Leopard Home Server

Discussion in 'macOS' started by Analog Kid, Oct 21, 2007.

  1. Analog Kid macrumors 601

    Analog Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    #1
    I keep hoping Apple will release a "Home" version of Server. Right now you can choose between 10 or unlimited clients. I don't want any clients. I want to be able to set up mail and web services, mainly, and possibly a jabber server.

    Every generation of OS I wonder if I should try installing Server at home, and eventually decide it's not worth $500. I can install many of the services from source since a lot of them are open sourced, but it really is a pain to keep them running-- especially given Apple's tendency to overwrite BSD directories at will with point updates and security patches. Having access to the GUI management tools would be another bonus.

    Anybody know if the Wiki server is open, or did Apple roll their own on that one?
     
  2. CavemanUK macrumors 6502

    CavemanUK

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Location:
    Rhyl, North Wales
    #2
    Without clients you would have no need for server my friend. Whoever or whatever connects to your server is considered a client.


    If you mean to run server on your own machine, then you should reconsider. Server systems are not meant to be "used", they are meant to serve and be "managed".

    A lot of people get into a mess trying to run server systems as their "main machine" and it just doesnt work.
     
  3. Analog Kid thread starter macrumors 601

    Analog Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    #3
    Perhaps I'm misunderstanding Apple's definition of "client", but I would be awfully surprised if the 10 client license only allowed 10 people to access a hosted website. Or limits the system to 10 email accounts, for that matter.

    My understanding of client is closer to what Apple refers to in the "client management" section of the Server feature list-- machines that essentially rely on the server to control their operating parameters (can I mount an external drive?), or may go so far as to boot off of a network mount.

    I've been running Apache, a name server, imapd, and squirrelmail on my "main" machine without too much of a mess, but I'm not relishing the thought of going back through all the ./configure;make;make install steps on everything again come Leopard. The eventual plan would be to move the server functions to a Mac Mini and leave it on a shelf.

    Your tone implies you're a professional admin. I'm not running a corporate server here, just a hobby and service to friends and family.
     
  4. robbieduncan Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #4
    I believe the number of clients thing relates to Apple File shares only. All the other services are unlimited.
     
  5. CavemanUK macrumors 6502

    CavemanUK

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Location:
    Rhyl, North Wales
    #5
    Hi,

    Your right that I have (and still sometimes do) administer servers professionally but thats only on the Windowz side. But regardless of which server system you use, the rules are basically the same.

    Whether your using it in a corporate environment or as a home server its not designed to be run as a client system on a day to day basis. This is where people get problems.

    What i mean by this is that it shouldnt be touched unless its to change a setting etc. You wouldnt use OS X Server (or any server system) for day-to-day tasks like browsing the net, playing games, music etc. These types of applications can cause problems in the reliability of the other services.

    Its purpose is to serve. What you said about a mac-mini is a much better idea.

    When Apple (and microsoft) refer to client licenses, they refer to authenticated machines (or sometimes applications) that are connected to your server.

    A Basic example is user management. You might have 20 users configured to be able to log-in to your network but only 10 can do it at a time. Im not sure with OS X Server but sometimes scheduled tasks such as backup are considered as being a "client connection"

    Also, if you are only using it for home then obviously OS X Server is quite expensive for this task and you could run OS X Client or a Linux/Unix Based server solution that would be a lot cheaper.
     
  6. Cromulent macrumors 603

    Cromulent

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Location:
    The Land of Hope and Glory
    #6
    Just install Linux on a cheap PC and you have a server for a fraction of the price.

    And SMB shares if I remember correctly.
     
  7. robbieduncan Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #7
    Interesting, I was under the impression they were unlimited. To my knowledge they are on the client version of OSX so I don't see why server would be any different.

    Apple's own tech specs page is not clear on the matter. It says "... 10-client edition is designed for small workgroups and Internet hosting services that do not require simultaneous file sharing among more than 10 Mac and PC clients" The "Mac and PC clients" bit would make it sound like SMB sharing was limited.
     
  8. tersono macrumors 68000

    tersono

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    No, it refers to authenticated accounts on a server-hosted domain. You can have unlimited mail accounts, file shares or web sites on the 10-client version - it's only if computers on the network are authenticating against the domain (rather than locally) for logons that the number of client licenses becomes an issue. Basically, if you're a large corporate then fine, but for home use or small business the 10-client version is more than adequate - or, for that matter, just use the desktop version and bolt on the stuff you need.
     
  9. twoodcc macrumors P6

    twoodcc

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Location:
    Right side of wrong
    #9
    i'm actually thinking about buying Leopard Server for mainly just playing around with. i want to get familiar with it, so maybe after i graduate, i can get a job being an Admin or something
     
  10. Analog Kid thread starter macrumors 601

    Analog Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    #10
    What I'm talking about here is essentially a toy. Reliability isn't my primary concern as long as it exceeds a certain threshold. If iTunes brings down some other service, I'll get a call from my mom saying "Your uncle can't get to the pictures I put on the website" and I restart the process. I actually prefer the mini solution too, if for no other reason than it would allow me to shut down the noisier PowerMac.

    What I can do with Linux, I can pretty much do with OS X client, which is what I've been doing. This is one of the reasons I love the BSD underpinnings of OS X. OS X Server is definitely overkill for my needs, so I've been hoping they'd come up with a cheaper alternative for home without all the client management stuff. Personal web sharing handles part of my problem by providing an Apache install, and I guess they think that's enough. I'd like access to the rest of the mangement tools though, at least those for the Internet services (rather than the "client services").

    Mostly I posted here to see if I'm a market of one-- am I the only person trying to run their own server rather than leasing space on a hosting service?
     

Share This Page