After all that was said, you come back and reply to that? Really? Go ahead, waste your money. Mac OS X server is faster, just do it. It's 128-bit man!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What are the differences between Snow Leopard and Snow Leopard Server?
- Thread starter thiagos
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
After all that was said, you come back and reply to that? Really? Go ahead, waste your money. Mac OS X server is faster, just do it. It's 128-bit man!
After all that was said, you come back and reply to that? Really? Go ahead, waste your money. Mac OS X server is faster, just do it. It's 128-bit man!
Yes Calderone's right. Our secret is out. All the IT Pros on this forum are running OSX server on all our Macs at home and at work because it's the fastest OS in the world. And the coolest. You know how snow leopard is like totally faster than leopard? Well OSX server snow leopard is like "snow snow snow leopard". Totally. If you ever see the beachball on snow leopard server, just phone apple and they'll treat it as a top priority bug, pushing trivia such as security fixes to one side to work on a patch just for you, which Steve and or Phil will come round and install for you personally.
And what's more itunes is a cocoa app when run on 10.6 server and hence is much faster. Every copy of snow leopard server comes with a piece of the real turin shroud and a sliver of the holy grail too. We're sorry for not telling you this before.
Clearly you're not a real Snow Leopard Server (aka-Snow Snow Snow Leopard) expert, otherwise you'd know that the sliver is from the One True Cross and not the holy grail...
Helps keep viruses away...
Sorry about that, must have got confused with 10.5 lolcat leopard server. You know how easy it is.
I know how you feel
Well dude i know how you feel. I hate it when people say "if you don't know or understand you don't need it" It took me forever to get an understanding of what was on offer from apple with a server solution and I would get people giving stupid F&*^in answers been smart arses when you just ask simple questions. Just because someone does not know or understand at the start does not dictate that they do not need something.
Just so you know with myself I have decided to go for a HP smartmedia server, my AEBS with a TB HDD hooked up to it worked well for a while but now I want more control over my centralised media. Because I have 3 macs, 1 PC, a PS3, Apple TV and a Wii that all share media it was getting to hard just using the AEBS. OSX server did not offer me ease of use on a home and media point of view at all.
If my business gets to the point that I move into a larger office space with multiple people working for me I will choose OSX server but while the need is small I will not go near the complexities of OSX Server - hope it helps
By the way it was good to see some people that would spend the time in this thread explaining things with out getting on their high horse - good on ya's.
Well dude i know how you feel. I hate it when people say "if you don't know or understand you don't need it" It took me forever to get an understanding of what was on offer from apple with a server solution and I would get people giving stupid F&*^in answers been smart arses when you just ask simple questions. Just because someone does not know or understand at the start does not dictate that they do not need something.
Just so you know with myself I have decided to go for a HP smartmedia server, my AEBS with a TB HDD hooked up to it worked well for a while but now I want more control over my centralised media. Because I have 3 macs, 1 PC, a PS3, Apple TV and a Wii that all share media it was getting to hard just using the AEBS. OSX server did not offer me ease of use on a home and media point of view at all.
If my business gets to the point that I move into a larger office space with multiple people working for me I will choose OSX server but while the need is small I will not go near the complexities of OSX Server - hope it helps
By the way it was good to see some people that would spend the time in this thread explaining things with out getting on their high horse - good on ya's.
Concurrent user limit
Hi, i've been thinking about setting up SL client as server for web, ftp, ssh, file sharing... Is there concurrent user limit on client version? About 20-30 people will be connecting at same time. If there is a concurrent user limit, can you tell me what the limit is? Thanks.
Hi, i've been thinking about setting up SL client as server for web, ftp, ssh, file sharing... Is there concurrent user limit on client version? About 20-30 people will be connecting at same time. If there is a concurrent user limit, can you tell me what the limit is? Thanks.
Well, this first answer is actually the correct one, if you parse it correctly.
There's no fundamental difference between OSX and OSX Server under the hood. Both use the same BSD kernel, and are technically are "Unix" systems. OSX Server may have some different default kernel settings that would make it more suitable for use as a server - "tuning" - but you could "tune" your OSX kernel the same way. (By tuning, I mean simply changing settings so that they are more appropriate for a server environment. For example, more file access would be expected in a typical server environment, and so, for example, a larger percentage of memory might be allocated as file cache.)
The main difference is that it comes with a wide variety of "servers" - e.g. programs that handle connections from clients (I HATE the ambiguous multiple-definitions of "server" in the industry - e.g. the word can also refer to a computer or even an OS...). And some nice GUI tools for managing those servers and monitoring the system's reliability and performance.
This answer is also right in that you could do some Googling and find a wide variety of servers that could be installed on OSX (thanks in no small part to the BSD kernel) and perform the same functions. They may or may not be exactly the same software that Apple supplies - for example, in many cases you might have to forgo the nice GUI, or use a substitute nice GUI in cases where Apple has written their own proprietary ones.
If you DO find you need these things, you might want to consider whether Ubuntu Server or Centos might suit your needs just as well or better. They will run on less expensive standard PC hardware, and you have basically the same choices in server software.
It's unfortunate that so many jumped in here to criticize your having the gall to ask the question, rather than just answering it.
SL Server is the only way?
Thanks for your reply. So SL Server doesn't have any restriction, right? In order to achieve my goal, I need to get Snow Leopard Server? What other limitations are there for client?
I hope I'm not hijacking this thread. I've been trying to find out difference between server and client and I couldn't find answer to my specific question. I know server comes with a lot of services but I won't be using many of those. If I could set up client as server, it will be easier and cheaper for me. Any advice or recommendation? Thanks in advance.
Thanks for your reply. So SL Server doesn't have any restriction, right? In order to achieve my goal, I need to get Snow Leopard Server? What other limitations are there for client?
I hope I'm not hijacking this thread. I've been trying to find out difference between server and client and I couldn't find answer to my specific question. I know server comes with a lot of services but I won't be using many of those. If I could set up client as server, it will be easier and cheaper for me. Any advice or recommendation? Thanks in advance.
Well, this first answer is actually the correct one, if you parse it correctly.
[ ... snip snip ... ]
It's unfortunate that so many jumped in here to criticize your having the gall to ask the question, rather than just answering it.
With all respect to the OP and to the many posters who followed (including those who are IT professionals) -- if this was the first response to the OP's question, then the thread would be done. None of this "look, we're not (directly) calling you an idiot" business.
"If you have to ask, you don't need it" might well be a correct answer, but it's pretty rude. (That said, the OP could have done some Googling or Wiki'ing before asking such an open ended question.) Even something simple like "A server OS is designed for administration of many multiple users and multiple machines on the network" would have been enough to say "Oh, OK, guess I don't need it then".
The fact that Apple now sells a Server edition of the Mac Mini is going to invite a lot more questions about the Server OS and "is this right for me?". Be warned.
I think Apple made a mistake in how they are positioning this. And I think you are right, but in addition to the "is this right for me?" threads, there will be tons of "SL Server just doesn't work!" or "Can't get SL Server setup." Etc.
And I am sure that when one of us tries to help, they will most likely not understand what we are saying.
Oh well. Apple's support line is going to blow up when these oblivious home users start calling them up for help.
Really? According to their website on the product it is targeted toward (at least mentioned):
Emphasis mine.
It doesn't look like it's being targeted for home users, rather its being aimed at the same sources that would be appropriate for a server anyway. In fact, I don't see the word "home" anywhere (in fact there is a link at the bottom to the Apple business solutions page). Not to mention that Apple has already promoted the mini as an ideal server already - they are just bundling it altogether now. They are sepearating the regular Mini from the Mini Server though - they are on different pages entirely (not a subdivision of one page)
I am not arguing that it's possible to use this at home, but I don't think its being positioned at anything more than what their Server OS would already be appropriate for. Lets face it, People are going to ask about the Server OS by its nature of it being easy to find on Apple's home Page and that Apple is pushing it in general.
I know what Apple is saying on the site. And I know who this is for.
Someone has a quote from Schiller saying it is "great for sharing media around the house."
I think the influx of "is this right for me?" is testament to the number of novices who will be buying this thing and not know how to set it up properly. THat is what I was getting at, I don't think they have set it apart enough and that will increase the number of support calls of OS X Server from people who have no idea what they are doing.
if not SL Server, what is the best alternative
Thanks to all the experts who have posted here, it is a very helpful forum.
I would like your opinion on what is the best alternative to SL Server in this situation (assuming SL Server is overkill):
1) mixed windows and mac environment (3-5 users)
2) file sharing is a must
3) calendar and mail sharing would be nice
4) home-office environment
5) file access when not at home (via -web)
Unfortunately, running Windows (vista) is required because certain applications are available on the this platform. I have been considering the HP media-smart server because of the cross platform capabilities.
Is an NAS the best option? Currently, we are using external hard-drives formatted with Fat32, which is really a band-aid solution.
Thank you in advance for your advice.
Thanks to all the experts who have posted here, it is a very helpful forum.
I would like your opinion on what is the best alternative to SL Server in this situation (assuming SL Server is overkill):
1) mixed windows and mac environment (3-5 users)
2) file sharing is a must
3) calendar and mail sharing would be nice
4) home-office environment
5) file access when not at home (via -web)
Unfortunately, running Windows (vista) is required because certain applications are available on the this platform. I have been considering the HP media-smart server because of the cross platform capabilities.
Is an NAS the best option? Currently, we are using external hard-drives formatted with Fat32, which is really a band-aid solution.
Thank you in advance for your advice.
Where did he say that? Saying someone is pretty meaningless. There is nothing on Apples press site where he says this. I need context otherwise its meaningless. All servers are good for sharing media - thats what a server does.
Provide a cite for me - otherwise I am not taking it any more than an off handed comment.
I think I first read about the Schiller quote on the BusinessWeek story Mac Rumors reported recently.
"The target Schiller says is small businesses for whom an XServe would be too expensive, as well as enthusiast consumers looking for an inexpensive, small-footprint media server server to share files around the house."
Which of course points out the quote that the primary target is "Small business for whom an Xserve would be inappropriate" which kinda backs up my point. True, it can be used at home, it is first and foremost for businesses - Schiller says just as much.
How is that positioned incorrectly? The quote provided earlier is at best incomplete judging by what is provided here.
Go to Apple.com, click store, then click Mini. What do you see? I see three Mac Mini models, set up seemingly as good, better, best. The average consumer is going to see the server mini as an upgrade, not as an entirely different beast. They're not going to look at the press releases or quotes from schiller, they're going to browse whats for sale. They should have alteast thrown Pro somewhere into the name.. not that it means much of course now adays as the Macbook Pro is just a consumer laptop with a slightly bigger screen and a fricken video card.
You see that because the Mini Server is a Mini! Heck the store page has a very fine division between the regular Minis and the Mini Server! I fail to see how anybody can draw the conclusion that you did. Even when you try and buy it, the items there are very different from what every other Mac out there is. Somebody is going to get mighty confused. And that assumes that people are just going to go shopping without looking into things first!
Cite please on the mentality of the average consumer". I bet they are going to read the web page about the Mini Server before they buy on impulse from the store simply because the store page divides them up as two separate items - the two Minis and one that has the word Server". People are not going to look at a server and automatically see it as the best.
They are going to first and foremost look at Apples own web page if they are a smart consumer. How else are people going to know what each Mac offers? And right there on the product description page for Mac Mini Server and read about its intended market. If consumers dont do basic research (and I think that most people will do that), thats going to be their problem when they get it and return it after they learn that something is wrong.
Of course I dont know of any consumer that thinks that assumes a server is the same thing as a Day to day computer. HP offers home servers and nobody is complaining that people are going to assume that they are for general computing! Because they are not. People buy them knowing what they do by reading HPs website and learning about the product. Do you think that Apple customers are not going to do the same?
Guys,
The OP really doesn't deserve the offensive responses that this particular thread has generated. Can we maintain this as a helpful forum for "IT Professionals" and those who want to become a part of our Apple community?
So if you are one of the professionals here, let's make the board a better place.
The OP really doesn't deserve the offensive responses that this particular thread has generated. Can we maintain this as a helpful forum for "IT Professionals" and those who want to become a part of our Apple community?
So if you are one of the professionals here, let's make the board a better place.
I'm sorry you're not getting it, I should have explained myself a little bit deeper. I'd argue that atleast 60 percent of consumers DON'T KNOW WHAT A SERVER IS! The "consumers" you know are likely the same kinds of people as you (you know.. coming to online forums, posting, reading, learning). That isn't everyone, and I'm sure if you did a survey most people couldn't tell you the difference between a server and your average PC.
And "cite"? Seriously? Life experience doesn't always have a source and that I can quote and throw at you. The people who I know, aren't nerds that only breathe the air at Macrumors. They're your average consumer. I am telling you they would have issues with not considering the Mini Server as just another Mac.
The headings go 2.26Ghz: 160GB, 2.53Ghz: 320GB, 2.53Ghz: Dual 500 GB with os x server.
Consumer = Sweet! If I can put up with an external SuperDrive I can have the Dual HDs and Snow Leopard Ultimate... I mean server.
How do YOU not see that?
You can throw numbers out of your rear all you want. Prove it. Back it up. Otherwise I am going to call then out on it. Apple is not targeting this at consumers. Period. Buyer beware. If they buy this without doing any research on it whatsoever (like looking at the pages Apple puts up), that’s there fault. I cite Apple’s own marketing pages on how they want to sell it. You pull one quote that is not even hosted on Apple’s own website that I am betting the same 60 percent of people have never heard of. Apple tells the buyer what the damed product is. You are deliberately ignoring Apple’s product page and are just assuming that people drop money only on their store and never see any other Apple page. I call bull on that.
There is a reason that Apple has separate pages for the normal mini and the Server mini. Look at the pages. They tell you what it does differently and what it if for. Thats because they are different products.
Yes I am serious. I present Apple’s website as proof that they are targeting this not at home users and try to show what Apple’s intents are. You show A quote that I doubt most people are going to see or hear. I have the upper hand here. Unless you want to show real statistics that you can back up from another source, lets not try to make assumptions here without something to back it up with. My assumptions are based on Apple’s own pages. Your assumptions are based on people never reading those pages. You cannot even tell me anything about your knowledge overall. How can I trust you?
Are you seriously saying average consumers do not read Apple’s own website that tries to tell people what the product is and what is is not? I can tell you just by looking at that page the average consumer is going to think that the MM Server is way too much and they would rather go with the normal Mac Mini like the link at the bottom of the page tells them about. THey are going to look at this quote:
And this quote:
And say “I don’t need this much. Its the same way with HP’s home servers. Nobody considers those to be general PC’s either. I think you are taking people’s intelligence for granted her. The Mac Mini server is specifically sectioned off from the main Mac Mini page so that people don’t think they are part of the same product line. Apple even provides links to their main server portion of their website.
Thats because they probably would do something like this:
Consumer: Gee, looking at the product descriptions that Apple puts it, I don’t need that Server OS - I would much rather just get the normal Mini and just get a 500 gig hard drive. Besides, the server looks to be pretty separate product being apart from the rest of the minis. Heck, even when I looks at buying that server it doesn’t look like the right product for me.
Here is your problem. You are assuming that people buy based on specs alone and just go to the Apple Online store and that’s it. I postulate that people are not going to look at the world the way you do. I have yet to come across one person in the real world to ask me if they should get that new Mac Mini server. Heck, most people never ask me about the minis anyway. And furthermore most mac consumers that I know are the kinds of people that know that there is not multiple versions of the MacOS - that is very obvious just by looking at the marketing pages for the OS. Unless you honestly think that people look at Windows and their server products the same way, i think you have to give people some credit and assume that they are going to do a bit of research first and use some common sense. Of course we should point out too that the only place you are going to get this is online - I have never seen this at an Apple Retail store. The only way you can find this product would be if you found it on their website where they start out by pitching it as a special product.
99 percent of mini buyers are just going to see the main mac mini pages and never see the Server product if at that. If they are going to drop a thousand on a Mac, they are most likely going to be doing it on the iMac which is a much better product. Heck, I am wiling to be that same 60% figure that you are citing (which you still never tell me where you get that figure) don’t even know what a dual hard drive setup is, don’t know about Apple remote desktop, the Promise External Raid device is etc. The person who looks at this device is going to have some idea about what it is. They are not going to be thinking OSX server = Ultimate!
And this is coming from my IT background here. I get tons of people who ask for my advice on buying computers and what they should be getting. Most consumers ask for advice from others first before they buy a computer - especially Macs. I would wager that most switchers get their first mac from the retail store. My life experience has never come across a person who bought a server product accidentally.
Edit: If you think about it, a consider can do the exact same thing for the Mac Pro. Every iteration that they offer includes options for OSX server. Apple has been doing this for years without an uproar. Why do you think this will change when Apple is offering a product that people have already been using as a server for years and is offered as a very distinct product (almost as an afterthought on their main mini page). Its almost as if Apple doesn’t want the average buyer to get it. Anyone looking at the MacMini server compared to other Macs are going to be disappointed really quickly. No option to get a monitor? No iLife? No iWork? Its not as if people are going to immediately go to the MacMini page on the store and think that every Mac is going to be like this. They cannot buy it without wondering "what the heck is this? This is not like the Mac’s are supposed to be!"
OP started the snide fest with his "if you don't know, don't answer" comment.
And then when people answered... well.
FWIW, I run apache, ftp, mySQL, php and Coldfusion 9 on my MBP running normal ol' Snow Leopard, and Leopard, and Tiger, and...
Servers give you easier control over access, ports, etc. Server are probably not fast as a desktop OS since they have so many server functions to pay attention to. The focus is totally different.
That said... Apple put Snow Leopard server on the Mini, so, I would think it would fine on the laptops.
And then when people answered... well.
FWIW, I run apache, ftp, mySQL, php and Coldfusion 9 on my MBP running normal ol' Snow Leopard, and Leopard, and Tiger, and...
Servers give you easier control over access, ports, etc. Server are probably not fast as a desktop OS since they have so many server functions to pay attention to. The focus is totally different.
That said... Apple put Snow Leopard server on the Mini, so, I would think it would fine on the laptops.
To answer your question, Server is todo exactly what its name implies. It is designed to serve files to other systems.
You CAN use it as a desktop, it would work to read email and surf the web and it would work fine. It would actually be slower then client because of everything running in the background that you most likely wouldn't be using.
You would start running into the real headaches when you started installing 3rd-party software. The server GUI looks very similar to client but the back-end(Libraries, directory structure, etc) of server is very different so some apps wouldn't notice it a work fine and others would flat out not install or run.
Believe it or not you can do 95% of what the SL server does with client. It just requires you to go out and install the services by hand and you don't get the nice GUI server management tools(like snouter said). This can be a good thing because you really get to learn how to run and install things like jabberd, Apache and mySQL.