ball
| with enterprise IT, focusing on consumer. It seems like they've
| fully embraced the massive enterprise market.
| colechristensen wrote:
| Apple has supported enterprise device management for a long
| time, it has just been third parties like Jamf doing most of it
| until now.
| sna1l wrote:
| I see a lot of comments where people are saying this is a killer
| blow to JAMF but almost every single org has a heterogeneous set
| of devices (PCs, Macs, iPhones, Androids, etc), so how will this
| work with that?
|
| Unless they support all types of devices why have yet another
| tool?
| binaryblitz wrote:
| JAMF is Apple only.
| mataug wrote:
| Not necessarily true, if a small business wants to keep MDM
| simple, they could adopt Apple's Business Essentials to get a
| lot of value quickly. These small businesses may like paying
| for apple care and MDM in a single payment rather than paying
| two separate companies.
|
| You're correct in that large businesses have heterogeneous
| devices and JAMF will still be relevant there.
| surye wrote:
| I thought JAMF was Apple Only Ecosystem as well. So it's a
| lateral movement from the perspective of heterogeneous set of
| devices, but if you had to go with Apple or third party, given
| the same features and limitations, most would go first party.
| motohagiography wrote:
| Smart play to focus on businesses with fewer than 500 employees,
| as those are the most likely to grow in the next 3-7 years into
| larger accounts, and they don't have the 12-18mo sales cycle and
| shennanigans of an enterprise.
|
| It's a strategic departure from being a consumer luxury product
| company, and the shift to enterprise suggests they're out of
| ideas, but at the rate they're losing consumer growth I'd say
| they've still got another 150 years. Leveraging the apple store
| as a service point is a huge deal, as it may compensate for the
| additional hardware premium their products cost.
|
| I've worked in a large number of organizations as a consultant
| and the microsoft ecosystem is basically unusuable to me now.
| Between performance issues and thoughtless design, I switch back
| to my apple devices to do simple things and get real feedback
| from actions while I'm waiting for the microsoft platform to
| respond. As a result, I manage client work on MSFT, and _do_ real
| work on my mac. With Apple getting into this space, I can 't see
| buying another microsoft product unless I actually hated the
| people I was hiring to use it.
|
| The essence of the apple experience is that by their products
| being designed to be responsive no matter what, you are always
| engaged and working on them for the feedback, whereas some MSFT
| error message means I'm going to go do something else for 15-20m
| while I get past the gumption trap. Current one is having to
| reboot the machine to reset a VPN driver just to check client
| site email. MSFTs problem isn't from lack of a solution, it's
| that the problem exists at all and as a user I am even aware of
| it.
|
| I have lots of issues with Apple's social decisions, and am
| switching out of their ecosystem because of it so I'm not an
| uncritical fan, however, this announcement means they aren't just
| getting into enterprise, they're getting upstream of it and in
| 10-20 years they will have replaced a lot of it. They're dropping
| in on a macro trend wave that is how work itself is going to be
| different.
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| Once Apple stops doing 22 percent year over year growth is when
| there is a problem. This is just Tim Cook's personal plan to
| move Apple into more of a service oriented company and this
| product should have existed a long time ago.
| novok wrote:
| > the shift to enterprise suggests they're out of ideas
|
| I would not say that. This is a long time coming for apple to
| finally acknowledge with actions that apple devices are used in
| an enterprise context for many, many companies and to start
| thinking about proper first class support for that use case.
| "Innovation" wise it's independent of their other efforts IMO.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| > the shift to enterprise suggests they're out of ideas
|
| Pretty sure its just the way to profit off of all types of
| users, keep cash flow coming and grow the business.
|
| When their app store faces anti-trust, and everyone already has
| an iphone and the next igadget is 5 years away, how do you
| generate growth?
| threeseed wrote:
| > When their app store faces anti-trust
|
| They have already faced the courts over the App Store. They
| won.
|
| > how do you generate growth?
|
| Through new devices eg. Watch, AirPods, AR/VR Headset. And
| most importantly through Services eg. AppleTV+, News+, Music+
|
| You should look at Apples balance sheet. Far more diversified
| than most people realise.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| > They won.
|
| They won, in america... for now. They have (a) a global
| business with other nations less inclined to side with them
| and (b) a likely chance of legislature targeted at them.
| The odds of a future decline in margins of the app store
| seem high. New laws in Korea and Japan are going to slowly
| erode the edges, and allow businesses to tests
| alternatives. The Epic trial may now allow link-out to
| payments with latest court docs. And EU is a big market
| that could easily turn against them with new laws.
|
| > Through new devices
|
| The best new devices can do now is replace existing ones
| people own, most people who want and can afford apple
| devices own them. New product catagories are a few years
| away.
|
| > And most importantly through Services
|
| Like the service they just launched, targeted at
| enterprise?
|
| > You should look at Apples balance sheet. Far more
| diversified than most people realise.
|
| I do financial analysis, and attend their earnings calls.
| You're right, it is very diverse, but the non-services
| revenues don't seem poised to see strong growth in next few
| years unless they launch a new (and successful) product
| category.
| motohagiography wrote:
| > When their app store faces anti-trust, and everyone already
| has an iphone and the next igadget is 5 years away, how do
| you generate growth?
|
| I'd suggest this is the definition of being out of ideas, as
| the way they grew last time was they invented the iPhone, and
| then the iPod, and then the Airbook, Apple Watch, and
| AirPods. Then there was the mini tracking device to help you
| believe every other product wasn't already a tracking device.
|
| Imo, the negative inflection point was the AppleTV launch
| where it was just a bunch of celebrities, and for Cook to
| stay at the helm, he needs to deliver a Jobs level win.
| Enterprise may be his "second envelope," as I think it's a
| safety play.
|
| Reframing your question as, what can they re-invent next?
| That's hard to answer without being that level of design
| thinker. Cook's team is designing products for a very
| different world than the one Jobs did. The aesthetics,
| aspirations, and even power means different things now, as
| they say, what got us here doesn't get us where we need to go
| next. The enterprise product is going to be huge revenue
| wise, but innovation wise, I think it's treading water.
|
| Maybe the smartest thing to do is to turn Apple into a
| company that doesn't need to run on genius anymore, and fork
| a design driven ventures division with a mission to get
| exposure to early stage brilliance instead. What Jobs did was
| bring artists to tech, but that whole play was predicated on
| a bohemian/creative class that doesn't matter the same way
| anymore because their rarity and scarcity was an artifact of
| geography that is no longer a factor. This bringing something
| from one place to another aspect of Jobs' vision (and
| cultural arbitrage) breaks down when that physical distance
| is no longer meaningful.
|
| The distance to bridge with products now is intellectual,
| educational, cultural, political, etc, and maybe we don't
| want it bridged now, maybe what we desire is that distance
| again. The next iPhone level innovation won't be a signifier
| of joining the middle class of that time, it will be either a
| barrier to it, or an escape from it.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| i largely agree with your points.
|
| I think the ousting (quitting?) of Ives is a sign that
| apple as an aesthetic force is ending, and the return to
| "logical" macs instead is a sign that they're reverting
| going too far. Its an acknowledgement that they have to do
| more than make pretty devices.
|
| I see a very similar path to luxury car brands for luxury
| electronics. A mix of status, comfort and performance. I
| wouldn't be surprised if the "pro"/"pro-sumer" line of
| devices diverges even more into the future so that we have
| $2k iPhones. Similar to how car companies have $200k+ cars,
| and $75k+ cars that effectively don't compete with each
| other and let them invest in more expensive efforts, that
| serve as flagships. Alternatively, go the racing-car route,
| and invest in high-end engineering efforts that way. This
| could be similar to your "forking" idea in that they get
| exposure without subjecting it to mass scale.
| numbsafari wrote:
| Agreed. They have been leaving a mountain of money on the
| table by not offering this, or a competitor for Google
| Workspace.
| frankfrankfrank wrote:
| It could actually be a play for far bigger, the mountain of
| money that is now largely dominated by Microsoft in ALL
| establishment corporations and governments. Think of being
| able to run your whole network and equipment with a mere
| fraction of the IT and network personnel that it now takes
| to run a Windows based environment.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| > a competitor for Google Workspace.
|
| I think this is their obvious next move. They just launched
| iCloud email with custom domains for end users. That seems
| like an early battle-test for enterprise use cases.
|
| They already have alternative software to google docs too,
| so it could be an easy business to set up.
| cptskippy wrote:
| > Current one is having to reboot the machine to reset a VPN
| driver just to check client site email.
|
| These aren't Microsoft specific issues but vendor specific. My
| partner's last two employers have used Dell machines and
| they've each had serious problems with audio drivers. I've seen
| Dell bios updates completely mess up full disk encryption by
| losing keys and more recently switching SSDs from ACHI to ATA
| mode.
|
| At the same time I've had comparatively few issues using my
| work issued Lenovo laptop. However I completely re-imaged my
| work issued Macbook because the Trend Micro software installed
| on it made it $3000 brick.
| short12 wrote:
| Didnt they already try this and it was a huge failure
| hhaha88 wrote:
| I've been backing up and restoring my personal phone, and
| managing family gadgets that way for a while.
|
| This is a reskin of an existing Apple iCloud infrastructure
| project.
| zeusk wrote:
| Who remembers xserve?
| ryanjkirk wrote:
| and XSAN <shudder/>
| [deleted]
| TimTheTinker wrote:
| I cried a tear or two when they deprecated it. Apple _can_
| do enterprise hardware... just because Linux and x86
| hardware became commoditized doesn 't mean there isn't room
| for further innovation.
|
| I think Apple should come out with an M1 Enterprise chip
| and a line of data center/server hardware to compete with
| Oxide. As for an OS, why not hire Hector Martin and adopt a
| particular flavor of Linux (maybe partner with Red Hat)?
| newsclues wrote:
| Apple has had success in certain sectors of industry: the
| creative space being a large focus where they had success
| often in spite of being Apple
| thereddaikon wrote:
| Smart to focus on smaller businesses but foolish albeit
| expected to only include Apple products in the solution. I'd
| put money on the overwhelming majority of businesses that have
| any Apple devices also have non Apple devices. Very few will be
| purely Apple environments and those that are would hardly
| qualify as enterprise environments. The reason is simple, Apple
| has failed to provide the needed suite of enterprise solutions
| to allow a company to build themselves around their ecosystem.
| You can do it in the home but Apple doesn't sell servers
| anymore or allow anyone to develop server products for them.
| Closi wrote:
| > Smart to focus on smaller businesses but foolish albeit
| expected to only include Apple products in the solution.
|
| Eh, it depends why you think they are doing it.
|
| If you think they are offering this because they want to get
| into selling MDM software, then yeah, it's foolish.
|
| If, on the other hand, you imagine that they are offering
| this because they want to encourage small businesses to go
| 'wall-to-wall' Apple, and for a benefit of this to be that if
| you go 'Apple' you effectively have some level of a technical
| support contract too with on-site hardware repairs (not
| really offered in a compelling way by any other hardware
| vendor), then it might not be so foolish from a commercial
| perspective.
|
| I suspect it's the latter - make going 'all in' on Apple a
| super appealing proposition for small businesses.
|
| The second thing is, Windows is _very_ appealing for small
| businesses because, amongst other things, configuration and
| management of users, sign ins, security policies e.t.c.
| through AAD / Office 365 is brilliant, so this seems to
| close the gap a bit.
|
| > Apple doesn't sell servers anymore or allow anyone to
| develop server products for them.
|
| This seems to be more like an MDM/device management and user
| management/onboarding solution, not something you would
| install or use to manage servers.
| r00fus wrote:
| > Smart to focus on smaller businesses but foolish albeit
| expected to only include Apple products in the solution.
|
| Apple isn't here to be end-all-be-all for their customers.
| They are there to sell products and services that make sense
| for their customers.
|
| If others undercut them or provide more comprehensive
| service, then that's a market Apple has decided not to
| compete in now. Good for their competitors.
| ziggus wrote:
| I'm calling BS on this entire pile of nonsense.
| baggy_trough wrote:
| What do you do if you need more than 2TB of storage?
| kalleboo wrote:
| Yeah I guess for "business" users who are only storing office
| documents 2 TB is plenty, but as a home user, I bought into
| iCloud Photo Library and I'm about to pass the max 2.2TB
| storage limit of iCloud and will have to switch to Synology
| Photos or something
| jnieminen wrote:
| You could have the 2TB iCloud storage add-on and also the
| Apple One with 2TB to get the total of 4TB.
| manquer wrote:
| Graphics and design pro users may need more that that
| easily.That is an important business segment for Apple .
| ksec wrote:
| This is what you get when part of Apple's Services Revenue is at
| risk . Finally doing something that it should have been since Day
| 1. Along with AppleCare+ Monthly option. Instead it took them the
| whole 2019 and 2020 before they act. I would imagine similar play
| will be made for Education market as well. As they are battling
| with Chromebook and now Windows 11 SE.
|
| This is easily another billion dollar ARR.
|
| Oh I would not be suspired if Johnson & Johnson are switching to
| using Mac sometimes in the future.
|
| Edit: I would bet the on site repair is the only good thing ever
| came out of Butterfly keyboard fiasco.
| jguimont wrote:
| I mean... I'd like to use that to manage my family's macs/iphone!
| lostgame wrote:
| You know what would piss me off, if I had kids; would be the
| lack of support the iPad, in particular - has for multi-user
| logins.
|
| It would be huge for families, and it would also make parental
| controls way more of a breeze.
|
| Does anyone know why this is the case? I was _positive_ when
| they made iPadOS its own thing, we 'd finally see this.
| Cipater wrote:
| >Does anyone know why this is the case?
|
| They want people to think of iPads as personal devices like a
| phone rather than communal devices leading to buying one for
| each member of the family.
| duxup wrote:
| Have kids.
|
| I HATE that there are no multi user options.
|
| Other people's browser history, settings, preferences,
| notifications, all jumbled into a mess.
| bradfa wrote:
| I don't know why it's the case, but it is very frustrating to
| me. I have 3 kids and 3 iPads, not assigned per kid, just a
| pool they all and my wife use. Current implementation is a
| common "family" account logged in as a "child" on all 3 iPads
| with app purchase approval going to me and my wife (we both
| have iPhones).
|
| This "works" just kind of OK. But it would work MUCH MUCH
| better if my wife could have her iCloud account sign in from
| the unlock screen when she wants to use it and have the kids
| sign in from the unlock screen on the shared kids account.
| The way it is now my wife ends up signing into various
| services she wants to use on random iPads, which isn't really
| ideal.
|
| Apple's solution to my family's problem would be to buy my
| wife her own iPad. But we don't have a shortage of iPads,
| there's almost never a time when someone doesn't have an iPad
| available to them when they need/want it. We have enough
| hardware, just the software doesn't provide a way to share
| that hardware in a nice way.
| sigspec wrote:
| Agree! Even Apple TVs have user profile switching.
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| They would rather you bought an iPad for each member of your
| family.
| dunham wrote:
| I think they have this for school iPads, with special
| management software, but not available on the consumer side.
|
| I suspect they're pushing for you to buy a device per user.
| But even for a household without kids, I could see some
| utility in being able to pick up the nearest iPad and having
| your personal state on it. (I think ChromeOS does this, but I
| haven't used it.)
| my123 wrote:
| Also available for business iPads.
|
| Has some catches like... around 30 secs to switch between
| users, doesn't seem to be instant. Maybe it's faster now.
| simonebrunozzi wrote:
| In your experience, would it make sense to use this to manage 4-5
| family members and their devices?
| walterbell wrote:
| Could this allow per-app VPNs via MDM, e.g. one browser goes to
| corporate VPN, rest of device uses standard network connection?
| thih9 wrote:
| Slightly off topic, check out the HTML code next to the "Onsite
| repairs" box; the formatting uses strikethrough, but there is a
| hidden element with "Not" text before each crossed out line. I
| assume this is for accessibility or copy-paste compatibility; as
| a result the raw text still reads:
|
| > Onsite repairs: Not someday Not next week Not soon ASAP.
|
| I find this kind of attention to detail very cool.
|
| (Too bad "ASAP" is not very specific either and can mean
| "someday", "next week", or "soon" too...)
| spyder wrote:
| Looks like they are using the hidden "not" and the weird :after
| CSS pseudo element to draw a line over text instead of "text-
| decoration: line-through;" probably because screen readers
| don't recognize the proper strike-trough styling:
|
| https://veroniiiica.com/2020/05/29/tips-for-censoring-text-w...
|
| If that's the case than it should be fixed in the screen
| readers instead of still requiring CSS "hacking" in 2021.
| 5faulker wrote:
| It's way too vague if they're channeling that much attention to
| it.
| CityOfThrowaway wrote:
| This is for the visually impaired! Screen readers will announce
| the hidden element
| dahfizz wrote:
| Can screen readers not figure out that a 1px x 1px element
| with a clip-path: inset(0px 0px 99.9% 99.9%) is invisible?
| londons_explore wrote:
| Screen readers are a lot dumber than you'd expect... And
| now web designers have come to rely on this dumb-ness, so
| making them smarter breaks stuff.
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| The trouble is, I think, that typefaces vary so much that
| some could appear to have a strike through when they don't.
|
| Or take for example the number 0 which sometimes has a
| fairly horizontal slash through it. Do you program the
| screen reader to check if the struck letter is a 0, and if
| so, consider it not to be struck? But... What if it
| actually is, and that typeface doesn't have a slashed 0?
|
| Do you only check perfectly horizontal strikes? How thick?
| At which height in the type? How much overhead is it to
| parse all of this? etc.
|
| This also requires rendering the document and inspecting
| the image with object detection, I would think? Someone
| correct me if I'm wrong, I'm only trying to imagine
| potential problems.
| zeusk wrote:
| screen readers don't do OCR.
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| That's kind of my point - I don't understand how you
| could go about identifying words on screen with a strike-
| through in the way they described.
| zeusk wrote:
| Depends on how you implement the strikethrough; if you
| use the HTML tag - the screen reader will have zero
| trouble.
|
| Although with all the vDOM and JavaScript crap these
| days, web is quite inaccessible compared to most native
| apps.
| dahfizz wrote:
| The issue is not with detecting the strike through. The
| issue is that the CSS of the hidden "not" element
| obviously makes the element invisible, but a screen
| reader still reads it.
|
| Obviously, Apple is abusing that fact here in order to
| insert elements that only screen readers would see.
| Definitely feels like a hack.
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| I understand what's happening (I use this approach
| myself). I'm only wondering about if the strike-through
| recognition idea makes sense.
| [deleted]
| cma wrote:
| Do they not indicate strike through already in another way?
| mappu wrote:
| Bootstrap's .visually-hidden (formerly .sr-only) does something
| similar using clip():
| https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/main/scss/mixins/_vis...
| polycaster wrote:
| I suppose this is more about the concern the wrong meaning
| could be indexed. Nice highlight in search results: "Apple BE:
| Onsite repairs someday".
| overspeed wrote:
| Slightly tangential but don't soon and ASAP mean the same with
| the difference of an urgency qualifier?
| city17 wrote:
| Thought the same. ASAP seems just as meaningless/vague as
| soon?
| isodev wrote:
| I work as a freelancer and together with a few colleagues we are
| essentially a "small product studio". We all have "business only"
| devices and we are definitely going to try this Business
| Essentials thing. It kind of reminds me of how easy it is to
| setup a macOS Server. Very cool!
| zylent wrote:
| I'm gonna be real with you, macOS server is a complete joke.
| Avoid and kill with fire.
| vondur wrote:
| This certainly seems like a direct attack on something like JAMF,
| which Apple has basically blessed to be the Enterprise management
| tool for Apple Devices. (Ok I guess since it's less than 500
| users, maybe not quite in the same ballpark as JAMF, but I'm JAMF
| has plenty of customers with less than 500 installed devices, and
| this service offers more than just management)
| artful-hacker wrote:
| You just wait, I am sure that after Apple tests this plan,
| knows it works reasonably well and can make money, they will
| start crippling JAMFs' capabilities and slowly take over the
| market.
| iJohnDoe wrote:
| Wow! Apple is now doing 4-hour onsite repairs?!? It's an early
| Christmas miracle!
| sabujp wrote:
| JAMF is overbought anyways, time to sell
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-10 23:00 UTC)