Want to share your stuff with Mac OS X Server? If you need to understand the basics of file sharing using Mac OS X Server, Ryan Faas walks you through both the underlying concepts and the actual steps involved in setting up file sharing and share points. This article is everything you need to know about creating a file server using Mac OS X Server: from the basics of share points to customizing user home directories and everything in-between.
Mac OS X Server: The Basics of Share Points and Home Directories
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Apple did a great job making their OSX server platforms-friendly. Not any OS did achieve this with that level of simplicity and comprehension.
Creating users is a piece of cake even compared with windows. Security is at the top level. And don’t forget Apple’s execlusive iChat Server which I cannot find any equivalent to it in any platform. Did I mention OSX Server’s Xgrid that you will never have something like it in any of Vista’s upcomming servers.
“Did I mention OSX Server’s Xgrid that you will never have something like it in any of Vista’s upcomming servers.”
Umm… Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003…
Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003 is still a beta program much like vista; I mean it didn’t see light.
Here is the proof “http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/ccs/default.mspx“
Humm, if the windows compute cluster server is working so well, tell me why there is no cluster with windows on the top 500 supercomputer list ?
“Humm, if the windows compute cluster server is working so well, tell me why there is no cluster with windows on the top 500 supercomputer list ?”
Maybe because its still in beta… I never said it was great but the original post I replied to said Microsoft didn’t have a grid computing platform.
Apple did a great job making their OSX server platforms-friendly. Not any OS did achieve this with that level of simplicity and comprehension.
Creating users is a piece of cake even compared with windows. Security is at the top level. And don’t forget Apple’s execlusive iChat Server which I cannot find any equivalent to it in any platform. Did I mention OSX Server’s Xgrid that you will never have something like it in any of Vista’s upcomming servers.
Performance wise? Sucks. What do I expect from server? To be user friendly or a network beast? Yeah, imagine next gen servers being sold under commercial “comes with lollipop included”
Vista has Grid computing. You can even download just works Live CD for Linux grid computing. So what?
I’m really impressed how user creating can be piece of cake for you. That tells everything about your knowledge level. Too much sun exposure hurts brains, you know?
“Vista has Grid computing”
Well the recently announced grid computing from MS is pathetic, it just supports 8 nodes while OSX grids support thousands of nodes. Look at how many Apple clusters were sold so far! Did MS ever sold a cluster over 8 nodes to anyone, if true give me that link?
Where the hell do you get your information? Linux FUDster Magazine?
Q: Is there a maximum number of compute nodes that I can configure in a cluster based on Windows Computer Cluster Server 2003?
A: There is no limit to the number of nodes in a Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003 cluster except for the number of hardware systems and node interconnects available, and the demands placed on the infrastructure by the applications running across the nodes.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/ccs/faq.mspx
I don’t think the poster is a linux user, considering his statements. He appears to be a Mac user, unless of course he’s actually trying to bring Mac users in discredit. This is not entirely unlikely IMO.
[edit: added ‘think’ in first line.]
Edited 2006-01-23 02:17
Yeah, I’d say you’re right.
In any case, he’s an effing moron. He continues to claim that WCCS2003 has a limit of 8 nodes, even provided the link to the FAQ.
So while X-grid can be used on every machine in the office at night Windows Cumpute cluster requires a dedicated hardware and separate copies of the OS bumping up the price tremendously. OS X allow existing hardware to be used at no additional cost, creating a render farm at night for projects, with hardware you already have.
Q. Is licensing different for Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003?
A.Licensing for Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003 will be restricted to computers that are used as dedicated computational servers only. Customers wishing to use compute nodes for other purposes (for example, using a cluster head node as a database server) should purchase the appropriate version of Windows Server 2003 x64 Editions (Standard, Enterprise, or Datacenter) for installation on those nodes. The cluster management components encapsulated in the Microsoft Compute Cluster Pack support installation on all editions of Windows Server 2003 x64.
I’m not comparing licensing costs or office-use capabilities. Yeah, OS X has X-grid in the client versions of their OSes, but WCCS2003 is not a client OS for office workers. It’s for datacenters and businesses wishing to do heavy-duty cluster computing where there are >8 nodes.
You’re comparing apples to oranges. Hell, this should not have even been a reply to my statement. I was only correcting a clueless troll about what WCCS2003 can/can’t do.
Dear Friend You seem unable to read my previous posts.
Windows Computer Cluster Server 2003 that you appreciate is not a product yet, I meant windows server 2003 Enterprise and DataCenter versions, those two support only 8 nodes; and by the way these nodes are mainly designed for redundancy purposes not performance unless of course you choose load balancing with web services. Clustering with OSX improve performance for all kind of applications not just web services and on all kinds of OSX computers, Can windows do this NOW?! Notice NOW
Dear Friend,
This is what you said — “Well the recently announced grid computing from MS is pathetic, it just supports 8 nodes while OSX grids support thousands of nodes.”.
The “recently announced grid computing” from Microsoft is Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003. Dear friend, you lose.
Sincerely,
Someone who read their FAQ
PS: Clustering with OS X will automatically improve performance for iTunes encoding? Photoshop filter rendering? iMovie processing? If not, specify what you mean by “all kinds of applications”.
PPS: WCCS2003 is basically MPI + Windows. MPI-aware applications will take advantage of your Windows cluster.
Clustering with OS X will automatically improve performance for iTunes encoding? Photoshop filter rendering? iMovie processing? If not, specify what you mean by “all kinds of applications”.
I meant All grid compatible Server Applications, we are talking since the start of this forum about server applications not desktop or workstation applications examples include:
1. gridMathmatica
2. MATLAB
3. TURBOWORK
4. BIOINFORMATICS
5. Others
See “http://www.apple.com/xserve/cluster/resources.html#c“ for further reading.
Can anyone claim windows has capability to grid compute a software over greater than 8 nodes? Also Can any one tell me about grid software written for windows other than SQL Server and IIS?
*You* *are* *a* *moron*
Research MPI, please. The reason Microsoft is implementing MPI is because it is *the* standard for grid computing. Any cluster-oriented software already written now just needs to be ported to Windows — which should be decently easy. You do not need to change the grid computing mechanisms (costly, hard work), BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME AS ON ANY CLUSTER-ENABLED UNIX.
As for “Can anyone claim windows has capability to grid compute a software over greater than 8 nodes”, did you completely ignore my original response, or are you just f–king stupid? I even posted a link to the WCCS2003 FAQ.
Please note for future reference that “no limit” does not mean “limited to 8”. Windows Server 2003 clustering is limited to 8 nodes. Windows Compute Cluster Server 2003 has *no* limit.
I’ll say it again, just to make sure you got that: WCCS2003 has no node limit.
Microsoft Windows can handle more than 2 CPU host * on the paper *.
But when you how windows handle two CPU, you can easily conclude that windows on a 4 CPU host will be crap.
Every body here is talking about a software that is in beta version. Wait for the final release and then you will be able to tell if there is no limit or not.
Christ, there is no getting through to you retards.
I would ask for some links backing up your statements, but I’m just not even going to bother.
See, I don’t think I’d mind you LIP, anti-Linux agenda and all, if you weren’t such a prick all the time. I mean, even when you have something worthwhile to add to the conversation, as seems to be the case here, you still go about with such a junior high mentality. Do us all a favor and grow up kid.
I don’t where you took your infinite wisdom from, but for the cases I actually used Mac OS X Server, performance didn’t suck at all…
Speaking of network beast, Apple has done a really great job of integrating kerberos for single sign on (for both, mac and windows (ad) clients).
“Did I mention OSX Server’s Xgrid that you will never have something like it in any of Vista’s upcomming servers.”
Even better, the Mac OS X client comes with XGrid… while Microsoft is leaving it’s own equivalent technology to a specialized version of their server OS.
http://www.apple.com/ca/macosx/newfeatures/newfeatures.html
Edited 2006-01-23 01:25
what apple says…
http://images.apple.com/server/pdfs/Xgrid_TB_v10.4.pdf
I will however say that the artical ISNT ABOUT XGRID! did anyone read it?