PDA

View Full Version : Xserve and Xserve RAID Next?




MacRumors
Feb 5, 2003, 09:33 PM
According to an unconfirmed source - next up for Apple is Xserve and Xserve RAID updates/introductions.

The Xserve was initially introduced in May 2002, and maintains the Dual 1GHz speeds. The Xserve raid was previewed at that time, but has yet to arrive. In November (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/11/20021119024841.shtml) the Xserve RAID was delayed by Apple until early 2003.

According to the information provided, next in line is the Xserve - which is rumored to sport dual 1.4GHz processors, 166MHz bus, DDR333, and 250GB Drive Modules, and the long awaited Xserve RAID -- reportedly still with Fibre Channel, contrary to other rumors (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?threadid=18713).

Though the source claims 1.4GHz speeds, it seems a 1.42GHz processor would be more likely much like the PowerMacs. As a new and unconfirmed source, it should be considered accordingly.



Chaszmyr
Feb 5, 2003, 10:02 PM
This sounds very likely.

shadowfax
Feb 6, 2003, 12:19 AM
man, Xserves are going to be so cool when they finally catch up with the Pmacs. i am really surprised that they let them get so far behind though.

Chisholm
Feb 6, 2003, 12:28 AM
I just had to , last week, make an "executive decision" to go with an xServe or a G4 tower server for a rack configuration. guess which i chose...

would love to say the xServe, but no.

shadowfax
Feb 6, 2003, 12:46 AM
Originally posted by Chisholm
I just had to , last week, make an "executive decision" to go with an xServe or a G4 tower server for a rack configuration. guess which i chose...

would love to say the xServe, but no.

how could you? i mean, the XServes are SO SLOW by comparison with the top line Pmacs... i don't know why apple let it slip. i thought they could sidestep just about any heating issue SOMEHOW. they're geniuses.

iAryeh
Feb 6, 2003, 07:31 AM
While the Xserve may be slower than the top of the line PowerMac, you can cluster it and make it have more power than the top of the line PowerMac.

PrettyMan
Feb 6, 2003, 08:09 AM
Originally posted by iAryeh
While the Xserve may be slower than the top of the line PowerMac, you can cluster it and make it have more power than the top of the line PowerMac.

H O W ?

They are only words... ?

springscansing
Feb 6, 2003, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by Shadowfax


how could you? i mean, the XServes are SO SLOW by comparison with the top line Pmacs... i don't know why apple let it slip. i thought they could sidestep just about any heating issue SOMEHOW. they're geniuses.

The top of the line PMs JUST came out. The XServer has only been behind 250mhz. And you do not need to update the server line every 6 months. Companies do not throw out only servers and smack down new ones twice a year.

A yearly update is more than enough.

shadowfax
Feb 6, 2003, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by springscansing


The top of the line PMs JUST came out. The XServer has only been behind 250mhz. And you do not need to update the server line every 6 months. Companies do not throw out only servers and smack down new ones twice a year.

A yearly update is more than enough.

i disagree. i think your assumption is that people upgrade with each apple update, which isn't remotely true. they should keep the servers updated as frequently as the PMac, i think, because having cutting edge power in a rackmount is what i think it should be about. not to convince the current Xserve users to update, but to convince prospective buyers to do so. dual 1GHz Xserves cost the same as they did OVER 6 months ago; that outrageous to me. if i were in the server market, i wouldn't buy an Xserve. i'd either put OS X server on a Pmac, or if i needed rackmount, i would put linux on a Dell or an IBM.

by the way, they weren't just 250 MHz behind, they were 250MHz per processor behind, which is much more significant.

MrMacMan
Feb 6, 2003, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by Shadowfax


i disagree. i think your assumption is that people upgrade with each apple update, which isn't remotely true. they should keep the servers updated as frequently as the PMac, i think, because having cutting edge power in a rackmount is what i think it should be about. not to convince the current Xserve users to update, but to convince prospective buyers to do so. dual 1GHz Xserves cost the same as they did OVER 6 months ago; that outrageous to me. if i were in the server market, i wouldn't buy an Xserve. i'd either put OS X server on a Pmac, or if i needed rackmount, i would put linux on a Dell or an IBM.

by the way, they weren't just 250 MHz behind, they were 250MHz per processor behind, which is much more significant.

Inless I'm on something real strong apple just release more powerful Powermacs...

If Powermacs have 1.42 Dual...
And Xserve have dual (or single) 1 GHZ Chip(s) then it is .42 Ghz each chip (420 Mhz each chip) so... There is a real difference.

timbloom
Feb 6, 2003, 06:07 PM
Apple has not left the Xserve on the back burner these last few months. They didn't have as high as expected sales, for one, so there have been some overstock they would need to get rid of first. Apple has been listening to feedback over the xserve VERY carefully, it is not a consumer mac. Corporations rely heavily on these things, they get tested and tested then tested some more. Also, clock speed is not the main issue with machines like this, it may be the reason you go out and buy a new powermac, but server admins know better than that. They look at figures that really count, how much network load it can handle, what does it offer that the competitor's does not. Right now the major need is FireWire 2 for the Xserve RAID, a bump in system bus, to use faster RAM, possibly a revamped system controller. Plus fixes of things that apple can not imagine in their labs, things that were shown as annoyances or things that were lacking. (*cough* OS unmounting the drive when somebody pulls the handle out, even if the drive is locked in, so it messes up your mirrored RAID still even though the drive is not being removed, and takes quite some time to repair *cough*) Servers need to be reliable, so updates aren't rushed.

Sauron1440
Feb 6, 2003, 06:11 PM
WHen I was at Macworld, I did see a rack of normanl Xserves, as well as at leat one unusual one - instead of being a 1u rack size with 4 horizontally oriented drive slots, I saw an (approximately) 3u or 4u size unit with 10 or more vertically oriented drives - (they were turned on their side) The unit was CLEARLY of Apple manufacture - I'm 89% sure I saw it at the apple area (booth doesn't quite decsribe it). I did not get a chance to ask any questions about it, but I suspect that this is the future RAID Xserve we are looking forward to. (And, yes, judging by the blinking lights, I'd say it was in acttive use)

scem0
Feb 6, 2003, 06:20 PM
This is very likely, same with iPod updates.

kenkooler
Feb 6, 2003, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by scem0
This is very likely, same with iPod updates.

However, for some reason it's not in the main MacRumors page.

MrMacMan
Feb 8, 2003, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by kenkooler


However, for some reason it's not in the main MacRumors page.

Arn must not think it is happening, and remember.

ARN KNOWS ALL.

arn
Feb 9, 2003, 05:44 AM
Originally posted by MrMacman


Arn must not think it is happening, and remember.

ARN KNOWS ALL.

heh... no, I don't know all.

This information did come from a "new" source... so, I don't know how accurate this info is.

arn