Who needs servers when the Cloud thingy is coming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by technohermit
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.
Thinking the same thing LOL Yes, who needs servers when we have rain, the ocean and atmosphere. Just use the cloud.
theolein, I feel your pain. Very few folks here understand the datacenter environment.
I suspect though that many of the people complaining are actually dealling with much smaller installations. You still have the problem though of the wisdom of Apple trying to support these people with a 1U server that doesn't sell in volume.
Most of these people should be asking themselves why they are buying this expensive XServe to stick in a closet someplace when generic Linux servers are a dime a dozen. After all if you small business needs a file server why spend three or four thousand on such a beast when a $999 device does just as well.
The people actually using XServes might understand their needs but frankly it is a strange need. If you are so cheap as to see Apples server software to be a deal then why not go even cheaper with a Linux machine on a really cheap server box. I guess some people can justify a Mac XServe's cost based on some attribute but from my perspective it occupies a no mans land between low cost and well supported.
Thinking the same thing LOL Yes, who needs servers when we have rain, the ocean and atmosphere. Just use the cloud.
And the cload is not always the solution -> data privacy protection -> you need a lot of faith!
And Apple and Security - I don't know.
There are some security holes it seems like Apple is a beginner, e.g.
Quote:
A fine example of Apple releasing code without a security review; or their security review process is so broken it does not catch basic authentication flaws.
All anyone had to ask was "Can the password can be changed without supplying the existing password?" and FaceTime would have been sent back for remediation. This is a pre-beta question.
It begs the question of other poor practices by the same development team.
Frankly It looks like half the people in this thread feel so damn special that they think they have the right to demand whatever sort of hardware they could want from Apple. Makes you wonder if they are all democrates.
The enterprise and datacenter folks that are here don't feel damn special - they expected enterprise-level service, consistency, and stability, from their vendors. Apple proffered an enterprise-level datacenter product, and has given very substandard service, consistency, and stability.
The enterprise and datacenter folks that are here don't feel damn special - they expected enterprise-level service, consistency, and stability, from their vendors. Apple proffered an enterprise-level datacenter product, and has given very substandard service, consistency, and stability.
Fail.
In other words, Apple has done these enterprise customers a favor by removing from the market an undersupported product that suffered from a persistent lack of a consistent and stable effort on Apple's part.
I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of running a data center, but I am honestly surprised that people responsible for large data centers would consider the Xserve an option given Apple's lack of a product roadmap and unpredictable communications and support policies.
but I am honestly surprised that people responsible for large data centers would consider the Xserve an option given Apple's lack of a product roadmap and unpredictable communications and support policies.
In other words, Apple has done these enterprise customers a favor by removing from the market an undersupported product that suffered from a persistent lack of a consistent and stable effort on Apple's part.
I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of running a data center, but I am honestly surprised that people responsible for large data centers would consider the Xserve an option given Apple's lack of a product roadmap and unpredictable communications and support policies.
Well, I wouldn't call it much of a favor. With $billions available, a more appropriate and mature solution would be to gear up properly to support the line-of-business.
Without a doubt, buying Xserves could be considered a risky move. But they play well in educational and other environments with large installed bases of OS X clients. Apple should have supported the few trusting adventurers who were early enterprise adopters, instead it appears they may be shafting them. Time will tell.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theolein
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.
1. Some ignorant loud-mouth was complaining that the Mac Mini didn't have RAID. I was simply pointing out that they were wrong.
2. What part of "the Mac Mini is not meant for enterprise server farms" don't you understand? The point you keep missing is that Apple wasn't doing well in the Enterprise market because their key strengths weren't of value to the market so they dropped it.
The Mini is meant for an entirely different market and is apparently doing well.
NO ONE has ever suggested that the Mini was a replacement for large enterprise server farms (except the mindless trolls).
Quote:
Originally Posted by theolein
The lights-out management, the dual power supplies perhaps? Let me guess, you don't know what lights-out management is, do you?
Of course I do. Now, please explain why you can't manage a Mini remotely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theolein
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.
Who ever said you could? The point I've been making repeatedly is that the departmental/small business/home server market is entirely unlike the enterprise market. Apple's offerings are great for the departmental/small business/home server market, but not for the enterprise market.
Do you get it YET?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
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?
Of course. But Theolein is too busy pretending that he's someone important or at least remotely informed on these topics to think rationally.
I've got two Xserves ( you can see them to the left of the stack of Mac Pros )
One of them (4 core Intel) is used as a file server and near line media server. There is a 4 port Fibre Channel card that connects it to a Rorke 20 TB RAID 50. It has 3 partitions, one for files relating to projects (3 TB), a Time Machine partition for backups of the first partition (6 TB) and the near line media storage partition (11 TB). The Xserve also has a 10gig Small Tree card for fast network access, particularly to the Restrospect archive server and all the various Mac and PC users in the facility.
I have another Xserve (8 core Intel) used for a Qmaster render node and to run Episode for files transcodes and compressions. It also runs the Red apps when needed. Again, nothing here would pose a problem for a Mac Pro.
It is unfortunate that the Xserve is being discontinued, but for my needs a Mac Pro will be fine. A Mini wouldn't cut it. I love the way the Xserves are built and I have had no hardware problems. I don't serve applications or domains so my setup is pretty basic. Just big shared drives and the nifty Wiki Server. The iCal server doesn't work and never has. There have been numerous networking bugs that Apple was slow to fix. Luckily for me I wasn't running a data center. I would like to see Apple double down on fixing some of the problems with OS X Server. Maybe the Unisys deal will make this happen.
So, again, the problem is that Apple's shitty, worthless, under-supported, overpriced, half-assed server hardware which they don't have a clue how to market or deploy or develop or improve because they totally don't get the enterprise on account of being a toy company, the problem is that that steaming pile of shit has been withdrawn from the market?
The one that no competent computer professional would piss on if it were on fire, but has caused competent computer professionals to gather round and jeer at Apple for not continuing to sell it.
Just want to make sure we're all on the same page.
I've got two Xserves ( you can see them to the left of the stack of Mac Pros )
One of them (4 core Intel) is used as a file server and near line media server. There is a 4 port Fibre Channel card that connects it to a Rorke 20 TB RAID 50. It has 3 partitions, one for files relating to projects (3 TB), a Time Machine partition for backups of the first partition (6 TB) and the near line media storage partition (11 TB). The Xserve also has a 10gig Small Tree card for fast network access, particularly to the Restrospect archive server and all the various Mac and PC users in the facility.
I have another Xserve (8 core Intel) used for a Qmaster render node and to run Episode for files transcodes and compressions. It also runs the Red apps when needed. Again, nothing here would pose a problem for a Mac Pro.
It is unfortunate that the Xserve is being discontinued, but for my needs a Mac Pro will be fine. A Mini wouldn't cut it. I love the way the Xserves are built and I have had no hardware problems. I don't serve applications or domains so my setup is pretty basic. Just big shared drives and the nifty Wiki Server. The iCal server doesn't work and never has. There have been numerous networking bugs that Apple was slow to fix. Luckily for me I wasn't running a data center. I would like to see Apple double down on fixing some of the problems with OS X Server. Maybe the Unisys deal will make this happen.
Hopefully they wont ditch OS X server software otherwise 20 years as an Apple engineer will be for nought.
I am use to the jibs from the darkside anyway about Apple not being a serious OS ( just smile I know I know)
So, again, the problem is that Apple's shitty, worthless, under-supported, overpriced, half-assed server hardware which they don't have a clue how to market or deploy or develop or improve because they totally don't get the enterprise on account of being a toy company, the problem is that that steaming pile of shit has been withdrawn from the market?
The one that no competent computer professional would piss on if it were on fire, but has caused competent computer professionals to gather round and jeer at Apple for not continuing to sell it.
Just want to make sure we're all on the same page.
Gee! My media srever is on a headless mini. I update software and reboot it *, remotely, all the time...
He didn't say reboot it, he said turn it on. Can you turn on a Mac Mini remotely? If so, can you please tell me how, because I can't do that on my Macs.
He didn't say reboot it, he said turn it on. Can you turn on a Mac Mini remotely? If so, can you please tell me how, because I can't do that on my Macs.
Yes!
You can find out how to do it if you look for a solution -- instead of looking for a knockoff.
There is a strategy here, it is just that none of us can see it clearly yet.
The strategy is to drop less profitable lines of business. Apple is making a whole lot more money selling to consumers. They need to deploy resources where they will yield maximum profit.
Comments
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.
Thinking the same thing LOL Yes, who needs servers when we have rain, the ocean and atmosphere. Just use the cloud.
theolein, I feel your pain. Very few folks here understand the datacenter environment.
I suspect though that many of the people complaining are actually dealling with much smaller installations. You still have the problem though of the wisdom of Apple trying to support these people with a 1U server that doesn't sell in volume.
Most of these people should be asking themselves why they are buying this expensive XServe to stick in a closet someplace when generic Linux servers are a dime a dozen. After all if you small business needs a file server why spend three or four thousand on such a beast when a $999 device does just as well.
The people actually using XServes might understand their needs but frankly it is a strange need. If you are so cheap as to see Apples server software to be a deal then why not go even cheaper with a Linux machine on a really cheap server box. I guess some people can justify a Mac XServe's cost based on some attribute but from my perspective it occupies a no mans land between low cost and well supported.
Thinking the same thing LOL Yes, who needs servers when we have rain, the ocean and atmosphere. Just use the cloud.
And the cload is not always the solution -> data privacy protection -> you need a lot of faith!
And Apple and Security - I don't know.
There are some security holes it seems like Apple is a beginner, e.g.
A fine example of Apple releasing code without a security review; or their security review process is so broken it does not catch basic authentication flaws.
All anyone had to ask was "Can the password can be changed without supplying the existing password?" and FaceTime would have been sent back for remediation. This is a pre-beta question.
It begs the question of other poor practices by the same development team.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archive...me_for_ma.html
Or Directory Traversal and mobileme...
For years there was mobileme (and .mac) without "full" SSL in the WebApps...
Frankly It looks like half the people in this thread feel so damn special that they think they have the right to demand whatever sort of hardware they could want from Apple. Makes you wonder if they are all democrates.
The enterprise and datacenter folks that are here don't feel damn special - they expected enterprise-level service, consistency, and stability, from their vendors. Apple proffered an enterprise-level datacenter product, and has given very substandard service, consistency, and stability.
Fail.
The enterprise and datacenter folks that are here don't feel damn special - they expected enterprise-level service, consistency, and stability, from their vendors. Apple proffered an enterprise-level datacenter product, and has given very substandard service, consistency, and stability.
Fail.
In other words, Apple has done these enterprise customers a favor by removing from the market an undersupported product that suffered from a persistent lack of a consistent and stable effort on Apple's part.
I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of running a data center, but I am honestly surprised that people responsible for large data centers would consider the Xserve an option given Apple's lack of a product roadmap and unpredictable communications and support policies.
but I am honestly surprised that people responsible for large data centers would consider the Xserve an option given Apple's lack of a product roadmap and unpredictable communications and support policies.
Fanboyism and/or incompetence
(except where it makes sense to use os x server)
In other words, Apple has done these enterprise customers a favor by removing from the market an undersupported product that suffered from a persistent lack of a consistent and stable effort on Apple's part.
I don't pretend to know all the ins and outs of running a data center, but I am honestly surprised that people responsible for large data centers would consider the Xserve an option given Apple's lack of a product roadmap and unpredictable communications and support policies.
Well, I wouldn't call it much of a favor. With $billions available, a more appropriate and mature solution would be to gear up properly to support the line-of-business.
Without a doubt, buying Xserves could be considered a risky move. But they play well in educational and other environments with large installed bases of OS X clients. Apple should have supported the few trusting adventurers who were early enterprise adopters, instead it appears they may be shafting them. Time will tell.
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.
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.
1. Some ignorant loud-mouth was complaining that the Mac Mini didn't have RAID. I was simply pointing out that they were wrong.
2. What part of "the Mac Mini is not meant for enterprise server farms" don't you understand? The point you keep missing is that Apple wasn't doing well in the Enterprise market because their key strengths weren't of value to the market so they dropped it.
The Mini is meant for an entirely different market and is apparently doing well.
NO ONE has ever suggested that the Mini was a replacement for large enterprise server farms (except the mindless trolls).
The lights-out management, the dual power supplies perhaps? Let me guess, you don't know what lights-out management is, do you?
Of course I do. Now, please explain why you can't manage a Mini remotely.
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.
Who ever said you could? The point I've been making repeatedly is that the departmental/small business/home server market is entirely unlike the enterprise market. Apple's offerings are great for the departmental/small business/home server market, but not for the enterprise market.
Do you get it YET?
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?
Of course. But Theolein is too busy pretending that he's someone important or at least remotely informed on these topics to think rationally.
One of them (4 core Intel) is used as a file server and near line media server. There is a 4 port Fibre Channel card that connects it to a Rorke 20 TB RAID 50. It has 3 partitions, one for files relating to projects (3 TB), a Time Machine partition for backups of the first partition (6 TB) and the near line media storage partition (11 TB). The Xserve also has a 10gig Small Tree card for fast network access, particularly to the Restrospect archive server and all the various Mac and PC users in the facility.
I have another Xserve (8 core Intel) used for a Qmaster render node and to run Episode for files transcodes and compressions. It also runs the Red apps when needed. Again, nothing here would pose a problem for a Mac Pro.
It is unfortunate that the Xserve is being discontinued, but for my needs a Mac Pro will be fine. A Mini wouldn't cut it. I love the way the Xserves are built and I have had no hardware problems. I don't serve applications or domains so my setup is pretty basic. Just big shared drives and the nifty Wiki Server. The iCal server doesn't work and never has. There have been numerous networking bugs that Apple was slow to fix. Luckily for me I wasn't running a data center. I would like to see Apple double down on fixing some of the problems with OS X Server. Maybe the Unisys deal will make this happen.
Of course I do. Now, please explain why you can't manage a Mini remotely.
Try turning it on, for a start. You'll be quite a while.
I kinda' like buying products from a company who intends to stay in business...
I kinda' like investing in them, too!
.
Try turning it on, for a start. You'll be quite a while.
Gee! My media srever is on a headless mini. I update software and reboot it *, remotely, all the time...
* and each of the 7 other Macs we own
...I must be doing something wrong!
... 'course I haven't figured out a way to unbox and install it...
...How do you do that?
Edit: actually my 14-year-old grandaughter, Mars, did the last remote update/reboot.
Sent from my iToy
.
The one that no competent computer professional would piss on if it were on fire, but has caused competent computer professionals to gather round and jeer at Apple for not continuing to sell it.
Just want to make sure we're all on the same page.
I've got two Xserves ( you can see them to the left of the stack of Mac Pros )
One of them (4 core Intel) is used as a file server and near line media server. There is a 4 port Fibre Channel card that connects it to a Rorke 20 TB RAID 50. It has 3 partitions, one for files relating to projects (3 TB), a Time Machine partition for backups of the first partition (6 TB) and the near line media storage partition (11 TB). The Xserve also has a 10gig Small Tree card for fast network access, particularly to the Restrospect archive server and all the various Mac and PC users in the facility.
I have another Xserve (8 core Intel) used for a Qmaster render node and to run Episode for files transcodes and compressions. It also runs the Red apps when needed. Again, nothing here would pose a problem for a Mac Pro.
It is unfortunate that the Xserve is being discontinued, but for my needs a Mac Pro will be fine. A Mini wouldn't cut it. I love the way the Xserves are built and I have had no hardware problems. I don't serve applications or domains so my setup is pretty basic. Just big shared drives and the nifty Wiki Server. The iCal server doesn't work and never has. There have been numerous networking bugs that Apple was slow to fix. Luckily for me I wasn't running a data center. I would like to see Apple double down on fixing some of the problems with OS X Server. Maybe the Unisys deal will make this happen.
Hopefully they wont ditch OS X server software otherwise 20 years as an Apple engineer will be for nought.
I am use to the jibs from the darkside anyway about Apple not being a serious OS ( just smile I know I know)
So, again, the problem is that Apple's shitty, worthless, under-supported, overpriced, half-assed server hardware which they don't have a clue how to market or deploy or develop or improve because they totally don't get the enterprise on account of being a toy company, the problem is that that steaming pile of shit has been withdrawn from the market?
The one that no competent computer professional would piss on if it were on fire, but has caused competent computer professionals to gather round and jeer at Apple for not continuing to sell it.
Just want to make sure we're all on the same page.
Couldn't have been said better!
My ducats... My daughter...
.
can i sell you some cable tidy's
Heh. That's my Cat5 patch panel. And the phone system patch panel (blue cables). I didn't build it. Someday I'll get around to cleaning it up.
Gee! My media srever is on a headless mini. I update software and reboot it *, remotely, all the time...
He didn't say reboot it, he said turn it on. Can you turn on a Mac Mini remotely? If so, can you please tell me how, because I can't do that on my Macs.
He didn't say reboot it, he said turn it on. Can you turn on a Mac Mini remotely? If so, can you please tell me how, because I can't do that on my Macs.
Yes!
You can find out how to do it if you look for a solution -- instead of looking for a knockoff.
.
There is a strategy here, it is just that none of us can see it clearly yet.
The strategy is to drop less profitable lines of business. Apple is making a whole lot more money selling to consumers. They need to deploy resources where they will yield maximum profit.