Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 27th Jan 2008 22:09 UTC
Mac OS X "Apple has brought its unique brand of richness and simplicity to servers. OS X Leopard Server is the fifth generation of the software half of Apple's server platform. This time around, Apple took what is a unique and bold approach for a Unix server. Leopard Server continues the OS X Server tradition of delivering platform-independent file/print, e-mail, Web, and network edge services (such as stateful firewall, VPN, proxy, virus, and spam filtering). But it is as easy to set up and run as a desktop. Truly; the typical Mac user could get a Leopard Server going, because the default administrative interface is a match for a Mac's System Preferences."
Thread beginning with comment 298156
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Ads Suck
by Windows Sucks on Mon 28th Jan 2008 19:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Ads Suck"
Windows Sucks
Member since:

I think you're missing the point. There is a very substantial niche for a server OS with a good, easy-to-use interface and limited scalability. There are lot's of servers that support a relatively small number of users and are maintained by a non-professional admin. For example, at my university, the small departmental computer labs are sometimes maintained by professors or students in their spare time. Where I work, our e-mail and source-control servers are maintained by people who have no formal IT training, and other primary duties. OS X Server is perfect for such environments. Indeed, if I recall correctly, that's exactly what runs our setup at work --- a PowerMac with OS X Server.

Mac OSX servers actually scale pretty well. here on our Development Network we have a bunch of Macs and Mac servers. On our Production Network it's all Windows, some Linux and Unix.

As I said the cost of hardware is Apples problem. For what you could buy a Mac Pro for you could get a couple Dell or Gateway small business servers with Windows 2003 server on them. (As the Mac pro does not come with Mac OS X server out the box) for the same price. And yes the Apple machine will be more powerful etc. But the Windows machines will get the job done and cost much less. (And they run Linux more easy) LOL!

Reply Parent Score: 1

Mac OS X --does-- scale VERY well
by Sabon on Mon 28th Jan 2008 20:26 in reply to "RE[2]: Ads Suck"
Sabon Member since:

As noted by a previous posts. Mac OS X does scale very well. Maybe not from the GUI but it is BSD UNIX under the hood and I don't think anyone will tell you that BSD UNIX doesn't scale well.

Harder to do than Windows? Only people I know that have only ever used Windows Server will say something like that. Or people that have used very old versions of other NOSs.

PS: Installing a NOS on a home computer and hooking up less than 200 computers to it doesn't even begin to make you an expert. Step two would be having people and all their ingenious ways of doing things differently from each other and supporting them would start to make you an expert.

Reply Parent Score: 1

PlatformAgnostic Member since:

Mac OS X is not BSD Unix. It is a BSD layer built on top of a Mach core with some BSD tools in the userland. They've done some things to improve their kernel scalability, but it's fundamentally a workstation OS right now. I think they've been improving it steadily, though they're nowhere close to FreeBSD, Linux, or Windows as a server OS.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Weeman Member since:

As noted by a previous posts. Mac OS X does scale very well. Maybe not from the GUI but it is BSD UNIX under the hood and I don't think anyone will tell you that BSD UNIX doesn't scale well.

Darwin's based on FreeBSD, and the FreeBSD team thought and admitted that it doesn't scale well, giant locks were everywhere in the kernel. They've started the SMPng initiative years ago to fix this. Apple snatched the FreeBSD 4.x codebase, which didn't get much SMPng treatment at all.

Edited 2008-01-29 15:28 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1