Slashdot Mirror
G4 Cases Holding Back Clustering Acceptance?
Mr. Quick writes: "An article at Wired talks about how Mac hardware is well-suited for clustering, but is being held back by the sexy cases. This follows closely on the heels of Apple releasing an optimized version of BLAST. Producing rack-mount *blades* is not in Steve's vision of world domination, but the opportunity exists. I, for one, hope that apple seriously considers developing a rack mounted dual-G4. Quad G4 maybe?"
Never happen. Apple will never go back to generic looking cases. The beige cases almost killed them and the flavored macs (and microsoft) saved their butter.
If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.
However, it would be possible to have a decent-looking (ie non-wacko), slimline design differentiated from Apple's normal consumer kit. This might be a niche market, but that is usually where Apple thrives.
Greetings, for free software!
Why that would be function over form!! ::Gasp::
Jobs would never go for it. ;)
~Anztac
3rd party rack-mounted cases are already out there - from Marathon or GVS. Given how important style is to Apple at the moment, I doubt they're going to branch out into purely functional cases anytime soon...
-dair
Only one button... only one menu bar... why more than one computer? That would just be making things too complicated!
A bold statement i know, but if you go to the apple store you can see that they have a "Server" section, which is basically a PowerMac with OS X Server. How hard would it be for apple to add a tick box for rack mount kit, perhaps even allow downgrading to OS X as the OS.
Personally I think that apple SHOULD change the look of the systems that they are trying to sell as servers, have a look at the Sun E250 or E450, they are not butt ugly, but rather well engineered cases (and not too bad machines, albeit old now). If apple took an approach like that, simply making a machine they sell to be a server look like one, and havit it available as rackmount, they would have it made.
Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
--I'm not actually after an answer!
The Google Search Appliance isn't a drab beige rackmount. I suppose Apple could do something along that line, of course it would have a neon tube in the front that changed color as server load changed, or something.
The one thing Uncle Steve won't do is build something noone will buy. Sure, it has to be 'cool', but it also has to sell. Since Darwin's cli is so similar to Linux, I think Apple-branded servers won't have any perceived benefit to the unwashed masses (who always complained that Mac hardware was too expensive).
My father is a blogger.
Developing a new form factor for whatever market can be an expensive proposition.
My suggestion: modify the Powerbook motherboard to be the ultimate rack mount server. Just a guess, but you could probably get four of them in one rack unit of space.
The fact that you sell it without a screen and with larger sized hard disk and CD might allow them to cut the manufacturing costs.
The trick will be how to price or configure a server like this so that it's still cheap enough for scientests to buy en masse but NOT attractive enough of an option for a dealer to buy a bunch of and make their own cheap boxes to compete with Apple boxes.
Maybe Apple could make such a product and sell it nude (no box, no CD-ROM); after all to the target market a nude Mac would be incredibly sexy.
Maybe Apple would remove the monitor port so that it couldn't be used as a stand alone Mac, but have to be part of a cluster (and assuring that at least one member of the cluster would be a typical Mac product for the sexiness to the managers and bosses).
Even if Apple does this and only sells it through education and special sales channels rather than the Apple store, I think this is a great idea in whatever form it eventually takes.
As explained before, Apple's form factor is a major differentiator between their product and a beige box. Beige (or black!) boxes don't get nearly as much attention as, say, the new iMac or even the old iMac. I've never seen a Newsweek with, say, a Dell insert in it explaining the features of the new Dell or Dell-branded MP3 player. Apple's marketing department's really on the ball selling the computer's form, and selling a boring old rackmount server isn't in Apple's little four-square Plan For The Future. The rackmount server goes against everything Jobsian in design, such as: the original iMac, the cube, the next cube, the iPod, the new iMac, and the G3 case design family (B&W G3, graphite G4, Quicksilver G4).
I will now redundantly add my name to the end of my post. You know, in case you forgot me or something.
Apple could easily make a drawer like the Sun Cobalt Raq. Nobody ever compares a Cobalt Raq to the looks of a Compaq Proliant drawer.
Pedro
----
The Insomniac Coder
Apple also has a big market of content creators, web designers, video production professionals, page layout operations - this rack-mount server would seem to be a no-brainer in my opinion. Of course it would be successful. I think they are going to do it. Don't forget, Apple generally builds up demand to a feverish pitch and then releases the product to the world and because of the heavy demand the product usually is snapped up in droves.
We have a rack-mounted G4. It sits in our rack on its side and has been running just fine for months. I do not see Apple's case design as a significant impediment to rack mounting... just people's desire to have every little thing done for them!
Ouch! The truth hurts!
Repackaging news from another mac web site and then insulting Apple users by ending each department name with "for dummies" is not an impressive start for this new section.
There is no reason that Apple can't make sexy pizza box servers. In fact, they MUST do this if they are to succeed in the server market, and I believe they can succeed spectacularly. They now have an OS that is more than up to the task of running a datacenter, but datacenters require many servers, and towers, even rack-mounted towers, don't cut it.
Apple knows this, and if they have a real server strategy, which I believe they do, you can bet you'll be seeing some sweet-looking aqua-translucent pizza boxes coming soon. Just think of the hot looking rack they could make. It would allow them to make their aesthetic statement on a macro scale!
Or maybe my math is just really bad, it would be half (40) as many processors per rack, not double. The ability to put Apple's latest and greatest in a 2U space is still very attractive...
Sun puts out large purple boxes with GIANT Sun logos on the side and 30+ flashing lights. So I can't see much diffreance between that and the Mac case. I personally think the thing that holds Mac's back from the server market is honestly few people view them as servers, least in my experiance. What upper level manager wants to say he has a rack full of Apples? The mere mention of that sounds odd. The uninitiated want to say they have a rack full of Sun's, IBM's, Dells or Compaqs, not Fruit.
Aren't G4's primary use from Motorola for embedded devices? I think this would make it very easy for the chips to fit into a small space with low power consumption and low heat. If Apple decides to go after this market it should not be difficult for them to fit 4 chips in a 1U case. BTW, all you guys posting the Marathon links, did you even read the article? They state the Marathon cases only allow 80 processors per rack, where comparable PC cases allow 160 processors.
For the power of the G4 mixed with linux and stacked serves or a rack mount option, Yellow Dog Linux makes the briQ.
/ br iQ.shtml
It runs on amazing little power and you can cram 8 of them in a 4U rack.
http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/products/briQ
-Barkeep, a draft of your most hazardous brew, for the world is slowly stepping into focus, and I don't like what I see.
Does this sound like trollish sarcasm? Perhaps, but I'm deadly serious. Apple's design innovations are all supposed to be about making computers more usable. But they're the darlings of those who thing form is everything and function is nothing. When the new iMac came out, NPR intereviewed a prominent design consultant. Here's a relevent excerpt
It's not Apple, but check out:
http://www.gvstore.com/apg4wor733.html
Apple Laptop Keyboards are Unacceptable to Unix Users
Apple designs horrible keyboards. ADB keyboards (which are still used on all of Apple's laptops) are unusable to unix users who need a Ctrl key to the left of the 'A'.
Proper Keyboard Design
- When a key is pressed, the keyboard sends a keyPress
event.
- When a key is released, the keyboard sends a keyRelease
event.
- Each key is assigned a different keycode.
Nothing more, nothing less.ADB Keyboard Mis-design
- When the key to the left of the 'A' (CapsLock) is
pressed, the ADB keyboard sends both a keyPress event
and a keyRelease event.
- When the CapsLock key is then released, the ADB keyboard
sends NO events.
- When the CapsLock key is next pressed, the ADB keyboard
sends NO events.
- When the CapsLock key is then released, the ADB keyboard
sends both a keyPress event and a keyRelease
event.
- The above cycle repeats over and over.
This is WRONG ! Apple's ADB keyboards are broken by design.Unix Users Cannot Use Apple's ADB Keyboards
What this means is that unix users who need the key to the left of the 'A' to be a Ctrl key cannot use Apple ADB keyboards. You can easily reprogram the CapsLock key to be a Ctrl key and get rid of the badness of the CapsLock key, but you can't get the required goodness of the Ctrl key to the left of the 'A'.
Apple Loses Sales to Unix Users
All Apple laptops have the horrible broken-by-design ADB keyboards which are unusable to unix users. I want to buy an Apple laptop, but I cannot and will not until Apple builds input devices usable by unix users.
Here's a story about a guy who has successfully clustered some G4 Cubes, bypassing the heat problem by adding some fans and removing the computer from the plastic casing. Sure, it's not quiet any more, but it apparently makes for a decent cluster.
Gentoo Linux http://gentoo.org/