Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IBM Considering DB2 on Mac OS X

Posted by pudge on from the yes-some-people-still-use-db2 dept.

zzen writes "Aparently, IBM is looking for input on the posibility of their DB2 database being ported to Mac OS X. MacObserver writes: 'IBM has posted a survey asking Mac OS X users if they are interested in having DB2 ported to Mac OS X. DB2 is an enterprise level database solution from IBM, and a Mac OS X port from IBM would be a major boost for Mac OS X in the corporate market place.'"

2 of 38 comments (clear)

  1. The real question is this. by BoomerSooner · · Score: 2, Flamebait

    Does IBM want Oracle to be the only Enterprise Database Server product for OS X Server?

    My guess would be no but then again who cares. I'll use Oracle either way.

  2. Re:Too late? by drsmithy · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Apple's server is the cheapest 1U server available.

    Rubbish. A PowerEdge 350 is less than half the price (~US$1300ish) of the basic Xserve ($US3000) even after bumping its options to within the same ballpark (1GHz processor, 80GH HDD, 256MB RAM, GB copper ethernet). They start at $850, or less than a third of the price of an Xserve. Not to mention they have a better warranty (1 year onsite parts/labour + 2 years parts vs 1 year parts)

    It's roughly the same price as a Dell PowerEdge 1650 1U server with Red Hat Linux with minimal hard drives options, cheaper by about $1000 with full drive options & several thousand cheaper than the same hardware with Windows 2000 Server.

    Your maths is quite strange. A base single 1.4GHz 1650 with 256MB RAM and a 73GB 10k RPM SCSI drive still only comes in around the $2000 mark ($1000 cheaper than the equivalent Xserve). And that's with dual 1GB/sec copper ethernet, two 64bit/66Mhz PCI slots free, a faster disk and a better warranty. Max out the 1650 to dual 1.4GHz CPUs, 3x73GB disk and 2G of RAM and it only comes to around $5600, nearly $2000 cheaper than the equivalent Xserve - with the same advantages wrt to network, slots and disk (albeit with only about half the disk space).
    And don't forget these machines are at the bottom end of the server market. If you want more oomph Dell have a whole slew of machines you can move up to. Apple have nothing.

    With full file-serving to Windows (Samba), Mac, & Unix (NFS) clients, plus built-in Apache, CUPS print server & the ability to run most any J2SE server applets, it's a bargain.

    It's not a bargain. It might be interesting to parties who don't want to employ a Unix admin to look after their workgroup server, but for more mainstream usage, where a real admin will be running the box and the software niceties of OS X are, at best, of little importance, it's a damn expensive piece of hardware.