At the MacWorld Expo today in San Fransisco, Apple announced new versions of iWork and iLife, as well as an updated 17" MacBook Pro, which promises a battery life of 7-8 hours. More interesting, however, is the fact that yesterday was Mac OS X Server's 10th birthday.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-06-29
Member since:2006-07-14
Despite your own experiences, I would think that it would have to be viewed as a disappointment. Its not even considered as an option by many businesses. Its Unix, but not Linux. Its GUI Administration, but not windows. There isn't a core of sys admins that are demanding enough of it to move it in the right direction to keep up with the others.
Member since:
2005-12-21
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2006-11-08
I have used OS X server for some time now. I can't speak for everyone , however for me it has been highly reliable. I have upgraded to new hardware by buying either refurb mac pro's.
This has allowed the cost of Mac hardware to be a non issue. Rock solid easy to maintain, easy to upgrade. Congrats OS X I can't wait for 10.6 server, with ZFS goodness.
Member since:
2006-02-09
Member since:2006-03-03
Member since:
2005-07-06
Back in the mid-90s, I used NeXTSTEP quite a bit, and Mac OS X server is basically the next-gen of that operating system. Such a great operating system and environment. I remember the Mac OS X previews that were NeXTSTEP with the Mac OS 9 window treatment running on a Quadra. Ah, those were the days.
Member since:
2005-07-06
The "read more" section of the article isn't entirely clear on the relationship between the original releases of OS X Server and the current Apple OSes that bear the "OS X" name (effectively, there were two separate-but-related lines of OS X that have been called "OS X Server" - the 1.x line and the 10.x line).
IIRC, OS X Server (the 1.x versions) were effectively updated versions of Rhapsody - using a modified version of the OS 8/9 "platinum" theme, with NeXTStep tech under the hood. It was released a year or two before the original OS X public beta - and OS X Server (or its codebase) was the basis for client versions of OS X.
And after the release of 10.0, Apple released a version with some server-specific tools under the "OS X Server" label. So in a nutshell, OS X Server 10.x is based on client versions of OS X 10.x, which is in turn based on OS X Server 1.x.
BTW, for anyone else interested in the history of OS X, ArsTechnica published very thorough articles on each of the "Developer Preview" releases (from DP2 onward):
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macos-x-dp2.ars
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/1q00/macos-x-gui/macos-x-gui-1.html
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/1q00/macos-x-dp3/macos-x-dp3-1.html
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/2q00/macos-x-dp4/macos-x-dp4-1.html
Member since:
2006-05-18
When Steve unveiled the AIO G3 (AKA The Tooth), all I could dream of was running OS X Server on that beauty..
The joy of NeXTStep, the lusty hardware that was the height of the PPC era..
I had clippings on my office wall for inspiration..
I have since had the opportunity to own said configuration, and I passed it up without much wincing.
It's a shame that they couldn't get more support behind it as NT became 2000, OS/2 and Netware were on their way out.
If they could have quietly offered X86 support for the server, while continuing to offer the 68K and PPC client support, we would have seen the shift to Intel much sooner, and OS X Server would be *far* more evolved than it is today.
I could care less about Aqua. Services are what do it for me..