I am sorry but these specs are UNDER whelming and for one reason alone. There are faster G4's available but Jobs is so damn paranoid that there will be a faster G4 in the server than on the desktop he announces this thing. Bleh Bleh Bleh is what I say! And if the GHz G4's work with DDR than why the hell does the Power Mac still have SDRAM?? And don't you dare say "it will be DDR ths summer..." It shold have been DDR LAST Summer.
I'm sorry but this sucks!</strong><hr></blockquote>
im sorry to say, but the logic of the above post is completely flawed. im reading it to say:
"When Apple releases a product, it sucks."
hello man, Apple's currently released products are always better than previously released products. and well it's to bad you think progress sucks.
Anyone want to find better hardware and software specs (including Unlimited server licnese (check out the cost for that at microsft.com and visual server monitor tools, and firewire) for an equal or lower price? any takers? huh?
I swear If apple had come out with a G6 1U some people would still find something to complain about.
Damn right!!! Remember IBM, Dell etc are selling single/dual 1.0-1.4 PIII's in 1U right now. Go take a look. Most of the base prices don't include an OS. OSX is a very sophisticated OS and Apple's prices include this cost. ATA is a little uncommon but maybe Apple is right that the extra cost of SCSI is unjustified. Is there on board ATA-RAID or through software is the question? We will soon know I guess. DDR ram is a little odd too. ECC I hope.
Another note: Is it 4MB total or for each processor? because the 7455 only supports 2MB of L3 cache. If the XServer has 4MB per processor then this is a whole new breed of G4.
A demo of Blast, used in genetic research to try to find matches in fragments of genetic code. Not only will Blast run on XServe, but on clusters of Xserves.
Like the sound of this...
T</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think BLAST is Job's new guassian blur benchmark. I hope they were able to run some more relevent banchmarks on this puppy.
I think BLAST is Job's new guassian blur benchmark. I hope they were able to run some more relevent banchmarks on this puppy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote] Server load demo: 400 simultaneous streaming connections, 50 percent server load, 211 megabits per second throughput, all on one server. <hr></blockquote>
I think what Apple is doing is smart w.r.t. ATA and SCSI. ATA is standard, and cheap, and SCSI can be added via a PCI card. No need to force expensive SCSI drives on users who don't want it. Everyone gets what they want.
Okay, am I completely nuts, or did the MacCentral report at some point state that this thing had a serial console port?!? I could have *SWORN* it said that, but after mailing it to a 'if it's not serial, it's CRAP' buddy, I had to eat crow when he pointed out that the page never says that.
From press release - Oracle to run on Xservers... :-)
"Apple's powerful new Xserve rack-mount workgroup server solution combined with Apple's UNIX-based Mac OS X Server software is a superior platform for Oracle9i Database," said Michael Rocha, senior vice president, Product Services and Platform Technologies, Oracle Corp. "Oracle's leading database clustering technology, Oracle9i Real Application Clusters, running on Xserve will deliver enterprise-class solutions to our joint customers and create new opportunities for both companies."
I really wanted to see RapidIO dropped into these servers, that would have given me a little more confidence that I would see that in the new Powermacs. I have begun to re-think my decision to buy a new-rev TI if new Powermac's are coming out at MWNY.
Still can dream, I guess but the biggest beef I have with ALL the macs is bus speed and a switched fabric "bus-less" powermac would be gravy... chicken gravy. Regardless of if it was only powered by dual 1GHz.
Sorry, got off topic <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> . I agree with some other posters that cpu speed in servers is a secondary concern. I know lots of companies that run comfortable on low-speed PII's (<=300MHz) but of course thats not a problem with SCSI controllers offloading IO requests from the processor.
Is anyone intimate with ATA and its processor usage? I know that most ATA controllers now support bus-mastering on PCI (by-passing the processor) but is it as efficient as newer-generation SCSI?
Right on Maine Road, it is cool to think about the world we live in sometimes. We are so spoiled and are expectations so high these days. And we bitch about the slightest hiccup, when in fact its amazing it all works as well as it does. Someone was in my studio complaining one time about the quirks of ProTools, and I responded that I am always amazed at a machine that can run 64 simultaneous tracks, with effects, inserts, and monitoring. Its a miracle it works at all.
Also, for those of you cursing jobs because of the speed, get a life. If you actually worked with servers, you would look at the whole picture, not just the speed of the processor. This unit rocks, and with Apple's knack for making admin simple, the unit will be great. I agree with the others who say that nothing would have satisfied the complainers. If they did release a 1.6 G4, you would be bitching about the fact that there were not out in the towers yet.
Is anyone intimate with ATA and its processor usage? I know that most ATA controllers now support bus-mastering on PCI (by-passing the processor) but is it as efficient as newer-generation SCSI?
Wish I could say that I was a drive expert but the only issues I see with ATA is the lack of Simultaneous Read/Writes. Running a DB should be slower on ATA drives when handling alot of requests. ATA's processor drag has lessened to the point where I don't think that's as much of an issue anymore
Comments
XServe is nice. But ATA sucks for High Volume Serving. Lucky there are PCI Slots. Pony up for that SCSI U360 card.
J :cool:
<strong>News Flash! Steve Jobs is a pussy!
I am sorry but these specs are UNDER whelming and for one reason alone. There are faster G4's available but Jobs is so damn paranoid that there will be a faster G4 in the server than on the desktop he announces this thing. Bleh Bleh Bleh is what I say! And if the GHz G4's work with DDR than why the hell does the Power Mac still have SDRAM?? And don't you dare say "it will be DDR ths summer..." It shold have been DDR LAST Summer.
I'm sorry but this sucks!</strong><hr></blockquote>
im sorry to say, but the logic of the above post is completely flawed. im reading it to say:
"When Apple releases a product, it sucks."
hello man, Apple's currently released products are always better than previously released products. and well it's to bad you think progress sucks.
<strong>
Anyone want to find better hardware and software specs (including Unlimited server licnese (check out the cost for that at microsft.com and visual server monitor tools, and firewire) for an equal or lower price? any takers? huh?
I swear If apple had come out with a G6 1U some people would still find something to complain about.
[ 05-14-2002: Message edited by: keyboardf12 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Damn right!!! Remember IBM, Dell etc are selling single/dual 1.0-1.4 PIII's in 1U right now. Go take a look. Most of the base prices don't include an OS. OSX is a very sophisticated OS and Apple's prices include this cost. ATA is a little uncommon but maybe Apple is right that the extra cost of SCSI is unjustified. Is there on board ATA-RAID or through software is the question? We will soon know I guess. DDR ram is a little odd too. ECC I hope.
<strong>From MacCentral:
A demo of Blast, used in genetic research to try to find matches in fragments of genetic code. Not only will Blast run on XServe, but on clusters of Xserves.
Like the sound of this...
T</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think BLAST is Job's new guassian blur benchmark. I hope they were able to run some more relevent banchmarks on this puppy.
Nah, just kiddin'
:cool:
"Apache, QuickTime Streaming, WebObjects, Mail (SMTP, POP, IMAP), WebDAV, SSL, PHP, MySQL, Java, CGI, Caching Web Proxy"
"Mac (AFP), Windows (Samba, SMB/CIFS), Unix and Linux (NFS), Internet (FTP, WebDAV), LPR/LPD and SMB/CIFS printing"
"Mac Manager 2, NetBoot, NetInfo, LDAP connectivity, Server Admin via SSH"
All this for a couple grand...
XServer is the Bob Vila of Servers!
[ 05-14-2002: Message edited by: Maine Road ]</p>
<strong>
I think BLAST is Job's new guassian blur benchmark. I hope they were able to run some more relevent banchmarks on this puppy.</strong><hr></blockquote>
RC5 anyone?
There we go!
Where on EARTH did I see it?!?
"Apple's powerful new Xserve rack-mount workgroup server solution combined with Apple's UNIX-based Mac OS X Server software is a superior platform for Oracle9i Database," said Michael Rocha, senior vice president, Product Services and Platform Technologies, Oracle Corp. "Oracle's leading database clustering technology, Oracle9i Real Application Clusters, running on Xserve will deliver enterprise-class solutions to our joint customers and create new opportunities for both companies."
Still can dream, I guess but the biggest beef I have with ALL the macs is bus speed and a switched fabric "bus-less" powermac would be gravy... chicken gravy. Regardless of if it was only powered by dual 1GHz.
Sorry, got off topic <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> . I agree with some other posters that cpu speed in servers is a secondary concern. I know lots of companies that run comfortable on low-speed PII's (<=300MHz) but of course thats not a problem with SCSI controllers offloading IO requests from the processor.
Is anyone intimate with ATA and its processor usage? I know that most ATA controllers now support bus-mastering on PCI (by-passing the processor) but is it as efficient as newer-generation SCSI?
first-time poster, long-time fanatic
<strong>OMG Cluster !!!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course Clusters. You think they want to make these to run websites? They want people buying these in three digit numbers!
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001669"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=001669</a>;
Also, for those of you cursing jobs because of the speed, get a life. If you actually worked with servers, you would look at the whole picture, not just the speed of the processor. This unit rocks, and with Apple's knack for making admin simple, the unit will be great. I agree with the others who say that nothing would have satisfied the complainers. If they did release a 1.6 G4, you would be bitching about the fact that there were not out in the towers yet.
Let's be happy for a change here.
<strong>
Is anyone intimate with ATA and its processor usage? I know that most ATA controllers now support bus-mastering on PCI (by-passing the processor) but is it as efficient as newer-generation SCSI?
first-time poster, long-time fanatic</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wish I could say that I was a drive expert but the only issues I see with ATA is the lack of Simultaneous Read/Writes. Running a DB should be slower on ATA drives when handling alot of requests. ATA's processor drag has lessened to the point where I don't think that's as much of an issue anymore