New awesome rackmount server!!!
- Thread starter simX
- Start date
scruffy
Notorious Olive Counter
It seems you can't buy the things without an unlimited-client license for OS X server. I wonder what the price difference would be if you could configure it for plain old OS X client edition...
Mind you, the software is essentially free for Apple anyway, so they can use good license terms as a carrot to get people to buy their rack hardware. Maybe the difference wouldn't be much.
Mind you, the software is essentially free for Apple anyway, so they can use good license terms as a carrot to get people to buy their rack hardware. Maybe the difference wouldn't be much.
simX
Unofficial Mac Genius
Uh, Ulrik?
This is a damn powerful machine, and it's not really using "outdated" processors. Yes, Motorola has failed to deliver, but with the performance enhancements across the line in this server, it still is a POWERFUL machine.
DDR RAM, Ultra ATA/100 drives with a dedicated bus to each of the four drives. 2 MB DDR SDRAM L3 cache per processor, and a system bus that allows PCI slots and drives to directly access key systems without going through the processor. This is amazing stuff, especially since Apple managed to squish it all into a 1U rackmount.
Yes, it will probably get a little dated in a few months, but then that's what MWNY is for, right?
Oh, one other thing. Apple still hasn't lost their marketing genius. Just look at their motto for the XServe:
"Rack and roll."
Ahahahaha that's great.
This is a damn powerful machine, and it's not really using "outdated" processors. Yes, Motorola has failed to deliver, but with the performance enhancements across the line in this server, it still is a POWERFUL machine.
DDR RAM, Ultra ATA/100 drives with a dedicated bus to each of the four drives. 2 MB DDR SDRAM L3 cache per processor, and a system bus that allows PCI slots and drives to directly access key systems without going through the processor. This is amazing stuff, especially since Apple managed to squish it all into a 1U rackmount.
Yes, it will probably get a little dated in a few months, but then that's what MWNY is for, right?
Oh, one other thing. Apple still hasn't lost their marketing genius. Just look at their motto for the XServe:
"Rack and roll."
Ahahahaha that's great.
googolplex
jeff.hume.ca
whoa I love it. I've just got time to look at in more detail and this thing really is amazing. I want one!
ulrik
Registered
I don't say it's slow. I just wanted to comment the post about DDR and stuff coming to newer G4 PowerMacs. All I wanted to say is that while it might be nice, it is completely NECESSARY that Apple drops the current G4 for the PowerMacs. They can keep them in PowerBooks, iMacs and the xServe (Intel still uses the XEON) but the PowerMacs have to make a leap forward instead of one Mhz bump after another. The PowerMac and the xServer they are not slow, but it is in the process of falling behind current PC CPUs. Both AMD (Sledgehammer or just Hammer) and Intel (Itanium) have their 64 bit CPUs ready, Linux 64 bit is ready, Win2K 64 bit is in beta, so Apple...please...GO GO GO!!! Apple is known to bring new architectures to the market before anyone else, so please introduce 64 bit CPUs to the mainstream market (where Silicon Graphics failed).
I'd love to have such a rackmount. I am thinking of seriously selling my Celeron 1300 intranet webserver and my G3 B&W Fileserver and get one of these babies for the intranet needs of the two houses I am providing. Then again, I think I have to finish some projects first before I can pay such a thing...
BTW: Since nobody mentioned it: in the second pic in the post above you can see the fiber cable harddisk mount Apple will release in some months.
Matrix Agent
Masochist Mascot
Some of the people over at slashdot are wetting their pants. That place has become a lot more mac friendly lately.....I smell success.
rhale1
KU Mac Geek
I must say, very nice! I was reading the specs on the Apple Store, and apparently they come with Mac OS X Server 10.1.5. Looks like 10.1.5 is about to be released, as I doubt Apple would put some unreleased version of OS X on a server system.
Also, anyone know what's with the larger server at the bottom of the rack?
Also, anyone know what's with the larger server at the bottom of the rack?
The large one at the bottom is the 3U RAID box with 14 drive bays as you can see on the front of it.
From maccentral's site:
* 3U height
* 14 drive bays
* 14 120GB ATA drives - in same hot-plug format as Xserve
* 1.68TB
* Dual 2GB Fibre Channel on system
* 400MB/second storage throughput
From maccentral's site:
* 3U height
* 14 drive bays
* 14 120GB ATA drives - in same hot-plug format as Xserve
* 1.68TB
* Dual 2GB Fibre Channel on system
* 400MB/second storage throughput
Javintosh
Meember
That looks like the Xserve RAID. It is going to be introduced at the end of the year. It is a companion product with 2Gbps Fibre Channel storage and 14 had drives.
Maccentral.com has the dirt on the RAID:
* 3U height
* 14 drive bays
* 14 120GB ATA drives - in same hot-plug format as Xserve
* 1.68TB
* Dual 2GB Fibre Channel on system
* 400MB/second storage throughput
Everything redundant: RAID controllers, power supplies, fans, drive caches and the drives drives themselves. Like the Xserve, each HD has a direct connection to their controller (7 HD's per controller).
Each RAID controller has 128MB of RAM. This thing looks like it kicks @$$!
must find reason for installing at home....
Actually, we have about 30 virtually new racks at work that are rusting in a warehouse. They are only 5 feet, but they are on pretty sturdy wheels. Now I have a reason to bring one home...
*sigh* - I gotta start playing the lotto.
Maccentral.com has the dirt on the RAID:
* 3U height
* 14 drive bays
* 14 120GB ATA drives - in same hot-plug format as Xserve
* 1.68TB
* Dual 2GB Fibre Channel on system
* 400MB/second storage throughput
Everything redundant: RAID controllers, power supplies, fans, drive caches and the drives drives themselves. Like the Xserve, each HD has a direct connection to their controller (7 HD's per controller).
Each RAID controller has 128MB of RAM. This thing looks like it kicks @$$!
must find reason for installing at home....
Actually, we have about 30 virtually new racks at work that are rusting in a warehouse. They are only 5 feet, but they are on pretty sturdy wheels. Now I have a reason to bring one home...
*sigh* - I gotta start playing the lotto.
Well, I highly doubt that the client version would even run on the new server. Maybe the server and client versions of OSX will begin separating a bit since this server is out..
double post
Ok, the XServe is really cool and the XServe RAID will make it a serious contender in storage and performance intensive network applications, but am I the only one that sees that Apple really missed the boat here?
The XServe not having on-board hardware RAID support is inexcusable!!! Let's see...a kick-ass server with lots of RAM and storage capacity, an unlimited server license supporting Mac, Windows, Linux clients all for $2,999! Sound great, doesn't it! Oh but wait, there is absolutely no disk fault-tolerance capability! What the heck was Apple thinking???? If they would have included RAID-5 capability the XServe would have been kicking wintel server ass all over the place. As it is right now, no serious Network Administrator would consider deploying it in any type of business environment.
It's just more proof that Apple just doesn't get it when it comes to file servers and networks. Nice try Apple...but another near miss! Hopefully Cupertino will make amends!
The XServe not having on-board hardware RAID support is inexcusable!!! Let's see...a kick-ass server with lots of RAM and storage capacity, an unlimited server license supporting Mac, Windows, Linux clients all for $2,999! Sound great, doesn't it! Oh but wait, there is absolutely no disk fault-tolerance capability! What the heck was Apple thinking???? If they would have included RAID-5 capability the XServe would have been kicking wintel server ass all over the place. As it is right now, no serious Network Administrator would consider deploying it in any type of business environment.
It's just more proof that Apple just doesn't get it when it comes to file servers and networks. Nice try Apple...but another near miss! Hopefully Cupertino will make amends!