Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Jobs: Xserve Axed Over Poor Sales
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The point is that a product name used for a meaningful purpose, such as "hey, you have to know this product because we use it" is not a buzzword.
Quote from the wikipedia def:
Labelling a term a "buzzword" pejoratively implies that it is now used pretentiously and inappropriately by individuals with little understanding of its actual meaning who are most interested in impressing others by making their discourse sound more esoteric, obscure, and technical than it otherwise would be.
You misunderstood him. He was talking specifically about OS X Server, not their laptop/desktop business. If they are truely abandoning the hardware server market, it would be a good move indeed to partner up with someone to offer enterprise grade hardware solutions for OS X Server.
That way they get both to drop the Xserve and still provide a solution to enterprise customers who need OS X Server to manage their Mac deployments.
Heck, a partnership with VMWare to offer OS X Server as a guest option on vSphere or ESX/ESXi would've perfect.
I suppose that would be a more accurate statement, a reverse halo effect. Whether it actually happens or not who knows, but if it made deployment of macs easier then cutting everything all together would be the zero sum easiest way yet. If not out of convenience, then yes, its quite possible that the negative smear from xserve/OSXS could cloud future mac purchases in the corporate environment.
Just speculation though.
In fact, I did not.
Clearly. I'm not sure what made you think anyone was suggesting otherwise.
Explain why. I'm not interested in received-wisdom assertions from the guy who didn't turn Apple into a moneymaking machine.
You seem to think that this is somehow a totally different thing from their failed desktop licensing attempt. In fact, it's exactly the same, though with lower stakes. It would still fail--it wouldn't take down the rest of their business, but it would not make any money either so why bother?
The big picture here is that, as others have mentioned, management of OS X clients is a much different game than it was five years ago. Increasing standardization on Apple's part has made it realistic, for most environments, to do it without a dedicated OS X Server host. I know, because we do.
Apple does not make their money doing things like selling rackmount servers, and there is no chance in hell they'd ever compete with the commodity rackmount makers. Anyone who thinks that offerings like the XServe or A/UX are anything more than, call them "stopgaps", does not understand the market they are working in and probably shouldn't be responsible for any big-picture aspects of a server farm.
He admitted in the other thread that he doesn't maintain any Mac clients. He's not familiar with the actual Apple tools nor OSXS. He's not even said that he's ever worked with an XServe. He's familiar with maintaining a large deployment of Windows clients, and the hardware and software tools required to do so. He's not familiar with how weak Apple's tools actually are.
crackpip
I don't know about servers. But I do know the the Mac Pro is way way way overdue for an enclosure design change. The aluminum enclosure has been like this since June 2003!!! And it's the Power Mac G5 days. Apple revamped all its product line except the desktop tower. Personally, I like pizza box style enclosure but the Xserve was too big and I don't need a server. However, if Apple can design a flat Mac mini, I'm sure they can come out something cool, compact and powerful. Towers are really dated design. Almost have a muscle tear two weeks ago trying to carry a Mac Pro. It's way too heavy.
Wait, a guy who sits around buying "expertise" from Accenture and clicking through WinServer GUIs portraying himself as an expert on all things technological? Stop the press, I've never seen this phenomenon before.
Not sure you understand what "buzzword bingo" is all about. This is a job posting listing specific products that are in use, and hence ones that the applicant should be experienced in. That's got no relation to a random person throwing around "ERP" in an attempt to cow people into thinking they're an expert.
But I can tell you one thing for sure - and no offense - but anyone who questions the need for redundant power supplies and suggests using machines with a form factor like the Mac Pros in server room looks more in the "Doesn't know anything" category than some who throws around "ERP".
Have you heard of ILO and ILOMs - does Mac Pro have something similar? Or do you think it's useless as you have never used it and every server should have a display attached and admins should locally administer it? May be serial consoles and KVM are useless too as you have never captured kernel panic remotely either?
Hardly surprising that they didn't sell well. The XServes have always been a couple steps behind the Mac Pro except in the old G5 days. Lack of updates, expensive price point and lack of marketing are the reasons why it didn't sell. Why would anyone buy an XServe when they could get a Linux rackmount at a fraction of the cost with newer hardware? it's a shame though, the XServes were amazing machines. If only Apple had invested a little more in keeping them relevant.
This is what I think of as self fulfilling prophecy.
"They weren't selling well."
Well DUH. Look at the 'why' in 'why weren't they selling well' and it feels a lot less like "It was good business to dump it" and a lot more like "It's been almost 2 years since we even TRIED."
As others have said, the way they handled their exit from the product is by far the worst thing about this.
I have no vested interest in this product, but I'll certainly remember the company's behavior in future purchasing decisions.
"They weren't selling well."
Well DUH. Look at the 'why' in 'why weren't they selling well' and it feels a lot less like "It was good business to dump it" and a lot more like "It's been almost 2 years since we even TRIED."
As others have said, the way they handled their exit from the product is by far the worst thing about this.
I have no vested interest in this product, but I'll certainly remember the company's behavior in future purchasing decisions.
His responses are pithy and cocky. And they're far too infrequent for any admiration as a customer-friendly CEO. I've emailed the man at least 6 times, and have never received a response.
I'm not knocking the decision to cancel the Xserv. I'm just saying there is some justification for poor sales when the updates are so sorely needed, and the price is so high. Couple that with a lack of marketing and the blame cannot be placed solely on the market. Apple has decided not to go after the pro market. It's not strictly a customer decision, which is how Jobs's douchey response makes it sound.
I don't see why people think Apple is required to come to the enterprise from the top down. They aren't making a good return on their investment, so they are changing things up.
Solution 1: Apple anoints a third-party product OS X-worthy and lets them sell the hardware (what they did with the Xserve RAID)
Solution 2: Apple allows OS X server to be virtualized and run on any third-party server.
People talking about FCP servers, etc. need to take a deep breath and realize Apple with have a solution where a solution is needed. They aren't going to jeopardize that part of their business.
@Knight I realize you know what you are talking about, but I have to ask if you actually manage any Xserves or if you are just here to stir the pot. I have a feeling if I go back and find any of the threads introducing "The New Xserve" you're probably there telling everyone just how horrible it is for "Real" enterprise solutions anyway. If I cared enough I'd actually do some searching.
Solution 1: Apple anoints a third-party product OS X-worthy and lets them sell the hardware (what they did with the Xserve RAID)
Solution 2: Apple allows OS X server to be virtualized and run on any third-party server.
People talking about FCP servers, etc. need to take a deep breath and realize Apple with have a solution where a solution is needed. They aren't going to jeopardize that part of their business.
@Knight I realize you know what you are talking about, but I have to ask if you actually manage any Xserves or if you are just here to stir the pot. I have a feeling if I go back and find any of the threads introducing "The New Xserve" you're probably there telling everyone just how horrible it is for "Real" enterprise solutions anyway. If I cared enough I'd actually do some searching.
Well, no it's not really. In the 90s, they were both making and selling hardware to run Mac OS on and selling licenses to clone makers. They were essentially enabling their own competition to undercut them. Since their money comes from hardware, this was a seriously flawed move.
This case is different, they are bowing out of the server hardware market. Enabling "clones" for OS X Server thus does not compete against their own hardware offering, since they have none now.
So yes, totally different.
Wait, a guy who sits around buying "expertise" from Accenture and clicking through WinServer GUIs portraying himself as an expert on all things technological? Stop the press, I've never seen this phenomenon before.
I don't do Windows Server administration, I do big Iron Unix and virtualization admin for multiple Linux deployments. I don't touch the AD/Exchange side of the business having done so for about 3 years at another firm prior to this. This is a career choice for myself, I'm now concentrating solely on Unix.
I have said I don't manage Xserve, we don't have a Mac deployment here, we're not an artsy shop, we're purely financial/customer oriented.
While the Xserve may have lacked in certain areas, it was all they had as a proper enterprise grade solution for OS X server. I have never chewed out Apple on this particular piece of hardware.
Last edited:
His pithy responses always have an air of superiority to them, in my opinion. I know I'm not alone in thinking that. It just offends me is all. I'm not saying he's not right about a lot of things, I'm just saying his delivery rubs me wrong as a consumer.
And I'm fine with marketing new and best products, but if Apple would actually make an effort at updating and marketing their pro devices, they might find that the sales increase.
Makes sense
Apple is shifting over to a wider consumer market, dropping products that aren't worth the time makes perfect sense.
Apple is shifting over to a wider consumer market, dropping products that aren't worth the time makes perfect sense.
Don't agree with Apple's decision to cancel the Xserve from an enterprise perspective. However, I've always felt that Apple was not really into the enterprise market.
While the hardware may be gone, the software remains and provides options. For the small business owner, the Mac Mini and Mac Pro server options are plenty robust. And I would imagine some creative solutions using these two computers for larger small companies, but don't expect true enterprise level support/offerings.
Who knows, down the road, Apple may introduce Xserve 2, to boldly go where no server has gone before.
While the hardware may be gone, the software remains and provides options. For the small business owner, the Mac Mini and Mac Pro server options are plenty robust. And I would imagine some creative solutions using these two computers for larger small companies, but don't expect true enterprise level support/offerings.
Who knows, down the road, Apple may introduce Xserve 2, to boldly go where no server has gone before.
Interesting video. Thanks.
On the contrary, breaking into the enterprise market with the iPhone and then dropping the primary finisher into the enterprise market - the server - is a senseless move.
Agreed, some people just believe *everything* Apple says in their marketing hype. The macmini is NOT a server, it's barely a decent (comparatively speaking) home computer.
And you clearly have no understanding of PSU redundancy, hot swappable bays and LOM. Not to mention that two of those Mac Pro servers will not have the combined power to replace the 12 Xserves that they will replace.
Discussing enterprise needs here is pointless. Until you've been in the server room, handled 1000+ client machines or needed to know that your OD servers can dependably run 24/7/365 for thousands of users... you simply are speaking without understanding the conversation.