Apple Discontinues Xserve, Only Available Until January 31st

[wildmac]

I don't see this as the end of xserve just the beginning of a new product, I think Apple is planing on releasing a new version of the Mac Pro Case one that would work as both a desktop and in a server rack maybe a 3u size. If apple dropped the xserve what would they use in there own backend?

The Mac Pro case is huge and does not need to be that size anymore, it was created back in the day when the G5 cpu could cool your breakfast and required a small nuclear reactor to power it, look at how small the mac mini is Apple can do it.

If apple was smart they would drop the more expensive zeon CPU's and go to cheaper i7 Quad core and faster CPU.

Think of it? it would be like cutting your feet off.

Too late. If they had a new product, they needed to announce it already. MacPros will not be going in datacenters.

 

[Stella]

It's pretty obvious no one involved in this conversation is a developer or has any understanding of why so many developers (not just Mac devs, but web and server devs) moved to Macs. The terminal is a huge part of debugging, analyzing, scripting, etc.

So long as OS X is UNIX based, there will be a terminal. The day it's not UNIX based, devs like me go elsewhere. Neither Apple nor Microsoft are retarded either, the strength of a platform is deeply rooted in giving developers what they want.

I use terminal frequently, so I know what its useful for. I find command line quicker than using a GUI for a lot of things, being about to tail logs in terminal is easier than using console.app.

However, Apple could very easily prevent users from accessing the terminal - just remove Terminal.app. Sure, you could find replacements but its more convienient if a terminal app is provided by default.

OSX makes a very good development platform. However, Apple aren't retarded but neither are they doing themselves favours amongst Java developers: still no word when / if Oracle will take over OSX JVM development. Apple's trend towards pro-users isn't exactly encouraging... like I said previously, Apple are great at spreading FUD.

I don't think Stella was saying anything different from what you are. He was questionning whether Apple really wants to continue down this path. I use OS X because it is Unix. Because it has a posix shell, X11, syslogd and all the other Unix goodness. However, we are not Apple's main market and more and more they are doing away with their niches (as evidenced by this recent move).

This is exactly why I started using OSX too ( in favour of Linux )... the *Nix underpinings. A great GUI where everythings 'works' ( just about ) and being *nix-like.

 

[wildmac]

Even a toe would be over-stating how much of an impact or interest xserves had...

Seems like a good move for Apple. Pretty much a waste of resources. They had no traction or real market share. I know some people who used xserves, but I know a lot more who do not, by a massive margin. Not Windows vs OS margins, but say 100x greater than that or even more.

For all intents and purposes this product line did not even exist.. so killing it is irrelevant. Not sure why so many negative comments on this story. Odds are 99.99999% of the people who negged the comments never used an xserve and never would have used one.

So, you have never used one, but you are an expert?

Tell that to my designers/video-team/photographers who access Xserves, and the scientists here who have computing clusters of Xserves.

(And tell it to any of the networks that bought those FinalCut editing solutions).

Have fun with running iOS on your MacBookPro in 5 years.

 

[calderone]

This comment shows that you have no clue how the real world works. I can point and click and setup my entire enterprise while you are sifting google for shell scripts. I in turn have saved my company and clients time and money.

Have fun being Mr. Smarty Pants I do everything in terminal the hard way administrator. Its people with attitudes like yours that caused outsourcing.

#2 Do explain how it is zero touch? Are you using Netboot? If so what are you pushing bless commands via the ARD Unix command terminal?

Sorry, I don't need to sift google. And I rarely use shell, more so python and ruby. More assumptions.

The point is, I don't have to do everything in Terminal we have a high level of automation here.

#2 NetBoot --> Custom DeployStudio image (some modifications to their scripts) --> Base image layed down (InstaDMG created) --> Postimage functions laid down --> Launchd calls the handler which runs the necessary scripts --> cleanup --> shutdown --> ready for deploy.

The only thing you have to do is NetBoot and select the correct workflow. If you consider that touch, then I lose.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Sorry, I don't need to sift google. And I rarely use shell, more so python and ruby. More assumptions.

The point is, I don't have to do everything in Terminal we have a high level of automation here.

#2 NetBoot --> Custom DeployStudio image (some modifications to their scripts) --> Base image layed down (InstaDMG created) --> Postimage functions laid down --> Launchd calls the handler which runs the necessary scripts --> cleanup --> shutdown --> ready for deploy.

The only thing you have to do is NetBoot and select the correct workflow. If you consider that touch, then I lose.

Thats not zero touch. I run ZERO touch.

Zero touch is Zero touch. Any time a tech touches a machine an associated cost goes a long with it. You obviously don't deal with the costs of running or managing an IT dept.

 

[wildmac]

However, Apple aren't retarded but neither are they doing themselves favours amongst Java developers: still no word when / if Oracle will take over OSX JVM development. Apple's trend towards pro-users isn't exactly encouraging... like I said previously, Apple are great and spreading FUD.

Between this, the Java mess, the Flash War, and more.. we are going back to Steve's controlled view of how computing should be done.

My guess is with Lion we won't be able to put icons on the desktop again..

 

[calderone]

Thats not zero touch. I run ZERO touch.

Zero touch is Zero touch. Any time a tech touches a machine an associated cost goes a long with it. You obviously don't deal with the costs of running or managing an IT dept.

How is yours zero touch? Are you saying your machines magically transmit the images to themselves? They unbox themselves as well? And plug in the cables, etc etc?

 

[alent1234]

I don't think Stella was saying anything different from what you are. He was questionning whether Apple really wants to continue down this path. I use OS X because it is Unix. Because it has a posix shell, X11, syslogd and all the other Unix goodness. However, we are not Apple's main market and more and more they are doing away with their niches (as evidenced by this recent move).

I think Stella was saying exactly what you are, after dropping the Xserve, who knows what's next. The Mac Pro ? All the pro software bundles ? The Unix certification and most of the "nice to have but not really needed" Unix tools ? Where does it end ?

This raises a lot of questions for Mac users that do indeed use this stuff.

interesting that apple has now allowed most languages on the iOS platform with few restrictions.

most of Apple's customers use Windows anyway and now that apple is cost cutting they may not see a point in developing apps for Mac and Windows. at least not the low quantity Pro apps like the dev kits and FCP

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

How is yours zero touch? Are you saying your machines magically transmit the images to themselves? They unbox themselves as well? And plug in the cables, etc etc?

Zero Touch install means no tech will need to touch a machine to image it.

I can goto my console, highlight a machine or numerous, and select netboot, and they will run through the entire song and dance. Install the OS, any additional packages, run scripts, install Sep11 and our local admin account, push all of our policies and managed preferences.

All this with one mouse click and nobody needing to be at the actual machine.

For being an ACTC you sure don't know your terminology very well.

 

[sunspot42]

Server market isn't where the action is at

Servers have become a commodity. Prices are collapsing, as are margins. Since Apple's high-margin front-end products interact just fine with any kind of server - Linux, Unix, Windows, whatever - there's absolutely no strategic advantage to them remaining in the server space. It's a bad place to be, and my guess is a lot of hardware manufacturers are going to lose their shirts over the next 5 years.

Beyond that, backend computing based around your own servers is rapidly being replaced by cloud solutions. If you're a small shop, or a small department in a larger organization, why pay $50,000 to buy and configure your own servers, then spend thousands a month to host and support them, when you can just pay thousands a month (or less) and have Amazon or some other cloud provider do all the work for you? The cloud will collapse demand for server hardware, especially oddball hardware like the Xserve. Amazon and Google are big enough to either roll their own generic hardware, or demand and get oodles of generic, standardized servers at aggressive prices from the likes of IBM, HP and Dell.

Further down the road, as applications themselves migrate into the cloud, and companies subscribe to the apps themselves instead of hosting applications on their own dedicated servers, the retail server market will register additional declines. It's a dying segment, and Apple (as usual) is one of the first to get out of a declining business.

It's interesting to note that at the same time they're exiting the retail server market, they're prepping their own enormous data center. Clearly, Jobs sees where the industry is headed.

 

[wildmac]

It's interesting to note that at the same time they're exiting the retail server market, they're prepping their own enormous data center. Clearly, Jobs sees where the industry is headed.

And it likely doesn't include professional desktop systems either.

 

[calderone]

Zero Touch install means no tech will need to touch a machine.

I can goto my console, highlight a machine or numerous, and select netboot, and they will run through the entire song and dance. Install the OS, any additional packages, run scripts, install Sep11 and our local admin account, push all of our policies and managed preferences.

All this with one mouse click and nobody needing to be at the actual machine.

For being an ACTC you sure don't know your terminology very well.

Sorry, you have to go to your console (1 click), highlight the machines (one or more clicks). Select the job (1 click).

Not much more than what we are doing. That isn't zero touch, somebody has to touch the machine whether it be your or a tech and whether physically or over the wire.

We prepare hundreds of machines a week and spend very little time doing it. It is a set it and forgot process, just like yours. We simply set it in a different way.

Please tell me, what terminology am I lacking?

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Please tell me, what terminology am I lacking?

Because you have no clue what a Zero Touch install is. I can hand you the shovel if you'd like to continue digging...

 

[calderone]

Because you have no clue what a Zero Touch install is. I can hand you the shovel if you'd like to continue digging...

Again, you are not zero touch. I know precisely what zero touch is, but guess what, it doesn't exist. You have to click buttons just like we do. The only difference is that we engineered the solution and you drag around some pre-built items.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Again, you are not zero touch. I know precisely what zero touch is, but guess what, it doesn't exist. You have to click buttons just like we do. The only difference is that we engineered the solution and drag around some pre-built items.

Again you have NO IDEA what ZERO TOUCH mean in response to imaging. Stop trying to argue your point you look foolish. Obviously nothing magically just happens the word zero touch means the Tech doesn't have to do anything other than plug in the machine and leave. Everything else happens with ZERO TOUCH. Bottom line can you 100% image a computer from start to finish without leaving your desk or Remote Controlling it? I can I highlight 1- infinity computers and image them all with a few clicks vs you having to send techs to go hold the N key down and configure them. Thats ZERO TOUCH.

 

[Stridder44]

Its not a consumer device and thats what Apple sells the most of.

This times a million. I doubt XServe sold that well in the first place. I'm not denying it's an awesome piece of hardware, but I really doubt their sales for it were very high. I mean Apple has really been pushing the iPad and iPhone for businesses and that has actually worked out pretty well so far, and is only getting better. So who knows, perhaps one day XServe will come back from the dead. Maybe even with a new name.

In any case, R.I.P.

 

[calderone]

Again you have NO IDEA what ZERO TOUCH mean in response to imaging. Stop trying to argue your point you look foolish. Obviously nothing magically just happens the word zero touch means the Tech doesn't have to do anything other than plug in the machine and leave. Everything else happens with ZERO TOUCH.

So you think that clicking in Casper means you are zero touch? Am I right?

Guess what, my tech does the same thing. Except, the machine is ready when it is dropped off. Not after.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

So you think that clicking in Casper means you are zero touch? Am I right?

Guess what, my tech does the same thing. Except, the machine is ready when it is dropped off. Not after.

Can you image 10,000 machines with one mouse click?

Again, I didn't invent the term Zero Touch. Zero touch refers to the ability to remotely image and deploy images to machines without a technician needing to touch a machine other than plugging it in.

Either way your imaging method uses more than one person and cannot span multiple sites simultaneously or be performed off hours. If a customer call me right now and says he needs his machine reimaged I can go... DONE and in 25 minutes hes ready to go. You would have to deploy a tech. Your deployment method is considered "Lite-Touch". Can you see the differences now. You keep referring to initial deployment. I'm telling you imaging happens more than just the first time you drop off a machine.

 

[KnightWRX]

Servers have become a commodity. Prices are collapsing, as are margins. Since Apple's high-margin front-end products interact just fine with any kind of server - Linux, Unix, Windows, whatever - there's absolutely no strategic advantage to them remaining in the server space.

Except to support your existing Mac infrastructure. Let's face it, I'm not going to manage imaging from some remote provider going through the Internet. I'll do it on my private WAN/MAN/LAN. Same for local authentication, I'm not going to run the risk of having all my accounts sitting in some datacenter not under my control, I'm going to want to run that locally.

Same for update management. Centralized updating solutions like WSUS and Update Server exist because I don't want every client on the network going out to the Internet and pulling random updates. I want to manage which updates and I want to save on bandwidth by running my local depot.

Cloud computing is not the be all, end all of computing. Again, people are listening more to the hype than the actual substance. While the cloud may be good for somethings, it won't replace every server in every shop.

Not to mention Final Cut Server render farms, are you proposing moving those to the cloud too ? And on what hardware are you going to these ? Cloud providers are not going to want unrackable, unmanageable servers without hardware redundancy and no way to service them without downtime.

The cloud will collapse demand for server hardware, especially oddball hardware like the Xserve. Amazon and Google are big enough to either roll their own generic hardware, or demand and get oodles of generic, standardized servers at aggressive prices from the likes of IBM, HP and Dell.

The cloud will just shift hardware demand from multiple small businesses to big providers. In the end, processing power is processing power. The cloud doesn't magically do away with the need for physical hardware to run the software.

And it doesn't do away with the need for local servers for many classification of needs.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Except to support your existing Mac infrastructure. Let's face it, I'm not going to manage imaging from some remote provider going through the Internet. I'll do it on my private WAN/MAN/LAN. Same for local authentication, I'm not going to run the risk of having all my accounts sitting in some datacenter not under my control, I'm going to want to run that locally.

Same for update management. Centralized updating solutions like WSUS and Update Server exist because I don't want every client on the network going out to the Internet and pulling random updates. I want to manage which updates and I want to save on bandwidth by running my local depot.

Cloud computing is not the be all, end all of computing. Again, people are listening more to the hype than the actual substance. While the cloud may be good for somethings, it won't replace every server in every shop.

Not to mention Final Cut Server render farms, are you proposing moving those to the cloud too ? And on what hardware are you going to these ? Cloud providers are not going to want unrackable, unmanageable servers without hardware redundancy and no way to service them without downtime.



The cloud will just shift hardware demand from multiple small businesses to big providers. In the end, processing power is processing power. The cloud doesn't magically do away with the need for physical hardware to run the software.

And it doesn't do away with the need for local servers for many classification of needs.

The Cloud scares businesses. Security is a HUGE concern.

 

[calderone]

Can you image 10,000 machines with one mouse click?

Again, I didn't invent the term Zero Touch. Zero touch refers to the ability to remotely image and deploy images to machines without a technician needing to touch a machine other than plugging it in.

Either way your imaging method uses more than one person and cannot span multiple sites simultaneously or be performed off hours. If a customer call me right now and says he needs his machine reimaged I can go... DONE and in 25 minutes hes ready to go. You would have to deploy a tech. Your deployment method is considered "Lite-Touch". Can you see the differences now. You keep referring to initial deployment. I'm telling you imaging happens more than just the first time you drop off a machine.

I am curious. On a brand new machine, out of the box, how is Casper forcing that machine to NetBoot?

 

[Mac Admin]

Why Apple?

Apple’s decision to discontinue the Xserve is probably the worst decision Apple made in along time, and it will come back to bite them – hard I hope.

If Apple thinks that the Mac Mini Server can be compared to the Xserve, then they don’t have a clue what the Xserve means to the IT world. First, the Mac Mini doesn’t even come close to the processing power of the Xserve. Not to mention, the RAM in the Mac Mini maxes out at 8 GB whereas the Xserve is 96 GB with 10.6 installed. Then there is the hard drive configuration. Albeit you can mirror two hard drives, that is not the same as RAID 5; you will have to go to some external storage device after you max the internal hard drive out at 500 GB. If you append an external storage device, then you can only concatenate it to the Mini via USB or Firewire; both are considered bad practices for corporate use. There are many other technical disadvantages for the Mac Mini Server when compared to the Xserve when it is used in a corporate environment; however, when it comes to servers of any kind, you don’t want it to shout out “I’m a single point of failure.” The Mac Mini Server says that loud and clear in every aspect of its makeup.

Apple is also saying that the Mac Pro is an alternative to the Xserve. I really do like the Mac Pro. It is a well built and rock-solid computer with many upgradeable components. With more internal drive bays than the Xserve, and you can also add a solid-state drive to it, the Mac Pro has a better internal storage option and a higher storage capacity than the Xserve. Processors in both computers are tit for tat as well. So why not the Mac Pro as an alternative to the Xserve? It is not practical when it comes to mounting it in a rack. With a rack mount kit, you can lay the Mac Pro horizontally and that will use about seven units of rack space. If you left it standing vertically in the rack, you will use about 12U of rack space. Therefore, I hope you have lots of racks because if you have as many servers as I do along with other devices such as a 4U tape library, Xserve RAID (which was another good product Apple did away with), and APC battery backups, you will run out of space fast. The Mac Pro does not have lights out management capabilities. In its current form factor, the Mac Pro can only have one power supply. The absence of LOM and dual power supplies make the Mac Pro inferior to the Xserve. Again, as good as the Mac Pro is, it is not a good corporate solution as an alternative to the Xserve. It does not fit in the server room.

I conclude this by saying to Apple, if you are going to do away with the Xserve than you might as well slap all who supported the Mac in businesses, schools, colleges, and government in the face. Not only are you slapping us in the face, but you are putting a lot of doubt in our minds about Apple’s long term plans for Mac OS X Server software. Give me a good reason why I should continue down Apple’s server road when you are continually discontinuing what I will call your enterprise product line? Right now I can’t trust Apple on whether they will someday discontinue server software or some other product I rely on in business. I really feel as if Apple just called me STUPID for buying their product.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

IBM has been a major innovator in the server industry for many years.

Yeah, I thought IBM moved in the opposite direction as Apple. It's funny, Apple used to look at IBM as "the enemy." Now they will probably be driving the backbone of Apple's cloud.

Apple’s decision to discontinue the Xserve is probably the worst decision Apple made in along time, and it will come back to bite them – hard I hope.

I think Apple is more than capable of surviving without it. As much as it pains me to say it - Apple doesn't need the IT sector, the "pro" sector, or any design related folk. They really don't. Their profits are changing extremely quickly to focus towards the non-desktop market. In a few years I wouldn't be surprised to see the mac pro gone entirely with the iMac to follow next.

 

[jaykk]

I think this is the worst decision from Apple. The moment enterprise started adopting iphone/ipad, they drop support for Java, now XServe. The biggest advantage Apple had was Quick Time streaming etc for Mobile devices with their Server lineup.

Now apple is pretty much saying if you want java/enterprise development, go with Windows or Linux. The combination of Windows Phone 7/Windows, Andriod/Linux will be better than any iPhone with Windows/Linux backend. If a CIO invests so much effort on Windows/Linux, they are definitely going to look into Windows Phone 7 and Android rather than iPhone/iPad.

Apple lost all the advantage it had. They have to depend on server offering from other companies. This is going to hurt apple in enterprise adoption. You can sell only so much iPhone/iPod to consumers, after a while, Enterprise will chose Windows 7 or Android.

 

[tobiasvdp]

I am very disappointed / currently running on XServe G5 as a homeserver (File Sharing, TM Backup, Video and Audiostreaming), lots of clients use fully loaded Xserves (Intel & G5) ...

a "upgrade" to mac mini would not work, the only advantage is the low power consumption, no lom, no server monitor with notifications in case of hw problems, no high performance file sharing, no redundant power supplies

mac pro does not work with server monitor and advanced hardware monitoring either, no lom, no redundancy, more space needed in racks, the btu / thermal output of the mac pro will probably be somewhat higher, no reliable solution

some clients might "upgrade" to nas systems like the new synology ds710+ / Cisco NSS 300 series, but still have lower throughputs on gbit networks than the old g5 xserve are capable of - linux machines might be another option, but basic adminstration could not be done easily on the client side

virtualization of osx server is still not allowed, this should be something that apple would need to rethink - osx server on a sun fire x2270 / 2470 could really be interesting