To summarize what others have stated, if Apple did the following then their server marketshare would grow through the roof.
1) Give a roadmap. example: every six months we'll roll-out new server hardware
2) Mirror Dell, HP, and IBM is support contracts with on-site service and 4 hour turnaround options.
3) Fix the bugs and rework the networking and file system stacks to make OSX Server a competitive server OS.
4) Offer more dense hardware configurations. example: a 4U 4 socket system and/or blades.
5) Provide support for multiple direct access storage vendors.
6) XSan and XGrid are nice but Apple needs to make XVirtual (a.k.a. robust Apple in-house made server virtualization software) and change the OSX Server licensing to allow virtualization.
7) Build and fully support a VAR network with the iPhone ecosystem as an example.
8) Rebuild XServe to match HPs features and quality for 1U servers.
9) License OSX Server to server OEMs
10) Create a world class server support group
11) Offer a competing cloud computing service
I think that's about it. If Apple is serious then they'll go after Dell's SOHO business.
Does the Server edition of Snow Leopard include iDelete (The one that deletes your data after you upgrade to Snow Leopard) or is that restricted to non Server versions only?
PS: Forgot to ask, does it have built in support for iPhone connectivity? I'm hearing from many people in the industry that RIM, HTC, Samsung and Microsoft are doomed and in two month or so every major corporation in the world is switching to iPhone and macs. According to him, Macs make corporates ten times more productive on average. For example, you can print photo books or upload movies directly to youtube via quicktime. Another big feature in macs that appeal to power users and professionals is leading edge graphics. The top end Mac Pro comes with a nVidia GT120 that is unheard of in the PC world! 4870? doesnt even exist on the PCs! screw M$ and their old century crap!
The first thing that bothers me is that Linux is discounted as a viable Server OS which I find rediculus. The fact is RedHat and others pretty much concentrate solely on the server market. Dependng on the numbers you reference Linux might have more than 50% of the market. It has achieved acceptance not because XServe is a bad server but because Linux is very very good for the task and very well supported.
The success of MS and Linux based servers really doesn't say anything about the quality of Apples servers, they simply target a different segments of the market. Believe it or not some people just don't care about Exchange or some of the other corporate favored packages. Besides that many corporations would not even try to run all these protocols on one box so the lack of Exchange does mean much.
As to other problems that Apple has created, their hardware management is absolutely terrible. As others have pointed out dropping what was acknowledged to be a very good RAID device really makes Apple look very stupid. Actually it goes beyound being stupid, because even a stupid person wouldn't make this sort of mistake, especially considering some of the markets Apple was targetting. While I don't consider XServe to be a bad server, I actually think it is a fairly good value, one server doesn't make for a product line up. Some here have mentioned going bigger as in 2U but I suspect that there is a huge market in smaller servers. Let's say something in the 1/3 to 1/4 width of a 1U server. There is a convergence of technology taking place that would allow for a very competitive server in these sizes. Obviously this is not the answer for a massive corporate environment but could be very useful in small business and the home. Plus a new platform would allow for innovations such as quick change external power supplies and maybe even that Light Peak connection.
I find distressing also that Apple has failed to target the home server market, especially for video and music. Really Apple who moves more digital content over the net, but doesn't provide for a rational storage and serving product for that content. The interesting thing here is that the same device has the potential to serve both the home user and small business very well. All you are really talking about is a RAID box with a video sysytem capable of 1080P. Actually this would be a good use for all of their cash as they could buy somebody like Drobo and apply that tech to a micro server product.
The last thing about hardware is that they seem to be asleep at the wheel here with respect to OpenCL, or high performance computing in general. They really need to offer and support a machine with either a Tesla or Fermi based accelerator card. A plug in card too, relying on the system GPU is to bright. Fermi should support ECC too. I say card but a Fermi chip built right on the motherboard isn't a bad idea either. The goal is to have a state of the art product to support your newest tech. The reality here is that such a product would likely be 2U just to support the power supplies and heat removal needs. Apples lack of support for suitable OpenCL hardware, on any of their platforms, has me wondering if the are really concerned about high performance uses of OpenCL.
As to software there has been much focus on that in this thread. Apple is improving but I just don't believe they care about some of the packages discussed in this thread. I suspect that the mundane corporate needs are not what they are targetting, but are rather after small business and more electic installations. Plus I do believe that hardware is a bigger problem for them right now, they simply don't have a wide array of solutions and the lack of such prevents targetting Apples hardware in the first place. Let's face it there is plenty of server grade software out there that could be targetted or ported to Apple hardware but isn't. I suspect the combination of the poor hardware line up and the lack of confidence in Apples server stradegy has a lot to do with that.
To summarize what others have stated, if Apple did the following then their server marketshare would grow through the roof.
1) Give a roadmap. example: every six months we'll roll-out new server hardware
2) Mirror Dell, HP, and IBM is support contracts with on-site service and 4 hour turnaround options.
3) Fix the bugs and rework the networking and file system stacks to make OSX Server a competitive server OS.
4) Offer more dense hardware configurations. example: a 4U 4 socket system and/or blades.
5) Provide support for multiple direct access storage vendors.
6) XSan and XGrid are nice but Apple needs to make XVirtual (a.k.a. robust Apple in-house made server virtualization software) and change the OSX Server licensing to allow virtualization.
7) Build and fully support a VAR network with the iPhone ecosystem as an example.
8) Rebuild XServe to match HPs features and quality for 1U servers.
9) License OSX Server to server OEMs
10) Create a world class server support group
11) Offer a competing cloud computing service
I think that's about it. If Apple is serious then they'll go after Dell's SOHO business.
density is not just more CPU's. right now i can buy a 1U HP server that holds up to 8 hard drives. the 2U is up to 16 hard drives. each of them scales up to 144GB of RAM, Apple maxes out at only 24GB.
and give away a free management tool similar to HP's Insight Manager. if you're on the phone with support and they ask you what kind of RAM you have, you shouldn't have to pop open a server to see which RAM you have in which slots
and something like integrated lights out. as long as you have power and the iLO port has a working NIC connection you can push the power button from any web browser, including the iphone's safari. if
As an IT manager for a company that purchased $80K in XServes and Promise RAIDs, I would say Apple has the best ROI than any Microsoft Server that I have setup.
Yes, I am Apple Certified and MCSE too.
Yes, 100% of the company I work for is Mac OS X 10.5.8 until PGP can get their software ready for 10.6!
Yes, Apple has a great server platform and it is the most stable I have ever worked on. It runs itself once you configure it the right way. It took a day to setup 3 Xserves, 2 - 16 TB Promise raids.
Our solution is rock solid! Not one issue! Using Apple Mail, iCal Server and NetInstalling, AFP, NFS, DHCP, DNS etc... Xserves are ROCK SOLID!
Apple Stock will be $1,000.00 a share, if Apple learns to package it correctly.
density is not just more CPU's. right now i can buy a 1U HP server that holds up to 8 hard drives. the 2U is up to 16 hard drives. each of them scales up to 144GB of RAM, Apple maxes out at only 24GB.
and give away a free management tool similar to HP's Insight Manager. if you're on the phone with support and they ask you what kind of RAM you have, you shouldn't have to pop open a server to see which RAM you have in which slots
and something like integrated lights out. as long as you have power and the iLO port has a working NIC connection you can push the power button from any web browser, including the iphone's safari. if
Absolutely correct. If Apple offered 2.5" SAS or SATA drives as an option then they could possibly fit eight of them in an XServe enclosure. Yeah 24Gb is pretty pathetic. I see one HP 1U that supports 192Gb of RAM.
As an IT manager for a company that purchased $80K in XServes and Promise RAIDs, I would say Apple has the best ROI than any Microsoft Server that I have setup.
[...]
Xserves are ROCK SOLID!
Apple Stock will be $1,000.00 a share, if Apple learns to package it correctly.
I guess the equivalent modular system would be VMWare's virtual appliance images.
As for the home server idea I am not sure in the home you really need servers, just sharing. Think about how easily Macs find each other. They have Bonjour, Bonjour Sleep Proxy, and even Back to My Mac to enable sharing over the Internet. And anything that can't be done with simple sharing there is MobileMe for.
I think Apple's server strategy for the home is "sharing."
Actually I think it's Time Capsule & also the new Snow leopard feature that lets your AirPort or Time Capsule wake your Mac for access to shares on your computer.
Before Apple ventures into Wonderland, they first need to get right the services Mac OS X Server currently provides. In this regard, IMHO Apple blew it with the Snow Leopard Server upgrade. One of the primary uses for a server is to handle e-mail. As the forums indicate, many "upgraders" were plagued afterwards with messages all dated November 20, 2060, which were a huge PIA to correct. And without warning, sieveshell support was basically removed by the upgrade. A few people in the forums are lauding Apple for providing a Squirrelmail interface to vacation and sieveshell, but the sieveshell rules that can be configured in this manner are absolutely rinky dink. The true power of sieveshell is now gone.
Please, these issues are no different for people moving to the first release of Server 2008 or Exchange 2007. There isn't a corporate Network Admin with any sense who would upgrade his systems using the first release of any server product. The people who got burned were people who were too impatient to wait & just wanted to play with their nice new Snow Kitty.
This is not an issue unique to Apple, you should never ever upgrade with release 1.
As an IT manager for a company that purchased $80K in XServes and Promise RAIDs, I would say Apple has the best ROI than any Microsoft Server that I have setup.
Yes, I am Apple Certified and MCSE too.
Yes, 100% of the company I work for is Mac OS X 10.5.8 until PGP can get their software ready for 10.6!
Yes, Apple has a great server platform and it is the most stable I have ever worked on. It runs itself once you configure it the right way. It took a day to setup 3 Xserves, 2 - 16 TB Promise raids.
Our solution is rock solid! Not one issue! Using Apple Mail, iCal Server and NetInstalling, AFP, NFS, DHCP, DNS etc... Xserves are ROCK SOLID!
Apple Stock will be $1,000.00 a share, if Apple learns to package it correctly.
Yeah, Apple's products are very much there in many regards & things like XGrid make them a no brainer for science shops.
Problem with Apple & corporate is 2 fold:
1. To many Windows entrenched & indoctrinated corporations. Microsoft gets you so locked into their stuff that there is no way you can afford the initial costs to switch shop.
2. Terrible business support. Making hardware that rarely breaks is not a viable alternative to having support that can get you the part the same day it goes down & will send someone onsite (no matter how far you live from an Apple Store) to fix it. Their warranty options stink too & their management of purchased warranties stinks. I should never have to register my own support contracts, they should register automatically when I purchase them against a list of serial numbers!
They also need to buy out JAMF, make their product more clean & integrated with Server tools, & push it out with their XServer product. Unlimited client is nice, but what sells to IT shops is great manageability. No IT admin wants to need to know CLI to be able to do the real powerful server management stuff.
Support & management are the key to breaking into the business world.
Please, these issues are no different for people moving to the first release of Server 2008 or Exchange 2007. There isn't a corporate Network Admin with any sense who would upgrade his systems using the first release of any server product. The people who got burned were people who were too impatient to wait & just wanted to play with their nice new Snow Kitty.
Condescend much? Basic e-mail was not migrated properly.
1. To many Windows entrenched & indoctrinated corporations. Microsoft gets you so locked into their stuff that there is no way you can afford the initial costs to switch shop.
That has nothing to do with it. The fact is Apple hardware is just more expensive then most corporations need, because of that your still stuck with basic workstations, or even thin clients. If your running a mainly windows environment, not running AD would make things more difficult then they need to be.
imurphit, how big is your organization?
Apple simply doesn't provide the support features required in an enterprise server setting. If they were really serious they would decouple the hardware and software, so I could run it on any server and just buy license for the OSX Server Software.
I obtained a trial version of snow leopard from apple to run on my mini. I assumed they would help me migrate our small office so that I would then buy the software. Unfortunately, they have no phone help available and, far worse, no documentation on how to migrate from AD to OD. What is the point of the trial. To prove that I am going to need a real IT whichever platform I am on. It defeats the purpose.
Does anyone know where there is a resource to explain how to do this?
I'm reading this thread with great interest and several posters have made good points. Others, well perhaps they lack an understanding of the server market. I worked for Apple from 1987 - 1992, as a field sales rep, and spent 15 years as a Sales rep for Sun Microsystems. Believe me. I've seen the Good Bad, and Ugly! (A/UX is clearly in the UGLY category...)
As much as I love Apple, on the desktop, they have no play in Enterprise Servers. Period! Their hardware lacks server management features such as 'lights-out' management, highly redundant components, and built-in virtualization (now standard on all server platforms). They have a point product that *may* fit into a small business or specialized applications, but they have made a strategic choice NOT to invest in or enter this market in a serious way. BTW, I believe this is a wise choice given the current market conditions and their own lack of expertise in servers. My previous employer (Sun) has a world-class lineup of Servers, Storage, and Software/Middleware and they are in the process of being eaten by Oracle. Apple understands it's market and where it can attain leadership position. They stick to their knitting and create dynamite value in the markets where they compete. Admittedly, Apple could do more to integrated their products (Hardware and OS) into Enterprises, and they have made some progress in recent years.
In the Enterprise Server Market companies like IBM, HP, and Oracle/Sun slug it out. This is mainly 'big iron' and proprietary Unix (AIX, HP/UX, Solaris). In the Entry to Mid-range market Intel-based commodity servers running either Windows or Linux dominate. Windows owns the majority of File, Print, Messaging, and small application servers while Linux has made significant inroads into Application, File, and Database servers.
Apple could probably carve out a few niche markets and perhaps turn the Mac Mini into a true home server. They could leverage their strength in User Interfaces with the mini as a low-cost, standardized hardware platform. This is probably as much marketing as it is technology, and of course they would need to beef up their technical support which inevitably comes with being in the 'server' market.
The truth is, no matter how you slice you pie chart, Apple server products are much more expensive than comparable products from Asus, HP, Dell etc.
When the budget is being drawn up and someone (not an IT person) asks why we are buying 20 of these $3000 boxes when we could get 30 $1000 boxes and have money left for other stuff.
The only compelling arguement I see for an Apple server are the escape from microsoft CALs (client access licenses).
You can argue that they are good for a small business. No business plans to stay small except the mom and pop grocery store. They need to scalable and have robust multiple options. A blade server would be an excellent start. Maybe a 2u 4 blade server which can be followed by an 8u 20 blade server which fits the same blades?
And you cant nest groups? sheesh!
Is there at least a way to import CSV files to set up users and groups?
This is a feature I use constantly on the server 2003/08 side.
If Apple doesnt want to come down to the level of the other servers they should instead specialize on teh network appliance side of things.
Make Xserve the premier content delivery box. Or the premier streaming box. You may have to go to 2u to make a box that can fit cards though. Or have serious data interfaces built in standard.
i've been a AI reader for many years, and a mac server administrator in education environments for even more years - and apparently i misplaced my AI membership from lack of use. anyway, i enjoyed this server related article, and would truely like to see more mac server content on AI. i've worked with mac servers from appleshare ip 6 to snow leopard server, and one thing i can say for certain is that if apple really desires to make Mac OS Server accessible to the masses as an easy-to-setup and easy-to-use server without having to go past the Server Admin and WGM GUI - they need to create WAY more GUI's for the buried server functions. you will likely fail in successfully running the "server advanced" feature of 10.5 and 10.6 server, or the earlier versions of Mac Server without such GUI's - you need to have knowledge beyond GUI. (fyi: the "basic" and "workgroup" features of Server 10.5 & 10.6 may be replicated with a 10.5 or 10.6 client installation). in many cases with Mac 10.3+ Server, functionality doesn't exist as advertised to this day, documentation is inaccurate, and Apple Server telephone support only comes with the investment of many thousands of dollars with AppleCare-for-Server. i can tell you from repeated experience on the receiving side - mac server is VERY hackable because Apple doesn't take security seriously enough, and there are A LOT of people who know UNIX out there, and will hack the crap out of your Mac Server, particularly if you have any login shells enabled - even with SSH only. Mac Server users need to get on Apple's back to invest more development in Server software to make a more robust, reliable and secure product. AppleInsider could be very helpful in such an endeavor. The Administrators at AFP548.com are too close to Apple to be helpful, since around 2006... perhaps even 2005.
If Apple just took a break from OS releases for 2 years and focused on bettering the apps (client and server) during that time I'd be all for it. Improve all the Server offerings and work out the bugs. Snow Leopard has a good foundation so tweaking should be good enough for awhile.
The notion that the solution to selling Apples servers is as simple as something like the App Store is slightly disturbing. The app store is good because it provides one outlet to get iPhone apps. Server software on the other hand is entirely different often costly and follows major plans on what way to take your infrastructure. How something like an App Store can come into that I fail to see.
The problem I'd say Apple has is you don't just buy a server for its OS features. You buy it to meet the needs of what your going to run on it. I run a Wed Development department and all our servers are windows for the simple reason that we want to right in .NET as we think its the best and most productive. For us to change to an Apple server it wont be a case of how good there server is, it will be a case of can they make something to rival the .NET framework!
Comments
1) Give a roadmap. example: every six months we'll roll-out new server hardware
2) Mirror Dell, HP, and IBM is support contracts with on-site service and 4 hour turnaround options.
3) Fix the bugs and rework the networking and file system stacks to make OSX Server a competitive server OS.
4) Offer more dense hardware configurations. example: a 4U 4 socket system and/or blades.
5) Provide support for multiple direct access storage vendors.
6) XSan and XGrid are nice but Apple needs to make XVirtual (a.k.a. robust Apple in-house made server virtualization software) and change the OSX Server licensing to allow virtualization.
7) Build and fully support a VAR network with the iPhone ecosystem as an example.
8) Rebuild XServe to match HPs features and quality for 1U servers.
9) License OSX Server to server OEMs
10) Create a world class server support group
11) Offer a competing cloud computing service
I think that's about it. If Apple is serious then they'll go after Dell's SOHO business.
PS: Forgot to ask, does it have built in support for iPhone connectivity? I'm hearing from many people in the industry that RIM, HTC, Samsung and Microsoft are doomed and in two month or so every major corporation in the world is switching to iPhone and macs. According to him, Macs make corporates ten times more productive on average. For example, you can print photo books or upload movies directly to youtube via quicktime. Another big feature in macs that appeal to power users and professionals is leading edge graphics. The top end Mac Pro comes with a nVidia GT120 that is unheard of in the PC world! 4870? doesnt even exist on the PCs! screw M$ and their old century crap!
The success of MS and Linux based servers really doesn't say anything about the quality of Apples servers, they simply target a different segments of the market. Believe it or not some people just don't care about Exchange or some of the other corporate favored packages. Besides that many corporations would not even try to run all these protocols on one box so the lack of Exchange does mean much.
As to other problems that Apple has created, their hardware management is absolutely terrible. As others have pointed out dropping what was acknowledged to be a very good RAID device really makes Apple look very stupid. Actually it goes beyound being stupid, because even a stupid person wouldn't make this sort of mistake, especially considering some of the markets Apple was targetting. While I don't consider XServe to be a bad server, I actually think it is a fairly good value, one server doesn't make for a product line up. Some here have mentioned going bigger as in 2U but I suspect that there is a huge market in smaller servers. Let's say something in the 1/3 to 1/4 width of a 1U server. There is a convergence of technology taking place that would allow for a very competitive server in these sizes. Obviously this is not the answer for a massive corporate environment but could be very useful in small business and the home. Plus a new platform would allow for innovations such as quick change external power supplies and maybe even that Light Peak connection.
I find distressing also that Apple has failed to target the home server market, especially for video and music. Really Apple who moves more digital content over the net, but doesn't provide for a rational storage and serving product for that content. The interesting thing here is that the same device has the potential to serve both the home user and small business very well. All you are really talking about is a RAID box with a video sysytem capable of 1080P. Actually this would be a good use for all of their cash as they could buy somebody like Drobo and apply that tech to a micro server product.
The last thing about hardware is that they seem to be asleep at the wheel here with respect to OpenCL, or high performance computing in general. They really need to offer and support a machine with either a Tesla or Fermi based accelerator card. A plug in card too, relying on the system GPU is to bright. Fermi should support ECC too. I say card but a Fermi chip built right on the motherboard isn't a bad idea either. The goal is to have a state of the art product to support your newest tech. The reality here is that such a product would likely be 2U just to support the power supplies and heat removal needs. Apples lack of support for suitable OpenCL hardware, on any of their platforms, has me wondering if the are really concerned about high performance uses of OpenCL.
As to software there has been much focus on that in this thread. Apple is improving but I just don't believe they care about some of the packages discussed in this thread. I suspect that the mundane corporate needs are not what they are targetting, but are rather after small business and more electic installations. Plus I do believe that hardware is a bigger problem for them right now, they simply don't have a wide array of solutions and the lack of such prevents targetting Apples hardware in the first place. Let's face it there is plenty of server grade software out there that could be targetted or ported to Apple hardware but isn't. I suspect the combination of the poor hardware line up and the lack of confidence in Apples server stradegy has a lot to do with that.
Dave
PS: Forgot to ask, does it have built in support for iPhone connectivity?
SLS comes with a new Push Notification service that can be configured to provide real push e-mail to iPhones, except it doesn't work.
To summarize what others have stated, if Apple did the following then their server marketshare would grow through the roof.
1) Give a roadmap. example: every six months we'll roll-out new server hardware
2) Mirror Dell, HP, and IBM is support contracts with on-site service and 4 hour turnaround options.
3) Fix the bugs and rework the networking and file system stacks to make OSX Server a competitive server OS.
4) Offer more dense hardware configurations. example: a 4U 4 socket system and/or blades.
5) Provide support for multiple direct access storage vendors.
6) XSan and XGrid are nice but Apple needs to make XVirtual (a.k.a. robust Apple in-house made server virtualization software) and change the OSX Server licensing to allow virtualization.
7) Build and fully support a VAR network with the iPhone ecosystem as an example.
8) Rebuild XServe to match HPs features and quality for 1U servers.
9) License OSX Server to server OEMs
10) Create a world class server support group
11) Offer a competing cloud computing service
I think that's about it. If Apple is serious then they'll go after Dell's SOHO business.
density is not just more CPU's. right now i can buy a 1U HP server that holds up to 8 hard drives. the 2U is up to 16 hard drives. each of them scales up to 144GB of RAM, Apple maxes out at only 24GB.
and give away a free management tool similar to HP's Insight Manager. if you're on the phone with support and they ask you what kind of RAM you have, you shouldn't have to pop open a server to see which RAM you have in which slots
and something like integrated lights out. as long as you have power and the iLO port has a working NIC connection you can push the power button from any web browser, including the iphone's safari. if
Yes, I am Apple Certified and MCSE too.
Yes, 100% of the company I work for is Mac OS X 10.5.8 until PGP can get their software ready for 10.6!
Yes, Apple has a great server platform and it is the most stable I have ever worked on. It runs itself once you configure it the right way. It took a day to setup 3 Xserves, 2 - 16 TB Promise raids.
Our solution is rock solid! Not one issue! Using Apple Mail, iCal Server and NetInstalling, AFP, NFS, DHCP, DNS etc... Xserves are ROCK SOLID!
Apple Stock will be $1,000.00 a share, if Apple learns to package it correctly.
density is not just more CPU's. right now i can buy a 1U HP server that holds up to 8 hard drives. the 2U is up to 16 hard drives. each of them scales up to 144GB of RAM, Apple maxes out at only 24GB.
and give away a free management tool similar to HP's Insight Manager. if you're on the phone with support and they ask you what kind of RAM you have, you shouldn't have to pop open a server to see which RAM you have in which slots
and something like integrated lights out. as long as you have power and the iLO port has a working NIC connection you can push the power button from any web browser, including the iphone's safari. if
Absolutely correct. If Apple offered 2.5" SAS or SATA drives as an option then they could possibly fit eight of them in an XServe enclosure. Yeah 24Gb is pretty pathetic. I see one HP 1U that supports 192Gb of RAM.
As an IT manager for a company that purchased $80K in XServes and Promise RAIDs, I would say Apple has the best ROI than any Microsoft Server that I have setup.
[...]
Xserves are ROCK SOLID!
Apple Stock will be $1,000.00 a share, if Apple learns to package it correctly.
You're an AAPL shareholder, I take it.
I guess the equivalent modular system would be VMWare's virtual appliance images.
As for the home server idea I am not sure in the home you really need servers, just sharing. Think about how easily Macs find each other. They have Bonjour, Bonjour Sleep Proxy, and even Back to My Mac to enable sharing over the Internet. And anything that can't be done with simple sharing there is MobileMe for.
I think Apple's server strategy for the home is "sharing."
Actually I think it's Time Capsule & also the new Snow leopard feature that lets your AirPort or Time Capsule wake your Mac for access to shares on your computer.
For home use you definitely don't need an XServe.
Before Apple ventures into Wonderland, they first need to get right the services Mac OS X Server currently provides. In this regard, IMHO Apple blew it with the Snow Leopard Server upgrade. One of the primary uses for a server is to handle e-mail. As the forums indicate, many "upgraders" were plagued afterwards with messages all dated November 20, 2060, which were a huge PIA to correct. And without warning, sieveshell support was basically removed by the upgrade. A few people in the forums are lauding Apple for providing a Squirrelmail interface to vacation and sieveshell, but the sieveshell rules that can be configured in this manner are absolutely rinky dink. The true power of sieveshell is now gone.
Please, these issues are no different for people moving to the first release of Server 2008 or Exchange 2007. There isn't a corporate Network Admin with any sense who would upgrade his systems using the first release of any server product. The people who got burned were people who were too impatient to wait & just wanted to play with their nice new Snow Kitty.
This is not an issue unique to Apple, you should never ever upgrade with release 1.
As an IT manager for a company that purchased $80K in XServes and Promise RAIDs, I would say Apple has the best ROI than any Microsoft Server that I have setup.
Yes, I am Apple Certified and MCSE too.
Yes, 100% of the company I work for is Mac OS X 10.5.8 until PGP can get their software ready for 10.6!
Yes, Apple has a great server platform and it is the most stable I have ever worked on. It runs itself once you configure it the right way. It took a day to setup 3 Xserves, 2 - 16 TB Promise raids.
Our solution is rock solid! Not one issue! Using Apple Mail, iCal Server and NetInstalling, AFP, NFS, DHCP, DNS etc... Xserves are ROCK SOLID!
Apple Stock will be $1,000.00 a share, if Apple learns to package it correctly.
Yeah, Apple's products are very much there in many regards & things like XGrid make them a no brainer for science shops.
Problem with Apple & corporate is 2 fold:
1. To many Windows entrenched & indoctrinated corporations. Microsoft gets you so locked into their stuff that there is no way you can afford the initial costs to switch shop.
2. Terrible business support. Making hardware that rarely breaks is not a viable alternative to having support that can get you the part the same day it goes down & will send someone onsite (no matter how far you live from an Apple Store) to fix it. Their warranty options stink too & their management of purchased warranties stinks. I should never have to register my own support contracts, they should register automatically when I purchase them against a list of serial numbers!
They also need to buy out JAMF, make their product more clean & integrated with Server tools, & push it out with their XServer product. Unlimited client is nice, but what sells to IT shops is great manageability. No IT admin wants to need to know CLI to be able to do the real powerful server management stuff.
Support & management are the key to breaking into the business world.
Please, these issues are no different for people moving to the first release of Server 2008 or Exchange 2007. There isn't a corporate Network Admin with any sense who would upgrade his systems using the first release of any server product. The people who got burned were people who were too impatient to wait & just wanted to play with their nice new Snow Kitty.
Condescend much? Basic e-mail was not migrated properly.
1. To many Windows entrenched & indoctrinated corporations. Microsoft gets you so locked into their stuff that there is no way you can afford the initial costs to switch shop.
That has nothing to do with it. The fact is Apple hardware is just more expensive then most corporations need, because of that your still stuck with basic workstations, or even thin clients. If your running a mainly windows environment, not running AD would make things more difficult then they need to be.
imurphit, how big is your organization?
Apple simply doesn't provide the support features required in an enterprise server setting. If they were really serious they would decouple the hardware and software, so I could run it on any server and just buy license for the OSX Server Software.
Does anyone know where there is a resource to explain how to do this?
As much as I love Apple, on the desktop, they have no play in Enterprise Servers. Period! Their hardware lacks server management features such as 'lights-out' management, highly redundant components, and built-in virtualization (now standard on all server platforms). They have a point product that *may* fit into a small business or specialized applications, but they have made a strategic choice NOT to invest in or enter this market in a serious way. BTW, I believe this is a wise choice given the current market conditions and their own lack of expertise in servers. My previous employer (Sun) has a world-class lineup of Servers, Storage, and Software/Middleware and they are in the process of being eaten by Oracle. Apple understands it's market and where it can attain leadership position. They stick to their knitting and create dynamite value in the markets where they compete. Admittedly, Apple could do more to integrated their products (Hardware and OS) into Enterprises, and they have made some progress in recent years.
In the Enterprise Server Market companies like IBM, HP, and Oracle/Sun slug it out. This is mainly 'big iron' and proprietary Unix (AIX, HP/UX, Solaris). In the Entry to Mid-range market Intel-based commodity servers running either Windows or Linux dominate. Windows owns the majority of File, Print, Messaging, and small application servers while Linux has made significant inroads into Application, File, and Database servers.
Apple could probably carve out a few niche markets and perhaps turn the Mac Mini into a true home server. They could leverage their strength in User Interfaces with the mini as a low-cost, standardized hardware platform. This is probably as much marketing as it is technology, and of course they would need to beef up their technical support which inevitably comes with being in the 'server' market.
That's my $.02...
When the budget is being drawn up and someone (not an IT person) asks why we are buying 20 of these $3000 boxes when we could get 30 $1000 boxes and have money left for other stuff.
The only compelling arguement I see for an Apple server are the escape from microsoft CALs (client access licenses).
You can argue that they are good for a small business. No business plans to stay small except the mom and pop grocery store. They need to scalable and have robust multiple options. A blade server would be an excellent start. Maybe a 2u 4 blade server which can be followed by an 8u 20 blade server which fits the same blades?
And you cant nest groups? sheesh!
Is there at least a way to import CSV files to set up users and groups?
This is a feature I use constantly on the server 2003/08 side.
If Apple doesnt want to come down to the level of the other servers they should instead specialize on teh network appliance side of things.
Make Xserve the premier content delivery box. Or the premier streaming box. You may have to go to 2u to make a box that can fit cards though. Or have serious data interfaces built in standard.
If Apple just took a break from OS releases for 2 years and focused on bettering the apps (client and server) during that time I'd be all for it. Improve all the Server offerings and work out the bugs. Snow Leopard has a good foundation so tweaking should be good enough for awhile.
The problem I'd say Apple has is you don't just buy a server for its OS features. You buy it to meet the needs of what your going to run on it. I run a Wed Development department and all our servers are windows for the simple reason that we want to right in .NET as we think its the best and most productive. For us to change to an Apple server it wont be a case of how good there server is, it will be a case of can they make something to rival the .NET framework!