Differences between OS X Client and Server

[bebu]

I am an experienced Mac user and run a server at my school that hosts a web app that i wrote and does some AFP as well. I have also done linux administration.

I am interested in becoming experienced with the server version of OSX. (Before you ask, the server I run at school is running Mac OS X 10.4 Client).

Are there any client features that I would miss if I were to install the server version on my MacBook for everyday use as a client as well as a server?

 

[Matthew Yohe]

I wouldn't recommend trying to use it as your main system, especially on a laptop.

However, OS X server can be virtualized. I would recommend starting there.

 

[bebu]

Okay, I'll try setting up a VM.

When you say "especially on a laptop," what exactly are the potential problems I would be facing?

 

[belvdr]

Okay, I'll try setting up a VM.

When you say "especially on a laptop," what exactly are the potential problems I would be facing?

None. It will run fine. I did this with 10.3 Server on my PowerBook G4.

 

[Alrescha]

When you say "especially on a laptop," what exactly are the potential problems I would be facing?

If you run many of the services that come with OS X Server, you might find as much as 500 MB of memory and 5-10% of the processor tied up by server tasks. On a laptop resources are sometimes limited so you might find this unacceptable. If you leave most (all?) services off you won't notice much of a difference.

A.

 

[bebu]

Okay. I'm going to try setting up a VM (probably later this week when I get a little time), but HD space is a little low right now, which is why I'm reluctant to have 2 systems running on one computer.

From what I'm hearing, if I were to install Server as my main system but keep all the services turned off, that would work out okay. Would stopping and starting services frequently cause problems?

But I bought a copy of VMWare Fusion last night (yay student discount ), so I'll try running it there first.

Thanks everyone for the quick, helpful replies!

 

[belvdr]

I doubt you'll see much of an issue. I ran 10.3 Server with 2 GB of RAM. I'd recommend using no less than that for 10.6 Server.

At the end of the day, try it for your needs. Worst case, you just rebuilt your system back to 10.6 client.

 

[Matthew Yohe]

When you say "especially on a laptop," what exactly are the potential problems I would be facing?

It's simply not tuned for operation on a portable.

 

[pdjudd]

It's simply not tuned for operation on a portable.

Ditto - like any server operating systems - it works best and is designed on a dedicated desktop system - they require lots of resources that are not optimized for laptops.

 

[Truffy]

There's a difference between optimised and failing to run at all. If the user doesn't need a finely tuned server set up then any hardware configuration that meets the minimum specs will suffice. The problems will arise if performance becomes throttled.

 

[Alrescha]

There's a difference between optimised and failing to run at all.

Quite true. All this anti-laptop noise is just fud. I ran 10.5 Server on a 1.25 GHz G4 with 512MB of RAM. It certainly wasn't optimized, but it did what I needed it to do.

A.

 

[Matthew Yohe]

Of course it will run, but there is no reason to not virtualize it on the laptop if you're just messing around with it.