I was very excited when I read "mac mini server": I was thinking for some time to buy a mac mini as a server at home. However it was not really feasible since the mini does only feature one ethernet port and I need two of them to connect:
- my modem
- my home network
But the new "server" one has the same limitation. And on the top of that, no DVD drive.
Sure, buffering takes care of smoothing out slower data transfers while playing video.
What kind of video is being played that needs buffering over a hard drive or network connection? One stream isn't close to maxing out the practical throughput, leaving plenty of room for other transfers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison
They show that diagram for optimum performance but it's ridiculous. No one wants to separate their network storage on a new switch. I believe the DroboPro will work fine sharing the same switch though it may not perform as well.
That makes sense. I'd still go into one switch however for a small network because I doubt that I'm gonnna need to constantly shuttle 70MBps worth of large data around harming the network performance.
The people that I know that do network storage have a separate network for the storage volumes.
Using the same port for both serving and storage can't be good, you're probably halving the potential of the Drobo that way.
This server is interesting. I wonder if we should have seen it coming that the Mini would be set to be used in a more business fashion when the last update give it USB ports while the iMac only has four but the Mac Pro has five.
I am surprised that they didn?t get SD card slots. Rips my theory to shreds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
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".
Jobs and other CEOs often say they aren?t going to do something right before they do. This case he said they couldn?t, but things may change. He could get on stage and say that they wanted to bring you a cheaper Mini and so they learned how? and other bullshit. The fact is the cheaper you make a machine the higher the profit margin has to be to make the same profit, yet there is usually more competition at the lower end so unless the volume is there it?s not advantageous to go cheaper. I think that there profit margins were just too low at $500, hence the bump up $600 that has stayed. A 20% increase in price can make a difference to your bottom line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1
It appears some here are thinking Apple was out to built an xServe Light and failed. I truly doubt that was their intent at all.
Instead, it appears Apple tackled the question "How do we outfit the current mini so it can be used as a credible server like some are already doing?" You don't start deviating far from the existing mini by making new cases and connectors otherwise you end up with a computer that's not going to cost $999 anymore. I think Apple did the right things to create an under $1000 server that budget-conscience and low-needs server customers are going to find uses for.
I think that is spot on. If they are buying OS X Server for $499, which does come with an authentication code and swapping out the optical drive for a HDD then this may seem like a deal to these customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison
This is really going to be Apple's first foray into high volume server sales.
I expect he Mac mini server (Mss) to exclipse pretty much ever xserve sold to date within 2 years. It's a good product coming at the right time. It may also finally signal that Apple's ready to take things like iTunes and more and eventually offer centralized storage/access.
With an Xserve you really couldn't do that because of cost.
That is an interesting thought. If it is a hit i would expect some variation of the device fairly quickly, perhaps even some of the ports some have been asking for. Do any Mac Minis that were sold and then had OS X Server installed after the fact show up as server sales or just consumer sales?
Does anyone know if you don't get the server option, does it have room for any extra hard drive? Or is the server option a larger case to fit two drives?
I already have the server software and would like to get a new Mini to replace my current server. But, I would want to add my own 2nd drive.
Ahh, I now see. They removed the Disk drive to put the 2nd hard drive in.
The Dual 500GB is DOA for any Server set up. Yes, you want 2 GigE Ethernet ports on any Server, whether for SMB or not.
Apple's asking you to buy a Managed Switch to make any serious use of OS X Server.
Never mind the fact that the Firewall in OS X Server still doesn't touch the options in Linux, but yes this is a 3/4s limp review of a cop out for a Server.
I could see this mainly having appeal as a home server, mainly for Media (Photo's/Music/Videos), but I would think it's appeal as even a small business server is limited.
The Dual 500GB is DOA for any Server set up. Yes, you want 2 GigE Ethernet ports on any Server, whether for SMB or not.
Apple's asking you to buy a Managed Switch to make any serious use of OS X Server.
Never mind the fact that the Firewall in OS X Server still doesn't touch the options in Linux, but yes this is a 3/4s limp review of a cop out for a Server.
Why? Honest question not trying to be a smart ass.
I'm looking to move my practice to Mac software and HW. I would like a simple server with two HDDs that mirror in the event one fails. I would also like to have an external drive that I can take off site each day and then cloud back up.
I would think that this would be pretty good back strategy up for my practice. Am I wrong?
I don't think this is meant to be anything more than a small business or home server. In which case I don't really think the 2nd ethernet port is essential. Most of this target audience is not looking to use it as a firewall/router. They will place it behind their existing router and use it mostly for internal purposes, with the possibility of mail.
I never understand the people that constantly complain when Apple comes out with a great low end product that doesn't have all of the high end features. Take this for what it is priced at, a low end server solution at a great price.
The Mac Mini Server model is perfect for a small business needing only file / print sharing.
if that is all you mean, you can do that with a regular mini.
the server model is so much more. file sharing, print sharing plus shared calenders, address books etc. email server, podcast server, wiki and so on.
for a small business there are so many things. being in video production, my bosses are already Mac Heads, but they spent all afternoon freaking out about the idea of finally having a bonafide internal network for the company. and don't get me started on the dreams of those 27 inch imacs on every desk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm
Here's a question. AppleCare apparently doesn't apply to OS X server. Is any other support included? For a less technical user setting up their own server for the first time this may be a critical issue.
you might want to do some exploring on the apple website
Still tempting, but not quite there. Apple desperately needs to get their DVR system out finally. It's absence shows terribly in the AppleTV and Mac Mini. The only explanation for the delay can be pressure from the TV companies for Apple to stay out of the DVR market.
For the entry level mini specs, the price really should be sub $500 like it used to be too.
Still tempting, but not quite there. Apple desperately needs to get their DVR system out finally. It's absence shows terribly in the AppleTV and Mac Mini. The only explanation for the delay can be pressure from the TV companies for Apple to stay out of the DVR market.
For the entry level mini specs, the price really should be sub $500 like it used to be too.
no it's the cable co's and the cable card / tru2way mess and some systems need cable card + sdv tuner and with a cable card no ppv, no vod, no sports packs (some systems)
also rcn and direct tv are working on new tivo boxes next year.
The dual NICs isn't a high-end feature for a server. If you said 3 or 4, yes. iSCSI is just now starting to hit SMBs, at least where I sit, so Apple can be excused for omitting it in that sense. But the firewall issues are just plain stupid not to have dual-NICs. Our company is ~20 people, with four servers. Three have 3 interfaces and the fourth two (plus PRI). It is more than workgroup equipment, but not much more.
The mini server has several intrinsic limitations, given internal drives, processors, memory, and expansion. It will work fine for a workgroup sharepoint alternative, an LDAP server, or even a fer other functions. It could run workgroup databases (maybe time for a filemaker appliance!?), but it is hard to use as a general purpose server if your needs exceed fw800.
As long as the harddrive and the RAM are not user exchangable (or only user-exchangable combined with loosing your warranty) these products leave some strange taste.
Why? Honest question not trying to be a smart ass.
I'm looking to move my practice to Mac software and HW. I would like a simple server with two HDDs that mirror in the event one fails. I would also like to have an external drive that I can take off site each day and then cloud back up.
I would think that this would be pretty good back strategy up for my practice. Am I wrong?
Configuration options
Unmanaged switches — These switches have no configuration interface or options. They are plug and play. They are typically the least expensive switches, found in home, SOHO, or small businesses. They can be desktop or rack mounted.
Managed switches — These switches have one or more methods to modify the operation of the switch. Common management methods include: a serial console or command line interface accessed via telnet or Secure Shell, an embedded Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) agent allowing management from a remote console or management station, or a web interface for management from a web browser. Examples of configuration changes that one can do from a managed switch include: enable features such as Spanning Tree Protocol, set port speed, create or modify Virtual LANs (VLANs), etc. Two sub-classes of managed switches are marketed today:
Smart (or intelligent) switches — These are managed switches with a limited set of management features. Likewise "web-managed" switches are switches which fall in a market niche between unmanaged and managed. For a price much lower than a fully managed switch they provide a web interface (and usually no CLI access) and allow configuration of basic settings, such as VLANs, port-speed and duplex.[10]
Enterprise Managed (or fully managed) switches — These have a full set of management features, including Command Line Interface, SNMP agent, and web interface. They may have additional features to manipulate configurations, such as the ability to display, modify, backup and restore configurations. Compared with smart switches, enterprise switches have more features that can be customized or optimized, and are generally more expensive than "smart" switches. Enterprise switches are typically found in networks with larger number of switches and connections, where centralized management is a significant savings in administrative time and effort. A stackable switch is a version of enterprise-managed switch.
Is there any reason you couldn't install standard Snow Leopard instead of the server equivalent? I'd like to run a file/print server, and like the idea of using the second HD for a mirrored RAID, but have no need for the functionality of Snow Leopard Server and so can't be bothered to use it. (I also had a nightmare with the permissions on Server 10.5 in a mxied windows/mac enviroment and never want to repeat that again!)
Coupled with a FW800 1 TB external disk for time machine, and an off-site cloud back up like jungle disk, and this looks like a really useful solution for my small business.
I was looking to have a Mini at work and install Leopard Server & SLS on my own for testing with our different client setups. Now this totally answers the need for testing things before enabling on production Xserves that our clients have.
I'm hoping to run Leoprd Server on 1 drive and SLS on the other
Good job to Apple to get SLS out there and find a good use for the mini!! It's gonna be a great SMB solution I think.
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.
And in a restaurant, for example, what would the [unlimited] client devices be?
... Oh, maybe iPod Touches or small, inexpensive Tablets?
That is an interesting thought. If it is a hit i would expect some variation of the device fairly quickly, perhaps even some of the ports some have been asking for. Do any Mac Minis that were sold and then had OS X Server installed after the fact show up as server sales or just consumer sales?
There has already been widespread use of Minis as servers that has not received much "ink" in the popular press, but Apple is very well aware of the trend. This includes edu as well as business clients (who pretty much like to use the hardware "as shipped" rather than modding it the way an individual might). This leaves me very surprised that Apple did not put a second network connection and at least one eSATA port unless this is merely an interim model that was put out until such time as they can mod the logic board and such. I just can not believe it would have been that hard to add SATA to the whole line.
I had been waiting on the Mini revision to consider using one as a dedicated HTPC and am greatly disappointed in the lack of a eSATA port. (I know I can mod it, but hate to get into warranty issues before even placing it in service.) There simply is no comparison between FW 800 and a SATA connection. Light Peak is an interesting concept, but it is unlikely to have widespread adoption for some time after Apple introduces it. SATA is the standard now.
Xservers are still needed for higher performance applications. I think the Minis are simply going to increase the situations where servers are used, but were not previously because of cost.
Unmanaged switches — These switches have no configuration interface or options. They are plug and play. They are typically the least expensive switches, found in home, SOHO, or small businesses. They can be desktop or rack mounted.
Managed switches — These switches have one or more methods to modify the operation of the switch. Common management methods include: a serial console or command line interface accessed via telnet or Secure Shell, an embedded Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) agent allowing management from a remote console or management station, or a web interface for management from a web browser. Examples of configuration changes that one can do from a managed switch include: enable features such as Spanning Tree Protocol, set port speed, create or modify Virtual LANs (VLANs), etc. Two sub-classes of managed switches are marketed today:
Smart (or intelligent) switches — These are managed switches with a limited set of management features. Likewise "web-managed" switches are switches which fall in a market niche between unmanaged and managed. For a price much lower than a fully managed switch they provide a web interface (and usually no CLI access) and allow configuration of basic settings, such as VLANs, port-speed and duplex.[10]
Enterprise Managed (or fully managed) switches — These have a full set of management features, including Command Line Interface, SNMP agent, and web interface. They may have additional features to manipulate configurations, such as the ability to display, modify, backup and restore configurations. Compared with smart switches, enterprise switches have more features that can be customized or optimized, and are generally more expensive than "smart" switches. Enterprise switches are typically found in networks with larger number of switches and connections, where centralized management is a significant savings in administrative time and effort. A stackable switch is a version of enterprise-managed switch.
How on earth did that answer his question? You do NOT NEED dual nics in a SOHO server. It's a nice to have but most SOHO setups aren't laid down for either the redundancy or load balancing.
Also most SOHO setups depend on a hardware firewall (aka their router) and not have a dedicated server for it. EVEN if they did, you sure as hell don't want to dual use your file/app server as your internet facing firewall. Some folks will but it's not optimal.
In 90% of normal offices you aren't going to saturate a GigE based fileshare anyway. For him a few nice FW800 drives that he can use for Time Machine and take home for offsite storage is fine.
Is the new mini a great SOHO server? Eh. You do get cheap access to SLS which is nice if you wanted to run a pure OSX shop. If that's the objective it's a steal.
Versus SLES and RHEL you probably also don't need a dedicated geek to run the thing. Same for managing AD/Exchange/Sharepoint in a Server 2k8. Most SOHOs have one guy quadruple hatted to be the IT guy as well. Unless that person is a linux geek or a former windows IT guy it's just a PITA to go down that route (especially if it's you). Snow Leopard Server with a buncha macs is a lot nicer for a SOHO environment for that poor smuck designated the IT guy.
My suggestion is to buy two of the things though. Not having your files or apps for days even if the data is safe will suck more than the $999 hit up front. Unless you have an Apple Store nearby and they stock the server versions of the mini.
Which they will be out of, of course, when your mini explodes.
So for your office I would buy two mini's and keep one at home for "testing". Actually, that's only half a joke...most stuff you want to try first in a test environment before you deploy. Even Apple's updates. So for SOHO, having a spare at the IT guy's house safeguards all sorts of things.
Comments
I was very excited when I read "mac mini server": I was thinking for some time to buy a mac mini as a server at home. However it was not really feasible since the mini does only feature one ethernet port and I need two of them to connect:
- my modem
- my home network
But the new "server" one has the same limitation. And on the top of that, no DVD drive.
Ho boy
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB442Z/A
Sure, buffering takes care of smoothing out slower data transfers while playing video.
What kind of video is being played that needs buffering over a hard drive or network connection? One stream isn't close to maxing out the practical throughput, leaving plenty of room for other transfers.
They show that diagram for optimum performance but it's ridiculous. No one wants to separate their network storage on a new switch. I believe the DroboPro will work fine sharing the same switch though it may not perform as well.
Ahh here we go.
http://support.datarobotics.com/app/...etail/a_id/127
That makes sense. I'd still go into one switch however for a small network because I doubt that I'm gonnna need to constantly shuttle 70MBps worth of large data around harming the network performance.
The people that I know that do network storage have a separate network for the storage volumes.
Using the same port for both serving and storage can't be good, you're probably halving the potential of the Drobo that way.
I am surprised that they didn?t get SD card slots. Rips my theory to shreds.
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".
Jobs and other CEOs often say they aren?t going to do something right before they do. This case he said they couldn?t, but things may change. He could get on stage and say that they wanted to bring you a cheaper Mini and so they learned how? and other bullshit. The fact is the cheaper you make a machine the higher the profit margin has to be to make the same profit, yet there is usually more competition at the lower end so unless the volume is there it?s not advantageous to go cheaper. I think that there profit margins were just too low at $500, hence the bump up $600 that has stayed. A 20% increase in price can make a difference to your bottom line.
It appears some here are thinking Apple was out to built an xServe Light and failed. I truly doubt that was their intent at all.
Instead, it appears Apple tackled the question "How do we outfit the current mini so it can be used as a credible server like some are already doing?" You don't start deviating far from the existing mini by making new cases and connectors otherwise you end up with a computer that's not going to cost $999 anymore. I think Apple did the right things to create an under $1000 server that budget-conscience and low-needs server customers are going to find uses for.
I think that is spot on. If they are buying OS X Server for $499, which does come with an authentication code and swapping out the optical drive for a HDD then this may seem like a deal to these customers.
This is really going to be Apple's first foray into high volume server sales.
I expect he Mac mini server (Mss) to exclipse pretty much ever xserve sold to date within 2 years. It's a good product coming at the right time. It may also finally signal that Apple's ready to take things like iTunes and more and eventually offer centralized storage/access.
With an Xserve you really couldn't do that because of cost.
That is an interesting thought. If it is a hit i would expect some variation of the device fairly quickly, perhaps even some of the ports some have been asking for. Do any Mac Minis that were sold and then had OS X Server installed after the fact show up as server sales or just consumer sales?
I already have the server software and would like to get a new Mini to replace my current server. But, I would want to add my own 2nd drive.
Ahh, I now see. They removed the Disk drive to put the 2nd hard drive in.
Apple's asking you to buy a Managed Switch to make any serious use of OS X Server.
Never mind the fact that the Firewall in OS X Server still doesn't touch the options in Linux, but yes this is a 3/4s limp review of a cop out for a Server.
The Dual 500GB is DOA for any Server set up. Yes, you want 2 GigE Ethernet ports on any Server, whether for SMB or not.
Apple's asking you to buy a Managed Switch to make any serious use of OS X Server.
Never mind the fact that the Firewall in OS X Server still doesn't touch the options in Linux, but yes this is a 3/4s limp review of a cop out for a Server.
Why? Honest question not trying to be a smart ass.
I'm looking to move my practice to Mac software and HW. I would like a simple server with two HDDs that mirror in the event one fails. I would also like to have an external drive that I can take off site each day and then cloud back up.
I would think that this would be pretty good back strategy up for my practice. Am I wrong?
I never understand the people that constantly complain when Apple comes out with a great low end product that doesn't have all of the high end features. Take this for what it is priced at, a low end server solution at a great price.
The Mac Mini Server model is perfect for a small business needing only file / print sharing.
if that is all you mean, you can do that with a regular mini.
the server model is so much more. file sharing, print sharing plus shared calenders, address books etc. email server, podcast server, wiki and so on.
for a small business there are so many things. being in video production, my bosses are already Mac Heads, but they spent all afternoon freaking out about the idea of finally having a bonafide internal network for the company. and don't get me started on the dreams of those 27 inch imacs on every desk.
Here's a question. AppleCare apparently doesn't apply to OS X server. Is any other support included? For a less technical user setting up their own server for the first time this may be a critical issue.
you might want to do some exploring on the apple website
For the entry level mini specs, the price really should be sub $500 like it used to be too.
Still tempting, but not quite there. Apple desperately needs to get their DVR system out finally. It's absence shows terribly in the AppleTV and Mac Mini. The only explanation for the delay can be pressure from the TV companies for Apple to stay out of the DVR market.
For the entry level mini specs, the price really should be sub $500 like it used to be too.
no it's the cable co's and the cable card / tru2way mess and some systems need cable card + sdv tuner and with a cable card no ppv, no vod, no sports packs (some systems)
also rcn and direct tv are working on new tivo boxes next year.
The mini server has several intrinsic limitations, given internal drives, processors, memory, and expansion. It will work fine for a workgroup sharepoint alternative, an LDAP server, or even a fer other functions. It could run workgroup databases (maybe time for a filemaker appliance!?), but it is hard to use as a general purpose server if your needs exceed fw800.
Or does the above not apply to the new models?
Why? Honest question not trying to be a smart ass.
I'm looking to move my practice to Mac software and HW. I would like a simple server with two HDDs that mirror in the event one fails. I would also like to have an external drive that I can take off site each day and then cloud back up.
I would think that this would be pretty good back strategy up for my practice. Am I wrong?
Configuration options
- Managed switches — These switches have one or more methods to modify the operation of the switch. Common management methods include: a serial console or command line interface accessed via telnet or Secure Shell, an embedded Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) agent allowing management from a remote console or management station, or a web interface for management from a web browser. Examples of configuration changes that one can do from a managed switch include: enable features such as Spanning Tree Protocol, set port speed, create or modify Virtual LANs (VLANs), etc. Two sub-classes of managed switches are marketed today:
- Enterprise Managed (or fully managed) switches — These have a full set of management features, including Command Line Interface, SNMP agent, and web interface. They may have additional features to manipulate configurations, such as the ability to display, modify, backup and restore configurations. Compared with smart switches, enterprise switches have more features that can be customized or optimized, and are generally more expensive than "smart" switches. Enterprise switches are typically found in networks with larger number of switches and connections, where centralized management is a significant savings in administrative time and effort. A stackable switch is a version of enterprise-managed switch.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833316088Unmanaged switches — These switches have no configuration interface or options. They are plug and play. They are typically the least expensive switches, found in home, SOHO, or small businesses. They can be desktop or rack mounted.
Smart (or intelligent) switches — These are managed switches with a limited set of management features. Likewise "web-managed" switches are switches which fall in a market niche between unmanaged and managed. For a price much lower than a fully managed switch they provide a web interface (and usually no CLI access) and allow configuration of basic settings, such as VLANs, port-speed and duplex.[10]
Coupled with a FW800 1 TB external disk for time machine, and an off-site cloud back up like jungle disk, and this looks like a really useful solution for my small business.
I'm hoping to run Leoprd Server on 1 drive and SLS on the other
Good job to Apple to get SLS out there and find a good use for the mini!! It's gonna be a great SMB solution I think.
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.
And in a restaurant, for example, what would the [unlimited] client devices be?
... Oh, maybe iPod Touches or small, inexpensive Tablets?
*
<snip>
That is an interesting thought. If it is a hit i would expect some variation of the device fairly quickly, perhaps even some of the ports some have been asking for. Do any Mac Minis that were sold and then had OS X Server installed after the fact show up as server sales or just consumer sales?
There has already been widespread use of Minis as servers that has not received much "ink" in the popular press, but Apple is very well aware of the trend. This includes edu as well as business clients (who pretty much like to use the hardware "as shipped" rather than modding it the way an individual might). This leaves me very surprised that Apple did not put a second network connection and at least one eSATA port unless this is merely an interim model that was put out until such time as they can mod the logic board and such. I just can not believe it would have been that hard to add SATA to the whole line.
I had been waiting on the Mini revision to consider using one as a dedicated HTPC and am greatly disappointed in the lack of a eSATA port. (I know I can mod it, but hate to get into warranty issues before even placing it in service.) There simply is no comparison between FW 800 and a SATA connection. Light Peak is an interesting concept, but it is unlikely to have widespread adoption for some time after Apple introduces it. SATA is the standard now.
Xservers are still needed for higher performance applications. I think the Minis are simply going to increase the situations where servers are used, but were not previously because of cost.
Configuration options
- Managed switches — These switches have one or more methods to modify the operation of the switch. Common management methods include: a serial console or command line interface accessed via telnet or Secure Shell, an embedded Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) agent allowing management from a remote console or management station, or a web interface for management from a web browser. Examples of configuration changes that one can do from a managed switch include: enable features such as Spanning Tree Protocol, set port speed, create or modify Virtual LANs (VLANs), etc. Two sub-classes of managed switches are marketed today:
- Enterprise Managed (or fully managed) switches — These have a full set of management features, including Command Line Interface, SNMP agent, and web interface. They may have additional features to manipulate configurations, such as the ability to display, modify, backup and restore configurations. Compared with smart switches, enterprise switches have more features that can be customized or optimized, and are generally more expensive than "smart" switches. Enterprise switches are typically found in networks with larger number of switches and connections, where centralized management is a significant savings in administrative time and effort. A stackable switch is a version of enterprise-managed switch.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833316088Unmanaged switches — These switches have no configuration interface or options. They are plug and play. They are typically the least expensive switches, found in home, SOHO, or small businesses. They can be desktop or rack mounted.
Smart (or intelligent) switches — These are managed switches with a limited set of management features. Likewise "web-managed" switches are switches which fall in a market niche between unmanaged and managed. For a price much lower than a fully managed switch they provide a web interface (and usually no CLI access) and allow configuration of basic settings, such as VLANs, port-speed and duplex.[10]
How on earth did that answer his question? You do NOT NEED dual nics in a SOHO server. It's a nice to have but most SOHO setups aren't laid down for either the redundancy or load balancing.
Also most SOHO setups depend on a hardware firewall (aka their router) and not have a dedicated server for it. EVEN if they did, you sure as hell don't want to dual use your file/app server as your internet facing firewall. Some folks will but it's not optimal.
In 90% of normal offices you aren't going to saturate a GigE based fileshare anyway. For him a few nice FW800 drives that he can use for Time Machine and take home for offsite storage is fine.
Is the new mini a great SOHO server? Eh. You do get cheap access to SLS which is nice if you wanted to run a pure OSX shop. If that's the objective it's a steal.
Versus SLES and RHEL you probably also don't need a dedicated geek to run the thing. Same for managing AD/Exchange/Sharepoint in a Server 2k8. Most SOHOs have one guy quadruple hatted to be the IT guy as well. Unless that person is a linux geek or a former windows IT guy it's just a PITA to go down that route (especially if it's you). Snow Leopard Server with a buncha macs is a lot nicer for a SOHO environment for that poor smuck designated the IT guy.
My suggestion is to buy two of the things though. Not having your files or apps for days even if the data is safe will suck more than the $999 hit up front. Unless you have an Apple Store nearby and they stock the server versions of the mini.
Which they will be out of, of course, when your mini explodes.
So for your office I would buy two mini's and keep one at home for "testing". Actually, that's only half a joke...most stuff you want to try first in a test environment before you deploy. Even Apple's updates. So for SOHO, having a spare at the IT guy's house safeguards all sorts of things.