AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple offers new Mac Pro Server configuration to replace Xserve
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple offers new Mac Pro Server configuration to replace Xserve - Page 2

post #41 of 199
11/5/10 at 9:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Yes... and because of it they are doing so poorly. Best you give them a call to make them aware of their failures.

Yes, they are doing poorly, in the enterprise market. They are evidently aware of it, and are bailing out instead of fixing it.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 199
11/5/10 at 9:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra View Post

And I'm going to jam that into the 2U space in my rack how????

Sideways with a large hammer?
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #43 of 199
11/5/10 at 9:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra View Post

Enjoy playing Bejeweled on your iPhone when you're forced to switch to Windows when Apple drops their PC business altogether....

You assume Windows will still be around when that scenario happens.
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #44 of 199
11/5/10 at 9:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

Just what happen if Next Mac Pro can be Rackmounted with some magic?

The most important question is what will Apple use for their Own Datacenter. They Definitely wont be using their old Xserve. A Pile a Mac Mini, or something big coming up?

I hope something big is coming up. You can mount an Mac Pro, even horizontally, but you don't get many of the features of Xserve, namely the rack density savings, hardware redundancy, better RAID options, LOM and more.

Even a better Server version of the Pro would be better. An option for redundant PSU right in the box (swap out the optical cage for another PSU, side by side.).
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 199
11/5/10 at 9:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Sideways with a large hammer?

Reply
Reply
post #46 of 199
11/5/10 at 9:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDreamworx View Post

The only thing nice was the 19" mount..

And Lights-Out-Management, and redundant power supplies. Neither the Mac mini nor the Mac Pro can match those features.

Someone else mentioned that Xserves make great departmental or small business servers, and that is precisely what the small company I work for uses one for. The idea of having to manage a Dell or HP server gives me nightmares, considering how awesome it is managing my Xserve. But,

Oh well, good-bye Xserve!
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 199
11/5/10 at 9:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwatson View Post

Yes, they are doing poorly, in the enterprise market. They are evidently aware of it, and are bailing out instead of fixing it.

Hey... not everyone can be as proficient as you in business... spending $10 to make a buck.
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
post #48 of 199
11/5/10 at 10:27am
Actually I heard Apple's official transition strategy is to suggest XServe customers just string a bunch of iPads in parallel as a replacement...
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 199
11/5/10 at 10:32am
Apple's been known to surprise before. This could be a prelude to something else they are going to introduce.

iServer anyone? Maybe they will introduce a server that's more integrated with iOS? Perhaps allow it to serve internal iOS apps in the enterprise? One never knows.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 199
11/5/10 at 10:37am
If Apple is still using Mac OS X, it's unlikely for users in server side to adopt it. Although I love Mac OS so much, thousands of stuffs are Linux only. I have no energy to port all of them to Mac OS even sometimes only minor codes are to be changed. Furthermore a lot of commercial softwares are binaries only, we only have the Linux version.
Then, Mac OS server version can't get enough resources to catch up with the Linux kernel team. I can't even find KVM port or Xen port to Mac OS. That's essential for any cloud base infrastructure.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 199
11/5/10 at 10:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Or in racks. http://img-cluster1.dannychoo.com/cg...1c7cbaa572.jpg

Apparently there are over 10,000 Mac Minis used as such in Vegas.

Would anybody like to bet against the IT guys that made those decisions? Like the idiots in the last forum.

That sure is a lot of wasted ODDs!

.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #52 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I don't think you know what you're talking about. Apple leaves the room when there is no money to be made. As long as desktops are around and selling, Apple will be making them. They will also likely be making the "best of class" in that market and capturing the top-end money as they do in most markets they play in.

If Apple is leaving the server hardware market, they are leaving it because it makes no money for them and doesn't fit into their strategic plans to the point where it's worth losing the money they aren't making. Did it ever occur to you that maybe the server hardware market is kind of a dying market anyway? IMO all indicators from the last five years or so are that virtualisation is the way forward and that server hardware has become commodified.

We have seen Apple exit from the market where it makes no strategic sense. Xserve Raid was a good indication.

I am not sure I would refer to server hardware being commodified as a reason.That would indicate that Xserve's were a premium product in the enterprise market, which wasn't the case.
If anything, Xserve & Xserve Raid's were quite on the budget side in their pricing, especially when server licensing were part of the equation.

AppleCare was also never up to par with others, like Dell. While I have no love for Dell, their mission-critical server support is bar none. Apple never did manage to build a truly competitive support service offering.

We have virtualized quite a few of our Redhat servers and would like forward to hear anyone describe major benefits of virtualizing Mac OS X server software. Besides licensing costs, that is.

As much as I love Mac OS X, linux distros easily outperform Mac Os X server in database intensive applications and websites (at least when using mySQL) and the user-friendly Server admin falls by the wayside the moment you have to modify versions or configurations via CLI, such as php, mySQl, postfix, etc. which is a requirement, not an option, when running public-facing services.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by malax View Post

I'd bet money against that proposition. The iPhone was successful because it has a completely different UX than Mac (or anything that came before). iOS isn't "better" than Mac OS X; it's a different OS for a different purpose.

iOS is OS X == OS X is Mac OS

The basic OS is the same the primary difference is the UI!

More and more features are migrating from Mac OS X to iOS OS X -- the latest is the API/Framework for Midi...

Why would they do that?


More and more features are migrating from iOS OSX to Mac OS X -- one of the more recents is the multi-touch UI.

Why would they do that?


The original iOS was built by taking Mac OS X and stripping out things that were not needed and reimplementing others -- all the while preserving the underlying OS, File System, etc.

That done, they are migrating some of the re-implementations and new features back to Mac OS X.

I suspect the goal is a Universal OS uOS (in Sol's words). I think Apple is implementing it so it contains everything in Mac OS X and iOS OS X,

Then, Apple will repackage the uOS so that when it installs on a device (including a computer), only the modules appropriate to that device get installed.

For example on a Mac with a multitouch screen (in addition to a regular screen) the Touch interface will be installed -- so Mac apps can use an interactive multitouch surface as a light table, drawing tablet, etc.

.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #54 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

that picture was from 2008

VMWare and hardware in general has grown a lot in the last 3 years. i bet this is all being transitioned to one vmware cluster if it hasn't been done already

And they are all there and more since.

Perhaps you need to see something a little later. http://obamapacman.com/2009/10/danis...ple-computers/

But they are not always the fastest:
Quote:
Mac mini Cluster Among World's Slowest Supercomputers

NEWS: red-lobster.it reports:

"(Schio, Italy) After the great worldwide success of Virginia Tech's Big Mac, a new Macintosh cluster has took everybody in the Mac community by storm.

"A supercomputer formed of a cluster of 4 Macintosh Mini has not scored high in the list of the world's fastest clusters, but its performance could still improve, according to the system's architect.

"According to the latest performance figures the Mac mini cluster, nicknamed Quarter Pounder Mac mini Cluster, the system is computing at 1 teraflop. That puts it basically behind every supercomputer in the world, according to the figures posted in a report at the top 500 supercomputers list.

"The Quarter Pounder Mac mini Cluster is turning heads in the low-performance computing world because it has been built for just over 2.000 $, from off-the-shelf Mac mini, in about six hours. Top-ranked supercomputers traditionally cost hundreds of millions of pounds and can take years to construct, and we don't understand why."


Reply
Reply
post #55 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra View Post

Actually I heard Apple's official transition strategy is to suggest XServe customers just string a bunch of iPads in parallel as a replacement...

Yeah, they'll valcro them to the wall and daisy-chain the earplug/microphone ports together.

... It may not offer the best throughput, but, no heat, power or space issues, and there's lots of redundancy!

... Just imagine the status/monitoring display possibilities -- now, that's what I'd call a Video Wall!

.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #56 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDreamworx View Post

The only thing nice was the 19" mount.

What was the reason for putting everything on a single box?
Just buy more Mac minis.

They do fit nicely on 19" shelves.


Poor man's blade chassis.

Curious what Apple plans to use in the new datacenter. I was pretty sure all along that it wasn't going to be xserves.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #57 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:41am
So what's the future of OS X Server? Especially with no true servers to run it on?

Seems to me Apple should update OS X Server to run on ANY server platform.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:44am
I have to say, I am very surprised to learn that Apple dropping a not very successful product that's always been somewhat of an orphan in their lineup variously means that they'll shortly abandon desktop OSes altogether, OS X specifically, that developers will abandon the platform entirely (?), Apple's NC server farms will replace everyone's need for servers, and, of course, the perennial favorite of trolling asshats, they'll concentrate on making "disposable consumer products" (as if the computer industry in general was noted for its preservationist, never toss anything ways).

Oh yeah, and noting that Apple seems to be faring pretty well as of late which suggests that they probably had sound business reasons for the move (in that they're not given to willy-nilly suicidal gestures of the sort being ascribed to them) means you worship Jobs and cannot conceive of him being in error, the great argumentum ad douchebagum of Apple discussion.

Or, as has been pointed out, they made a business decision that they weren't selling enough Xserves to justify the expense. We need better trolls, these ones are broken.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #59 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woode View Post

And Lights-Out-Management, and redundant power supplies. Neither the Mac mini nor the Mac Pro can match those features.

Someone else mentioned that Xserves make great departmental or small business servers, and that is precisely what the small company I work for uses one for. The idea of having to manage a Dell or HP server gives me nightmares, considering how awesome it is managing my Xserve. But,

Oh well, good-bye Xserve!

But for a departmental or small business server, why do you need the rack mounting? A Mac Mini or Mac Pro server will do the job just fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Nope, desktop app developers will do that on their own after the death of the XServe. I give it three to five years before Apple is forced to make a new XServe and Mac Pro with obscenely competitive specs/pricing to get people back before the OS becomes a graveyard.

People like you have been saying that for 20 years.

Here's a clue: desktop app developers couldn't care less about the demise of the xserve. The xserve is designed for running big databases and server functions. They are, by and large, running the same things as Linux or Unix servers. They are NOT generally running desktop apps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

except that mac mini's have no management capabilities and no RAID or hot swappable drives

Might I suggest that you learn something before posting on a topic?

You can easily remotely manage a Mini and Mini Server comes stock with RAID (can be configured as either RAID 1 or 0).


Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

a 1U HP server can take up to 8 hard drives and 192GB of RAM. you'll need a whole rack full of mac minis for that. by the time you pay more money for power, KVM switches, data center space, more racks, you have wasted a lot of money compared to buying Dell/HP/IBM servers

So?

What part of "Apple is not interested in that market because it has become too commoditized and doesn't value Apple's core strengths' don't you understand?

BTW, you'd be a fool to try to do that with a Mini Server. Use a Mac Pro server. It won't handle 8 hard drives or 192 GB, but it's more than adequate for most users (I'd be surprised if HP can put 8 hard drives and 192 GB into a 1U server, either, btw).

Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

and $1500 will buy me a 5 year 24x7 4 hour warranty from HP. with a mac mini i have to take it to an apple store for simple things like replacing hard drives

Or, for $999, you can simply have a spare Mac Mini server lying around. If it breaks, you restore with Time Machine and you're ready to go.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 199
11/5/10 at 11:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwatson View Post

Yes, they are doing poorly, in the enterprise market. They are evidently aware of it, and are bailing out instead of fixing it.

Yeah! The cowards! How dare they pick and choose what markets they compete in!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #61 of 199
11/5/10 at 12:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You can easily remotely manage a Mini and Mini Server comes stock with RAID (can be configured as either RAID 1 or 0).

Except nobody uses those configs in datacenters. Everyone wants RAID-10 or RAID-50. Also you can't put an iSCSI card in it either, so SAN is out as well.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #62 of 199
11/5/10 at 12:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Poor man's blade chassis.

Curious what Apple plans to use in the new datacenter. I was pretty sure all along that it wasn't going to be xserves.

You'd be amazed at how many Mac Minis fit in 1,000,000 square feet with high ceilings. They'll just pop in a new one every time someone signs up. Your own personal cloud server. It'll be built out like a robotic tape library, of course, so it's not like someone has to actually climb a ladder to install or service your server.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 199
11/5/10 at 12:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post

xserve's don't scale up

HP/Dell servers can take more hard drives and RAM. with Apple you have to buy more servers which is a lot more expensive

and profit margins are dropping on servers. the profits are in services now.

Hard drives and Ram is not scaling.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 199
11/5/10 at 12:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

But for a departmental or small business server, why do you need the rack mounting? A Mac Mini or Mac Pro server will do the job just fine.



People like you have been saying that for 20 years.

Here's a clue: desktop app developers couldn't care less about the demise of the xserve. The xserve is designed for running big databases and server functions. They are, by and large, running the same things as Linux or Unix servers. They are NOT generally running desktop apps.



Might I suggest that you learn something before posting on a topic?

You can easily remotely manage a Mini and Mini Server comes stock with RAID (can be configured as either RAID 1 or 0).




So?

What part of "Apple is not interested in that market because it has become too commoditized and doesn't value Apple's core strengths' don't you understand?

BTW, you'd be a fool to try to do that with a Mini Server. Use a Mac Pro server. It won't handle 8 hard drives or 192 GB, but it's more than adequate for most users (I'd be surprised if HP can put 8 hard drives and 192 GB into a 1U server, either, btw).



Or, for $999, you can simply have a spare Mac Mini server lying around. If it breaks, you restore with Time Machine and you're ready to go.

Correct.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 199
11/5/10 at 12:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I have to say, I am very surprised to learn that Apple dropping a not very successful product that's always been somewhat of an orphan in their lineup variously means that they'll shortly abandon desktop OSes altogether, OS X specifically, that developers will abandon the platform entirely (?), Apple's NC server farms will replace everyone's need for servers, and, of course, the perennial favorite of trolling asshats, they'll concentrate on making "disposable consumer products" (as if the computer industry in general was noted for its preservationist, never toss anything ways).

Oh yeah, and noting that Apple seems to be faring pretty well as of late which suggests that they probably had sound business reasons for the move (in that they're not given to willy-nilly suicidal gestures of the sort being ascribed to them) means you worship Jobs and cannot conceive of him being in error, the great argumentum ad douchebagum of Apple discussion.

Or, as has been pointed out, they made a business decision that they weren't selling enough Xserves to justify the expense. We need better trolls, these ones are broken.


A call for better trolls

.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #66 of 199
11/5/10 at 12:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stju View Post

This isn't clear for me... Why on the hardware that is intended to work as a server there is a video card with 1Gb of RAM ???? Looks like the new server standard for installing OS

So if you are using that you would need to have some kind of video card. We have an Xserve set up in a FCS system that is just doing that.
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 199
11/5/10 at 12:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

You'd be amazed at how many Mac Minis fit in 1,000,000 square feet with high ceilings. They'll just pop in a new one every time someone signs up. Your own personal cloud server. It'll be built out like a robotic tape library, of course, so it's not like someone has to actually climb a ladder to install or service your server.

Just working with round numbers 60 million.

4 sq ft rack foot print, 10' high each shelf holds front and back = 24 Minis for a total of 240 Minis per rack. 1 million divided by 4 x 240 = 60 million

just a guess check my math

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #68 of 199
11/5/10 at 12:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Just working with round numbers 806 million.

4 sq ft rack foot print, 10' high each shelf holds front and back = 24 Minis for a total of 3,224 Minis per rack. 1 million divided by 4 x 3,224 = 806 million

Exactly, and if you go, say, 15' high, you can easily fit a billion in, although, you have to leave a little room for the robots. But, still, more than enough for one Mac Mini per customer. Just think of the economies of scale they will achieve on the Mini!
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 199
11/5/10 at 1:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Exactly, and if you go, say, 15' high, you can easily fit a billion in, although, you have to leave a little room for the robots. But, still, more than enough for one Mac Mini per customer. Just think of the economies of scale they will achieve on the Mini!

Actually my math needs some work, slight mis calculation, but it would be better with real blades and virtualization anyway, you could probably serve way more customers in the same cubic space.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #70 of 199
11/5/10 at 1:05pm
For those of us who have been running Apple's XServe for years, this news, while not entirely unexpected after Apple discontinuing the XRAID in 2008, is pretty damn bad. Mac Pros and (lol) Mac Minis are not an option in the data center.

We've been having an emergency meeting about this and we've decided that playing catch up with Apple's lack of stability and Steve Jobs' mood swings all the time (Classic->OSX, PPC->Intel, Software, software, software and now this) is just not worth the cost any more and we'll be transitioning to Windows in the next two years, on the client side as well.

I'm pretty sad about this, but the plus side is that we won't have to deal with Apple's (lack of) support anymore, which sort of makes it less painful.
Ja sam probam
Reply
Ja sam probam
Reply
post #71 of 199
11/5/10 at 1:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Exactly, and if you go, say, 15' high, you can easily fit a billion in, although, you have to leave a little room for the robots. But, still, more than enough for one Mac Mini per customer. Just think of the economies of scale they will achieve on the Mini!

Then, once they've achieved one to one parity for every customer, they announce the most ambitious distributed service ever conceived: they ship each Mini to its associated user so they can operated it right in their own home! Genius!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #72 of 199
11/5/10 at 1:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by theolein View Post

...not worth the cost any more and we'll be transitioning to Windows in the next two years, on the client side as well.

I'm pretty sad about this, but the plus side is that we won't have to deal with Apple's (lack of) support anymore, which sort of makes it less painful.

What kind of applications are you running? Wouldn't it be easier to stick with some unix flavor than to reinvent your whole software landscape to transition to Windows?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #73 of 199
11/5/10 at 1:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Actually my math needs some work, slight mis calculation, but it would be better with real blades and virtualization anyway, you could probably serve way more customers in the same cubic space.

Well, sure, but where's the fun in that, especially since there are no robots in that scenario?
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 199
11/5/10 at 1:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Then, once they've achieved one to one parity for every customer, they announce the most ambitious distributed service ever conceived: they ship each Mini to its associated user so they can operated it right in their own home! Genius!

Only if I get a robot, too.

Reply
Reply
post #75 of 199
11/5/10 at 1:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

But for a departmental or small business server, why do you need the rack mounting? A Mac Mini or Mac Pro server will do the job just fine.

The lights-out management, the dual power supplies perhaps? Let me guess, you don't know what lights-out management is, do you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Might I suggest that you learn something before posting on a topic?

You can easily remotely manage a Mini and Mini Server comes stock with RAID (can be configured as either RAID 1 or 0).

Oh man. RAID 0 and RAID 1 are for end users, not for data centers. Most data centers run with hybrid RAID 50 or 60 etc. We're not talking about your home office here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

What part of "Apple is not interested in that market because it has become too commoditized and doesn't value Apple's core strengths' don't you understand?

I don't blame Apple for leaving a market they were competing badly in (mostly for lack of trying, IMO)). It would, however, have been nice if Apple had been a little bit more consistent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

BTW, you'd be a fool to try to do that with a Mini Server. Use a Mac Pro server. It won't handle 8 hard drives or 192 GB, but it's more than adequate for most users (I'd be surprised if HP can put 8 hard drives and 192 GB into a 1U server, either, btw).

You don't know how dumb you make yourself look with comments like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Or, for $999, you can simply have a spare Mac Mini server lying around. If it breaks, you restore with Time Machine and you're ready to go.

Time Machine is an end user/home user backup tool. It's not something that you would use in a data center, where the requirements are at another level entirely.
Ja sam probam
Reply
Ja sam probam
Reply
post #76 of 199
11/5/10 at 1:46pm
Who needs servers when the Cloud thingy is coming.
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 199
11/5/10 at 2:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Who the hell inferred anything about success in the enterprise.

I guess you're inferring that Jobs and his team make their decisions by throwing darts at a board.

No, you just dismiss the failures because of the successes, as if being successful at servers would be a bad thing.
They had a product in XServe, but never really realized it's potential. Shitty SLAs, blah hardware choices, and expensive. More of a hobby. I'm not saying they throw darts at a board, I'm saying they had a product that made people think they would evolve into the enterprise market, and failed at it.
You are saying "who cares", which I get, I just don't understand how you can say it in this thread. The thread is about the death of Xserves, Apple's only mediocre attempt at rack servers. Steve obviously knows how shitty of a job they were doing with them, and that's why they're dead.

No need to be a douche about it....I'm guessing your island is Manhattan?
Reply
Reply
post #78 of 199
11/5/10 at 2:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by technohermit View Post

No, you just dismiss the failures because of the successes, as if being successful at servers would be a bad thing.

No need to be a douche about it....I'm guessing your island is Manhattan?

... and who is calling who names...

You're dismissed...
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
We know where you are. We know where youve been. We can more or less know what youre thinking about. - Eric Schmidt
Reply
post #79 of 199
11/5/10 at 2:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

... and who is calling who names...

You're dismissed...

Reply
Reply
post #80 of 199
11/5/10 at 3:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DimMok View Post

Who needs servers when the Cloud thingy is coming.

How is the cloud formed again?

This is just verifying that Apple wants no part of 24x7 immediate support contracts. They want to sell simple hardware warranties, not enterprise level service contracts. Which is too bad, there is certainly money to be made in that respect.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple offers new Mac Pro Server configuration to replace Xserve