Slashdot Mirror
Apple Blurs the Server Line With Mac Mini Server
Toe, The writes "Today Apple announced several new hardware offerings, including a new Mac mini, their (almost-literally) pint-sized desktop computer. In a bizarre twist, they are now also offering a Mac mini with Mac OS X Server bundled in, along with a two hard drives somehow stuffed into the tiny package. Undoubtedly, many in the IT community will scoff at the thought of calling such a device a 'server.' However, with the robust capabilities of Snow Leopard Server (a true, if highly GUI-fied, UNIX server), it seems likely to find a niche in small businesses and even enthusiasts' homes. The almost completely guided setup process means that people can set up relatively sophisticated services without the assistance of someone who actually knows what they are doing. What the results will be in terms of security, etc. will be... interesting to watch as they develop." El Reg has a good roundup article of the many announcements; the multi-touch Magic Mouse is right up there on the techno-lust-inspiration scale.
Why scoff at a nice looking server that adds to the array of options you have for serving whatever you may want to serve? Sure, it may not be the right thing to rack-mount en mass (though maybe it would work fine for that too), but it'd be a safe bet to say that Apple isn't trying to take over the rack-mounted server market with this particular offering. Those who would scoff would merely be scoffing at a misuse of the product.
Not only the small form factor but the Mini has an extremely low power consumption. Homes and small businesses should like that.
As an admin on a mix mac/linux network(well, we do have to support 4 pcs, but only grudingly), I would say that Apple's tools are pretty nice, and have progressed immensely during the lifespan of Leopard(Tigers Open Directory was buggy as hell, Leopard has been pretty rock solid), the GUIs actually work really well UNTIL something goes wrong. Then trying to wade through the mish-mash of manual configs vs. gui configs(not to mention you don't really know what the GUI is doing) trying to track down the problem is a real mess.
Overall, if you want centralized logins at your mac-centric organization I would definitely recommend a Mac Server, largely because LDAP config on Linux still isn't quite as simple as it is on a mac, but for everything else(web, database, file shares etc.) I would go Linux.
The nice thing about the mac clients is that they support most of these technologies out of the box. For instance sharing NFS between macs and Linux is pretty braindead simple. Of course, that *other* OS still doesn't support NFs out of the box. I mean, I guess you have to give them a little slack, the protocol is only 20 years old....
Monstar L
Actually, I have heard some great things about OSX server. You do realize at the core its just BSD, which makes some great servers. And if your going to have a GUI, why not the OSX gui rather than xwindows.
I compare OSX server to Windows Server, a bunch of crap running on top of a decent network operating system. If I had to choose between the two, I'd probably choose OSX if my environment needed a single file server for a mixed OS network.
For a small workgroup, it has a lot to offer for centralization and system management, similar to having windows machines in an AD environment. See http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/
Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
Actually any mac will run OS X server, the big difference is that you have to pony over $500 to load OS X server on the non-XServe(and now this box) machines. You could run OS X server from a macbook air if you really wanted to.
Monstar L
Snow Leopard Server (a true, if highly GUI-fied, UNIX server)
That's not true. The UNIX trademark is handled by the Open Group. Only if they say it's UNIX, it's UNIX. Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard (for Intel) is UNIX. Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard is not. The Server version also doesn't have a certification.
Sure, it's Unix-like. It might even comply with the Single Unix Specification. But it's not a true UNIX until the Open Group says it is.
Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
You will then notice that there is a Configure-to-order option of a Promise FireWire 800 RAID unit with 4x 1TB hard drives.
Specialist Mac support for creative pros, Melbourne
"Part of the value is that the Mac mini Server is only $100 more than the standard mini equipped with a single 500 GB drive"
A caveat: the server does not have an optical drive (that's where they stuffed the other HD). Still a good deal, just not quite as good as on first glance.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
The mac mini is already in use in server farms. Apparently it's size and low power consumption make it a good candidate in a server farm. Check it out yourself:
http://www.dannychoo.com/post/en/13019/Mac+Mini+Server+Farm.html
Say NO to unpaid Internships!
Its operating system is Mach. Its operating environment is based on FreeBSD and its GUI is based on NeXTSTEP. A stock standard OS X machine is not running any FreeBSD tools 99.99% of the time except at boot or some configuration stages. There is also some FreeBSD code added in some of the Mach layers.
OptiPlex 160
Single Core, Tiny Desktop
Processors
Intel® Atom 230 Single Core Processor
There's a bit of a difference between a Core 2 Duo & an Atom. Both have their purpose.
I'll ignore the issue of whether or not OS X makes for a good server. Instead, I'd like to make clear that Mac OS X (Darwin) is not "just BSD." Its userland is from BSD. Apart from that, there is not much else that is shared. Most especially, they each have different kernels. That alone makes it impossible to say that Mac OS X has to be a good server OS just because (Free)BSD is.
"Server" isn't particular hardware. Anything can be a server, it just not be the *proper* server for a given usage.
You even note it in your objection: "...Linux, MySQL [server software] and Apache [HTTP server software]"
You're confusing the terms "enterprise class server configuration" with "server".
What about Windows Small Business Server? Granted... the OEM price is roughly the same as a standard OEM copy of Server 2008... only it comes with a heck of a lot more in the box (Exchange, SQL, etc).
One wonders what will come of Windows Foundation Server and it's pricing.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Ehm, Active Directory /is/ LDAP, with Kerberos on top.
These 379 dollar ones: http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/3709945-3709945-3328410-241641-3722790.html
I've been running OS X Server in a SOHO situation for several years, including hosting some websites, LDAP-based network login, OS X Mobile accounts on laptops (laptop synchs when it's back in the home network) and file sharing.
Last week I got a new low-end Mini and a copy of Snow Leopard Server, at about the same cost as the new product. My Mini is only 2.0ghz, compared to 2.5ghz, and has only 1, 120gb, disk drive vs the 2x 500gb drives. But those drives are 5400rpm, and you give up the optical drive for the second hard drive. My big disappointment with this (besides it coming out a week after I bought something a bit less capable) is that I think they should have added at least one and preferably 2 eSATA ports (and given up 2 USB ports.)
I'm looking forward to trying out the Wiki server, and also the new 'connect to home' facility that is something like a very simplified VPN, that's new in Snow Leopard Server.
Administering Snow Leopard Server is very little like handling Unix servers, with one exception. You still need to pore through logfiles for security issues, etc. But the late Leopard Server (X.5.6 or so) and now Snow Leopard server "server preferences" are likely to provide a relatively knowledgeable user with the ability to set up a functional server in, literally, 10 minutes (voice of experience...) That's assuming you have a DNS that provides domain name/IP mapping, and you're doing simple LDAP or already have an LDAP server (including Active Directory, but I don't have any experience with AD or mixed Windows/Mac integration.)
Clearly this is not for someone who needs computational power in a server. But a pair of servers, using a shared (NAS) disk, and some sort of mechanism that can do hot-backup/rollover at the edge, could be a very workable relatively high-reliability situation for someone. But more importantly, I think this is a very attractive product for small offices, particularly with some sort of FW800 or NAS RAID mirrored/redundant disk enclosure.
Oh, and someone asked how you do an install without an optical drive in the server: "There's more than one way to do this." MacOS provides remote disk (this was developed for the MacBook Air), so you slide your install DVD into another Mac with an optical drive and active remote disk. OR, you can use Firewire Target mode (one of the great Mac tricks of all time.) This is how I loaded my Leopard server double-density DVD onto an old G5 that did not have a double density DVD drive. I stuck it in my MacBook Pro, then rebooted the MBP into Firewire Target mode. I used a (FW800 - great performance) cable to plug that machine into the G5. All of the MBP's drives, including the DVD in the optical drive, mounted on the G5. Basically Target mode turns your Mac into the equivalent of an external disk enclosure for all drives/volumes on that machine. This is also super-cool for backup. I have an eSATA enclosure and a ExpressCard34 eSATA adapter for the MBP. I can do drive-dump level backups by putting the Mini into Firewire Target mode and then disk-dumping drive images onto my eSATA enclosure. (The eSATA enclosure is left over from that G5, which had a hardware RAID eSATA card in it. I was sorry to give that particular card up, it worked pretty well.)
Interesting to note, the new iMac's DisplayPort is also an input. Just switch to your server on your iMac if you need to, or use screen sharing over the network. Nice to use the Mac Mini as a dev machine, and use your iMac as a KVM.
Asus Eee Box
My eee gets "hot" in an hour and approaches boiling water temperature in two or so...
Good thing that's not what he's talking about
An EeePC is not an Eee Box
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Let me ask again. Is this server, 'rackable'? How many Us?
4 Mac Minis will fit on this $58 2U tray..
Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant. The population is growing.
People are already using Mini's as servers, there are co-lo's that offer Mac Mini's as "servers". Others are using them as display servers for overhead screens in their commandcenter with their OS X based system.(saw an article somewhere about some police command center that used a OS X based system)
So there is many places where you already can find racks of Mac Minis today so I'd say there is a demand for server minis with RAID disks.
http://www.apple.com/uk/imac/features.html#ports
"Mini DisplayPort.
The Mini DisplayPort lets you connect an external display, including the Apple LED Cinema Display, to your iMac. On the 27-inch iMac, the same port offers input, too. So you can connect any external source that has DisplayPort output — including a MacBook or MacBook Pro — and use your iMac as a display."
If you have another Mac, you can share its DVD drive across the network. CD/DVD sharing is built into OS X 10.6, and I think it was in 10.5 also. Apple also makes the software available to share a drive from a Windows PC. It even works for booting and OS reinstallation.
Likewise, if you have another Mac with firewire, you can also use its DVD drive via firewire target mode.
Or, if you're old-fashioned, any external USB or firewire DVD drive will most likely work.
~Philly
Actually, with the 27" iMac you can actually use that as an external monitor. So, you could get yourself an iMac and use it until it's obsolete, then use it merely as a display. Not quite sure if/how you would switch between internal/external source (maybe a KVM switch could work), but you could then turn the iMac into a server when you upgrade to whatever next.
Fail. Epic fail.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The ability to utilize a remote CD/DVD drive for installation on a Mac without optical has been around for year or so... since the Air was released IIRC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_Install_Mac_OS_X
The Atom is nothing to sneeze at and should do more than fine for a SOHO fileserver, but it's not a C2D processor. The Mini as advertised here is a full blown desktop PC with all bells and whistles, and it _still_ only uses 16W idle. That's where the additional cash goes.
Also, it's not easy to find a decent (80+) PSU with good efficiency in the lower watts. The PicoPSU is great, but adds another $40 plus around $40 for an adapter. Which should also be 80+ again.
I would never run a Mac server at this point because it can't be virtualized.
Mac OS X Server can be virtualized for exactly the reasons you mentioned, actually. VMware virtualization of OS X Server works quite well in my personal experience.
The new Mac Mini is actually rated for "14 watts of power when idle", which Apple says is lower than any other computer in the EPA STAR database.
But wait, there's more! With Snow Leopard, Apple introduced a new "Wake on Demand" feature that could allow the Mini to be in sleep mode (~1.5W) most of the time, but still work as a server when needed:
(1) Airport base stations can now provide a "Bonjour Sleep Proxy" service that will keep announcing all the services your computer is hosting on the network, even after the computer goes to sleep. The base station will then wake the server whenever another computer tries to access it. It isn't clear whether this happens only for Bonjour services, or for any IP-based access (which should be possible in principle).
(2) All this magic can happen via the wireless network if your computer is new enough. (Wake-on-LAN was only possible via ethernet before.)
If the server is set to go back to sleep automatically after a few minutes of inactivity, this setup provides a low-power, always-on server arrangement: the computer sleeps most of the time, automatically wakes up whenever someone wants to connect to it, then goes back to sleep whenever it's not needed.
Your spot on with the home office server which I agree, is where this is squarely aimed. I already use a Mac mini (G4) with OS X 10.4 server to run the home network, serve up music to all the other PCs and laptops around the place, and run as the local mail server. The last job it serves is as a test platform for any MAMP projects I do on the side, plus host my blog/web presence (which probably only gets all of 7 hits a week). I've had this scenario since 2005 and I'd actually been looking to upgrade to the Intel platform. This new box now gives me the perfect opportunity!
Dan. -- So what if it's spelt wrong, nobody's perfect