1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Apple kills off Xserve server range

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 5 Nov 2010.

  1. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
  2. Psy-UK

    Psy-UK New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    111
    Likes Received:
    4
    I never knew Apple even made servers.
     
  3. mi1ez

    mi1ez Active Member

    Joined:
    11 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    1,430
    Likes Received:
    17
    "The Xserve range was sold at a significant price premium over competing x86 server ranges from Dell, HP, and others, and while there was no denying its aesthetic appeal Apple missed a key point: servers are traditionally hidden where nobody can see them."

    Sums the whole thing up really. I'm not surprised at all.
     
  4. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    so does this mean that apple won't be working on osx server anymore? this will be a disappointment since apple JUST allowed virtualbox to use osx server in it and now they might ditch it, so what are we left with?

    if apple stuck with PPC, their servers would do soooo much better. x86 is not ideal for servers, its too limited. ppc, sparc, and cuda are the best for servers.

    what shocks me is how bit-tech says apple's servers are too expensive. for an x86 server, yes i'm sure its immensely overpriced, but ibm servers are RIDICULOUSLY expensive. but, ibm's servers are a lot more reliable.

    i'm not really sure why apple bothered to make servers, because as far as i'm aware, osx server still uses the same basic desktop that regular mac has, it just doesn't have the same programs. that basically means you get an os spending a lot of resources on the GUI, which doesn't matter. i'm sure mac's servers are also a lot more restricting than linux or even windows servers.

    the really interesting thing is, what will apple be using for their own servers if they stop making their own?
     
  5. perplekks45

    perplekks45 LIKE AN ANIMAL!

    Joined:
    9 May 2004
    Posts:
    5,743
    Likes Received:
    331
    If you'd read it properly the article answers your question:

    And how come you think Apple's servers are reasonably priced? While we migrated file servers at my former job some people asked us to evaluate Apple's offering as well. We had a good laugh and moved on.
     
  6. liratheal

    liratheal Sharing is Caring

    Joined:
    20 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    10,586
    Likes Received:
    705
    Good riddance.

    Needlessly pretty boxes.
     
  7. Er-El

    Er-El Member

    Joined:
    31 May 2008
    Posts:
    482
    Likes Received:
    10
    At last.
     
  8. StoneyMahoney

    StoneyMahoney New Member

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    287
    Likes Received:
    13
    The Xserve wasn't actually too badly priced and, when paired with an Xraid, was an excellent file server. We used several of them at the publishing and design firm I used to work for. Not that I'd recommend them for any company that wasn't heavily Mac based to start with. And all our webservers were 1U HP boxes running Linux (which our developers kept calling Blades, bless 'em).

    Skip forward to now and the Xserve has been discontinued for years, Apple is pushing Xsan and the Mac Pro is far more capable than the Xserve. Goodbye redundant product. Xserve, you will be missed. Just not for long.
     
  9. bowman

    bowman Member

    Joined:
    7 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    363
    Likes Received:
    10
    Such a shame they didn't introduce ZFS in Snow Leopard. That would have given them a great edge.
     
  10. sb1991

    sb1991 New Member

    Joined:
    31 May 2010
    Posts:
    425
    Likes Received:
    31
    Perhaps purchasers of servers have a bit more sense than apple's usual customers?
     
  11. Unknownsock

    Unknownsock New Member

    Joined:
    13 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    444
    Likes Received:
    1
    Honestly who isn't surprised here?
     
  12. Fabou

    Fabou New Member

    Joined:
    22 Apr 2010
    Posts:
    455
    Likes Received:
    2
    @sb1991 +1
    Anyway Apple market is clean looking system you can't really tweak, it kinda fell the opposite of server market.
     
  13. fodder

    fodder Member

    Joined:
    20 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    162
    Likes Received:
    3
    Having worked for a manufacturer in pre-press publishing systems, I have seen a lot of companies using servers who are primarily mac based. Very very few used mac servers and those that did were some of the most frequent support calls. Aside from being more expensive than the equivalent competition, they were unreliable and too closed. A file server should do just that, serve files, in an efficient, open and easy manner. Mac servers didn't like anything without a mac badge really.

    The worst case of this was one customer who lost ALL their work (TB of the stuff) because when a windows machine was updated with some patches it decided not to let the client complete the changes to it's files on the server, thus borking the lot. Silly apple.
     
  14. kempez

    kempez modding again!

    Joined:
    4 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    1,212
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'm sorry, but IBM servers are expensive and not hugely reliable. The rediculous thing about them is the licensing model IBM have. It's about £15k per CPU license last time I checked!

    I know, because we've had a P Series sitting in our data centre with hardware sitting there not being used, despite us needing capacity. Absolutely rubbish.

    Worth saying that we're replacing these with Windows X86 servers that are hugely cheaper and massively quicker.

    Not bothered about OSX servers, but it's a shame with Apple's reputation for producing stable software that they didn't think a little more about their server pricing and design.
     
  15. digitaldunc

    digitaldunc New Member

    Joined:
    4 Oct 2010
    Posts:
    629
    Likes Received:
    24
    I noticed the sneaky BSG reference in the subtitle :p

    Apart from that, not really much to add... if they're as closed platform and as expensive as their other products it's not really surprising.

    What I do find surprising is that products with inherent disadvantages like this repeatedly make it to market in the first place.
     
  16. bobwya

    bobwya Custom PC Migrant

    Joined:
    3 May 2009
    Posts:
    193
    Likes Received:
    1
    hmmm shiny
     
  17. digitaldave

    digitaldave New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    they are still making osx server, just not this hardware, will still be available to order but in a mac pro or mac mini.

    osx server is just osx with less gui and more server admin stuff, the main selling point for the mac mini server is unlimited seats, it costs not alot more than microsoft sbs with say 25 cals but you get unlimited cals and the hardware to run it.

    most biz are use to exchange and outlook though, so not as easy to configure or as flexible as sbs, blackberry enterprise server as a example doesnt work with mac osx server, its a comprimise thing really, if you know what you are doing and have users who also know what they are doing osx server does almost everything and is very stable, if you have users who dont want change or cant be bothered making a comprimise then sbs still wins hands down.
     
  18. antiHero

    antiHero ReliXmas time!

    Joined:
    19 Jan 2005
    Posts:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    13
    We use an Xserve at work as DC and print server. Love the admin panel, hate the setup!
    To get them running the way you want is a pain in the back, but when they run they run good.
    Biggest problem is the switch from AD to OD and the way samba works
     
  19. general22

    general22 New Member

    Joined:
    26 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    190
    Likes Received:
    1
    Unsurprising, nobody would use Apple servers over a *NIX/Windows box unless you had a bunch of Mac clients anyway. Looks like its time for those using Xserve to switch away from Apple for their servers.
     
  20. Phil Rhodes

    Phil Rhodes Hypernobber

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    10
    Now please make a Mac Pro that will fit in a rack - for all the people who'd like that, not just server admins. Yes, yes, I know, there's sporadic availability of rack conversion kits for them, but for pete's sake...
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page