+ Post New Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13
Mac Thread, Apple kills the server version of Mac OS X with Lion in Technical; Just noticed this on Apple's website. With the Xserve dead, it makes perfect sense. http://www.apple.com/macosx/lion/...
  1. #1


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    51.405546, -0.510212
    Posts
    8,709
    Thank Post
    220
    Thanked 2,615 Times in 1,926 Posts
    Rep Power
    777

    Apple kills the server version of Mac OS X with Lion

    Just noticed this on Apple's website. With the Xserve dead, it makes perfect sense.



    http://www.apple.com/macosx/lion/

  2. Thanks to Arthur from:

    rh91uk (25th February 2011)

  3. #2

    FN-GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    15,773
    Thank Post
    865
    Thanked 1,663 Times in 1,448 Posts
    Blog Entries
    11
    Rep Power
    442
    Hmm cant decide if thats good or bad....

  4. #3
    Carter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    269
    Thank Post
    10
    Thanked 64 Times in 41 Posts
    Rep Power
    18
    I think this is great.

  5. #4
    rh91uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    871
    Thank Post
    137
    Thanked 132 Times in 114 Posts
    Rep Power
    35
    Hmmmm, do I upgrade our macs/server in the summer or not. Thanks for posthing this!

  6. #5
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by FN-GM View Post
    Hmm cant decide if thats good or bad....
    it's good if you didn't like spending a few hundred quid on additional os x server licenses.

    to be honest, i have no problems with Apple ditching xserve and rolling os x server services into Lion, but i would like them to come out with a mac mini server that had dual gigE ports.

  7. #6

    Dos_Box's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    9,786
    Thank Post
    572
    Thanked 2,154 Times in 982 Posts
    Blog Entries
    23
    Rep Power
    626
    They will still need to manufacture decent server grade hardware to run it off though!

  8. #7

    mac_shinobi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    9,680
    Thank Post
    3,210
    Thanked 1,030 Times in 955 Posts
    Rep Power
    361
    Quote Originally Posted by Dos_Box View Post
    They will still need to manufacture decent server grade hardware to run it off though!
    The server version of the mac pro ??

  9. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    16
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Rep Power
    7
    File Sharing for iPad looks really interesting and finally answers the question that so many have when using the devices with multiple users!

    Looking at the screen shots it does seem to be part of the standard OS which will be interesting.

    When Thunderbolt reaches other Macs, such as the Mac mini server, you could use an adapter to utilise the port for ethernet giving you two Gb ethernet ports.

  10. #9


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    51.405546, -0.510212
    Posts
    8,709
    Thank Post
    220
    Thanked 2,615 Times in 1,926 Posts
    Rep Power
    777
    Quote Originally Posted by Dos_Box View Post
    They will still need to manufacture decent server grade hardware to run it off though!
    As mac_shinobi suggested, there's the Mac Pro.

    Now that Apple have adopted ThunderBolt (Light Peak), it's entirely possible for an enterprising third-party manufacturer to come up with a device for the Mac mini which provides most of the missing features required to turn it into a "proper" server. Something like the MiniStack from NewerTech (but similar in height to HPs Proliant MicroServer) or the 1U RackMac mini from Sonnet which sat below your Mac mini(s) and provided hot-swappable RAID protected storage, IPMI remote management, dual gigabit ethernet (as jwpercival mentioned), a couple of PCI Express slots etc. That would be pretty cool.
    Last edited by Arthur; 25th February 2011 at 10:01 AM.

  11. #10

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,241
    Thank Post
    110
    Thanked 242 Times in 193 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    74
    If they get that right it is going to be disruptive.

    Imagine Joe User with point and click home 'cloud' server. Couple that with Virgin Media XXL or BT Infinity, and why do you need mobileme or dropbox? With an iphone/3giPad you eliminate the need for live or google apps...

    Now imagine that on your LAN. If Apple get it right, and the end user makes use of TimeMachine, that's almost the SA part of our jobs gone. Interesting times.

    I think I prefer this direction to the one mapped by Google and Microsoft. My Data, My Server, My Device. Apple as the SA.

    p.

  12. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,241
    Thank Post
    110
    Thanked 242 Times in 193 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    74
    From what I've read Thunderbolt is basically PCI-Express through the DisplayPort connector. AS jwp and Authur say - huge potential for third parties there, assuming that they don't need to write kext drivers.

    And on the lack of server grade hardware... if some type 1 hypervisors start supporting lightpeak, then a gaggle of cheap non redundant consumer grade boxes could easily match the overall service reliability of fully redundant server grade hardware at a fraction of the price.

  13. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    hey hey hey, stay outta my shed. STAY OUT OF MY SHED.
    Posts
    1,004
    Thank Post
    237
    Thanked 190 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    106
    The mac pro server is still a toytown server. It's better specced than the macmini server but it's still not really that good.

    <rant>If I'm going to give up acres of rack space to something then its going to have to do a little better than no redundant power supplies and only 4 disks. They can call it a server all day and all night if they like but it still doesn't stack up to proper server hardware on many levels. </rant>

    I'm really quite pessimistic about the future of apple machines in business/educational networking given the idiotic decisions apple have been making lately. It remains to be seen if this new direction for Lion server is an amazing innovation or part of a goodbye to the datacentre on apple's part.

  14. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    267
    Thank Post
    6
    Thanked 67 Times in 59 Posts
    Rep Power
    51
    It would be much better if they just let us run OSX on any Intel server hardware either as a virtual or physical server.

    The servers from HP and others are considerably better than the ones from Apple. Cheaper, more reliable and higher quality. The Mac Mini Server is pretty pants. There is very little cooling or ventilation on them. Apple seem to be getting worse at cooling their Macs down, as well as sealing them up so its hard to repair them.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Mac OS X Lion
    By FN-GM in forum Mac
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 25th October 2010, 08:00 AM
  2. [Debian] SSH Tunnel Kills Remote Server
    By Batman in forum *nix
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 9th December 2009, 05:05 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 20th February 2009, 08:41 AM
  4. Virtual Server 2005 R2 kills server network connection
    By ajbritton in forum Thin Client and Virtual Machines
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 31st August 2006, 06:19 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •