Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Apple Acquires Fleetsmith (fleetsmith.com)
246 points by gmemstr 12 days ago | hide | past | favorite | 123 comments





Fleetsmith disabled their entire third-party app catalog this morning and disabled Bash scripting (that was reenabled 15 minutes ago), breaking workflows for a bunch of users (and, according to the MacAdmins slack, tons of end users got random popups asking for an administrator to fix kernel extensions that were previously loaded via Fleetsmith). [0]

I can understand having to sunset the catalog, but how did Fleetsmith (or Apple) think that doing that without one peep was okay? Even a "we've been informed by legal that we can't host these packages, so within x days they will be removed from our catalog. we will provide functionality to replace them on your systems with packages you make yourself".

0: https://www.reddit.com/r/macsysadmin/comments/hf30qk/apple_b... (discussion about fallout)


How? Pretty simple:

Transition during an acquisition is driven by the M&A and legal teams which are more focused on mitigating deal risk than providing customer/product benefit. It's just simply not top of mind for them. It then takes a while for the acquired team and tech to work their way into the engineering organization but by that time the damage of the initial decisions is done.


This can be true. But that's when, as a lawyer, I expect the product teams and other folks within the business to push back, if necessary, so we can find a solution that optimally balances risk against ongoing business needs. Of course, if the business really just cares about getting the deal done, and doesn't care that much about their existing customers in light of that deal, then...

But just as likely the business team either is inexperienced or doesn't have clear objectives for the transition and therefore doesn't give the deal/legal team the feedback they need to strike the right balance. A good lawyer will fish for these types of issues, but its hard to know what you don't know, especially if you're not in direct contact with the right people.


In the enterprise IT world, admins pay money precisely because they don't want things like this to happen.

I can't imagine that IBM would make an acquisition like this and screw it up in quite this way.


This is so absolutely true. What happened here shows that the people involved have no idea as to what enterprise companies require. It's sort of like hiring an intern who made a change that they thought was a-ok but that also took the entire network offline.

"Can't imagine IBM would ..."

Oh really ? IBM's probably the most enterprisey lawyer-driven tech outfit there is ?

And even if they didn't, its IBM ... they've got a dozen other ways they'll mess it up.

IBM is a brand relic living in the glories of its past. Its not the company it used to be.


I believe you are thinking of Oracle

Pretty sure they are an enterprisey tech-driven lawyer outfit.

Ahh, that's right.

por que no los dos?

> IBM's probably the most enterprisey lawyer-driven tech outfit there is

Let me introduce you to Rambus. Once a strong chip manufacturer and system bus innovator with products used in the Nintendo 64 and Playstation 3, it now employs an equal number of lawyers and engineers. Most of the companies revenues have shifted from technology licencing to technology litigation.


Yeah, this is unacceptable. I get why Apple legal wanted to kill off distributing third party apps, but the way Fleetsmith approached this likely puts many companies out of compliance who were using it to enforce minimum versions of 3rd party apps.

They really should have put together a migration plan that included time for an orderly transition and a way to automatically move the third-party apps into the custom catalog, maybe even after the administrator accepts liability for distributing those apps.


Wow, without third-party apps, FS has become mostly useless.

That's a lot of pain for admins, especially in a SME environment where I'm not aware of any viable alternatives …


You can make custom packages yourself and upload them, but there's no information on how to remediate that with the packages that Fleetsmith themselves already installed (that I saw).

Yeah, the problem is they deleted controls without warning, potentially opening up their customers to risks. Had they automatically migrated their third party packages to custom packages or gave more time it would have been OK.

This is the way Apple does it on most (all?) takeovers.

That's a good way to keep people from using products that risk takeover. Apple is for consumer only. Get out of that wheelhouse and you're risking a good fuck-over.

Our app Workflow had a largely seamless transition when being acquired, minus accidentally DDoSing Pinboard[1] for a period of time due to a bug.

[1] https://twitter.com/Pinboard/status/845072973673357312


> Fleetsmith disabled their entire third-party app catalog this morning and disabled Bash scripting (that was reenabled 15 minutes ago), breaking workflows for a bunch of users (and, according to the MacAdmins slack, tons of end users got random popups asking for an administrator to fix kernel extensions that were previously loaded via Fleetsmith)

So, they're already learning from Apple?


I hate to have to sardonically upvote this but Apple has really been losing their way.I find both my iMac and my iPhone to be increasingly nagware-focused, especially because I have zero desire to use iCloud.

The insistence on bullying me into iCloud with notifications is my least favorite iOS feature.

Every time I start up the Music app to listen to something, my phone tries to convince me to pay them for a subscription that I don't want. I'd really rather move to Apple than stay with Spotify, but I refuse to reward this bad behavior.

I believe there’s a way to turn off Apple Music integration in your settings so you just get the old music app.

Don't get me started on settings only being available if I install an app. That's Facebook levels of UX.

You’re angry about having to install the Music app to change settings in the Music app?

Thank you! It’s still shitty for Apple to do this, but at least I can stop the nagging now.

Thank you. TIL something wonderful.

Curious, why not use iCloud?

I already have a cloud sync service through OneDrive that is substantially cheaper for my whole family for starters. That Apple won't allow a 3rd party to act functionally equivalent to iCloud is annoying and seems like mostly an intentional business decision to sell more iCloud than provide a good user experience.

I don't need 2 different cloud storage providers, let me use the one I already have.


You can backup and sync all the same Apple things that iCloud can do using OneDrive?

No, Apple does not allow the same level of integration with OneDrive. You can't backup to the cloud, you can't automatically prune old photos/videos that are backed up in the cloud, you have to manually open OneDrive to have it "automatically" upload your photos/videos even though camera upload is enabled in OneDrive.

Android doesn't have most of these restrictions so OneDrive works more like iCloud there.

Despite that, I'm not paying an extra $10/mo on top of the $99/yr I pay for Office 365 because the limitations are artificial. I can launch OneDrive to sync photos/videos just fine, all my contacts are already in the cloud and I can make manual backups of my phone directly to my PC but frankly all the content I care about is not on the phone so I only do that before any major upgrades.


I've said many times that Apple deserves a serious competition lawsuit like Google has been dealing with.

If preloading Chrome on Android is anti-competitive, the way Apple uses its market power to give preferential treatment to its own services vs spotify, onedrive, etc is definitely anticompetetive.


I also use OneDrive and sometimes when it updates you need to restart iPhone to make the Camera upload to work again.

In general I've had bad luck with "cloud storage" applications such as Dropbox. A lot of it is that I lived behind a very slow DSL connection, so synchronizing a modest number of files could mean the DSL connection was degraded for all users.

I tried to give OneDrive a chance but the close integration with Microsoft Office meant that I frequently could not save the documents I was working on because OneDrive didn't want to save. The nagging to install OneDrive killed it for me because it caused lost work.

Microsoft did the same with OneNote. OneNote was a great notetaking application, but Microsoft managed to put two buttons on the taskbar, three on the desktop, commandeer the Print Dialogs and use every other trick in the book to trick people into using it. Then it a fit of mindlessness they removed the ability to have a local (non-cloud) Notebook and I was gone.


Microsoft's cloud storage integration suffers from configuritis for me (poster child: SharePoint).

I'm sure there's a perfect way to use it for all my use cases. But doing so would require I learn / study the correct OneDrive-specific settings. Which would only be useful for OneDrive.

But by far worse, the defaults on most Microsoft products don't follow first, do no harm. Consequently, unless I learn the settings and monkey with them, adopting the product will negatively impact me.


Why use iCloud? Why use or not use any feature? Who cares. If one chooses not to use it, why nag him incessantly?

I'm not saying what Apple is doing is right, I am just asking a side question of why not use it. I just want to know _why_ something is an easy choice for me and not for someone else. Not judging Apple or the user. Just curious.

- No Linux support

- No Windows support

- No Android support

- Synchronization is not reliable

- Very pricey, and free tier is too small

- "We're going to take all your documents hostage in our cloud, because you've got only 100GB space left" (after taking the space by APFS snapshots).

It might be fine for some casual users, but not for any device than stores anything serious.


iCloud does support Windows.

I use my own nextcloud. My data is my data.

Several reasons, but it mainly boils down to control and history.

I run my own services for email, web publishing, calendar, identity, remote storage, etc. So Icloud already would have to be better-enough than mine to make me want to change. When they do accomplish that, it is mainly by making it difficult or impossible to use mine.

I have a lot of history built up in my services that I'd have to agree to trash or somehow move. That history is important to me - I have a quarter-century of personal mail, and about 15 years of photography, as just a couple examples. Considering the average lifespan of Apple's various attempts at services over the years, this one is super easy - my "cloud" has already outlived nearly all of their offerings. Apple was hawking eWorld when I started running my mail server.

More generally, I trust myself more than I trust Apple to get this right. I understand why you trust Apple more than me, but that's an entirely different proposition. This isn't hubris, it's categorization - we operate at wildly different scales for wildly different-sized customer bases pursuing very different goals.

Finally, integration. Apple is going in the direction of integrated-everything. I'm pulling in the other direction - at this point most of my computing infra is not Apple, and I've already decided I'm not getting another Mac as my everyday laptop. I'll decide what that means about the phone next time I need to replace it, but it probably means we're headed for a divorce. Luckily, I've never put my data in a position to make that a harder choice than it should be.

So there you go.


I use my own cloud, based upon Nextcloud. To use that cloud, I don't need to pay anyone, and a giant company doesn't peruse my files at a whim.

Apple ID login screen doesn’t allow use of a password manager for starters. But also, why care? I already paid for an iPhone, there is the option of making me regret my purchase or letting me be.

There’s also the third option of hopefully getting you to pay them even more.

Why take a risk whose fallout is unmeasurable?

> So, they're already learning from Apple?

No. They're already Apple.


This is very likely bad news for companies like Jamf.

Apple is likely wanting to bring macOS/iOS management into their own product suite and tightly integrate it in future products, much like what Microsoft did with Terminal Services, which nearly killed Citrix 20 years ago.


Yes, it's puzzling. Apple had pretty much "blessed" JAMF as the goto way to manage Mac/iOS Devices in the enterprise. Most of the JAMF seminars/tech sessions I have been to usually had an Apple enterprise Rep on hand to work with.

This was also my first thought.

It's surprising because JamF is recommended as the de facto (only serious) solution for people serious managing fleets.


That’s simply not true, a marketing a line from jamf. There are several serious MDMs. Of big enterprises I know of just one that uses jamf, and they augment it with many, many questionable bash scripts.

What enterprise management isn't chock full of questionable scripts?

Shit, my org has over 15,000 group policy objects that have been collecting, getting linked across OUs, and duplicated for over 15 years. The whole thing is questionable.

It works though.


> a marketing a line from jamf

My perspective comes from talking to anyone on the Apple Business team at the San Francisco union square location, and also reps from apple's general business support line.

There are definitely a ton of other MDM solutions, but none that I've heard mentioned so frequently by apple employees as JamF.


Apple has long echoed this line (part of the reason their purchasing of fleetsmith, not jamf, is surprising).

A sampling of MDMs that large companies you've heard of use:

- vmware workspace one

- bare metal micromdm

- simplemdm

- fleetsmith

- kandji

- jamf


My experience also. Apple business team recommended jamf every time.

Right but Jamf is what enables you to deploy those bash scripts reliably.

Apple uses JamF internally.

I deployed Fleetsmith a couple years ago after evaluating the field. Fewer features than the competition but well designed and clearly improving over time.

Zach Blum (CEO/co-founder) would regularly follow up on issues and tickets himself, always friendly and helpful.

I know transitions like this can be rough but I'm glad to see them achieve this success.


Wow. Apple seems to have gone out of their way over the years to not provide their own actual MDM service, or even a server for people to host themselves.

"We look forward to continuing to deliver Fleetsmith to existing and new customers." sure sounds like the service will stay open, AKA this is not Apple's usual acqui-hire and shut down the company.


Except they completely disabled the app catalog this morning, without notice. That's fun.

Apple has offered an MDM service for years.

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/devicemanagement


Apple doesn’t have an MDM. They create the base MDM protocol for iOS/macOS/tvOS that other vendors make systems on top of. You used to do some basic stuff using OS X Server and configuration profiles, however much of this is gone now and you really need a third party MDM to manage Apple devices in any meaningful way.

While Apple has been publishing their MDM Protocol Reference, the only implementation they ever offered was "Profile Manager", a limited, unreliable service that only runs on macOS Server. Apple never provided MDM as a cloud service.

Profile Manager works great* * , ask me how I know.

* Until your hidden-from-view postgre SQL db gets corrupted and stops working and all the solutions on the Apple support forums are "couldn't find a fix so just flatten and reinstalled... now moving to Jamf", so every thing in PM is treated like a faberge egg and you're using a kludge of package managers and such to fill in the gaps.

Your 2012 Mac Mini Server in a Sonnet Rackmac needs it's dying 5400rpm HDD switched over to SSDs, which, now you're also using 3rd party hardware + SAS PCIe controllers to connect to a RAID / Tape Drive to keep this thing going.

* Every OS X update is held off because you're trigger shy of the last time it broke OS X Server and your 3rd party SAS controller drivers.

Yet another server to manage on site and/or spend too much $$$ on a boutique "Mac Stadium" data center which is essentially a colo'd Mac Mini.


Beeg oof. I feel your pain.

Jamf Pro is more like Jank Pro but fuck me, it's a million times better than PM.

First time I met our now current Apple Systems Engineer for my region, he laughed when I said I had used PM in the past and said "Uhhh, yeah, don't use Profile Manager in production."


Yep … but someone had (and has) to run the necessary services …

Apple bought TestFlight some time ago, which ended up not as a standalone service but as an integrated service; this will probably happen to Fleetsmith too: it'll close as a standalone, be rewritten into something Apple likes, and be marketed as an Apple solution for MDM.

I also see this as more of a TestFlight style acquisition for product integration

Most of the features are gone, i.e., support for third-party applications …

CEO of Kolide here.

This announcement couldn't have come at a crazier time...today I planned on announcing our intentions to enter the MDM product space.

Our MDM is meant to be a new fresh take on device management that puts end-users in the driver seat. It's user focused device management and we are applying everything we've learned from our security product to the management space.

https://blog.kolide.com/kolide-mdm-for-those-that-dont-need-...

If you are interested in trying out what we are releasing later this year, read the post, and get on the list https://www.kolide.com/mdm/


>Our MDM is meant to be a new fresh take on device management that puts end-users in the driver seat.

Oh, so that means I can pay you a few hundred for a copy of your software and put it on my own ESXi system and have absolutely zero further dependency on you specifically or the internet in general beyond if I eventually decide to pay for further updates right? I'll have total control over all my data?

Oh, it's just another subscription service 3rd party dependency lock-in thing? Oh.


Am I missing something, or by “crazier time” do you mean “standby while I advertise my product”?

His offering is highly germane to the conversation, and quite likely helpful to a lot of people reading through the comments. We're (largely) a community of makers, and it's totally fine to mention what you've made in the appropriate contexts. This is but one (good) example.

It is crazy timing from his point of view. Crazy perfect timing. He was going to advertise it anyway, and now he has lots more people that would be interested. And in fact, it is relevant to this news.

I like to kid that every time we read "Google bought company A", that salespeople from Company A's competitors get busy.

Until Company B gets bought out...

I understand where you are coming from but it's more like, "standby while I share something my team and I have been working really hard on that is relevant to the news and who are interested in MDM".

I'm genuinely curious: how is that not advertising your product?

It's advertising, but perfectly legitimate in the context. Many people in this thread are probably looking for an alternative now, so they might well be happy to see this mention.

Besides that it's also a personal story "I've been working on a competitor for a while and this is weirdly nicely timed".

A few months ago burtonator was under almost every article advertising his project ("Javascript? During the development of Polar Bookshelf (getpolarized.io) I have used Javascript!"), which I personally found a lot more annoying.

In the sea of close to 100% of pointless ads you quickly forget that they are actually supposed to make you aware of something you want. For many people in this thread that has probably succeeded.


Unless it allows you to own all your data - how it is different and what is the guarantee they won't be acquired in the same way and leave all their customers to look for a third service?

not all advertising is soullessly cynical

I'm confused why this comment is here.

Literally a startup themed website, literally a thread about a related product. It's kind of obvious why it's here.

Fleetsmith has always been one of the only two commercial products I've endorsed for Mac management. They do great work and have the right vision.

I work a lot in this space on https://micromdm.io/ an open source service, and have industry experience doing device management at various organizations.


How does this compare with Jamf in your experience?

> Fleetsmith has always been one of the only two commercial products I've endorsed for Mac management.

What's the other commercial MDM product you endorsed? There seems to be quite a few dozens of commercial MDM providers out there.[1]

> They do great work and have the right vision.

Can you elaborate?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mobile_Device_Manageme...


Thanks for sharing your take on this from a unique vantage point.

And thanks for the downvote! Will never again thank anyone with unique insights to take their time and offer perspective on this forum again!

What's the other one, out of curiosity?

Can you tell me the other one?

SimpleMDM

According to Wikipedia, SimpleMDM doesn't provide "Device Lockdown" and "Expense Management", whereas there are some vendors provide all (all green in a row). [1]

Also as far as I know, SimpleMDM pricing[2] is not the cheapest in the market either, their feature set is similar to Mosyle's, but Mosyle's cheaper.[3]

[1:] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mobile_Device_Manageme...

[2]: https://simplemdm.com/pricing/

[3]: https://business.mosyle.com/pricing


Picking products based on feature checklists is how people end up buying horrible enterprise software, and then spend enormous resources trying to make it work. Doing everything implies not doing anything well.

SimpleMDM doesn't try to do everything, as the name implies, but instead they focus on doing what they do extremely well.


If you been in an enterprise RFP process, you will understand "Picking products based on feature checklists" is commonly being done to compare software products because if you don't provide the feature that your competitors provide, you are pretty much out of the competition.

I migrated our entire fleet to Fleetsmith a few weeks ago, largely due to their third-party catalog and features like Chrome extension deployment.

All third-party apps have now been pulled and we have virtually no fleet management.

Happy for them, but it's painful for us. Classic Apple move.


Ok. So what exactly happens to Fleetsmith's coveted ISO 27001 and SOC 2 certifications? Barely four months ago Jesse Endahl promised: [0]

"Achieving compliance with the SOC 2 and ISO 27001 standards means that we are committed not just this year or the next — we are committed to operating our business in compliance with these standards every year going forward. Our auditors will request evidence to prove that we’ve continued to follow the policies, processes, and technical controls we’ve put in place on an annual basis. We look forward to demonstrating, year after year, that we’re worthy of your trust.

To get access to our SOC 2 report and ISO 27001 certificate, get in touch at sales@fleetsmith.com."

Apple has an ISO 27001 certification for Apple Business Manager, but I don't exactly see them being so hot on an independent CPA auditing their accounting practices for an AICPA certifications.

Personally, I think Fleetsmith being under Apple's control (a full service MDM solution provided solely by Apple), renders these certifications meaningless.

But hey, do you think if I email sales@fleetsmith.com, they'll be happy send me Apple's ISO 270XX certifications now?

0: https://blog.fleetsmith.com/soc-2-iso-27001/


Nothing changes. No matter what certification, there’s a scope of what parts of the business and product are in and out of scope of the audit. Fleetsmith having SOC2 doesn’t bring the rest of Apple into scope

And, in the interest of full disclosure, the only real reason I commented at all: I was following the some of the "advice" at "https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12897921" in hopes of being able to gain all of one additional karma, so I can verify this account with Keybase.

Guess I'll try writing something in LISP instead...

Sorry, perhaps I was a bit too pithy in the way I phrased that. I wasn't trying to call into question the certifications, as they were conducted, at the time they were conducted, or implying their scope would change. What I was (perhaps too snarkily) trying to point out is that by unifying—vertically integrating—a previously independent MDM provider with the company that provides the MDM platform, that the promise "we are committed to operating our business in compliance with these standards every year going forward" is highly questionable at this point, unless Apple is committed to maintaining Fleetsmith's independence. Perhaps I should loosen my point even further by asking: how many more papers like https://i.blackhat.com/us-18/Thu-August-9/us-18-Endahl-A-Dee... should we expect Mr. Endahl to be releasing in the future?

It is infuriating to see the entire investment we put into adopting and setting up Fleetsmith in our company to be done and they didn't even have the decency to send an email to tell us that. We had to find out here that this happened.

Next time when you want to sign up for a VC backed service, remember how many times they pushed the companies behind the tools we use to this end leaving us holding the can.


Is Apple planning to really go in on the enterprise usage? This aquisition, locking down access behind T2, notary notifications of everything in Catalina. I've not seen that direction in marketing yet, not it's like they started putting the foundations in place.

Only tangentially related, but if you're looking for a sufficiently challenging development project the iOS MDM protocol is a great one. It's well-documented, so you're not stuck banging your head against a wall. It lends itself to microservices very well, and is explicitly asynchronous for a lot of operations. I spent a week or so writing one in Java (and later ported to server-side Swift) and found it moderately challenging and a lot of fun to write.

I'll throw out there that I work for JumpCloud. We just launched our MDM service for Macs on top of the remote management of Macs we've supported for almost eight years now, and continue to support Windows, and Linux systems as well. If you manage a heterogeneous fleet you should check us out. (Or honestly, I think we're pretty great in homogeneous envs too).

Accounts with less than 10 users are free.

https://jumpcloud.com

EDIT: Clarified that we've been remotely managing macs or the better part of a decade. The MDM piece is the new one.


Just visited your site and now my title bar (tab name) is flashing "(1) New Message!"

Definitely not interested in your product now. Just FYI.


Thank these guys: https://www.drift.com/

Never heard of them before, and will definitely avoid them in the future. How obnoxious.


I don't really understand it either, but it does give way better attach rates. A lot of B2B clients seem really into it.

I’m not sure I understand. They like being tricked into thinking there’s a message for them?

They like clicking and talking to someone real in a chat like application, and like having the option extremely clearly marked.

I like chatting with support via that sort of widget, too. I've used it many times, and it is far superior to the old popup window chat interface.

However, I've never noticed those widgets lying to me and claiming that I've got a message waiting for me in order to steal my attention.


There's a difference between the normal support chat, and making it very very clear that you can chat before you even have an account or any real relationship with us.

Lol. There sure is. I'm also sure there is a way to do that without returning to one of the most-hated browser abuses of the 1990's.

That sounds great, however, 'just launched' doesn't sound too promising.

In addition, I'm not sure whether you are GDPR-compliant as claimed at https://jumpcloud.com/gdpr. Where's your Privacy Shield certification and who's your EU representative according to art. 27 GDPR?


> That sounds great, however, 'just launched' doesn't sound too promising.

Just launched, as it's been out for months, and working very well. And we've been at the forefront of remotely managing Mac systems for years prior to this, we just anticipate that Macs will continue to be locked down in a way that will remove the ability for management software to continue to do it's job if it isn't tightly integrated with MDM.

> Where's your Privacy Shield certification

https://jumpcloud.com/blog/jumpcloud-supports-eu-data-protec...

> who's your EU representative according to art. 27 GDPR

I'm not sure about the specifics of our GDPR compliance just being an engineer on a portion of the product that isn't in the backend, but can look into it and get back to you if you like. If you'd prefer to go through our main channels without an account sales@jumpcloud.com answers these questions.

Edit: It's unfortunate you're being downvoted for asking totally valid questions. I upvoted you to try and counteract it a bit.


The blog is problematic. It came out pre-GDPR and doesn't reference GDPR.

It also has incorrect statements: "A simple attestation by the company along with referencing Privacy Shield creates compliance": No, really it does not.

So yes, would advise you to get a real DPO and Art 27 Rep in. They aren't expensive and with CCPA present now too, will likely be a good investment.


The blog poost is more an explanation about why we went to the EU Model Clause structure rather than Privacy Shield, and less a real explanation of Privacy Shield.

Our DPO can be reached at dpo@jumpcloud.com as is listed in our GDPR documentation above.

And (and to be clear this me me speaking, not the company, we've got a lot of brouhaha going on with WWDC, etc), but my understanding is that you don't need an Art 27 Rep if you have a physical presence in the EU and specify have a contactable DPO.


Privacy shield is an ALTERNATIVE method of to GDPR compliance for legal controls (other alternatives are SCCs/BCRs etc). US companies can either do Privacy Shield or implement GDPR themselves.

You are correct on their lack of an Art 27 Rep however.


Good news! I trust Apple with user privacy a lot more than the horde of "Device Management" solutions lately that are full of grotesque privacy violations.

A world in which an IT person or contractor is able to run amok with random bash scripts on a user's laptop in the name of "device management", without any controls whatsoever is horrible for privacy.


I worked with Zach and Ken back at Wikia. They were great to work with! When Zach showed me the first version of Fleetsmith I was beyond impressed and knew he had discovered a very cool market opportunity. It's really nice to see their efforts get recognized in such a fantastic manner. Way to go!

May be a silly question.

Does that mean JAMF is dead? I dont see how there would be a large enough market left once Apple enter the field to sustain their business.


Does this mean they might get into the MDM full service game and add testpilot to it?

Can't not see the favicon they have is Ghost's instead of their logo.

It appears to be fixed.

Congrats!



Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: