Apple Will Demo Mac OS X Server At WWDC

epec254 writes "According to MacCentral the next new version of Mac OS X Server, based on Panther, will be previewed at the WWDC session 'Apple Solutions in Enterprise.' Maybe they will get file permissions right this time."

Comments

Re:Aqua Lite?

[Hungus]

Just run it headless on my Xserves at Idle I use less than 1% total CPU and thats while monitoring it. the gui only comes up when i log into it as a user ( via ARD or TB2)

Re:Aqua Lite?

[Pathwalker]

If you were using an OSX box as a server, you would probably disable the GUI and run the system with a text console.

You do that by editing /etc/ttys and uncommenting the first of these two lines, while commenting out the second:

#console "/usr/libexec/getty std.9600" vt100 on secure

console "/System/Library/CoreServices/loginwindow.app/Cont ents/MacOS/loginwindow" vt100 on secure window=/System/Library/CoreServices/WindowServer onoption="/usr/libexec/getty std.9600"

(random spacing in the second long line inserted by slashdot's anti-page-widening code)

Re:Windows Domain-like functions?

[kwerle]

It also supports NetInfo which is similar in function to LDAP.

How sad that it is reduced to this. NetInfo is one of the finest resource administrative systems available. It is very unfortunate that it is languishing - mostly unused and un-talked about. (yes, every system uses it by default, but I'd say that most folks on a network don't use/understand it to a fraction of it's potential)

Yes, I'm one of those NeXT zealots :-/

you're thinking too hard

[Petrox]

or you could just type ">console" at the login screen and save yourself from futzing with loginwindow.app.

Re:...from the oxymoron dept.

[TheRaven64]

he current Moto PPC is just too underpowered

Maybe. I suspect that this is true for large sites (well, except iTMS, which I hear works just fine on a bunch of X-Servers). For most small buisnesses, however, modern CPUs are overpowered. Our current server is a 750HMz Duron with 256MB of RAM. It handles email (SMPT, POP3, IMAP and webmail), about a hundred individual web sites (not very high traffic, about 15000 requests per day average), Jabber (public server, listed on the jabber.org site), a web-cam and a few other things. Its load average sits at under 0.20. In fact I'm running top on it right now, and the most CPU-intensive thing it's doing is running top. We stopped upgrading it a while back and diverted the funds to new workstations.

you can run it on an AMD or whatever for half the price.

For a small buisness the additional cost of an X-Server over an Intel/AMD Linux/*BSD server is minute compared to the amount that they can save by not employing someone fulltime to maintain it.

The OS is not designed to be a server, it's designed to be a personal use OS.

A lot of the kernel is from FreeBSD which is very much a server OS. The rest is designed to increase usability. Linux (and *BSD for that matter) are not friendly for people with no *NIX experience (well, they might be on a desktop where you can hide behind gnome or KDE, but not on a server). An X-Serve could quite easily be run in-house by a company which already has Mac-experienced employees, and a company that is not a 'computer company' is much more likely to have Mac people in house than *NIX people.

Of course I wouldn't recommend using an X-Serve for hosting a site like /., but for a SME that out-sources all of its IT support it would be a cost-effective solution.