I certainly didn't expect that. But it makes sense for a home media server, or for a small business. Considering that Mac OS X Server by itself is half the cost of the machine, that's really not a bad deal at all. Apple ought to push this hard for small business customers; Windows SBS costs nearly as much as this bundle ($700 or so last time I checked -- for five client licenses only).
WIth unlimited clients, Apple could leverage Mac Mini Servers to create a whole new class of customers in the small retailer, service, and restaurant industries.
The Mac Mini is perfect as a server for small businesses and maybe iPhone/software developers looking for inexpensive server. Actually, the Mini has been used as a server for long time now. Check this out.
The main thing which holds the Mac Mini back from being a decent home media server is the fact that the internal hard drive is not easily upgradable. I know I've said in the past that modifying the Mini isn't much more difficult than modifying a PC, but increasing/adding hard drive space is something which is done frequently enough on servers to warrant the need for it to be as easy as possible (i.e. not require putty knives and patience).
And there's no eSATA port to allow external hard drives to be connected at speeds which are the same as the internal drive. Sorry, but FireWire 800 is still too slow when dealing with large video files (think 1080p). I still don't get what Apple has against eSATA...
Not sure I agree. I use a Mini as a HT machine and I have 1080p ripped BR movies on a FW800 drive. It plays perfectly fine. In fact I can copy files to that drive and still play an HD movie without a skip.
Would it have killed them to at least put a *better* laptop video card in the mini?
I wish they'd dump the 500GB second drive, swap out the 500GB for a $750GB drive and make the box wider, a bit longer and give me a second GPGPU for use as an affordable OpenCL option.
A full PC-E x16 double slot would have been nice so one can put in an ATI-5800 series card or Nvidia.
Not sure I agree. I use a Mini as a HT machine and I have 1080p ripped BR movies on a FW800 drive. It plays perfectly fine. In fact I can copy files to that drive and still play an HD movie without a skip.
Sure, buffering takes care of smoothing out slower data transfers while playing video.
However copying 10+GB video files on a regular basis over an 800Mbit/s connection just feels like wasted time to me now that I'm used to 3000Mbit/s.
It's nice to have the assurance that the Mini is here to stay. It does make for a nice server box but they should have addressed the upgradeability issues.
The problem they have now with dropping the price to $499 is that it would precisely contradict what Steve Jobs said:
"What we want to do is deliver an increasing level of value to these customers, but there are some customers which we choose not to serve. We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk; our DNA will not let us do that."
That extra $100 makes all the difference between junk and a "little powerhouse".
On a laptop, I agree. But it doesn't matter for a server machine which never moves.
Quote:
2. No power or ability to run any other devices other than SATA drives.
Again, for a server, finding plugins isn't a problem. And why would I care about connecting a pro audio/video device to a server (about the only other devices which Firewire is used for)?
Quote:
3. Already legacy pretty much with 6Gbps SATA coming it makes no sense to add current eSATA
6Gbps doesn't make a difference for a single drive since you've already hit the wall for how fast current hard drives can transfer data. Only for external RAIDs does it start to make sense.
Quote:
It's a limited connection and since Apple prefers svelte designs keepin the port total low is what they tend to skew towards.
Svelte doesn't make any difference when it's locked away in a server room.
I'd agree with all of your points if Apple weren't marketing the Mini as a low-cost server.
Wow. The server option is great. Two gigabit Ethernet ports would have been cool (iSCSI DroboPro, or firewall capabilities. Competes with a Dell rackmount server, but could save you the rack.
Now all Apple needs to do is make the software seemless for a 3-50 person office and they can easily take on both MS SBS and Linux. Maybe a few ads, genius info, and VAR linkage and they really have something! (The X-Serve [c/w]ould work for most of these companies, buti think it was too intimidating of a solution.)
I don't think people realize how huge this really is.
If we're strictly talking about storage then eSATA really isn't in the equation.
Servers attached to external storage are dominated by
Ethernet connections and NAS or SAN or a combination of both.
The Mac mini server + DroboPro would be perfect for a SMB.
So with only one ethernet port, how do you also connect your Mini to your network so that it can actually act as a server? And don't say the Firewire port...
And yes, you could use a separate router, but then you're still stuck with the problem that the Mini needs to access both the Drobo and the network at the same time. Thus limiting the amount of data which can, for instance, be read from the Drobo and then streamed to other devices on your network at the same time.
Edit: ok, right, use FW800 for the Drobo. But then we still have the problem that FW800 doesn't maximize the speed of accessing files on your storage device, which is where I started.
So with only one ethernet port, how do you also connect your Mini to your network so that it can actually act as a server? And don't say the Firewire port...
Run it into a switch, add a NAS or DroboPro, add a time capsule for Wifi and tertiary storage and perhaps Cloud storage a la Dropbox. Voila
Stuff like Addressbook server Mobile Access Server and improved email and calendar make
this the right time to deliver a mini based Server.
I've been clamoring for an affordable server from Apple and they've finally delivered. I imagine the tie in with a potential tablet and the affordability of setting up push email/calendaring will make the sales of this product explode.
Run it into a switch, add a NAS or DroboPro, add a time capsule for Wifi and tertiary storage and perhaps Cloud storage a la Dropbox. Voila
Disaster Recovery for SMB.
If you had a DroboPro, wouldn't it be cheaper to just add a DroboShare and forgo the Mini altogether? (Edit: Just noticed that the DroboShare doesn't work with the DroboPro)
What I'm talking about is using the Mini as the all-in-one solution (both storage and server). Which is I assume what Apple is also intending...
Comments
A server model eh?
I certainly didn't expect that. But it makes sense for a home media server, or for a small business. Considering that Mac OS X Server by itself is half the cost of the machine, that's really not a bad deal at all. Apple ought to push this hard for small business customers; Windows SBS costs nearly as much as this bundle ($700 or so last time I checked -- for five client licenses only).
WIth unlimited clients, Apple could leverage Mac Mini Servers to create a whole new class of customers in the small retailer, service, and restaurant industries.
The Mac Mini is perfect as a server for small businesses and maybe iPhone/software developers looking for inexpensive server. Actually, the Mini has been used as a server for long time now. Check this out.
The main thing which holds the Mac Mini back from being a decent home media server is the fact that the internal hard drive is not easily upgradable. I know I've said in the past that modifying the Mini isn't much more difficult than modifying a PC, but increasing/adding hard drive space is something which is done frequently enough on servers to warrant the need for it to be as easy as possible (i.e. not require putty knives and patience).
And there's no eSATA port to allow external hard drives to be connected at speeds which are the same as the internal drive. Sorry, but FireWire 800 is still too slow when dealing with large video files (think 1080p). I still don't get what Apple has against eSATA...
Not sure I agree. I use a Mini as a HT machine and I have 1080p ripped BR movies on a FW800 drive. It plays perfectly fine. In fact I can copy files to that drive and still play an HD movie without a skip.
Would it have killed them to at least put a *better* laptop video card in the mini?
I wish they'd dump the 500GB second drive, swap out the 500GB for a $750GB drive and make the box wider, a bit longer and give me a second GPGPU for use as an affordable OpenCL option.
A full PC-E x16 double slot would have been nice so one can put in an ATI-5800 series card or Nvidia.
This form factor is getting long in the tooth.
Not sure I agree. I use a Mini as a HT machine and I have 1080p ripped BR movies on a FW800 drive. It plays perfectly fine. In fact I can copy files to that drive and still play an HD movie without a skip.
Sure, buffering takes care of smoothing out slower data transfers while playing video.
However copying 10+GB video files on a regular basis over an 800Mbit/s connection just feels like wasted time to me now that I'm used to 3000Mbit/s.
The problem they have now with dropping the price to $499 is that it would precisely contradict what Steve Jobs said:
"What we want to do is deliver an increasing level of value to these customers, but there are some customers which we choose not to serve. We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk; our DNA will not let us do that."
That extra $100 makes all the difference between junk and a "little powerhouse".
1. Shabby connector that doesn't lock
On a laptop, I agree. But it doesn't matter for a server machine which never moves.
2. No power or ability to run any other devices other than SATA drives.
Again, for a server, finding plugins isn't a problem. And why would I care about connecting a pro audio/video device to a server (about the only other devices which Firewire is used for)?
3. Already legacy pretty much with 6Gbps SATA coming it makes no sense to add current eSATA
6Gbps doesn't make a difference for a single drive since you've already hit the wall for how fast current hard drives can transfer data. Only for external RAIDs does it start to make sense.
It's a limited connection and since Apple prefers svelte designs keepin the port total low is what they tend to skew towards.
Svelte doesn't make any difference when it's locked away in a server room.
I'd agree with all of your points if Apple weren't marketing the Mini as a low-cost server.
But why not just put it on the server Mini then?
Light Peek FTW!
Servers attached to external storage are dominated by
Ethernet connections and NAS or SAN or a combination of both.
The Mac mini server + DroboPro would be perfect for a SMB.
I'd personally run two mirrored SSD (SLC) for the boot drive and add an external
NAS via iSCSI.
All could be done for sub $1499 easily.
Light Peek FTW!
Maybe when 3D Atomic Holographic Optical Data Storage also comes of age...
Now all Apple needs to do is make the software seemless for a 3-50 person office and they can easily take on both MS SBS and Linux. Maybe a few ads, genius info, and VAR linkage and they really have something! (The X-Serve [c/w]ould work for most of these companies, buti think it was too intimidating of a solution.)
I don't think people realize how huge this really is.
If we're strictly talking about storage then eSATA really isn't in the equation.
Servers attached to external storage are dominated by
Ethernet connections and NAS or SAN or a combination of both.
The Mac mini server + DroboPro would be perfect for a SMB.
So with only one ethernet port, how do you also connect your Mini to your network so that it can actually act as a server? And don't say the Firewire port...
And yes, you could use a separate router, but then you're still stuck with the problem that the Mini needs to access both the Drobo and the network at the same time. Thus limiting the amount of data which can, for instance, be read from the Drobo and then streamed to other devices on your network at the same time.
Edit: ok, right, use FW800 for the Drobo. But then we still have the problem that FW800 doesn't maximize the speed of accessing files on your storage device, which is where I started.
The Mac mini server + DroboPro would be perfect for a SMB.
How do you do the droboPro with this-- just fw800 and not iscsi?
So with only one ethernet port, how do you also connect your Mini to your network so that it can actually act as a server? And don't say the Firewire port...
Run it into a switch, add a NAS or DroboPro, add a time capsule for Wifi and tertiary storage and perhaps Cloud storage a la Dropbox. Voila
Disaster Recovery for SMB.
The Mac mini server + DroboPro would be perfect for a SMB.
I'd personally run two mirrored SSD (SLC) for the boot drive and add an external
NAS via iSCSI.
All could be done for sub $1499 easily.
I'm looking to switch my business software ( PM and EMR) to Mac software and this *may* be exactly what I'm looking for.
Do you know if the two internal HDDs mirror each other or would I need to buy software to do that?
How do you do the droboPro with this-- just fw800 and not iscsi?
I'm looking to switch my business software ( PM and EMR) to Mac software and this *may* be exactly what I'm looking for.
Do you know if the two internal HDDs mirror each other or would I need to buy software to do that?
backtomac you can use built in RAID utility to set up a mirror without having to spend another nickel.
backtomac you can use built in RAID utility to set up a mirror without having to spend another nickel.
Awesome!
I've contacted my SW vendor to get their opinion on this new mini server but it looks like it'll be ideal for my purposes and the price is right.
http://www.macworld.com/article/1432...rd_server.html
Stuff like Addressbook server Mobile Access Server and improved email and calendar make
this the right time to deliver a mini based Server.
I've been clamoring for an affordable server from Apple and they've finally delivered. I imagine the tie in with a potential tablet and the affordability of setting up push email/calendaring will make the sales of this product explode.
Run it into a switch, add a NAS or DroboPro, add a time capsule for Wifi and tertiary storage and perhaps Cloud storage a la Dropbox. Voila
Disaster Recovery for SMB.
If you had a DroboPro, wouldn't it be cheaper to just add a DroboShare and forgo the Mini altogether? (Edit: Just noticed that the DroboShare doesn't work with the DroboPro)
What I'm talking about is using the Mini as the all-in-one solution (both storage and server). Which is I assume what Apple is also intending...