Apple Computer is guarding its server plans closely, leaving observers to wonder what will come of the product line. The Mac manufacturer said on April 5 that it will preview its new Mac OS X 10.5, dubbed Leopard, at its Worldwide Developers Conference in August. But the company has yet to reference a Leopard server edition. Nor has it hinted about any plans it might have to move its Xserve server line to Intel processors from the PowerPC under its June 2005 decree to move from PowerPC chips to Intel processors by June 2007. On a related note, another Apple product's future is uncertain. Apple has asked the development team behind Aperture to leave-- probably related to the fact that Aperture got some pretty harsh reviews after its release.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-23
--WebObjects - I've never seen a large scale deployment of "WebObjects"
iTunes, .Mac, Apple Store, BBC, Deutsche Bank, DisneyLand, Walt Disney World, United States Postal Service , etc ...
But I think that for you, a store like iTunes, selling more than 1 billions of songs isn't a large scale deployment ...
--you must never have done major design work
You must never have used Webobjects nor even know anything about it ...
--I certainly can name a lot of other technology that can do the same thing.
I highly doubt this.
--Video Streaming - *any os*. I suppose you meant quicktime video streaming? Who cares, vendor lockin issue again.
Because streaming MP3, AAC, MPEG-4 and 3GPP is a vendor lockin for you ?
Is isn't because there is "Quicktime" in the name, that only quicktime files can be streamed. If you had just read a basic documentation about it you will know that.
Anyway, vendor lockin issue is a political issue, it is YOUR issue, not a Mac OS X one.
--Windows integration - Other than at the workgroup level, I don't see how OSX does this any different than anything else. You do realize OSX is using Samba, right? So can FBSD/Linux/etc
Perhaps with compatible windows 2003 ACL integrated in Tiger ? There is also WorkGroup Manager despite the fact you don't want to count it for Mac OS X.
It is so easy to say: "Other than all good stuffs built in Mac OS X, Mac OS X suxes ..."
--Spotlight module for apache - sucks/pointless
Tell me how your method can be more efficient than an indexed search built in the OS ?
Again, your post only prooves that you don't have any clues about macosx server. Your are only prooving that Mac OS X is able to handle all the things that linux/fsbsd can.
From this, I just don't see any *advantage* to running Linux/FBSD when I already have Mac OS X. (Solaris 10 is out of this scope as I consider it as the best OS server, far away Mac OS X, Linux and FBSD).
-- -5 for the rest though
Wow, -5 to Mac OS X just because it can do the same that Linux/FBSD, what a fair point of view.
--beyond workgroup space you're doing the same amount of work to get that stuff functional (if not more)
Only if you don't know Mac OS X.
Member since:2005-10-09
Maybe you should learn to quote me correctly. You can't just snip out parts of a comment which nullify what you are saying just so you *sound* like you have a legitmate argument. That's bad form.
"Other than apple.com, I've never seen a large scale deployment of "WebObjects""
Guess what, the three big ones (first in your list) you listed are part of Apple. *I* can create a web-language and use it that will work for my needs. I can also throw enough hardware at it to make it work well.
As for the others:
bbc.co.uk runs Solaris (9).
db.com was for obvious reasons unable
disneyland runs IIS (windows)
usps runs netscape enterprise server, this isn't available for OSX.
*ding ding* sorry, you lose.
"You must never have used Webobjects nor even know anything about it"
Actually I do, a lot more than just reading the WEBPAGE which is all you apparently did. You didn't even do a good job of that:
"Platforms
* Mac OS X v10.4.1with Xcode 2.1 (development)
* Mac OS X Server v10.4.1
"
Aww, looks like all of the places you listed cannot possibly run Webobjects (it is non-supported on any other OS - even though it's written in java) on their frontend, nor even OSX. I wonder why. No big business is going to run unsupported tech, sorry.
"I highly doubt this. "
Doubt no more!
1. SOPE
2. GNUstepWeb
3. Apache Tapestry
4. Cayenne
All from the same wikipedia page you probably gleamed your information from. At least mine can be verified, yours is wishy-washy. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebObjects)
"Because streaming MP3, AAC, MPEG-4 and 3GPP is a vendor lockin for you ?
Is isn't because there is "Quicktime" in the name, that only quicktime files can be streamed. If you had just read a basic documentation about it you will know that. "
No, you snide ass, the only video streaming OSX does better/that cannot be done on another os IS Quicktime. All of the others I can stream from other platforms, with BETTER PERFORMANCE. Which was my whole point. I really ditest your attitude towards me. Read the line you quoted from me, as I said *any* os can do streaming, only quicktime is limited to OSX....
"Anyway, vendor lockin issue is a political issue, it is YOUR issue, not a Mac OS X one. "
Uh?? Do you live on Mars?? vendor lockin IS NOT a political issue, it's a MONETARY issue. Example: State of Hawaii uses OS/390 mainframes still running OS/VS COBOL II to handle all finances. Guess why? IBM Vendor lockin, they can't convert. You have ANY idea how much that costs them? You don't want to know...
"Perhaps with compatible windows 2003 ACL integrated in Tiger ? There is also WorkGroup Manager despite the fact you don't want to count it for Mac OS X."
?? To quote one of my original posts: "I just don't see any *advantage* to running OSX Server for anything more than a workgroup server"
Why on earth are you telling me it's a good workgroup server and that I am clueless? Are you purposefully blind and ignorant?
"It is so easy to say: "Other than all good stuffs built in Mac OS X, Mac OS X suxes ..." "
That's nice, but other than as a workgroup server, OSX does not fare well for me, nor many others. That's why it's not used! Not only that, but don't make me out to be an idiot who would use the term "suxes". I'm not 14.
"Tell me how your method can be more efficient than an indexed search built in the OS ? "
What the hell is the point of that? I don't need an indexed search built into my OS, all of my webapps index themselves into a database as well, JUST LIKE SPOTLIGHT DOES FOR THE FILESYSTEM except mine do it on the logical level, which allows them to index FAR MORE than spotlight. Spotlight can only index filenames, meta information, and content of a few kinds of files. My websites can index based on user tagging, input, comments, etc. Sorry, spotlight can't do that! Spotlight is great on OSX client, but it's pointless on Server. Again, in one of my original posts I make it quite clear I use and like OSX as a client.
"Again, your post only prooves that you don't have any clues about macosx server. Your are only prooving that Mac OS X is able to handle all the things that linux/fsbsd can. "
What? I never said OSX *can't do things*. I said other OSs can do the majority of people's server workload more efficiently/quicker/however you want to say it. Sorry to destroy your dreams, but it's true.
"From this, I just don't see any *advantage* to running Linux/FBSD when I already have Mac OS X. (Solaris 10 is out of this scope as I consider it as the best OS server, far away Mac OS X, Linux and FBSD)."
#1 - Guess what server OS I run. Solaris 10. Guess what else, I migrated FROM OSX SERVER to FreeBSD due to performance issues on my large scale (1000+ server) deployment. I *do* know what I am talking about. Visit my website if you think I'm full of poo.
"Wow, -5 to Mac OS X just because it can do the same that Linux/FBSD, what a fair point of view. "
-5 because it does it terribly/slowly/etc. Why spend all that money on hardware/OS when I can pick up a Sun server for much less and have MUCH more hardware power, AND a much more efficient OS for serving?
"Only if you don't know Mac OS X."
What the hell are you talking about? You try getting spam filtering working when you have virtual domains. Guess what? You'll be editing postfix config files JUST LIKE any FreeBSD admin/Linux admin/etc. This is very BASIC stuff. Don't even get me started on configuring mySQL properly or trying to setup postgresql or tuning apache, etc. ALL of those require hand editing config files. It's the same as running them on any other unix, why not run them on unixes that are much more efficient at serving and run on much less expensive (but faster) platforms?
Sorry, but you really had it coming with that piss-poor attitude of yours. When you've graduated HS come back and try again.
Member since:
2005-10-09
WebObjects - *laughs* you must never have done major design work, or you just went to apple.com to get your information. Other than apple.com, I've never seen a large scale deployment of "WebObjects" and I certainly can name a lot of other technology that can do the same thing.
Video Streaming - *any os*. I suppose you meant quicktime video streaming? Who cares, vendor lockin issue again.
Xgrid - I found it pretty damn easy to write MPI aware software. I don't really see how Xgrid makes it any easier.
Windows integration - Other than at the workgroup level, I don't see how OSX does this any different than anything else. You do realize OSX is using Samba, right? So can FBSD/Linux/etc
Xsan - I'll give you this one, it's a pretty nice tool. Can't argue.
Spotlight module for apache - sucks/pointless. Can do it all with other methods, and be more efficient at it.
Good try, but even Xsan is doable with less expensive solutions. Xsan is certainly easier to deal with though, so you get +1 for that. -5 for the rest though, beyond workgroup space you're doing the same amount of work to get that stuff functional (if not more) on OSX as you would on FBSD/Linux/Solaris/etc.