‍

Your IT stack decision shouldn't be made in a vacuum. Whether your business runs primarily on Mac or Windows fundamentally changes which productivity platform will serve you best—and the stakes are higher than most realise.

The bottom line

Microsoft 365 dominates Windows environments with deep system integration and superior enterprise features, while Google Workspace offers consistent cross-platform performance that levels the playing field for Mac-heavy businesses.

However, the choice has become more nuanced in 2025 as both platforms have evolved dramatically, pricing models shifted, and enterprise Mac adoption accelerated by 20% year-over-year. The operating system divide creates real performance gaps, hidden costs, and workflow friction that can make or break your team's productivity.

Mac-focused creative agencies face different trade-offs than Windows-dominated manufacturing companies. Here's what matters when choosing your productivity platform.

Platform performance reveals the hidden divide

Microsoft 365's Windows advantage is overwhelming.

Native desktop applications integrate with Windows Active Directory, leverage Windows Hello authentication, and provide full offline functionality without setup. The performance difference is measurable, 64-bit Office versions are 2x faster than 32-bit on Windows, and SSD storage delivers 2x faster application launch times.

Windows users get features Mac users don't

Access database applications, Publisher for marketing materials, and deep SharePoint integration that maps libraries as local drives. Most importantly, Windows 10 end-of-support in October 2025 creates a migration opportunity that smart IT leaders are already planning around.

Google Workspace delivers the opposite promise

Identical functionality across every platform. A Mac user in your creative department has the exact same experience as your Windows-based accounting team. This consistency eliminates training overhead and reduces support complexity, but at the cost of platform-specific optimisation.

The web-based architecture means Google Workspace works the same whether your team uses MacBook Airs, Dell laptops, or Chromebooks. For businesses with mixed hardware environments, this uniformity provides significant operational advantages—no version compatibility issues, no platform-specific feature gaps.

Mac users face a crucial decision point

Microsoft 365 for Mac has improved dramatically with native Apple Silicon support, but still lacks Windows-exclusive features and receives updates after the Windows version. Google Workspace provides identical functionality but sacrifices the deep system integration that makes productivity tools feel native.

‍

Device management complexity multiplies across platforms

JAMF integration reveals the enterprise reality‍

Organisations serious about Mac deployment need JAMF Pro for comprehensive device management—Google Workspace requires this external tool, while Microsoft 365 can work with either JAMF or its native Intune platform.

The Microsoft-JAMF partnership since 2017 provides the most sophisticated enterprise solution: JAMF handles Mac-specific management whilst feeding compliance data to Microsoft Intune for conditional access policies. This hybrid approach costs more but delivers enterprise-grade security that neither platform achieves alone.

Apple Business Manager compatibility

Highlights another divide. Microsoft 365 offers more mature federation capabilities with OIDC (Open ID Connect) and SCIM support for automated user provisioning. Google Workspace provides direct federated authentication but requires iOS 15.5+ and macOS 12.4+ minimum versions.

Windows environments get comprehensive device management through Microsoft Intune included in enterprise licensing. Mac environments require additional JAMF licensing that typically costs £8-15 per device monthly. This creates a real TCO difference that many organisations underestimate during initial planning.

The hybrid solution works best for mixed environments‍

JAMF Pro for Mac devices, Microsoft Intune for Windows computers, with unified identity management through Azure AD or Google Cloud Identity. But this complexity requires dedicated IT resources that smaller organisations may lack.

‍

‍

Workflow differences that impact productivity

Real-time collaboration

This is where Google Workspace excels universally. Multiple users editing documents simultaneously with visible changes works identically across Mac and Windows. Microsoft 365's collaboration features are more sophisticated but can be sluggish in desktop apps when displaying real-time updates from other users.

Offline capabilities create the biggest workflow friction

Microsoft 365 desktop applications work fully offline with automatic sync—a massive advantage for field workers, frequent travellers, or anyone with unreliable internet. Google Workspace requires Chrome browser with offline extensions configured in advance, and complex formatting may be lost during sync.

Creative workflow integration

Heavily favours platform-specific choices. Google Workspace offers native Adobe Creative Cloud integration that works seamlessly across platforms. Microsoft 365 provides limited creative tool integration and focuses primarily on business applications.

Mac-based creative agencies benefit from Google Workspace's universal compatibility with their existing Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro, and Adobe workflows. The web-based approach eliminates file format compatibility issues that plague mixed Mac/Windows environments using Microsoft Office formats.

‍

Cost realities changed dramatically in 2025

Google Workspace raised prices 17-22% across all plans‍

Whilst including Gemini AI features that previously cost extra. Business Standard jumped from £12 to £14 per user monthly, but now includes full AI capabilities that would cost additional fees with Microsoft.

Microsoft 365 implemented a 5% surcharge

Annual plans billed monthly (effective April 2025) and unbundled Teams, adding £5.25 per user monthly for new customers. The total cost impact varies significantly by organisation size and payment structure.

Volume licensing creates real differences

For larger organisations. Microsoft provides 15-45% discounts for 500+ users through Enterprise Agreements, whilst Google Workspace has limited volume pricing and caps Business plans at 300 users.

Total cost of ownership studies show Google Workspace typically provides 15-25% lower TCO for small businesses under 50 users, close parity for medium businesses, but Microsoft 365 often costs less for large enterprises due to volume discounts and reduced third-party tool requirements.

‍

Security architectures reveal philosophical differences

Microsoft 365's security advantage

Comes from deep Windows integration. Windows Defender, BitLocker encryption management, Windows Hello authentication, and system-level features like Credential Guard provide comprehensive endpoint protection that Google Workspace cannot match on Windows systems.

Google's BeyondCorp zero-trust model

Works consistently across all platforms without requiring OS-specific agents or configurations. This approach provides uniform security posture whether users work on Mac, Windows, or Chromebook devices, simplifying management but sacrificing platform-specific protections.

Mac security integration

Favours Microsoft 365 significantly. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint on macOS provides comprehensive protection with FileVault integration, whilst Google Workspace offers limited Mac-specific security features beyond browser-level protections.

‍

Strategic recommendations for different business types

Mac-focused creative agencies should choose Google Workspace

For consistent cross-platform experience, superior Adobe Creative Cloud integration, and simplified IT management. The recent price increases still provide better value than Microsoft 365 plus required additional tools.

Windows-dominated enterprises benefit most from Microsoft 365

Due to deep system integration, comprehensive compliance tools, and volume licensing advantages for organisations over 500 users. The unified security platform reduces third-party tool requirements.

Mixed environments require careful consideration

The Microsoft-JAMF partnership provides the most sophisticated enterprise solution but requires higher IT expertise and budget. Google Workspace offers operational simplicity but may require additional security tools for comprehensive protection.

Small businesses under 50 users

Typically benefit from Google Workspace's lower TCO and reduced management complexity, whilst large enterprises over 500 users should evaluate Microsoft 365's volume discounts and advanced enterprise features.

Platform ecosystem drives the decision

The choice between Google Workspace and Microsoft 365 isn't about feature comparison—it's about ecosystem alignment and strategic priorities. Microsoft 365 provides superior value for Windows-centric organisations willing to invest in comprehensive enterprise features, whilst Google Workspace offers operational simplicity and consistent cross-platform experience that particularly benefits Mac-heavy creative businesses.

The Windows 10 end-of-support deadline in October 2025 creates a strategic opportunity for organisations to reconsider their entire productivity stack. Whether you upgrade to Windows 11, migrate to Mac, or adopt a mixed environment will fundamentally influence which productivity platform serves your business best.

Your hardware choices and productivity platform should reinforce each other, not create friction. The most successful deployments align platform strengths with business requirements rather than chasing feature checklists or following market trends.