didn't Apple used to make an Xserve?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
at this rate we'll have G5 Newtons before they bump the Xserve line to G5.





i'm now officially beside myself.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 62
    Yeah, they even sell the g5s with the option to get Mac OS X panther server unlimited clients.



    But I'm sure Xserve g5s will appear soon enough, I would imagine it's not unlike putting a g5 in a powerbook, that 1U design for the Xserve is pretty slick, but I could only imagine they are having some issues squeezing a powerful g5 system in there.



    I guess one advantage in the server area is that quiet fans and stuff aren't as important, servers aren't expected to run quiet, they are expected to run fast.
  • Reply 2 of 62
    chagichagi Posts: 284member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Wrong Robot

    Yeah, they even sell the g5s with the option to get Mac OS X panther server unlimited clients.



    But I'm sure Xserve g5s will appear soon enough, I would imagine it's not unlike putting a g5 in a powerbook, that 1U design for the Xserve is pretty slick, but I could only imagine they are having some issues squeezing a powerful g5 system in there.



    I guess one advantage in the server area is that quiet fans and stuff aren't as important, servers aren't expected to run quiet, they are expected to run fast.




    Aside from possibly waiting on 90mm G5s, it's also worth noting that the desktop G5s are only about 4 months old, so it hasn't been that long of a wait.



    If IBM is able to ship dual 1.6GHz G5 blades, a 1u Apple dual G5 Xserve shouldn't be very far off.
  • Reply 3 of 62
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chagi

    Aside from possibly waiting on 90mm G5s, it's also worth noting that the desktop G5s are only about 4 months old, so it hasn't been that long of a wait.



    If IBM is able to ship dual 1.6GHz G5 blades, a 1u Apple dual G5 Xserve shouldn't be very far off.




    Yep, they just have to change the bios, and ship OS X with the IBM blade, and then you will have an Xserve ...
  • Reply 4 of 62
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,645member
    The 4 months is important people give them a chance. Now that doesn't mean I'm not wondering what is up.



    Could it be that Apple will try to implement drasticly new technology in the servers? Seems like a good possibility. After all they already are selling 2X SMP's like hot cakes, maybe they will be considering 4x or other arraingements. This of course would require new chip sets.



    Dave







    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chagi

    Aside from possibly waiting on 90mm G5s, it's also worth noting that the desktop G5s are only about 4 months old, so it hasn't been that long of a wait.



    If IBM is able to ship dual 1.6GHz G5 blades, a 1u Apple dual G5 Xserve shouldn't be very far off.




  • Reply 5 of 62
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    My bet is they'll be monsters, but more importantly, have good uptime, which is the most important benchmark.
  • Reply 6 of 62
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,147member
    I read somewhere that an educational institution pleaded with Apple for when they'll release a G5 xServe and the response from Apple was that it was four or five months away. That was last month. I think I read the rumor on MacRumors.
  • Reply 7 of 62
    It makes sense that they would want to first work out any issues with both the G5 architecture and Panther Server. A server release is a lot more sensitive to scrutiny as Apple will be asking corporations to entrust their mission critical data to them. So everything has to be just so considering that a G5 server will give Apple a lot more attention than the G4. When you go to the ball, you should be dressed to the nines.
  • Reply 8 of 62
    Why would you need a G5 Xserve?



    The current Xserves are well equipped for fileserving, mailhub etc. G5 would only be idle in there and generate heat that would probably melt the 1U unit.



    The only reason I could see would be IO performance that may benefit from the new bus architecture. If you re in number crunching, the Xserve is not what you want. Feel free to buy a G5 put a fiber card in it and boot 10.3 server!
  • Reply 9 of 62
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BNOYHTUAWB

    Why would you need a G5 Xserve?



    The current Xserves are well equipped for fileserving, mailhub etc. G5 would only be idle in there and generate heat that would probably melt the 1U unit.



    The only reason I could see would be IO performance that may benefit from the new bus architecture. If you re in number crunching, the Xserve is not what you want. Feel free to buy a G5 put a fiber card in it and boot 10.3 server!




    clustering



    that Virgina Tech supercomputer becomes a hell of a lot smaller with 1100 Xserves instead of full blown towers
  • Reply 10 of 62
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BNOYHTUAWB

    Why would you need a G5 Xserve?



    Oracle. It will probably be released with the G5 XServe. A 64-bit processor in a 1U form factor for under $3000 will also be particularly useful for selling servers.
  • Reply 11 of 62
    shawkshawk Posts: 116member
    Quote:

    Why would you need a G5 Xserve?



    Pixar wants them.
  • Reply 12 of 62
    At this point, for those of us who need the speed, and store these things in a room with a 3U RAID, I can't imagine people being upset if Apple introduced a 3U G5 XServe.



    Or do you think the Wintel camps would claim this was another death knell for Apple not being able to produce a blade?



    What I'd be more interested in is a G5 Cluster Nodes!

    Attach those to my current XServe and get things moving for our thin clients!
  • Reply 13 of 62
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JimDreamworx

    At this point, for those of us who need the speed, and store these things in a room with a 3U RAID, I can't imagine people being upset if Apple introduced a 3U G5 XServe.



    Or do you think the Wintel camps would claim this was another death knell for Apple not being able to produce a blade?



    What I'd be more interested in is a G5 Cluster Nodes!

    Attach those to my current XServe and get things moving for our thin clients!




    that 3U Xserve would only be accepted if it was 8 way though.
  • Reply 14 of 62
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    I think we'll see a G5 Xserve demo' at MWSF running a version of RenderMan server. That would be an awesome Xserve intro, and Demo, because Pixar says the G5 is the fastest processor that RenderMan runs on. (or something to that effect)



    I'd still like to see PowerMacs at 3GHz at Macworld though.
  • Reply 15 of 62
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    that 3U Xserve would only be accepted if it was 8 way though.



    I don't know about that. A 4-way G5 with support for 16 or even 32 GB of RAM at 3U sounds pretty sweet. Many times, keeping an entire database in RAM is more beneficial than massive processing power.
  • Reply 16 of 62
    If 3 gig PowerMac debut at San Fran? I'm laying an egg and putting the money down...



    But 980s are rumoured to be 8 months-ish away?



    G6 honey?



    I said rev B...but who can tell? Lookit those single 1.8 buyers that got burned with dual 1.8s for a little more!



    Ouchy!



    From the debate to the 'new' chip in the iBook to G5 Powerbooks to G5 Xserves...it's pretty exciting.



    I would have thought at the outset that G5 X-Serves will appear at the WWDC which is 6 months away now..?



    That would make sense?



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 17 of 62
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BNOYHTUAWB

    Why would you need a G5 Xserve?



    1. Smaller form factor than a G5 desktop. Rack mountable with many on a rack, not six.



    2. FAR BETTER computational performance. Not everyone serves files, quite a few large users run rendering farms and the G5 rules in FP perfromance.



    3. FAR BETTER system bus. This matters quite a bit to the people running programs like BLAST which are altivec optimized. The better bus means that you will get a large speed boost.



    I think that you think that all people use XServes for is for storing a few files on. Frankly, why use an XServe for this? You could grab any old refurbished dual G4 and do the same thing. Some people use XServes to do serious computations, and these people really want new boxes.
  • Reply 18 of 62
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    clustering



    that Virgina Tech supercomputer becomes a hell of a lot smaller with 1100 Xserves instead of full blown towers




    It could also be the world's first supercomputer & fusion reactor.
  • Reply 19 of 62
    big macbig mac Posts: 480member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by onlooker

    I think we'll see a G5 Xserve demo' at MWSF running a version of RenderMan server. That would be an awesome Xserve intro, and Demo, because Pixar says the G5 is the fastest processor that RenderMan runs on. (or something to that effect)



    I'd still like to see PowerMacs at 3GHz at Macworld though.




    So would everyone else. But those expectations are astronomical - SJ said 3GHz by summer.
  • Reply 20 of 62
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Big Mac

    So would everyone else. But those expectations are astronomical - SJ said 3GHz by summer.



    Astronomers are usually happy with measurements that are correct within an order of magnitude, so...



    29GHz PowerMacs next summer! CONFIRMED!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.