I totally disagree.

I own a small business and we primarily create “software in the cloud,” which effectively runs everything.

This has already ensured that many companies no longer care about the type of laptop/smartphone/tablet employees.

We also exchange a lot of traffic because almost everything is in one package (calendars, timekeeping, etc.), which makes many things like exchange possible.

Internal servers are mainly used exclusively for security (blocking certain websites, software, etc.) and rarely have anything to do with our products.

Clients work from Chromebooks to Linux to Windows and Mac. Ironically, most of my clients are (former) farmers and at least rural residents, so “what a farmer doesn’t know he doesn’t eat” is a ridiculous statement here.

In the end, it’s all about how many headaches it causes them. If you can remove that headache (which has already become easier, partly due to the broader support offered by Windows, but also the cross-platform improvements offered by Apple), this will be much more doable than before.

Offering it at a cheap price also helps greatly, because these people count every cent.

What usually happens, since our software has no real impact on the “ecosystem”, is that we get the opportunity to run shadow. This is often completely gone within a year and they’ll save hugely by ditching all the Microsoft crap.

As far as Apple is concerned, the impact seems to be less in my experience, which is funny enough. Companies that run almost entirely on Apple have almost no problems—perhaps because Apple has less management than Microsoft does.