Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Considering Discontinuing More Server-Focused Products?

Apple blew their chance by not buying Sun when they could have! Just think this could be the Xserve now: Sun Fire X4170 M2

Apple could acquire Fujitsu, though they would have gotten their hand's on Solaris, MySQL, Java etc... had they acted and bought Sun :/

PinkyMacGodess said:
Were you aware that both Novell and Sun are no more?

Novell was broken up and the scraps sold to who ever wanted them and Sun was bought by Oracle and they have been working hard to alienate all of Sun's hardware customers as fast and as much as they can... (If anything, Oracle should sell Sun's hardware business to Apple)

And as far as server OS's, nothing beats, in my experience, Novell Netware 4.11. We had a server that was up for nearly 18-months with no problems. No leaks, no hangs. It just ran. We also had a Netware 3.12 server that ran for over two years without a reboot. Try that with, at the time, Windows NT Server and even now with Windows 2003 Server. At times, not having a server seemed better than Windows NT Server... And don't even get me started on NT Workstation...
Click to expand...
 
Confirmation of what I had feared.

Unfortunately this doesn't surprise me.

I've felt this coming for a while (though I'll still hope it isn't true). The fact that we never saw an xServe RAID with SATA support or an Intel node server hinted at Apple's position. Now that there is no rack mount option I think its clear Apple is uninterested or unable to effectively compete in this market. I know you can CoLo a Mini at a handful of places but come on, what if you need any semblance of a high-availability?? I guess you have to send a MP and lease out the whole dang rack :confused: Not good.

Snow Leopard Server was a little bit of a hot mess. Seemed like there were some big oversights in ADB Server and Time Machine but what was worse was Apple's response (or lack of). There is still no way to make Address Book Server run like the product sheets suggest it will.

I realize this market doesn't share much in common with those they usually find themselves succeeding in but I do think its one that has plenty of room for Apple's innovation. It seemed that Apple may have been making some progress into the corporate arena but I'm concerned this may be limited to handheld devices running on (now spectacular) Exchange compatibility.

Hope 10.8 Server sees the light of day...need to get a bunch more mileage out of the IT infrastructure we've got! :eek:
 
Well looks like Apple wants Microsoft to keep all the business and schools, As business and school needs server to manage all user accounts etc..

To me i think this mite be a step apple is taking to take away there computers and go all mobile.
 
LucidMac said:
UNIX is more stable than NT. There I said it. UNIX being more stable than NT does not equal NT being unstable. But that really isn't the point. The point is your extreme lack of even the most basic knowledge on this topic. You have totally discredited yourself in this forum based on your ridiculous, simplistic comments. Dude please stop while you're behind!
Click to expand...

UNIX is a specification, not an OS. Saying "UNIX is more stable than NT" sort of doesn't even make sense.
 
Why can't they OEM license OSX server? Let other companies build what Apple does not want to.

BTW, what does Apple use for its server farms? They must make their own servers. Maybe an Xserve variant? With all their cloud computing initiatives discontinuing the Xserve was the last thing I thought they would do.
 
Missing the point

I have worked for many years in IT I have never seen any Apple servers used, my take is not so much that the device was bad but that most companies have already to much invested in Windows or Dell for example and just would not move from it.

Apple needed to have been more pro-active when it came to selling the capacity and advantages of xserver. Something in the line of dropping IT staff. But IT staff are going to fight to make sure they are not implemented in organizations. I have setup up for fun Apple Leopard Server and liked how simple it was to get it up and running, it was in some ways simpler than MS WINDOWS.

I think if Apple is looking long term at the cloud and xserver gets in the way.
 
DakotaGuy said:
Apple makes 99% of their profit on their consumer products (especially the iDevices). I don't see why they would want to mess with putting time and effort into these niche product areas when the profit margin is so much better on things like the iPhone, iPad, iPod and to a lesser extent the Mac.
Click to expand...

From a business standpoint, sure, but Apple is also about pushing the envelope. They need servers in their own operation, so do they build a great solution that they use internally or just sell out to third-party solutions? Cost is a big factor, but the Xserves were known for being cost effective for what they delivered. I can see both points. One of the reason I'm losing my interest in Apple is their increasing focus on consumer products, rather than the more balanced creative/artistic/education focus of their legacy.
 
BTW said:
Why can't they OEM license OSX server? Let other companies build what Apple does not want to.

BTW, what does Apple use for its server farms? They must make their own servers. Maybe an Xserve variant? With all their cloud computing initiatives discontinuing the Xserve was the last thing I thought they would do.
Click to expand...

NOT. Never mind it goes against all their legal and copyright structures, they won't do it for obvious reasons of having to manage hardware varieties and illegal copies.
 
Dagless said:
Cloud computing.
To replace industrial and commercial servers.
You're joking, right?
Click to expand...

A co-worker of mine is talking with a prospect right now who wants NO server hardware onsite. He wants EVERYTHING in the cloud. All employees working from home.
 
Why are people so surprised?

Just look at Apple's product line, it's all about mobile devices with a few consumer macs thrown in every now and then.
Apple has now become a gadget company. Macs are becoming the center-hub for gadgets.
I just hope they keep their remaining mac lineup because windows computers are simply not fun to deal with.
 
DarthMoops said:
If Apple wishes to go this route, no "Apple" enterprise products, they should partner up with Novell or Sun and let them provide the back end for Mac environments.

None the less, keep the Mini & SL Server for the home market.

IMO "cloud computing" is a buzzword, this year's marketing gimmick, I just don't see the corporate world allowing their sensitive data to be housed off site.
Click to expand...

Bingo.
So while everyone is going nuts selling software as a service. Apple does what the rest it does with the rest of it's store and gives the people what they want Software as a Product.

Instead of a server OS offer a set of Xcode templets that not only create an OS image, that can be feed to the cluster, but will create a Interface that can be used on Apple branded hardware. Use Notifications to alert of issues.

Then the experts on configuring any given service are the ones writing the interface, which doubles as documentation. Plus they have a marketplace to make a living out of that if they choose.

There might not be a point to Apple building semi's but that doesn't mean they can't sell a smaller truck to the mechanic who services them and makes the trailers.
 
revelated said:
A co-worker of mine is talking with a prospect right now who wants NO server hardware onsite. He wants EVERYTHING in the cloud. All employees working from home.
Click to expand...

I think that "NO hardware" might actually work. But Microsoft seems to be embracing this concept of cloud computing to such an extreme point that, in 5 years, you will need an internet connection to open a word document because Microsoft Word will no longer be on your physical computer, but rather on a Chinese server :D
 
Why bifurcate the product line? Just make the server features part of the regular distribution of OS X. I assume the extra licenses cost would be minimal, but I do not know.
 
It would be interesting to see Apple abandoning the Mac Pro computers and the whole Pro software products... :p
 
BTW said:
Why can't they OEM license OSX server? Let other companies build what Apple does not want to.

BTW, what does Apple use for its server farms? They must make their own servers. Maybe an Xserve variant? With all their cloud computing initiatives discontinuing the Xserve was the last thing I thought they would do.
Click to expand...

Apple uses debian servers (or other linux distros) for critical services. (Also microsoft uses debian for their main DNS servers)
 
coolspot18 said:
I think this is the fundamental issue.

Also doesn't help X-Serve hardware costs 2x as much as a comparable Dell Server.
Click to expand...

Yes but with the Linux system i have to deal with Linux nerds to get the system and keep it running because on one else can understand him. Even then it takes him six months to get it working fully. All the while everyone is getting frustrated the phones don't work and using their mobiles.

And i'm dealing with angry bosses (far worse than angry birds) asking why are we using this system? with my only answer being "You told me i would be half the price"

It's all fixed now but no one uses all the cool feature we got for "Free".

Edit: good thing we stuck with xServe Email and that was working in about 5min well until some plugged in an ethernet cable wrong and crashed the office network for half a day.
 
My 2 cents

IMHO, assuming Apple abandons the enterprise market, they should offer OS X Server for Virtualization. As someone who worked for three Fortune 100 companies, there is ZERO chance of being deployed into the infrastructure unless it complies with their standards. Apple's suggestion that Mac Pros or Mac Minis are an alternative to xServes is dead on arrival. I am being kind that Apple even offered these as a solution that was other than ludicrous.

No Enterprise is going to allow ANYTHING that is not rack mounted into their infrastructure period.

Third party "solutions" using rack mounted Minis are a non-starter as they do not offer redundancy and are viewed as a kludge at best.

Enterprises that depend on 100% uptime cannot run on less than redundant systems that run 24/7/365 without fail.

This seems that in order for Apple to enter the Enterprise at all after killing the xServe that they must license OS X Server for VMs.

I see no alternative if they abandon the hardware market by killing the xServe.
 
Last edited:
Why bother making computers when you can make PRETTY SHINIES!

The thing is, who is going to make the apps that run on the pretty shinies if they are losing all of the tools for creation?
 
Windows 7 doesn't connect to Mac OS X Server PDC

Maybe a sign of Apple giving up on OS X Server is the fact that you can't connect a Windows 7 workstation to a PDC on OS X Server.

http://support.apple.com/kb/ts3235

The reason I have been recommending Mac mini server is that you could put an office on it. Now all I can do is map a drive to it. The dominos keep falling because without support for the windows domain controller there is really no use for OS X Server in a network environment.
 
Last edited:
Please allow me to express my thoughts on this matter in a quasi haiku form:

Axing the X-Serve
hardware no more
Future clouded mystery
in North Carolina

You liked that? No? Well, here's another one:

Best friend the oracle
shoulder by shoulder
battling the giants
in the cloud

And a final one for good measure:

The oracle in the cloud will speak
with machines as light as air
A scent of green apples
in a brewing storm from south
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back