PDA

View Full Version : Apple Rackmount Event


arn
May 14, 2002, 10:49 AM
http://www.apple.com/xserve
http://www.macrumors.com

arn

Ensign Paris
May 14, 2002, 10:57 AM
well, lets all hope for great machines at 12!

I just am looking forward to it soooo much!

I wonder if the spec (rumor) will actually be true!

Ensign

menoinjun
May 14, 2002, 11:04 AM
I'm here at CompUSA waiting for the announcement and I just met uglychad. Nice to meet another macrumors local.

-Pete

Compufix
May 14, 2002, 11:24 AM
Maccentral has a live update article....

Classic
May 14, 2002, 11:25 AM
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0205/14.server.php

Compufix
May 14, 2002, 11:27 AM
The server will have a dual 1GHz G4 processor, 256K L2, 4MB DDR L3 caches. System controller with custom ASIC done by Apple. Built-in: Gigabit Ethernet and FireWire. That controller has up to 2GB DDR SDRAM. (This is the first time that we know of that that SDRAM has been used in a 1U server.) In addition, it will have a PCI slot with gigabit Ethernet. This means server comes std. with two gigabit Ethernet ports. Quad ATA/100 drives, all on independent controllers and all have independent channels into system controller; a CD-ROM and 2 64-bit/66MHz PCI slots.

arn
May 14, 2002, 11:38 AM
the leaked specs were correct it seems.

overall seems awesome... this means DDR is coming almost certainly in the PowerMacs.

arn

Ensign Paris
May 14, 2002, 11:41 AM
well, we will be buying some for work as soon as they are on the AppleStore site, its a shame they are some time away from release :(

Ensign

Tue12
May 14, 2002, 11:47 AM
All I want to know is, do they come in fruity colors?! :D

Phaedrus
May 14, 2002, 11:52 AM
Looks like Apple is going to be competitive here: From the maccentral breaking report:

"Unlimited clients (windows server requires expensive server licenses)."

"Dell PowerEdge 1560 $4277 - 3 bays
* IBM eServer X330 $5186 - 3 bays
* Sun Fire 280R $19590 - 2 bays
* Xserve $3999 - 266MHz DDR SDRAM, 4 bays means more total capacity"

JoeCanadian
May 14, 2002, 11:53 AM
Does anyone know about RAID support?

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by Tue12
All I want to know is, do they come in fruity colors?! :D

*SMACK*... That was your one and only warning slap... all future ones will be beatings.

Apple has burried the fruity colors for some time now, everything is either a shade of grey or white (except for the remaining G3 iMac's with one Indigo and the others in either graphite or snow).

It looks like the new rackmount server is inside a 1U enclosure. That should make all the cluster-babies happy as pigs in *****. Top it all off with 2GB of DDR memory, and it should have big enough balls for just about anything you can toss at it.

I will be trying to get one of these in at work, as soon as I can figure out a way to justify it's existance on our network. Never mind the fact that it will never go down, and will support all the users here.

Mr. Anderson
May 14, 2002, 11:55 AM
Its been an hour and still nothing at the Apple store. I want to see more pics. I wonder if there will be a QuickTimeVR?

This is a great step forward for Apple:D The OSX Server Software seems to be pretty damn amazing as well. But I'm wondering how long we're going to have to wait before we see this type of hardware in the DeskTops.

eyelikeart
May 14, 2002, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by AlphaTech
I will be trying to get one of these in at work, as soon as I can figure out a way to justify it's existance on our network. Never mind the fact that it will never go down, and will support all the users here.

one of these would be highly usefull for us here at work...it would make the workflow much smoother when having to dig back into archive cds...

but I doubt we will be getting one...

so I will have to envy u all who will have the luxury of getting one... ;)

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by JoeCanadian
Does anyone know about RAID support?

OS X (server and desktop versions) have RAID support built into the OS. You can set up drives as either RAID 0 or 1 without adding anything extra. I would imagine that you can do either of those to the non-booting drives inside the server. Use RAID 0 (aka Striping) and you have a single volume with approx. 3x the spec's of each individual drive (they will act as a single, über fast ATA drive) with 3x the space available.

JtheLemur
May 14, 2002, 11:58 AM
I am completely unimpressed! $3000 for a base model? I hope they give big discounts for education or something! Check this edu pricing:

Quicksilver OS X Server (unlimited clients)
1 GB RAM
2x 80 GB ATA drives
CDRW
Zip drive
Gig ethernet
for $2992.

Sorry, but faster RAM and ASIC is not enough to warrant the price - seems like yet another situation where we're paying for the design. I'd rather just get the above Quicksilver and rackmount it. Hell, I'm serving up more than 1000 MacintoshManager accounts over 10/100bT and AirPort to over 500 computers with 4 servers HALF as powerful as the Quicksilver system above, and it works FINE!

And frankly, as 'foreshadowing' is concerned, this does NOT look good. Are they going to get processors over 1GHz out in time for MWNY?

And if they do, it sure wouldn't pay to buy this XServe, since it would STILL be at dual 1GHz (unless they update it in what is effectively only a month!)

That's my opinion... what do the rest of you think in regards to what's coming at MWNY and what kind of value this XServe is?

(Don't get me wrong - the hot-swap and server monitor app is VERY cool...)

macstudent
May 14, 2002, 11:58 AM
Are there any images of it yet?

arn
May 14, 2002, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by JtheLemur
I am completely unimpressed! $3000 for a base model? I hope they give big discounts for education or something! Check this edu pricing:

Quicksilver OS X Server (unlimited clients)
1 GB RAM
2x 80 GB ATA drives
CDRW
Zip drive
Gig ethernet
for $2992.

Sorry, but faster RAM and ASIC is not enough to warrant the price - seems like yet another situation where we're paying for the design. I'd rather just get the above Quicksilver and rackmount it. Hell, I'm serving up more than 1000 MacintoshManager accounts over 10/100bT and AirPort to over 500 computers with 4 servers HALF as powerful as the Quicksilver system above, and it works FINE!

Reminder: Mac OS X Server costs $999

You could get a Quicksilver and rack it... but it would cost you $999 to buy Mac OS X Server.

arn

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by eyelikeart


one of these would be highly usefull for us here at work...it would make the workflow much smoother when having to dig back into archive cds...

but I doubt we will be getting one...

so I will have to envy u all who will have the luxury of getting one... ;)

Maybe I will dig up a rack, set it up at home, and buy one next year. Sounds like a good thing to do with next years bonus to me. :D With the ability to add additional ones later, I could even set up my own web site on it, have it run 24/7 and almost never need to check on it. Add storage (rack mount of course) as I need it, and it will be sweet. Of course, this will force me to get a gigabit NIC for the game peecee so that I can access the server at blazing speeds. I will also be able to plug directly into the server with my TiBook, and download at insane speeds :D.

I need to go get a mop and bucket now... too much drool on my office floor (good thing it is anti-static rubber). :D

JtheLemur
May 14, 2002, 12:03 PM
Reminder: Mac OS X Server costs $999

You could get a Quicksilver and rack it... but it would cost you $999 to buy Mac OS X Server.

arn

Arn -

That system I quoted COMES with OS X unlimited; the tower-based servers always have. =)

-- justin

PS - the message I posted... I'm in education, so that's why the cost thing plays heavily in my criticism. =) Hehe.

porovaara
May 14, 2002, 12:08 PM
Is a little out there especially considering some of the competition listed (by Apple) give you the OS for free. Of course the msoft os's aren't free but still.

These are pretty tight boxes, although at the price point they are at I am not sure who Apple expects to sell them to. They are about $1200 across the board too high to compete with Lunix boxes and Sun rackmounts.

zuffen
May 14, 2002, 12:08 PM
I know it is a server but it is still a workhorse and well suited for a video editing station. Hot swappable drives is a god send.

I want to know the video specs and if it will support standard third party dual head cards.

It is pricey, I hope the come out with the same hardware without the Server software price...maybe a Apple special order.

I WANT ONE.

gjohns01
May 14, 2002, 12:10 PM
Why is the RAM limited to 2GB? The IBM and DELL offer up to 4GB. Sun offers 8GB but they use a 64bit processor so they don't count. Just curious.

"A demo is taking place now of a Sybase database of NBA statistics, served through WebObjects" - Please tell me that Sybase database is running on the XServe and please please say that Oracle is on the way. :)

barkmonster
May 14, 2002, 12:10 PM
All I was expecting was the same specs as the current towers in a 1 U rack with raid support.

ATA100 and DDR is a shock to me, and something I'm looking forward to seeing on the desktops later in the year.

Notice the 4Mb Cache, it could mean 4Mb per CPU, I can't see them quoting the L2 cache size of 1 CPU and the combined size of the 2 L3 caches just to make the specs look more impressive.

If i could somehow get it to work with protools LE, that entry level model would be a screamer and one hell of a replacement for my beige G3!

All I can say is, now I know what I can realistically look forward to in the future, I can just start saving now, safe in the knowledge that I'll be happy with whatever tower I can buy for £1,400 - $1,500 later in the year.

:p Happy :p Happy :D Joy :D Joy!

-Ren "steeempy, you washed my collection of used celebrity underwear"

-Stimpy "so what you little squirt, I'm getting a G4 with DDR this year!"

arn
May 14, 2002, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by porovaara
Is a little out there especially considering some of the competition listed (by Apple) give you the OS for free. Of course the msoft os's aren't free but still.

Sorry for the confusion...

All of Apple's servers come with Mac OS X Server included in the price.

I thought JtheLemur was implying that he would buy a _consumer_ quicksilver and rack it... (consumer machines dont' come with osxserver)
... but i was mistaken... he was looking at the servers apparently.

arn

Timothy
May 14, 2002, 12:12 PM
I'm a bit confused...on the two basic models that have been listed so far, with a price difference between them of $1000 ($2999 and $3999) the only listed difference that I can see is 256mb of DDR ram.

That has to be a mistake, right? An extra 256 of DDR ram for $1000?

BTW...I think these prices are clearly in line for those who really need powerful rack-mount servers. I think Apple will have a hit here.

JtheLemur
May 14, 2002, 12:15 PM
Good call Timothy! What's the deal? All the other sites say the same thing....:confused:

-- justin

Tue12
May 14, 2002, 12:15 PM
$5 says Genentech buys the first 100 Xservers. :D

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 12:16 PM
I just talked with our server admin/tech over hereatest IBM server (a 1 year old TB server) that we have is inside a 6U housing (rack mounted of course, and built that way). Imagine having 6 G4 Rackmount servers inside the same space, all running OS X server... Slip 160GB drives into the open bays (leave whatever Apple puts in it to start with) and make them RAID 0.... my god..

evangelist
May 14, 2002, 12:17 PM
Forgive me, but doesn't RAID support require SCSI drives, not ATA drives or am I mistaken?

:confused:

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by evangelist
Forgive me, but doesn't RAID support require SCSI drives, not ATA drives or am I mistaken?

:confused:

You ARE in error... you can RAID EITHER ATA OR SCSI drives. There are plenty of ATA RAID cards out there. I actually have an ATA RAID controller built into the motherboard on my peecee (supports two drives in either RAID 0 or 1).

SCSI RAID's are old school, especially with the ATA133 drives out now (and RAID controllers that support them).

arn
May 14, 2002, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by evangelist
Forgive me, but doesn't RAID support require SCSI drives, not ATA drives or am I mistaken?

:confused:

no RAID doesn't require either specifically.

arn

gjohns01
May 14, 2002, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by evangelist
Forgive me, but doesn't RAID support require SCSI drives, not ATA drives or am I mistaken?

:confused:

There are RAID controllers for ATA drives. They have been around for a few years. Quite a few vendors offer them.

JtheLemur
May 14, 2002, 12:20 PM
Alls I know is, I've got four WD 120GB drives (ATA) running off a Sonnet Tempo ATA/133 RAID card, so guess not... it's sort of like emulation =)

evangelist
May 14, 2002, 12:24 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


You ARE in error... you can RAID EITHER ATA OR SCSI drives. There are plenty of ATA RAID cards out there. I actually have an ATA RAID controller built into the motherboard on my peecee (supports two drives in either RAID 0 or 1).

SCSI RAID's are old school, especially with the ATA133 drives out now (and RAID controllers that support them).


Oops.... Boy am I behind times. Thanks for the info!:)

Pants
May 14, 2002, 12:24 PM
Im not overly blown away (im wondering why the max ram is stuck at 2 Gb...) however, i was thinking that if I had a server, I'd want access to parts - something that apple traditionally doesnt do.....
and then this
A group of them wanted to be self-sufficient, particularly in the hardware area. Xserve is simple and fast for servicing -- pull it out, replace parts.

indeed we do!! now, does this mean I could buy a twin g4 mobo and cpus without extras? hmm...now theres a thought....
:)

Timothy - I suspect this price difference reflects apples odd RAM pricing - its probably 512 in one slot that hiles the price... ;) However, i think these specs should put the nail in the proverbial g5 coffin for the foreseeable future. its a pity, as it would have been nice to see Apple 'first to market' with a 'consumer' 64bit (ie affordable!!) machine.

gjohns01
May 14, 2002, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Pants
Im not overly blown away (im wondering why the max ram is stuck at 2 Gb...) however, i was thinking that if I had a server, I'd want access to parts - something that apple traditionally doesnt do.....
and then this


indeed we do!! now, does this mean I could buy a twin g4 mobo and cpus without extras? hmm...now theres a thought....
:)

Timothy - I suspect this price difference reflects apples odd RAM pricing - its probably 512 in one slot that hiles the price... ;)

I hope it's not just that. You can buy DDR fairly cheap right now even for name-brand memory. But we won't know for a few hours yet.

JtheLemur
May 14, 2002, 12:31 PM
But, Kingston's price for DDR ram is around $170! Not sure what Apple's specs are in regards to exactly what type, but there's no WAY is could be $1000.... is there??

gjohns01
May 14, 2002, 12:32 PM
"Introduces Mike Rocha, senior vice president, Platform Tech, Oracle: Oracle 9i on OS X -- we very excited about this hardware. Oracle is about low-cost clustering. Future releases will be on-time, synchronous. When we use UNIX native support, native APIs, optimized for this hardware, we can synchronize our releases so that our customers can have unified database versions across different hardware platforms. "


I am rapidly becoming a VERY VERY HAPPY CAMPER.

pc_convert?
May 14, 2002, 12:33 PM
I think the price difference will also reflect the amount/type of support.

i.e. the higher price the quicker the support

3rdpath
May 14, 2002, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by Timothy
That has to be a mistake, right? An extra 256 of DDR ram for $1000?


i was thinking the same thing....is DDR ram that much more expensive?

anyone have any approximate prices?:confused:

arn
May 14, 2002, 12:35 PM
MacCentral had it wrong...

$2999 - > 1ghz SINGLE processor model
$3999 - > 1ghz DUAL processor

See the main macrumors page article for update and link to official press release.

JtheLemur
May 14, 2002, 12:37 PM
$3000 for a SINGLE processor??!?!!

I don't know, but to me that is CRAZY. NOW a Quicksilver Server with DUAL 1GHZ for $2992 is looking DAMN good.

-- justin

Tue12
May 14, 2002, 12:37 PM
Woot!

gjohns01
May 14, 2002, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by arn
MacCentral had it wrong...

$2999 - > 1ghz SINGLE processor model
$3999 - > 1ghz DUAL processor

See the main macrumors page article for update and link to official press release.

I hope the single processor model offers the ability to add a second processor at a later date.

Rower_CPU
May 14, 2002, 12:45 PM
I'm suitably impressed, and I look forward to seeing the academic pricing on these.

I'm still waiting to see the pics and full tech specs on Apple's website...

Looks like we've got Oracle on board as well...

My my...and a new record of 417 users...I think my estimate of 500 users at MWNY was too conservative. :D

arn- any plans on keeping up with the bandwidth?

arn
May 14, 2002, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU

arn- any plans on keeping up with the bandwidth?

It's not a bandwidth isssue so much as a server load issue... we'll see....

arn

gjohns01
May 14, 2002, 12:47 PM
He he. and a RAID product coming soon. A monster RAID solution I might add. They've been working hard. Good show Apple.

JtheLemur
May 14, 2002, 12:49 PM
Pants -

That's exactly what I said. I guess education doesn't REALLY matter.

-- justin

Mr. Anderson
May 14, 2002, 12:52 PM
Looks like pics are coming soon:D

Pants
May 14, 2002, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by JtheLemur
Pants -

That's exactly what I said. I guess education doesn't REALLY matter.

-- justin

i deleted teh post - i figured people here would think Im always negative.. ;)
however, your right - 4 grand is a lot of dosh, and although not a bad deal, its not exactly great, and education/ research isnt exactly swimming in cash...


having said that....it *looks* really nice...too nice to be hidden under the stairs... :)

arn
May 14, 2002, 01:06 PM
man... crazy fine!

http://a112.g.akamai.net/7/112/51/425235c9ce3e50/www.apple.com/xserve/images/indextopxserve05142002.gif

Check this out:

http://www.apple.com/xserve/storage.html

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 01:06 PM
Looks like they updated their page: http://www.apple.com

Looks sweeeeeet

:drool:

Timothy
May 14, 2002, 01:07 PM
To update the store...don't they have a production server where they can test everything offline, and then just make the switch in a few seconds?

Don't they know that my productivity is next to zero when I am waiting to see new products? C'mon Apple, I need to get back to work! Show me the boxes! :D

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by JtheLemur
$3000 for a SINGLE processor??!?!!

I don't know, but to me that is CRAZY. NOW a Quicksilver Server with DUAL 1GHZ for $2992 is looking DAMN good.

-- justin

I knew someone would find something to b*tch about.... You are paying for the engineering it took to condense the server into a 1U housing. As well as including TWO Gigabit ethernet controllers.

I just priced out a 1U option from IBM, with dual GHz processors (actually 1.13GHz), NO L3 cache (not even an option), 512MB of PC133 memory (NOT DDR like the Apple 1U server), Linux (installed before you get it), two Gb ethernet adapters/cards, keyboard, mouse, and 3 year 9-5 on site support (less then you would get from AppleCare, but close enough). Total comes to $4800, and that is WITHOUT ANY hard drives inside. You are forced to use SCSI drives, unless you want to add an ATA card to use them.

You get much more from Apple, for less money. Imagine what you would get for the 1U server with $4800 (get the DDR memory elsewhere, since Apple will probably charge a premium). Besides the fact that I would bet the Apple server looks a hell of a lot better then what IBM offers.

Backtothemac
May 14, 2002, 01:10 PM
Oh, sweet Jesus, look at the Graphics support. 32MB Radeon standard and 64mb Radeon 8500 Optional! Man, this mother is goint to rock!!!!!!

MWNY is looking great!

Pants
May 14, 2002, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


I knew someone would find something to b*tch about.... You are paying for the engineering .....


hmm...so why *did* you buy a harley? ;)

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 01:13 PM
hmmmmm....

It has a blue mobo.

Backtothemac
May 14, 2002, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by Pants



hmm...so why *did* you buy a harley? ;)

OMG..... B2TM runs as fast as possible to avoid the nuclear detonation that fell on Pants....

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by arn
man... crazy fine!

http://a112.g.akamai.net/7/112/51/425235c9ce3e50/www.apple.com/xserve/images/indextopxserve05142002.gif

Check this out:

http://www.apple.com/xserve/storage.html

DROOOOOOLL!!!!!!! I WANT ONE!!! Just have to figure out where to put it, and how to pay for it. I wonder if I could rig up a mounting system under my desktop at home (fully open, with no drawers under the desk). Oh so very tempting....

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by Pants



hmm...so why *did* you buy a harley? ;)

Because I wanted a QUALITY item that will keep on running forever. Considering how the odometer reads 6 digits...

I know that any Mac I purchase will be usable for years to come, and only gets replaced because I want something newer. I am looking at having my Harley for the next 10-20 years, and then MAYBE trading it in to get a new model, when the time comes (if ever).

eirik
May 14, 2002, 01:17 PM
Motherboard? What's new about it? How fast?

Main memory (DDR), how fast?

Firewire, what flavor?

CPU's replaceable?

Motherboard replaceable?

What flavor of G4?

Nice aggressive pricing for its target market. Bear in mind bitchers ('price too high'), it's not intended for consumers or desktops. It has redundant (?) power supplies, hot-swappable drives, and a variety of electronics to monitor the health of the machine.

Eirik

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac


OMG..... B2TM runs as fast as possible to avoid the nuclear detonation that fell on Pants....

Ahhhh, you know me well grasshopper... muahahahahahahahahaaa...

Light 'em up... :D

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by eirik
Motherboard? What's new about it? How fast?

Main memory (DDR), how fast?

Firewire, what flavor?

CPU's replaceable?

Motherboard replaceable?

What flavor of G4?

Nice aggressive pricing for its target market. Bear in mind bitchers ('price too high'), it's not intended for consumers or desktops. It has redundant (?) power supplies, hot-swappable drives, and a variety of electronics to monitor the health of the machine.

Eirik

Go to the web site and see... sheeesh.. it's using PC2100 DDR memory (widely used in high end desktop peecee's but rare in servers). CPU's appear to be on a daughter card (as is the norm for Apple these days, at least in towers)... Look at the spec's and find out... or are you too damned lazy???

Pants
May 14, 2002, 01:20 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


Because I wanted a QUALITY item that will keep on running forever. Considering how the odometer reads 6 digits...

I know that any Mac I purchase will be usable for years to come, and only gets replaced because I want something newer. I am looking at having my Harley for the next 10-20 years, and then MAYBE trading it in to get a new model, when the time comes (if ever).

ahh....ok, so thats why it got modified as soon as you bought it? i bet its also got 3 digits on the speedo.... ;)

Mr. Anderson
May 14, 2002, 01:20 PM
Now I'm really impressedhttp://www.dukestreet.com/AS/bouncy1.gifhttp://www.dukestreet.com/AS/clap.gifhttp://www.dukestreet.com/AS/bouncy1.gifhttp://www.dukestreet.com/AS/beer.gifhttp://www.dukestreet.com/AS/drool.gif

eirik
May 14, 2002, 01:21 PM
Interesting. No market for it? Nonsense!

Is there a motherboard/main memory limitation?

Is someone post about the G4 not being good for quad configurations true?

Does this mean we don't have an updated G4?

No G5 or six-way (2 G4's and 4 G6's; my ribs are still sore)

Eirik

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by Pants


ahh....ok, so thats why it got modified as soon as you bought it? i bet its also got 3 digits on the speedo.... ;)

Speedo goes up to 120MPH, and the odometer already reads 710 miles on it... not bad for about 6 weeks (with cold times, and this damned rain we are having this week).

I swapped parts on it to fit what I wanted right off the bat. I plan to slowly customize it further over the next several years. When I am done, there will be little left of the original motorcycle (frame and engine most likely). That is part of the beauty of a Harley... you can customize the hell out of it. As long as you still have the VIN numbers on the frame (that identify it as a HD) it retains it's value. Go to a different frame, and the value will drop. Don't ask why, it just does. Sort of like why does windblows crash so much... it just does.

Bradcoe
May 14, 2002, 01:24 PM
take a look at this picture of 23 Xserve's (http://www.apple.com/xserve/) !!! The estimated price? $69,000 Single Processor or $92,000 for Dual. Wow. Talk about Gigaflops. The Dual would be about 345 Gigaflops based on the Quicksilvers performance. But DDR and other MOBO refinements have to bring that number up signifigantly.

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 01:24 PM
dukestreet, I almost had an accident when I saw that picture on Apple's web site... I can't afford that since I am at work... :D

JtheLemur
May 14, 2002, 01:25 PM
AlphaTech -

You compltetely missed my point. I wasn't comparing it to other platforms, just to Apple's other products. I'm in education, and I'm sorry but $4000 for a dual-gig system is just too expensive, I don't care if it fit in a quarter unit of rack space. Like I mentioned before, you can get a pretty much maxed-out Quicksilver server for only $2992.

So, $2992 versus $4000, not including AppleCare. For most schools, it'll end up being the latter.

-- justin

eric_n_dfw
May 14, 2002, 01:25 PM
Wonder if they'll offer a DVD-R drive.
I'm serious! :)
I've been considering taking my current video editing hobby and starting a small business. The new server would be great since I could rack mount it along with a recording mixer and video deck. (Anyone know if computer racks are the same width as A/V racks? Might need some kind of adapter if not.)
The only thing lacking is an internal DVD. It's not too big a deal as an external, FireWire DVD-R would work DVD Studio Pro.

Really, I just hope they get that DDR memory into the towers ASAP! That's when I'll probably buy.

Backtothemac
May 14, 2002, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech
dukestreet, I almost had an accident when I saw that picture on Apple's web site... I can't afford that since I am at work... :D

Here is my favorite so far...

Well, so much for all of those that said the G4 couldn't support DDR....

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by eric_n_dfw
Wonder if they'll offer a DVD-R drive.

Don't think so— there's no space as it is. Only expansion seems to be the PCI, RAM, and HD's.

Seems (http://www.apple.com/xserve/design.html) to be no Firewire 2 as I expected.

Fire wire port on the front!

Backtothemac
May 14, 2002, 01:29 PM
k0sZ iginally posted by JtheLemur [/i]
AlphaTech -

You compltetely missed my point. I wasn't comparing it to other platforms, just to Apple's other products. I'm in education, and I'm sorry but $4000 for a dual-gig system is just too expensive, I don't care if it fit in a quarter unit of rack space. Like I mentioned before, you can get a pretty much maxed-out Quicksilver server for only $2992.

So, $2992 versus $4000, not including AppleCare. For most schools, it'll end up being the latter.

-- justin [/QUOTE]

Yes, you can, without....
DDR 2 gigs worth
4megs of ddr memory for the procs
much, much faster bus
2nd gigabit port
hot swap drives
remote server management software
the list goes on.

Remember the the base is 2999, and will probably be less for education.

Damn, I want one!

PS.
Do you thing Virtual PC would be fast on this?
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

xelterran
May 14, 2002, 01:33 PM
.48 terrabytes!! ooooa!! man these things are gunna OWN!!! all we need now is the G5's!!:D

Mr. Anderson
May 14, 2002, 01:34 PM
Did anyone notice that the old desktop servers are no longer available? Which sort of sucks if you only need one and you don't have a rack, which cost a bundle to begin with.

Can you take the OSX Server Software and put it on the other desktops?

arn
May 14, 2002, 01:34 PM
Apple's really outdone themselves with the design on the XServe.

arn

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 01:35 PM
For those of you who don't know, you can find all the pictures of XSever here (http://www.apple.com/pr/photos/xserve/xserve.html), in Hi-Res. Must find something to clean up all this drool, I'm making a mess. :D

Wouldn't you know it, this Dell crashed from heavy Internet browsing in the middle of this madness.

GetSome681
May 14, 2002, 01:35 PM
Sure it's more expensive than the quicksilver server, but it's also much smaller, cooler design, faster b/c of the ddr, etc...nad also..i'm under the impresat price includes 4 hard drives...what does the quicksilver one you're talking about come with? Anyways, would be nice to have an edu price of around $2k hhehee.:D

arn
May 14, 2002, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by dukestreet

Can you take the OSX Server Software and put it on the other desktops?

Sure... the old "servers" were simply Quicksilver machines with Mac OS X Server bundled.

arn

eyelikeart
May 14, 2002, 01:36 PM
I cannot believe the B.S. I am witnessing in here...:rolleyes:

I was going to resurrect my old post about how much the zealots b*tch and whine too much....but it won't...

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by dukestreet
Did anyone notice that the old desktop servers are no longer available? Which sort of sucks if you only need one and you don't have a rack, which cost a bundle to begin with.
That sucks for some people who only want one. But if you did buy a XServe, you don't necessarily NEED a rack.

Can you take the OSX Server Software and put it on the other desktops?

Yes, we have X Server running on a 533 here at work.

gopher
May 14, 2002, 01:40 PM
http://www.apple.com/xserve/management.html

Can that mean that 10.1.5 can't be far behind?

arn
May 14, 2002, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by mc68k

That sucks for some people who only want one. But if you did buy a XServe, you don't necessarily NEED a rack.


As I said above... the old servers were simply regular Quicksilvers with bundled software (and maybe some more drive/storage options). But same CPU/Motherboard.

arn

pc_convert?
May 14, 2002, 01:42 PM
For those bitching about the lack of G5's please take a moment to actually examine the specs of the Xserve.

These specs are outstanding.

This is truely Beautiful Technology.

I need to go somewhere quiet and reflect on just how amazing apple are...

Falleron
May 14, 2002, 01:44 PM
What I want to know is, how much real world performance gain does the new memory type give (over current desktops)??? Are we talking 10% here??

Useful to know so that we can compare it to the new Powermacs this summer.

3rdpath
May 14, 2002, 01:45 PM
apple has done an amazing job-cramming all of this into 1u. i am humbled. man does this bode well for july( or sooner) for us non-server peeps.

btw, there is a picture of the mobo on the apple site-i wonder how it compares with the infamous ebay mobo.

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by arn


Sure... the old "servers" were simply Quicksilver machines with Mac OS X Server bundled.

arn

Except for the redundant power supply used in the servers that was not present in the desktops.

shadowfax0
May 14, 2002, 01:47 PM
I think this is great, but I'm sick of all the bitching. I went and checked out Slashdot before, and the people there are like "..No SCSI, IDE and ATA are NO good..", "It's too expensive.." and one guy ahd the nerve of saying "...ONLY 480 gb, isn't this 2002?" Look it has the unlimited user license software with it, how much would WinNT or 2K cost with and unlimited user license, I'm not sure that that alone wouldn't cost $3000...Just because these geeky guys are afraid there might be something better than what they currently have and might ahve to re-learn something instead of being able to tell everyone what to do all the time, makes me sick :rolleyes: I think this is great, and that Apple was targeting more like render farms and scientific instituions, rather than some huge corporate office. Not saying that you couldn't use them in a corporate enviroment, but I think it was aimed for the arts and sciences. Like their software, that alone eliminates the need to have huge number of IT people running around, now one person can check the stats by themselves, etc. etc. Scientists do not want to deal with hardware like that, they want to do their project, not deal with machines.

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by Falleron
What I want to know is, how much real world performance gain does the new memory type give (over current desktops)??? Are we talking 10% here??

For overall performance, RAM is just a small part of the picture. The redundant drives with individual controllers, and the network have more to do with the overall picture than just RAM alone. But the DDR is a welcomed improvement.

Desktops do different types of work than a server. A server is all about the network, and how fast you can get that information onto it, with maximum safety.

cjv2192
May 14, 2002, 01:48 PM
for anyone worried about education, apple website already has educational pricing for the xserve - $2499 and $2999. $500 off - not bad...... chris

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by 3rdpath
btw, there is a picture of the mobo on the apple site-i wonder how it compares with the infamous ebay mobo.

Not the same motherbaord by a long shot. Everything's different on this one. I could go into detial, but I think the differences are more than eveident. That mobo was most likely a proto for a desktop, not a server.

McFreggle
May 14, 2002, 01:54 PM
http://www.apple.com/xserve

They're definately changing the style of their website... this is no pure Aqua anymore...

Cool.

k.

pc_convert?
May 14, 2002, 01:56 PM
Gopher is right!

Check the XServe management section of the site. The Quicktime animation cleary shows OS version 10.1.5 in the info part of animation...

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by McFreggle
http://www.apple.com/xserve

They're definately changing the style of their website... this is no pure Aqua anymore...
They've done this before with the TiBook (http://www.apple.com/powerbook/). The consumer-oriented hardware portions of Apple's site are still Aqua (http://www.apple.com/imac/) vs Titanium-looking.

tjwett
May 14, 2002, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by dukestreet
Did anyone notice that the old desktop servers are no longer available? Which sort of sucks if you only need one and you don't have a rack, which cost a bundle to begin with.

Can you take the OSX Server Software and put it on the other desktops?

You can buy a 1u rack from any Sam Ash or Guitar Center for $20. you can get 4U racks for $40. Or, a milkcrate is a 6U rack that you can steal from, behind any grocery store.that's cheap.

Backtothemac
May 14, 2002, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
I cannot believe the B.S. I am witnessing in here...:rolleyes:

I was going to resurrect my old post about how much the zealots b*tch and whine too much....but it won't...

No doubt!!!! Man, it is making me sick to my stomach hearing all. People need to shut their mouths and be happy.

Here is a message to anyone not happy with the server announcement.

Go get a dell Rack or standard dell server, and be miserable.
:mad:

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 02:02 PM
I think we should come up with a 1U to 4U rack that mounts under desks/tables. That way, we could get the new Xserver at home, without investing in a full rack. Add units as you need to...

I will have to work on this before early next year, since that is when I am thinking about getting a new Mac system.

I wonder how it would do as a UT hosting server. :D

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac


No doubt!!!! Man, it is making me sick to my stomach hearing all. People need to shut their mouths and be happy.

Here is a message to anyone not happy with the server announcement.

Go get a dell Rack or standard dell server, and be miserable.
:mad:

How about for those that are lusting after an Xserve now??? The thing looks soooooo nice... I WANT ONE damnit....

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 02:03 PM
That’s how Xserve can achieve a theoretical peak performance of up to 266 megabytes per second, compared to a 160MB/s theoretical performance with SCSI Ultra160 disk drives — at a significantly lower cost, and while generating less heat than SCSI drives.

Hmmmm...Apple didn't mention Ultra 320. But I guess Apple went away from SCSI in 1997. Fibre-channel in addition to independent controller ATA in the future 3U servers seems a lot faster and more worth waiting for than the current offerings.

shadowfax0
May 14, 2002, 02:04 PM
I find this amazing...
"...42 high-performance units in an industry-standard 8-foot-tall rack with up to 630 gigaflops of processing power..."

42! 42! This IS the answer to life, the universe, and everything! Seriously, these guys who do plasma research in Portugal (I posted a pic before on some other topic) use 16 DP 450 with 1.5 GB RAM each, and they were doing live renditions of plasma at super high temperature (well that last statement is a bit redundant, but whatever...:)) now think about 42! That's such a HUGE amount of processing power, SETI anyone? Or how about some IDL or BLAST? I have to say, this is going to be a great thing for alot of people...

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by mc68k


Hmmmm...Apple didn't mention Ultra 320. But I guess Apple went away from SCSI in 1997. Fibre-channel in addition to independent controller ATA in the 3U servers seem a lot faster and more worth waiting for than the current offerings.

You don't want to mix up fibre and SCSI inside the same server, or attached to the same server. We have a server here that had fibre hard drives (in a RAID configuration) and a SCSI based backup system. Every backup lost resource forks... Of course those files were then useless to Mac people, since they then showed up as pc files, with corrupt names (converted to the 8.3 scheme).

I would much rather have what Apple is offering then one with mixed fibre/SCSI inside, or attached.

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by shadowfax0
these guys who do plasma research in Portugal (I posted a pic before on some other topic) use 16 DP 450 with 1.5 GB RAM each, and they were doing live renditions of plasma at super high temperature (well that last statement is a bit redundant, but whatever...:)) now think about 42

Think about the space efficiency too. That picture looks so wrong with all those desktops, where they could be rack-mounted servers. 42*2=84 processors. :D

Everything about these new servers is better than what they have offered before.

peterjhill
May 14, 2002, 02:12 PM
Wow, a month ago a spec'd out my wish list for an Apple Rack server, and Apple came through!

AlphaTech, looks like Apple agreed with me, and not only stuck a serial console port on the machine, but even made it a DB-9 so I don't need to carry a separate cable to console into the box. Awesome. I had guessed that it would be a USB thing, DB-9 is awesome.

People who are comparing this to the old Quicksilver server, this thing blows it out of the water for real Enterprise users. Sure the old server was fine for one-off machines, but this machine is seriously targetted for business users. It is awesome. Blows Dell out of the water for a company that wants to buy a server and not put Windows on it. We had been using mostly Sun machines and have started to use Dell rack servers and intalling Linux on them, but this machine could really make some inroads here (major University).

Look at what you get over the Quicksilver:
- Remote monitoring of hardware, including SNMP support (we use snmp to monitor everything)
- 4 independant ata controllers for RAID
- 2MB of L3 cache per processor
- 2.5 PCI cards (.5 being the half -length PCI/agp slot)
- serial console as mentioned above)
- 3 firewire buses
- Hot swap damn near everything
- FOUR HOUR ONSITE RESPONSE 5/8!!!! (optional i'm sure)
- 30 minute response to email queries!!!!

This is one freakin' awesome machine. This could truly turn apple into a serious player. The price is great. --Don't even compare the price to the Quicksilver, rack servers across the board cost way more than tower servers)

go apple!!!!!!

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech
I would much rather have what Apple is offering then one with mixed fibre/SCSI inside, or attached.

Me too. Don't get me wrong, but ATA drives are so much cheaper than SCSI. Even if they have less lifespan/quality, in the new XServe you would know when they are going bad and just do a simple swap. Imagine a XServe with SCSI drives. It would be hotter, noisier, thicker, more expensive, etc.

SCSI really is getting to be at the end of it's life. Now fibre-channel in the new 3U XServes will really be exciting. Rack 'n Roll, baby!!!!

McFreggle
May 14, 2002, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by mc68k

They've done this before with the TiBook (http://www.apple.com/powerbook/). The consumer-oriented hardware portions of Apple's site are still Aqua (http://www.apple.com/imac/) vs Titanium-looking.

Okay, I agree, but the font on the homepage is different, and BIG this time...

k.

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by peterjhill
AlphaTech, looks like Apple agreed with me, and not only stuck a serial console port on the machine, but even made it a DB-9 so I don't need to carry a separate cable to console into the box. Awesome. I had guessed that it would be a USB thing, DB-9 is awesome.
What is the function of this serial port? What can you do through a serial port? Doesn't seem like it would be very high bandwith, or support more than simple input.

Enlighten me. Last time I saw a serial port was on an old AIO Classic Mac.

Ouroboros
May 14, 2002, 02:27 PM
All I have to say is: HOW the HELL can someone complain about this price??? Before anyone else feels the need to complain, ACTUALLY TAKE THE TIME to see the specs, and realize that what it offers is totally different from someone who wants a machine for playing Quake or tooling around on the internet...

eric_n_dfw
May 14, 2002, 02:31 PM
I'm not so sure the bus itself is that much faster. The Ram will be twice as fast as it is DDR, but the bus is still 133.

Don't get me wrong - I'm slobbering over this thing! DDR is way over-due and MUST get into the tower's soon! Like tomorrow!!!!!

djniche
May 14, 2002, 02:31 PM
the Xserver --

Is this the mother board that was for sale on ebay???

ftaok
May 14, 2002, 02:32 PM
I'm not interested in servers and such, but I am intrigue that this one is using DDR 266mhz RAM.

My question is this, does this mean that the system bus is running at 266mhz or what? I'm not a techie, so bear with me.

Plus, I thought that Motorola's G4 was unable to support DDR RAM and system bus speeds above 133mhz. What's the deal.

Another question. If I were inclined, could I buy one of these to use as a desktop? I wonder how fast regular OS X and games would run on it. Probably pretty damned fast with the optional Radeon 8500.

eric_n_dfw
May 14, 2002, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by djniche
the Xserver --

Is this the mother board that was for sale on ebay???
No.
Among other things, that one had 4 PCI slots in a row, this has 2 via riser cards.

--edit-- Er' I meant 3 pci --/edit--

eric_n_dfw
May 14, 2002, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by mc68k

What is the function of this serial port? What can you do through a serial port? Doesn't seem like it would be very high bandwith, or support more than simple input.

Enlighten me. Last time I saw a serial port was on an old AIO Classic Mac.
You can, however, telnet/ssh into the box via a term app or a dumb terminal. I'm no network/server guru but a lot of the tech's here will plug right into the Cisco switches and whatnot with a laptop via serial and log in to make quick config changes or check settings.
There's probably automated tools out there that could use it for support and data gathering too.

From www.apple.com/xserve (lower right corner):
Serial console for UNIX-savvy administrators
Prefer to rule your domain through command line server management tools? The serial port lets you do just that.

eirik
May 14, 2002, 02:38 PM
SCSI is by no means a dying breed. Unlike, IDE/ATA, it is multithreaded, which makes it suitable for large numbers of transactions at a rapid rate. IDE/ATA is single threaded and relies upon the CPU for control. Whereas SCSI drives have onboard (hard drive) smarts, allowing peer to peer transactions too. IDE/ATA is cheap and provides pretty good performance.

I'm not sure how a software RAID of ATA100 drives compares with SCSI transaction capability.

So, my point here is not to 'dis' the Xserver but to point out to those, such as the slashdot geeks, that Xserver is not intended to target markets that require SCSI or hardwired RAID (but I believe the RAID drive coming out later this year is hard wired).

Its similar to the classic mistake, people bitch about a consumer product (Xserver not consumer, BTW) but do so in comparing it to non-consumer products.

Would some of you more geeky folk help us better understand the significance of Apple's hard drive selection and how this pertains to Apple's target market?

eirik

Backtothemac
May 14, 2002, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


How about for those that are lusting after an Xserve now??? The thing looks soooooo nice... I WANT ONE damnit....

Those of us, that are in lust right now....

We need towels.... Awww, there is a blue light special at K-Mart on towels....How many do we need?

robguz
May 14, 2002, 02:41 PM
I've been longing for a replacement for my original iMac so I can play Bugdom faster and this is all Apple comes up with. It doesn't even have a screen and my iMac costed 1299 while this ugly thing is almost $3000! Can't it at least come with a round mouse like I'm used to? And what's all this stuff about a server? I don't want my iMac to serve anything, well maybe toast every once in a while would be nice. I just want to be able to get on AOL and free those poor ladybugs in Bugdom. Apple is ruining my life!

lucs
May 14, 2002, 02:43 PM
This is awesome. This is gonna set industry standards.

I was really convinced that they would be quad processors, but man, they have so much power already ;) ...........

GOOD JOB APPLE!!:D :D

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by lucs
I was really convinced that they would be quad processors, but man, they have so much power already ;) ...........

That would require more R&D. They already have a dual-gig. All they need to do is cluster. Quad would be wasted money when you can cluster with the current dual-gig spec.

eric_n_dfw
May 14, 2002, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by eirik
SCSI is by no means a dying breed. Unlike, IDE/ATA, it is multithreaded, which makes it suitable for large numbers of transactions at a rapid rate.
I, generally agree, but Apple is quick to point out that having 4 separate controllers provides more bandwitch than SCSI160. Also, I'd venture to guess that, even though SCSI is multi-threaded, having 4 controllers is kind-of-like have a 4-threaded controller. (Okay, I'm stretching my knowledge hardware now!)
IDE/ATA is single threaded and relies upon the CPU for control. Whereas SCSI drives have onboard (hard drive) smarts, allowing peer to peer transactions too.
Good point, I did not know about the peer-to-peer "smarts" either. However, with modern ATA aka UDMA controllers, less CPU is needed than most people think.
I'm not sure how a software RAID of ATA100 drives compares with SCSI transaction capability.
I was surprised (and am skeptical about) the fact that Apple went with software RAID - especially with hardware ATA RAID as cheap as it is.

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by robguz
I've been longing for a replacement for my original iMac so I can play Bugdom faster and this is all Apple comes up with. It doesn't even have a screen and my iMac costed 1299 while this ugly thing is almost $3000! Can't it at least come with a round mouse like I'm used to? And what's all this stuff about a server? I don't want my iMac to serve anything, well maybe toast every once in a while would be nice. I just want to be able to get on AOL and free those poor ladybugs in Bugdom. Apple is ruining my life!
UGLY!!!????!! All you can think about is games!!!????!!!

All this stuff about a server????? Do you know who this is marketed to???? The XServe is obviously not meant for you. Buy an LCD iMac and be gone to your trivial computer tasks.

peterjhill
May 14, 2002, 02:56 PM
I want to put the thing in my basement in a rack with a Cisco 3550-12T (http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/si/casi/ca3550/prodlit/3550p_ds.htm) 10/100/1000 Multilayer Switch. Put it in a wall mounted rack, that way I won't have to hear the fans.

Put an access point in the basement and one on the top floor. Run copper around the house.

Yum!

Taft
May 14, 2002, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by mc68k

UGLY!!!????!! All you can think about is games!!!????!!!

All this stuff about a server????? Do you know who this is marketed to???? The XServe is obviously not meant for you. Buy an LCD iMac and be gone to your trivial computer tasks.

So are you being sarcastic or did you really not get the satire in the original post??

All I can say about this is that it is really good for Apple. This is the kind of thing Apple needs to do with its new OS. Having a great Unix at the core is really opening up whole new worlds to Apple. This machine is a powerful demonstration of what is capable with OS X.

Taft

eric_n_dfw
May 14, 2002, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by robguz
I've been longing for a replacement for my original iMac so I can play Bugdom faster and this is all Apple comes up with. It doesn't even have a screen and my iMac costed 1299 while this ugly thing is almost $3000! Can't it at least come with a round mouse like I'm used to? And what's all this stuff about a server? I don't want my iMac to serve anything, well maybe toast every once in a while would be nice. I just want to be able to get on AOL and free those poor ladybugs in Bugdom. Apple is ruining my life!
Yeah - and where's my 2 button mouse and floppy drive!:rolleyes: ;)

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 03:12 PM
Originally posted by Taft


So are you being sarcastic or did you really not get the satire in the original post??

Guess I didn't get it. Sorry. :)

drastik
May 14, 2002, 03:21 PM
Wow, you guys need to relax, its obviously a joke. Man, This is one etherial machine and all haters can stuff it. Sometimes I think none of you will be happy untill Apple just gives you next decades powermacs for free and Jobs comes over to wash your car.

This is a killer system. Live with it, or buy something else. Intelligent people tend to buy Macs, now inelligent dmins can too.

Wry Cooter
May 14, 2002, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by drastik
Wow, you guys need to relax, its obviously a joke. Man, This is one etherial machine and all haters can stuff it. Sometimes I think none of you will be happy untill Apple just gives you next decades powermacs for free and Jobs comes over to wash your car.


Wait a minute... car detailing? I want one. Maybe this summer huh?

Phaedrus
May 14, 2002, 03:33 PM
Interesting quotes, reiterating why Xserve is a bargain, and showing a very Buddhist-like Jobs (from The Register):


"We are humble, we know we have a lot to learn," said Jobs, sounding as humble as he possible could."

"But Apple made as much of OS X Server's unlimited user license at the launch today. With a 25-user client license for a Windows server costing $3295, the price of an entry level Wintel rack can double."

Rocketman
May 14, 2002, 03:38 PM
Originally posted by arn
http://www.apple.com/xserve
http://www.macrumors.com

arn

I told you so.

From Applestore:
Summary
• Dual 1GHz PowerPC G4 • 512MB DDR SDRAM - 1 DIMM • 120GB Ultra ATA - 7200rpm - Bay 1 • 120GB Ultra ATA - 7200rpm - Bay 2 • CD-ROM drive • Gigabit Ethernet Card • ATI Graphics Card • Mac OS X Server, Unlimited License
Subtotal $4,649.00

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 03:40 PM
Originally posted by robguz
I've been longing for a replacement for my original iMac so I can play Bugdom faster and this is all Apple comes up with. It doesn't even have a screen and my iMac costed 1299 while this ugly thing is almost $3000! Can't it at least come with a round mouse like I'm used to? And what's all this stuff about a server? I don't want my iMac to serve anything, well maybe toast every once in a while would be nice. I just want to be able to get on AOL and free those poor ladybugs in Bugdom. Apple is ruining my life!

Two words for you there Bubba... 'Bugger OFF!!!'.

The Xserve is not supposed to replace your ancient iMac. It a server damnit. Put DOWN the ganja and read ya mook.

eirik
May 14, 2002, 03:40 PM
The most impressive piece of this new rack server is the price and the feature set. I believe that Apple has a clear idea of its target market. Its not shooting for the top end of server market segments.

As for the server itself, frankly, I see it as a modest piece of technology. It is not cutting edge. But that's okay because most enerprises want reliability and proven technologies as much as they want performance.

I just wish that we would have seen something in the way of Rapid I/O and/or HyperTransport with main memory speeds faster than 266 Mhz.

As for the clustering capability of the system, I'd say its good for distributed computing but not so great for clustering. The clustering limitation is limited to Gigabit Ethernet, albeit two ports each blade. A pair of G4's can overwhelm a Gigabit Ethernet connection easily. If apple also had some kind of a switch fabric blade for clustering these servers together that would make it really good clustering solution. SETI works fine because its computations are divided prior to computation initiation.

What does this bode for the PM? Modest improvement with just DDR? Hmmm? I'll save this one for another thread.

Eirik

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac


Those of us, that are in lust right now....

We need towels.... Awww, there is a blue light special at K-Mart on towels....How many do we need?

More then I can afford to get at this point... I'm about ready to convert my office into a pool... :D

TypeR389
May 14, 2002, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by eric_n_dfw

I, generally agree, but Apple is quick to point out that having 4 separate controllers provides more bandwitch than SCSI160. Also, I'd venture to guess that, even though SCSI is multi-threaded, having 4 controllers is kind-of-like have a 4-threaded controller. (Okay, I'm stretching my knowledge hardware now!)


I agree that this is faster than a single U160 controller, but a lot of servers, even some of the 1U ones have dual U160 controllers on it. This is all theoretical though throughput though, and while a 7 15k RPM drives can easily saturate a single controller, that is not the case 'often' and if it is, you wouldn't be using a 1U server with limited i/o, you would go right to fiber or something similar.

This also gets around the major problem with IDE/ATA drives by dedicating one controller per drive, that way you don't run into the issue of having multiple commands 'commendering' the bus. I think this is a very cost effective way to get alot of high performance storage at a reasonable price.


Good point, I did not know about the peer-to-peer "smarts" either. However, with modern ATA aka UDMA controllers, less CPU is needed than most people think.


The modern ATA controllers are pretty good, and depending on how they are implemented can be VERY close in CPU load to a SCSI controller. I don't think SCSI in general is easier on the CPU, but most adaptec cards or better have a CPU on the card to handle the i/o so the CPU doesn't, while most ATA controllers do not. That is why an good standard adaptec single channel card is still $300 and a ata/133 card is 75...

BTW, this thing is pretty sweet! :)

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 03:47 PM
.48 TB? I don't think so. Guess that was a closer # to .5 which is half. Really it's closer to 4.69, but I guess I'm the only one who cares. :)

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by mc68k
.48 TB? I don't think so. Guess that was a closer # to .5 which is half. Really it's closer to 4.69, but I guess I'm the only one who cares. :)

Ok, simple math lesson.. Four 120GB hard drives inside... total space= 480GB

Actual usable space will vary.

I wonder if the Xserve will use all of 160GB hard drives space. If it can, that would max it out at 640GB... *drool*

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by TypeR389
I agree that this is faster than a single U160 controller, but a lot of servers, even some of the 1U ones have dual U160 controllers on it.

Only if you are willing to pay extra for them. I checked out what IBM offers, and the SCSI controllers are extra, as are the hard drives (which max out at 75GB).

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech
I wonder if the Xserve will use all of 160GB hard drives space. If it can, that would max it out at 640GB... *drool*
Guess it all depends on the software on the XServe. The controllers are advanced enough. Does X Server have the GB limit?

Wonder if it's pronounced "ex-serv" or "ten-serv"?

wrylachlan
May 14, 2002, 04:05 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


Ok, simple math lesson.. Four 120GB hard drives inside... total space= 480GB

Actual usable space will vary.

I wonder if the Xserve will use all of 160GB hard drives space. If it can, that would max it out at 640GB... *drool*

Actually he's right because of the 1024 not 1000 thing. But man that's really nitpicky, and since the rest of the tech world tends to fudge on this one, I don't think apple's really being dishonest.

aafuss1
May 14, 2002, 04:05 PM
I read on another site that was a reaser for another product. Good job Apple-thanks for releasing a rack mount server

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 04:06 PM
Just found this in the description of the extra Xserve's drive modules (under Storage on the Apple online store).

Mac OS X Server includes AppleRAID, providing RAID 0 and 1 support through software, allowing you to increase either data redundancy or performance. Xserve is able to boot from RAID volumes. Choose any combination of mirroring or striping across the four drive bays, but all RAID configurations require a minimum of two ADM hard drives

With that backing up what I said earlier about the built-in RAID support of OS X (also present in the client version), it makes the Xserve even better.

gbojim
May 14, 2002, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by Backtothemac
Well, so much for all of those that said the G4 couldn't support DDR....

I've been one of the people saying this all along and I stick by it. Motorola's documentation clearly states that the bus interface is 133MHz and the current G4s can only transfer data once per clock cycle - therefore although you could plug in DDR RAM, the CPU can't read the data that fast.

So the question is - how is Apple taking advantage of DDR? I called a couple of people I know in Apple engineering and they refuse to talk about it. Anyone else have any info?

eirik
May 14, 2002, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by gbojim


....I called a couple of people I know in Apple engineering and they refuse to talk about it. Anyone else have any info?

Take them out, get them drunk!!!

:cool:

ftaok
May 14, 2002, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by gbojim
I've been one of the people saying this all along and I stick by it. Motorola's documentation clearly states that the bus interface is 133MHz and the current G4s can only transfer data once per clock cycle - therefore although you could plug in DDR RAM, the CPU can't read the data that fast.

So the question is - how is Apple taking advantage of DDR? I called a couple of people I know in Apple engineering and they refuse to talk about it. Anyone else have any info? Maybe it's a new G4 chip. Not the 7455. Motorola tends to keep things quiet so as not to steal Apple's thunder.

Can someone explain to me about the various system busses? I see that Intel/AMD has 400mhz and 533mhz and such. What does that actually mean?

Would the new Xserve be considered a 266mhz bus (assuming that it does take advantage of DDR)?

mischief
May 14, 2002, 04:35 PM
this phrase in the coverage caught my eye: "System controller with custom ASIC done by Apple".

Is this a custom version of something like Rapid I/O or Hypertransport?

Or is this the famed 7460 chip?:confused:

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by ftaok
I see that Intel/AMD has 400mhz and 533mhz and such. What does that actually mean?

Actually, the current line of processors from AMD have "Advanced 266MHz Front-Side Bus" Intel has to get even faster bus speeds out because their chips can't handle as many instructions per clock cycle. Which is one of the reasons why the XP2100+ chip performs just as fast (or damned close to it) as the top speed pentium4. Similar things happen for the G4 processor as well, with more instructions being processed per clock cycle making a supposed slower chip perform better then the MHz/GHz rating would suggest.

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by mischief
this phrase in the coverage caught my eye: "System controller with custom ASIC done by Apple".

Is this a custom version of something like Rapid I/O or Hypertransport?

Or is this the famed 7460 chip?:confused:
I don't think it's a 7460 becuase it wouldn't be done by Apple but instead Moto.

As for ASIC, I don't know what that means.

gbojim
May 14, 2002, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by ftaok
Can someone explain to me about the various system busses? I see that Intel/AMD has 400mhz and 533mhz and such. What does that actually mean?

Sorry in advance about the long post but I couldn't figure out how to make it shorter and still answer your question

The CPU communicates with the peripheral hardware through it's IO bus - often called the front side bus or just the bus. Normally, the only devices on the bus are the CPU itself and the peripheral controllers - or what many call the chipset. The controllers translate the front side bus speed and timing to things like PCI, AGP and memory.

The G4 front side bus runs at 133MHz and can transfer data in and out of the CPU once per clock cycle or 133 million times per second. Data to and from main memory flows thru the controller at the full speed of the bus.

Normal SDRAM also transfers data once per clock cycle so it perfectly matches the speed of the G4 bus. However, DDR RAM doubles the throughput because it can transfer data twice per clock cycle. So on a 133MHz bus, data transfers at 266MHz.

To take advantage of DDR, you would have to get the CPU to also transfer data at 266MHz. The easiest way to do that is have the CPU transfer data twice per clock cycle like the DDR RAM does. (That's what the 7455 cannot do).

As for the busses used by Intel and AMD at 400MHz and 533MHz, they are basically 200MHz and 266MHz busses that transfer data twice per clock cycle giving double the effective throughput. (I read this on another site a while back and did not check it out myself so I hope it is right).

Hope this helps.

Rocketman
May 14, 2002, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by gbojim


I've been one of the people saying this all along and I stick by it. Motorola's documentation clearly states that the bus interface is 133MHz and the current G4s can only transfer data once per clock cycle - therefore although you could plug in DDR RAM, the CPU can't read the data that fast.

So the question is - how is Apple taking advantage of DDR? I called a couple of people I know in Apple engineering and they refuse to talk about it. Anyone else have any info?

It may be something as simple as a saturation issue. While if everything were operating at absolutely full capacity you may be right, in the real world the pipeline tends to shift from empty to full and perhaps there is some savings by filling the pipeline more quickly.

Also I wonder if it is 133 mhx "per pipeline" (of 4) or if the chip output itself is 133 mhz. I don't know.

Separate subject. I suppose you could plug one of those bluetooth dongles into your server main to do admin with a keyboard and mouse.

1000 ethernet is only about 4-5 times as fast as 100 in real world.

Rocketman


http://v-serv.com/-upload/avatar.jpg

Rocketman
May 14, 2002, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by gbojim

To take advantage of DDR, you would have to get the CPU to also transfer data at 266MHz. The easiest way to do that is have the CPU transfer data twice per clock cycle like the DDR RAM does. (That's what the 7455 cannot do).

Hope this helps.

This may explain why the posterchild unit has two processors. And no more.

Rocketman

http://v-serv.com/-upload/avatar.jpg

Xapplimatic
May 14, 2002, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by gbojim


I've been one of the people saying this all along and I stick by it. Motorola's documentation clearly states that the bus interface is 133MHz and the current G4s can only transfer data once per clock cycle - therefore although you could plug in DDR RAM, the CPU can't read the data that fast.

So the question is - how is Apple taking advantage of DDR? I called a couple of people I know in Apple engineering and they refuse to talk about it. Anyone else have any info?

Simple... DMA.. (Direct Memory Access).. The 64bit PCI bus has direct access to the DDR RAM without using the g4..

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by Rocketman
1000 ethernet is only about 4-5 times as fast as 100 in real world.

That has been true with Cat 5e cables since they topped out at about 350Mb for transfer rates. Cat 6 cables (true Cat 6) are starting to come into the market now. The only thing with that, at this time, is that to have a network backbone/infrastructure to support it will be expensive. You will need all gigabit switches and cards in the computers that are going to use it at full speed. Plus, you will need to run all new Cat 6 lines inside the walls. Eventually, we will see it on a large scale, but for now, it just is too expensive to implement.

gjohns01
May 14, 2002, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by eirik
Motherboard? What's new about it? How fast?

Main memory (DDR), how fast?

Firewire, what flavor?

CPU's replaceable?

Motherboard replaceable?

What flavor of G4?

Nice aggressive pricing for its target market. Bear in mind bitchers ('price too high'), it's not intended for consumers or desktops. It has redundant (?) power supplies, hot-swappable drives, and a variety of electronics to monitor the health of the machine.

Eirik

No redundant power supplies. You typically don't see those in a 1U. Still an excellent machine.

percolate
May 14, 2002, 06:30 PM
Apple mentions "If you’re a creative professional who plans to use Xserve as a rack-mount workstation, " and I'd agree that there are a lot of advantages to the Xserve but there are a couple of problems I'm having in trying to choose a configuration. [Please note at the end I'll mention a couple of advantages, so this isn't a b*tch post.]

First, they don't offer a basic AppleCare 3 year warranty. The cheapest APP offered costs $950. I just want a three year warranty, nothing more.

Second, their video card and PCI slot configuration is confusing. It seems like unless you need a second gigabit ethernet port, you should go with the Radeon 8500 because otherwise you're taking up one of the full size PCI slots. However, looking at their architecture diagram it seems the full size PCI slots share a bus and PCI/AGP slot is on a separate bus. Also, it sounds to me like only the default ATi card can run headless but they don't make it completely clear. Advice?

Last, the server software might be better as an option than a requirement. Don't yell at me - "Creative professionals" don't need a full copy of OS X server. I could see myself using hardware monitoring and eventually using clustering but everything else I've heard sounds pretty much unnecessary.

The Xserve is about perfect for audio/video needs. CD-ROM drive instead of more costly and unnecessary optical drives; built-in space for 4 hard drives which can be hot swapped out. It's rack mount to fit right in with the rest of your gear. More than double the power of the TiBook with about the same convenience, plus support for PCI based a/v hardware solutions, internal hardware monitoring, support for more and faster RAM and 3 firewire ports with one on front. I could see a use for these as tasty headless audio modules. Plus, Xserve has blinkenlights. Whereas PowerBooks are currently a staple of live music, I think you'll see many people moving towards these puppies over time. If the APP wasn't so expensive and I knew which graphics card to go with, I'd probably order one right now.

eric_n_dfw
May 14, 2002, 06:35 PM
... are on the Apple store site. Looking at my local elementary school (don't know if they differentiate by city or anything) in Euless, TX prices are:
$2,499
1 GHz PowerPC G4
256K L2 cache & 2MB L3 cache
*
256MB DDR SDRAM @ 266MHz
60GB Apple Drive Module
CD-ROM drive
ATI Graphics Card
Dual Gigabit Ethernet
Two USB ports
Three FireWire ports
Discounted from $2,999 retail price

$3,499.00
Dual 1 GHz PowerPC G4
256K L2 cache & 2MB L3 cache
per processor
512MB DDR SDRAM @ 266MHz
60GB Apple Drive Module
CD-ROM drive
ATI Graphics Card
Dual Gigabit Ethernet
Two USB ports
Three FireWire ports
Discounted from $3,999 retail price

$6,824.00
Dual 1 GHz PowerPC G4
256K L2 cache & 2MB L3 cache
per processor
2.0GB DDR SDRAM @ 266MHz
4x120GB Apple Drive Modules
CD-ROM drive
ATI Graphics Card
Dual Gigabit Ethernet
Two USB ports
Three FireWire ports
AppleCare Premium Support Plan
Discounted from $7,799 retail price

$500 off the pre-canned settups / $825 off the "Ultimate" one - not to bad, what do y'all think?

nickgold
May 14, 2002, 07:23 PM
Those educational discounts seem even larger than the discounts given on other products. Am I hallucinating? :confused:

heheh I can definitely see my next machine being a rack. :D

Macmaniac
May 14, 2002, 07:55 PM
This is very COOL! I see the future of things to come! It won't be long until the put DDR in the powermacs!

barkmonster
May 14, 2002, 08:36 PM
The Pentium 4, up until recently only had a 100Mhz FSB, the memory being quad pumped to 400Mhz

The Athlon is 133Mhz FSB with DDR at 266Mhz

I never saw any reason why a similar thing couldn't be done with the G4.

I'm glad apple have come up with a motherboard that we can be proud of, I'm sure it will have quite a large impact on all realtime software once it's on the towers. Photoshop and other non realtime software like seti have really been the only thing the mac's been able to compete with PCs and win at over the past few years, if we really do get something like a dual 1.4Ghz G4 with DDR later in the year I'm sure it could give even an Athlon XP 2000+ a run for it's money for a lot of things. Wouldn't a "let's see how many reverbs we can run in Logic" test be more of an indication of realtime speed than the usual "look how many seconds slower this PC is at photoshop".

Not that I'm suggesting Logic is the only thing people could use, I just think it's a highly optimised package, available on both platforms and it would be a fair test because of it taking full advantage of both SiMD and Dual CPUs on both platforms.

mikedman
May 14, 2002, 08:47 PM
Just for grins I thought it would be fun to price that rack full o' fun pictured on the apple web site. A rack of Xserve's maxed out with all the trimmings, a sweet support plan, a rack, and a 22" monitor will set you back somewhere around $327,756.00. So if you gots to have your 630 Gigaflops you can start collecting pennies now!

szark
May 14, 2002, 08:51 PM
The Xserve PDF Data Sheet (http://a1984.g.akamai.net/7/1984/51/4c5fd6cfb8d856/www.apple.com/xserve/pdf/XserveDS.pdf) (page 6) states that the servers ship with 10.1.5 !!!

All models include rackmounting hardware; Mac OS X Server v10.1.5 with unlimited-client license

Guess we'll be seeing 10.1.5 next month?

tjwett
May 14, 2002, 08:54 PM
Anyway. my question is: How would you go about using this as your main machine? Is it able to run regular old OSX? I noticed there is no option to connect an Apple ADC connector. I guess you could get the adapter. I'm really considering getting this thing for my next "desktop" because my educational discount rocks and it would be a nice deal. Is it practical? I do music production, video, graphic and web design.

locovaca
May 14, 2002, 09:01 PM
The P4 has a 100mhz (now becoming 133mhz) bus that transfers data 4 times in a single clock, making it an effective 400/533mhz bus (called QDR, or quad data rate).

The Athlon uses a 100 (older athlons)/133 mhz bus that transfers data 2 times in a single clock, making it an effective 200/266mhz bus (called DDR, or double data rate).

The G4 has a 100/133mhz bus, and transfers data only once in a single clock, keeping it an effective 100/133 mhz bus (called SDR, or single data rate).

The ram has no effect on the bus speed, although generally the base rate of the ram matches the speed of the CPU fsb speed (100 mhz/133 mhz)- when PC133 ram first came out on the PC side (before 133 mhz cpus came out) you had the option to run the memory at 133 mhz and the cpu at 100 mhz, which didn't give you a gain but it gave them something to brag about, I guess. That said, DDR wouldn't make sense for the G4 unless each processor had it's own FSB to the memory controller, meaning that each CPU would have it's own 133 mhz of ram effectively to work with.

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by locovaca
That said, DDR wouldn't make sense for the G4 unless each processor had it's own FSB to the memory controller, meaning that each CPU would have it's own 133 mhz of ram effectively to work with.

An excellent first post! Welcome to the MR community.

There are two versions of the XServe a single and a dual. So your hypothesis that each CPU has its own 133MHz bus is interesting but doesn't take into account the single processor version.

I think a more plausible hypothesis would be a new chip design my Moto that uses 2 instructions per clock cycle, as stated earlier in this thread (I think).

What I find interesting are these specs for the RAM:
Repeat one or all
— 128MB or 256MB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 128Mbit technology)
— 512MB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 256Mbit technology)

I really have to study for my finals or I would do some more research on this. What is the difference between 128Mbit and 256Mbit technology? Does the memory controller need 256Mbit technology for 512MB DIMMS to be utilized? Is there such a thing as 512MB DIMMS that use 128Mbit technology?

I'm new to all this DDR business, since all we've had in the Mac community has been SDR RAM for what seems like centuries. Now that it's on the mac platform, it gives me a reason to research it. :)

me hate windows
May 14, 2002, 10:10 PM
sweet server, I just wish I could get 1 for maya.

locovaca
May 14, 2002, 10:10 PM
The mbit is just the size of the individual ram chips. A 512 meg dimm with just 128 mbit chips would have to have 32 chips on it (16 on a side), which would mean it would be a double height dimm (128/8= 8 megabytes per chip, 512/8=32 chips), whereas a 256 mbit chip is double, so half the number of chips required. I don't think I've ever seen a dimm with 16 chips on a side because it would be pretty huge- thus the requirement. If such a dimm did exist (512 with 32 chips), it would probably would work, but the size might not fit in the 1U case.


(thanks a lot- I just found this site about a week ago, and I'm technically just getting my first mac this week... but I've always liked macs, just could never afford one... but that'll all change when my sawtooth g4 comes in... throw in a gf2 mx and watch quartz extreme fly!)

G4scott
May 14, 2002, 10:12 PM
I don't see why everyone in education is so angry... If you have enough students to justify 500 computers in a school (I know mine doesn't have that many, but I wish it did...), then they must have enough money to justify a $2500 server... In a school with that many clients, there has to be some serious network equipment, like file servers, filtering servers, mail servers, some major switches, firewall boxes, and tons of other stuff, and besides, some flitering services cost up to $16000 a year (or something like that...)

I know that the McAllen Independent School District MISD (http://mws.mcallen.isd.tenet.edu) spent over $40000 taxpayers dollars on some huge HP server that's out of date by now, whose job can eaisly be done by at least 2 xServes and that other RAID thingy... They also have at least 3 42U racks filled with hundreds of thousands of dollars of networking equipment, plus that huge HP server. The thing is, that most of these devices are too slow for my school district's network, so they're looking at replacing some of the stuff. For example, a flitering box that can handle the needed bandwidth costs well over $10000

Seriously, schools get tons of taxpayer dollars... But if you're not high enough up on the pecking order, and can't be the one to decide to buy these suckers, then suggest it to your IT personell, but don't complain...

Besides, compared to similar servers, Apple's xServe is cheaper, and has more features (like 4 drive bays). Even if you see this as a pricey computer, think of how long it would last. Even if you just get the base-line model for a school, you'd be able to upgrade it's storage and RAM easily, and it's bandwith in a school environment is more than sufficent.

So... Stop whining. $2500 and $3500 are relatively cheap for what these servers supply, and besides, they'll last for quite a while, especially if you just use them for storage or e-mail like most schools would...

elgruga
May 14, 2002, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by percolate


Last, the server software might be better as an option than a requirement. Don't yell at me - "Creative professionals" don't need a full copy of OS X server. I could see myself using hardware monitoring and eventually using clustering but everything else I've heard sounds pretty much unnecessary.


Well, you have to have an OS on the machine, and OSX Server is quite capable of running Photoshop et al - this is a Server, so it must have the capability to allow clients to connect to it. Thats the definition of a server.

OS X server doesnt look that different from OSX, and it runs the same. Sort of.......

I think we will get one of these for a web server when we finally switch to OSX. Maybe a year from now.

This is a great step forward for Apple - no caveats!

The battle with M$ isnt over yet........hehe!

AlphaTech
May 14, 2002, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by elgruga
The battle with M$ isnt over yet........hehe!

Lets see m$ put out a 1U rackmount server that gets people excited (as Apple's Xserve has). Actually, lets see anyone else put out a 1U server with an unlimited user license version of the OS on it, with two gigabit NIC's in it for the same money, and have as many people drooling over it.

I don't think that will ever happen.

Wry Cooter
May 14, 2002, 11:46 PM
Originally posted by G4scott


Besides, compared to similar servers, Apple's xServe is cheaper, and has more features (like 4 drive bays). Even if you see this as a pricey computer, think of how long it would last. Even if you just get the base-line model for a school, you'd be able to upgrade it's storage and RAM easily...

What I would really like to know about the Xserve... can you swap out the CPU chips later when something better comes along? Or is Apple going to ask you to drop 3000 clams on them again for a couple of chips?

locovaca
May 14, 2002, 11:47 PM
The battle with M$ isnt over yet........hehe!

I don't really think the battle is with Microsoft. Sure, they have a server OS (not hardware, but let's just ignore that for a second), but most people that get rackmount solutions tend to go towards a unix/linux environment. The biggest caveat of running a unix/linux rackbox is that it requires many skilled people to get it up and running. Sure, it may be fine for a while afterwards, but if it crashes or gets hacked (not often, but something you should be worried about), then you're looking at $$$ for the support (since not any old person can walk up to a CLI and just edit configurations). Just as OSX was designed to do, it takes that reliability and makes it simple enough for a teacher to do. And _THAT_ is who this'll cater to- the people that need the power, but don't want to spend the excessive amount of time learning where httpd.conf is. There is a big market for this- small ISP's, small to medium companies, and now with the economic downfall and layoffs, some bigger organizations that are laying off IT staff may look at this due to it's advantages over a traditional unix box.

The people that run Windows servers won't switch because usually they end up using the active directory and windows network related services, and doing such a large switch would probably cause a lot of services to be loss (that is, unless OSX Server started to integrate some of the NT/2k server services, like what the Samba team is trying to do). However, those that rely on unix boxes or have platform independent needs (like just a web server, etc.) will see this as a good TCO reduction.

mc68k
May 14, 2002, 11:57 PM
Originally posted by locovaca
If such a dimm did exist (512 with 32 chips), it would probably would work, but the size might not fit in the 1U case.

(thanks a lot- I just found this site about a week ago, and I'm technically just getting my first mac this week... but I've always liked macs, just could never afford one... but that'll all change when my sawtooth g4 comes in... throw in a gf2 mx and watch quartz extreme fly!)

I had a DIMM before, stacked with too many chips, bought by the previous owner. I believe it was bought at thechipmercant.com, judging by the markings. I have it right here…32 chips for 64MB…was used in my 7200.

So I guess cr@p like this exists and probably screws up memory controllers— like this one did to mine.

Good to hear on the mac purchase. Good thing it's a sawtooth, because that's the lowest DT that QE supports. I like your posts too. So many newbies have so little to contribute.

I'm not so lucky. I bought a Radeon Mac Edition for like 200+ beans a while ago for my S900, only to find out all that technology is wasted…but I digress. :)

peterjhill
May 16, 2002, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by AlphaTech


That has been true with Cat 5e cables since they topped out at about 350Mb for transfer rates. Cat 6 cables (true Cat 6) are starting to come into the market now. The only thing with that, at this time, is that to have a network backbone/infrastructure to support it will be expensiv\

On a server, gig is extra nice, for a short run from a server to a server aggregation switch, like a Cisco 6500, with gig uplinks to other distribution switches, once you pile on a bunch of users using 100 mbits/sec fast ethernet, you can saturate a high volume server gig link pretty quickly.

I kind of doubt the 350 mbit/sec rate for the cat 5e. I know i have broken that from my desktop over 5e cable using iperf to test the bandwidth. Of course if you want, you can always use the copper NIC for management, and get the optional fiber gig card. Then you won't run into the emf losses.

An enterprise definitely starts in the core and server block for deploying gigE. We still have a couple thousand users on shared-10 (out of about 25000 outlets I believe).

gopher
May 16, 2002, 08:50 PM
Mac OS X server includes the following:

"
Continuously monitored server activity
Mac OS X Server features built-in failure-recovery systems that continuously monitor server activity to detect and recover from breakdowns in essential system services. If a monitored system goes down, Mac OS X Server restarts it automatically. Mac OS X Server also restarts services automatically in the event of a power failure.

Ironclad security
Security Maintaining data security and preventing unauthorized file access is one of your top priorities. We understand. The good news is that with its UNIX file system permissions architecture and modern operating system design, Mac OS X Server supports the latest in data and protocol security. Integrated SSL supports encrypted and authenticated client/server communications, and Secure Shell (SSH2) provides encrypted and authenticated login for secure remote administration from the Terminal application.

The open source advantage
Tomcat. Mac OS X Server also includes QuickTime Streaming Server and WebObjects 5.1, and incorporates the important contributions from the open source community — including the most reliable releases of Apache, Samba, PHP, MySQL, Tomcat and OpenSSL — besides featuring software RAID support for disk striping and disk mirroring for flexible storage configuration, data redundancy and improved disk-read performance.

No per-user streaming charges
QuickTime Streaming Server 4 combines outstanding performance with great economies of scale. A single Xserve can serve up to 4,000 simultaneous streams. If you were on another server platform, that could cost you major bucks. But since QuickTime Streaming Server has no “server tax” — that is, no streaming charge per user — you don’t have to pay extra for additional users."
http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/

Put it simply Xserve ROCKS!

Originally posted by locovaca


I don't really think the battle is with Microsoft. Sure, they have a server OS (not hardware, but let's just ignore that for a second), but most people that get rackmount solutions tend to go towards a unix/linux environment. The biggest caveat of running a unix/linux rackbox is that it requires many skilled people to get it up and running. Sure, it may be fine for a while afterwards, but if it crashes or gets hacked (not often, but something you should be worried about), then you're looking at $$$ for the support (since not any old person can walk up to a CLI and just edit configurations). Just as OSX was designed to do, it takes that reliability and makes it simple enough for a teacher to do. And _THAT_ is who this'll cater to- the people that need the power, but don't want to spend the excessive amount of time learning where httpd.conf is. There is a big market for this- small ISP's, small to medium companies, and now with the economic downfall and layoffs, some bigger organizations that are laying off IT staff may look at this due to it's advantages over a traditional unix box.

The people that run Windows servers won't switch because usually they end up using the active directory and windows network related services, and doing such a large switch would probably cause a lot of services to be loss (that is, unless OSX Server started to integrate some of the NT/2k server services, like what the Samba team is trying to do). However, those that rely on unix boxes or have platform independent needs (like just a web server, etc.) will see this as a good TCO reduction.

shadowfax0
May 17, 2002, 06:49 AM
Now here's a question...the Xserve jsut came out, so....what the hell has Apple been running their website off of? Don't tell me they have a warehouse of G4's sitting there, or do they simply have like 20, and then just some big RAID array for all the media, and then the comps to just take requests and pull up the information...(?) OR do they run SUN or something?

locovaca
May 17, 2002, 07:15 AM
Gopher:

I do not disagree. I guess, I find that many people Microsoft Servers for all the integration they have (with Exchange Server as well), and for them to change would require a complete overhaul, something that takes years to even just upgrade to the new version, let alone implement a different system. That's why this is an attractive option for those that have a unix base already, or who's servers aren't necessarily tied to a microsoft environment.

Wry Cooter
May 17, 2002, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by shadowfax0
Now here's a question...the Xserve jsut came out, so....what the hell has Apple been running their website off of? Don't tell me they have a warehouse of G4's sitting there, or do they simply have like 20, and then just some big RAID array for all the media, and then the comps to just take requests and pull up the information...(?) OR do they run SUN or something?

Actually, I always figured a good deal of it wasn't on site at all, but on whatever Akamai is using for servers.

gjohns01
May 17, 2002, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by shadowfax0
Now here's a question...the Xserve jsut came out, so....what the hell has Apple been running their website off of? Don't tell me they have a warehouse of G4's sitting there, or do they simply have like 20, and then just some big RAID array for all the media, and then the comps to just take requests and pull up the information...(?) OR do they run SUN or something?

Apple uses Netscape on Solaris for store.apple.com and developer.apple.com. The main site is served using Apache on OS X. (check www.netcraft.com)