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

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
69,104
40,131



osxserver.png
Apple has released a potential Golden Master (GM) build of OS X Mavericks Server to developers ahead of next Tuesday's media event where the release date of OS X Mavericks is expected to be announced.

Apple has this to say about OS X Mavericks Server on the marketing page for the software:
OS X Server includes a number of innovations that will help the people who use your network as well as the people who manage it. The new features in Xcode Server make it easier than ever for a Mac or iOS development team to create robust, reliable software, thanks to continuous integration, testing, and repository hosting services. Caching Server 2 speeds up the download and delivery of software through the App Store, Mac App Store, and iTunes Store, and it can now cache on your server for faster downloading to iOS 7 devices. And Profile Manager has an array of new management features for iOS 7 and OS X Mavericks that simplify software distribution of apps and books.
9to5Mac says the GM of OS X Mavericks Server comes with a build number of 13S440. It's available from the OS X Developer page. The consumer version of OS X Mavericks reached Golden Master earlier this month.

Article Link: OS X Mavericks Server Golden Master Seeded Ahead of October 22 Media Event
 
Hopefully the update from Mountain Lion to Mavericks server won't be has horrible as the update from Lion to ML. I swear I almost threw my mac out the window.
 
Wouldn't it be better to fresh install any new operating system anyway?

Starting from scratch isn't always the simplest solution, especially when you have multiple users sharing the same computer who all have to figure out preferences/iTunes Libraries/install apps/etc.

I mean, sure the Migration Tool exists, but if I'm going that route I might as well just upgrade with a backup and see what happens.
 
If it can also block iOS7 updates, this would be a great solution for the guy that is suing Apple to keep the updates away.
 
I'm really hoping they've improved SMBX file services for Windows in this release. When they replaced Samba with the homebrew version it was something of a disaster at my cross-platform lab--there are issues with Acrobat and some Office documents that were effectively impossible to work around, and I ended up needing to fall back to disabling SMBX and installing Samba. I'd much rather use the built-in solution, though.
 
Hopefully the update from Mountain Lion to Mavericks server won't be has horrible as the update from Lion to ML. I swear I almost threw my mac out the window.

I'm not surprised. Lion Server was a horrible version. As soon as ML Server came out, all our machines were updated. Having to use two server configuration apps was a pain. I haven't upgraded a production machine to Mavericks Server yet, but my other machines upgraded fine.

----------

OS X server isn't it's own OS. Now it's pretty much just an app that you install.

No, but Server is a self-contained app. It contains the processes and data require to run the "server" OS. If you delete Server.app from your Mac, it goes back to being a client OS. The server data (wiki, DNS, DHCP settings, etc.) stay in the Library folder, but the processes that run DHCP, DNS, etc. are no longer running in OS X. Download the Server.app back in the Applications folder and it's a server OS again.
That is why the upgrade from Lion or ML Server should be fine. It's just weird to install a client OS on top of a server OS and then make it a server again by purchasing the Server.app.
 
I'm confused. Don't you need Mavericks to run this?

EDIT: Nevermind, the fact that it's GM didn't sink in right away. I thought it was released to public. :eek:
 
Hopefully the update from Mountain Lion to Mavericks server won't be has horrible as the update from Lion to ML. I swear I almost threw my mac out the window.

What were your problems? I've updated my Macs effortless to every new release without any problems over the past 10 years.
 
I'm really hoping they've improved SMBX file services for Windows in this release. When they replaced Samba with the homebrew version it was something of a disaster at my cross-platform lab--there are issues with Acrobat and some Office documents that were effectively impossible to work around, and I ended up needing to fall back to disabling SMBX and installing Samba. I'd much rather use the built-in solution, though.

So you haven't heard then?? Word on the street is full CIFS support provided through collaboration with Microsoft.
 
What were your problems? I've updated my Macs effortless to every new release without any problems over the past 10 years.

Were they server versions? I've updated non-server versions without issue as well, but the server upgrades have been hit or miss.
 
Wouldn't it be better to fresh install any new operating system anyway?

This isn't Windows. "Better" is subjective here. There were some things along the way that you could only use if you upgraded. If I rember correctly, the version that officially dropped support for Classic was still able to run it if you had upgraded. There have also been various apps over the years that an upgrade install wouldn't remove, so you could keep using them, but you wouldn't get the with a clean install.

All that aside, Apple's upgrade process actually works. In my experience as a highly skilled bench technician, I found that every time someone brought in a computer wheret hey'd done the upgrade themselves and it failed, it always came down to a hardware problem--usually either a bad hard drive or bad RAM. The difficulty with making this claim is that there isn't a good hard drive testing program for the MAC (so in forums, people will dispute that they have a bad hard drive because all the Mac tools tell them it's fine); we always had to pull hard drives out and test them on PCs. Obviously, this annoyed the Mac purist in me, so I wrote my own by modifying e2fsprogs' badblocks tool.

The moral of the story is that no, it isn't decidedly better to do a clean install on OS X. Unless you explicitly want to get rid of everything you've already done, you're just making your life harder and wasting your time.
 
So you haven't heard then?? Word on the street is full CIFS support provided through collaboration with Microsoft.
I haven't been paying much attention to server rumors, so I hadn't heard, but that would be great news.

I'm not as surprised as I would be given the news that Apple is apparently downgrading AFP--they more or less had to come up with a more stable solution if the Win-ish standard is going to be the recommended network filesystem.
 
This isn't Windows. "Better" is subjective here. There were some things along the way that you could only use if you upgraded. If I rember correctly, the version that officially dropped support for Classic was still able to run it if you had upgraded. There have also been various apps over the years that an upgrade install wouldn't remove, so you could keep using them, but you wouldn't get the with a clean install.

All that aside, Apple's upgrade process actually works. In my experience as a highly skilled bench technician, I found that every time someone brought in a computer wheret hey'd done the upgrade themselves and it failed, it always came down to a hardware problem--usually either a bad hard drive or bad RAM. The difficulty with making this claim is that there isn't a good hard drive testing program for the MAC (so in forums, people will dispute that they have a bad hard drive because all the Mac tools tell them it's fine); we always had to pull hard drives out and test them on PCs. Obviously, this annoyed the Mac purist in me, so I wrote my own by modifying e2fsprogs' badblocks tool.

The moral of the story is that no, it isn't decidedly better to do a clean install on OS X. Unless you explicitly want to get rid of everything you've already done, you're just making your life harder and wasting your time.
I only stated that because the forum constantly recommends it. Any time there is some large upgrade, "Do a fresh install." Whether it be iOS, OSX or Windows. Thanks for the input.
 
I only stated that because the forum constantly recommends it. Any time there is some large upgrade, "Do a fresh install." Whether it be iOS, OSX or Windows. Thanks for the input.

It also doesn't matter whether it's Linux, FreeBSD or any other operating system, including OS X - upgrades ALWAYS carry long forgotten corpses and outdated, unstable or even incompatible drivers with them and they NEVER run as well as fresh installations. And that assessment is based on 30 years of IT experience, not forum hearsay.

I do this stuff for a living in a global network environment, and whenever I can avoid it, I don't perform and upgrade but make a fresh installation instead. (Router and switch operating systems like Cisco IOS and Mikrotik RouterOS are the only exceptions.)
 
it also doesn't matter whether it's linux, freebsd or any other operating system, including os x - upgrades always carry long forgotten corpses and outdated, unstable or even incompatible drivers with them and they never run as well as fresh installations. And that assessment is based on 30 years of it experience, not forum hearsay.

I do this stuff for a living in a global network environment, and whenever i can avoid it, i don't perform and upgrade but make a fresh installation instead. (router and switch operating systems like cisco ios and mikrotik routeros are the only exceptions.)

+1
 
It also doesn't matter whether it's Linux, FreeBSD or any other operating system, including OS X - upgrades ALWAYS carry long forgotten corpses and outdated, unstable or even incompatible drivers with them and they NEVER run as well as fresh installations. And that assessment is based on 30 years of IT experience, not forum hearsay.

I do this stuff for a living in a global network environment, and whenever I can avoid it, I don't perform and upgrade but make a fresh installation instead. (Router and switch operating systems like Cisco IOS and Mikrotik RouterOS are the only exceptions.)

Totally. It's so much easier to reinstall these days, too.
 
It also doesn't matter whether it's Linux, FreeBSD or any other operating system, including OS X - upgrades ALWAYS carry long forgotten corpses and outdated, unstable or even incompatible drivers with them and they NEVER run as well as fresh installations. And that assessment is based on 30 years of IT experience, not forum hearsay.

I do this stuff for a living in a global network environment, and whenever I can avoid it, I don't perform and upgrade but make a fresh installation instead. (Router and switch operating systems like Cisco IOS and Mikrotik RouterOS are the only exceptions.)

Well, crap, haha. Knowledge is power. :)
 
So you haven't heard then?? Word on the street is full CIFS support provided through collaboration with Microsoft.

Would be great if OS X Server (Mavericks edition) could now be set up as an Active Directory domain controller. They took out this functionality when they replaced Samba with SMBX, but now they should go the extra mile and make OS X Server a bonafide Windows directory server. This would help Apple a great deal in the enterprise space. Apple would also develop its MDM services through Profile Manager, for Apple-centric tech (Macs, iPads, iPhones, and iPod Touch devices).
 
It also doesn't matter whether it's Linux, FreeBSD or any other operating system, including OS X - upgrades ALWAYS carry long forgotten corpses and outdated, unstable or even incompatible drivers with them and they NEVER run as well as fresh installations. And that assessment is based on 30 years of IT experience, not forum hearsay.

I do this stuff for a living in a global network environment, and whenever I can avoid it, I don't perform and upgrade but make a fresh installation instead. (Router and switch operating systems like Cisco IOS and Mikrotik RouterOS are the only exceptions.)

To be clear, my position is not based on forum hearsay, either. It's based on the years I spent as a Mac technician. If someone did an upgrade install and complained about it, the solution was never a reinstall of the OS. In fact, at our company, using "reinstall the OS" as the solution to a problem was a sign of incompetence as a tech (on the Windows side as well as the Mac side). I'm not trying to say anything about you or your skills here. I'm just pointing out that IT and bench work is a very different beast, especially since IT is rarely given much time to solve a problem, and being a bench tech, I had the time. Also, being an AASP in the age of the Apple stores, we had to be better than the Apple stores, and we had to get it right the first time every time.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.