Oh BS, TexasGunLover. Seriously? You think that because Android has 2.4 Billion active devices they are somehow BETTER than iOS with 1.3 BILLION??? One single company which has 38% of the installed base of mobile devices compared to the competitions' 600 manufacturers' 62% installed base, many of which are really NOT smartphones but rather mere feature phones or even dumb flip phones and candy bar basic phones, or even embedded devices?
So now you trot out the logical fallacy of "everybody likes" Android, so it must be the best. That's Argumentum ad populum, i.e. because something is popular, it must be better. If everyone is jumping off a cliff, should you do it too?
That's like making the assumption that just because more people eat at McDonalds in any given day than eat at fine restaurants, McDonald's food is better. Or, another analogy, more people buy all the cars that sell under $50,000 than those that buy cars over $100,000. . . so the under $50,000 cars are somehow better than a luxury car.
Has anyone ever told you that you lack any semblance of logic?
I've provided you first hand data from a fortune 100 company over 20 years with hundreds of thousands of devices, millions of support calls and repair tickets.
You personally did all that. I'm impressed. NOT even a little bit. . . because YOU didn't do that. YOU weren't the VP of IT. You haven't provided first hand anything. Did you ever even get a trouble ticket for a Mac at your location? I doubt it. If you did, you wouldn't have had a clue what to do with it. You provided an anecdote without any data. The plural of anecdote is not data and repeating the same anecdote in post after post after post doesn't give it any more status as data.
You don't name the company. You gave FALSE data about the number of Mac failures in relation to other computers. "Tell a lie about one thing, then you can't be believed about anything else." — Judge Judy.
I on the other hand provided Links with HARD DATA from a named company, IBM, which has PUBLISHED THEIR RESULTS. . . which had a company official, an officer, speak publicly about those results and even report them in their Financial statements at the annual meeting of Stockholders, which puts it on record for Sarbanes Oxley Act fines and punishments if they were lying about the results. Yet YOU blithely dismiss those HARD FIGURES as if they simply don't exist, or are somehow the "conjecture of iSheep." Right, sure, a VP of IBM is an iSheep.
i IBM is finding they don't have to be stuck servicing those "millions of support calls and repair tickets" for all those problematic PCs, Texas. because they are making the problem go away by getting Macs. . . but then you never bothered to read what IBM is saying about how they are saving over $50 million dollars a year by switching to Apple Macs, did you? IBM found that only 5% of their Mac users are calling in for tech support compared to 40% of their Windows users each year.
That comports with my experience in my business. That's a HUGE savings in IT costs, Tex. But YOU don't want to hear that because it shows you've been backing the wrong horse.