PDA

View Full Version : Snow Leopard Server VS. OS X Server 10.8




Jaggions
Aug 31, 2013, 04:35 PM
Hi. I decided to create a small home server. I started with FreeNAS but I didn't like it very much because it was quite complicate to use (I had never used FreeBSD before), so I decided to install OS X Server 10.8 on a 2010 MacBook. I don't like it very much too, it's not a very good software in my opinion (if I had to choose I would take FreeNAS). What about Snow Leopard Server? I know it's very different from OS X server because that's a whole O.S. instead of just an application, but in your opinion which is better? What are the main differences? And should I install S.L. even if it's quite deprecated? Thank you.



talmy
Aug 31, 2013, 04:48 PM
I recently upgraded my 3+ year old mini with Snow Leopard Server to Server 10.8. The upgrade took a couple days to iron out but it's been running perfectly since (up 38 days now). A few features are gone, but they are ones I never used or actually found negative (such as the printer spooling). Configuration is much simpler now as well -- lots of features in your face in Snow Leopard Server are still present but hidden behind popups which keeps it cleaner.

Anyway, you haven't stated what you don't like about Server 10.8. I could tell you what is different in SLS for the features you dislike.

There is nothing wrong with SLS, even today. I just wanted it for some new features that weren't in SLS, particularly the update caching since I've got 7 Macs here, and improvements to the Calendar server.

Jaggions
Aug 31, 2013, 05:04 PM
I recently upgraded my 3+ year old mini with Snow Leopard Server to Server 10.8. The upgrade took a couple days to iron out but it's been running perfectly since (up 38 days now). A few features are gone, but they are ones I never used or actually found negative (such as the printer spooling). Configuration is much simpler now as well -- lots of features in your face in Snow Leopard Server are still present but hidden behind popups which keeps it cleaner.

Anyway, you haven't stated what you don't like about Server 10.8. I could tell you what is different in SLS for the features you dislike.

There is nothing wrong with SLS, even today. I just wanted it for some new features that weren't in SLS, particularly the update caching since I've got 7 Macs here, and improvements to the Calendar server.

Thank you for your answer. I can't tell exactly what I don't like of ML Server; as I've said I come straight from FreeNAS, which was more customizable and more... open. I don't know if you can understand, also my English is not very good but with hindsight I think that FreeNAS was a little better. It wasn't convenient at all because I had to use a whole Windows PC, two different drives and they were formatted with a particular filesystem, this is because I decided to change. But on the other hand ML Server - in my opinion - has too many useless features and too poor configuration for the ones I care about (AFP, FTP, SMB, WebDav sharing, Mail server and Web Server).
Also, I don't like how everything is organized. For example, I hate that if you want to share a folder through AFP with someone you HAVE to create a normal OS X user, as if he had to use my computer personally.

monkeybagel
Aug 31, 2013, 05:16 PM
Thank you for your answer. I can't tell exactly what I don't like of ML Server; as I've said I come straight from FreeNAS, which was more customizable and more... open. I don't know if you can understand, also my English is not very good but with hindsight I think that FreeNAS was a little better. It wasn't convenient at all because I had to use a whole Windows PC, two different drives and they were formatted with a particular filesystem, this is because I decided to change. But on the other hand ML Server - in my opinion - has too many useless features and too poor configuration for the ones I care about (AFP, FTP, SMB, WebDav sharing, Mail server and Web Server).
Also, I don't like how everything is organized. For example, I hate that if you want to share a folder through AFP with someone you HAVE to create a normal OS X user, as if he had to use my computer personally.

All versions of OS X Server are just server applications tacked on to the desktop OS/kernel. The same goes for Windows. Windows from Windows NT 3.5 has been the same kernel and use the same drivers as their desktop counterparts.

As asked above, exactly what are your goals for this server? 10.6 Server was when Apple did the same thing Microsoft does now - they determine that if it was a "Server" they could charge more for it because it was more than likely used in a corporate/business environment. Since then, Apple has steered away from support those types of customers and have watered down their server offerings. They did lower the cost significantly to reflect this, however. For many people, the Server addon for 10.7, 10.8 and 10.9 should meet their needs.

Acquiring Snow Leopard Server will probably still be a little expensive, particularly if you get the unlimited client version. It requires activation using a product key almost in the same way Windows does. They give the Server application away to paid developers to test, however they never gave Snow Leopard Server away. We had access to it, but it was only with a temporary serial number that would expire in something like six months.

Jaggions
Aug 31, 2013, 05:32 PM
As asked above, exactly what are your goals for this server?

What I need is a server with these features:
- Possibility to easily create many users and manage their permissions
- Folder sharing trough AFP, FTP, SFTP, SSH, SMB, WebDav
- Web interface or screen sharing trough VNC
- Possibility to send Push notifications to clients
- Possibility to easily manage an Apache Web Server (this is where I'm stuck on ML, as I was on FreeNAS)
- Possibility to use it as mail server
Also keep in mind that I'm going to keep the server on 24/7.

So, this is what I need. What O.S. should I use?

chrfr
Aug 31, 2013, 06:47 PM
What I need is a server with these features:
- Possibility to easily create many users and manage their permissions
- Folder sharing trough AFP, FTP, SFTP, SSH, SMB, WebDav
- Web interface or screen sharing trough VNC
- Possibility to send Push notifications to clients
- Possibility to easily manage an Apache Web Server (this is where I'm stuck on ML, as I was on FreeNAS)
- Possibility to use it as mail server
Also keep in mind that I'm going to keep the server on 24/7.

So, this is what I need. What O.S. should I use?

Stay with Mountain Lion. Snow Leopard is old and soon to be outside of any security updates at all, and also has no support for push notifications.

talmy
Aug 31, 2013, 11:00 PM
But on the other hand ML Server - in my opinion - has too many useless features and too poor configuration for the ones I care about (AFP, FTP, SMB, WebDav sharing, Mail server and Web Server).
Also, I don't like how everything is organized. For example, I hate that if you want to share a folder through AFP with someone you HAVE to create a normal OS X user, as if he had to use my computer personally.

A lot of the configuration, such as setting up sharing permissions, is there but somewhat hidden. SMB is SMB2 which can cause trouble with some Linux distributions that don't support it. I've never used WebDAV or Mail server. The web server is Apache and really needs to be manually configured, as one might expect.

You don't have to create normal OS X users for shares. My server has only one account, an administrator account, and none of the client accounts have login access. It will appear in server.app as "Local Network Users" and when you create them if you set the Home Folder to "None - Services Only" they won't have access. You can also download and use Workgroup Manager to create these service users and System Preferences for local login users as was done in Snow Leopard Server. Server.app just combines them into one location.

adjuster
Sep 20, 2013, 12:33 PM
We are going in the opposite direction as the others in this post.

We had an IT person setup an Mtn. Lion server for our office. To say it is buggy, limited and incompetent is being polite. For example, we pointed out to Apple techs, who finally agreed, that it is incapable of giving some of my users permission to read/write/move files, but not delete them. There is an obtuse work around, but I hate work arounds, which fail after the next update.

The good news is that we have an older MacMini with 60gb SSD's, so they are fast and reliable. I am loading one with the Snow Leopard Server software and will convert to that asap.

The watered down 10.8 server was supposed to make it easy for a non IT expert to configure. Well, I fall into that category, but it is way over my head. So I may as well go with the proven Snow Leopard Server which will require an IT person to set up. At least it should work more than a few hours at a time.

I have about 20 Macs in my company. This is the first product which has fallen way short of expectations.