Originally Posted by screamingfist
that was freebsd and what is amusing about it?
It's amusing because linux proponents invariably talk about server share and linux dominance while the top tier providers without an ideological ax to grind appear to choose bsd for better stability and uptime.
its a good operating system. whats amusing is i see nothing with os x server.
OS X server isn't something likely to show up on netcraft or used as ISP machines (mini colo being one of the few exceptions). It targets the same market as Windows Small Business Server and supports apple shops that do a lot of content creation on xserves.
Web servers aren't the only kind of servers. Given that web servers are commodity servers anyway I have no idea why anyone would expect Apple to compete in this market at all.
apple doesn't really care about enterprise. i have pleaded with engineer for some apple competition for exchange. he suggested 'xythos'.
Apple cares about enterprise...recent improvements in iOS for the enterprise shows this. It just doesn't care to go toe to toe against Microsoft in its exchange/ad/sharepoint stronghold.
That said, Apple does provide lightweight alternatives that can serve the small business market. A small business user can happily run without exchange with just the stuff in SLS.
google runs on linux.
hotmail,live runs on windows (took them forever to get off of freebds though)
those are huge systems.
So? You could run huge web systems on OS X Server if you wanted to. Not sure why you would want to because of cost but are you implying that you couldn't?
freebsd is a good choice for companies that want to use the code and then not share what they build on top of it.
Right...you mean like Google? Wake me when they release their internal version of Linux...ain't going to happen. Even the FSF is afraid of Google...or GPL3 would have had the afferro clauses embedded as the purists wanted.
Freebsd is a good choice period if you aren't going to go with RHEL or SLES. And the primary reason to go with RHEL or SLES is a solid service contract. IMHO the reason folks choose Linux over BSD for servers is either personal preference or ignorance. There's no compelling technical reason to choose Linux over BSD IMO.
As far as open permissive licenses vs closed copyleft license give me open permissive licenses any day of the week but that is personal preference.
oh and apple doesn't have a web server does it? oh thats right, apache. why didn't they 'invent' their own?
Apache is Apache 2.0 license (permissive) and not GPL...so I guess from your perspective it's a good choice for companies that want to use the code and then not share what they build on top of it.
In any case, Apple didn't build it's userland either. It's largely taken from FreeBSD. Nor did they build CUPS (but now support it) or webkit. They didn't invent their own web server because there is no reason to.
I'm not even sure what your point is.