Continuing their barrage of system upgrades, Apple just released an upgraded XServe in addition to the long awaited Xraid. The Xserve now comes in two configurations: single or dual 1.33 GHz G4 CPU(s), 256MB or 512MB DDR, Firewire 800 and option Fibre Channel support (200mbs). The Xraid features support for up to 2.5 Terabytes of storage (fourteen drive modules) with built-in Fibre Channel support and support fr upt 512mb of cache memory. Prices start at $2799 for the Xserve and $5999 for the Xraid. Also, Sun updated their servers and lowered the prices, while AMD released the Barton 3000+ chip, which according to various benchmarks on the web falls short of its competitor 3 GHz P4.
Apple Releases New Xserve and Xraid; Sun/AMD Updates
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
1.33 mhz G4 CPU(s),
Cool, there’s a speedy cpu
This is what i wanna know. Who is buying this (very overpriced) hardware, to use with a very non functional server OS?
I mean, I hear all this stuff all day long about Apple’s price/performance ratio with X, but then I read all day long about some content producer (PIXAR!!) Or some business switching the Intel hardware running linux.
So who the hell is buying these things? I cant find anyone?
Actually, back when they first came out alot of articles on them popped up about how much of a great deal they were, compared to other u1 racks using crusoes, or pentium 3s. They were better performace, price, quality of hardware, and easier to administrate.
People complained about the lack of raid capabilities I think, well now they have that too.
People like me buy these things. Or at least, when our budget ‘crisis’ passes we’ll likely get an XServe.
Why? The hardware design is well thought out, software design is excellent and it’s a whole heck of a lot easier to maintain than a Linux/BSD server.
Sure I could learn what I need using Linux or one of the BSD variants, but I manage all things computer and network related for four locations with close to 100 PC users, so I have little time to spend learning (and yes, that’s an ignorant statement but I really don’t have the time to study) and daily monitoring security patches. XServe puts everything together in a neat, easy to manage package.
Hope that answers your question.
Evan: Explain to me how 5k-8k for a 1U is “a great deal compared to the rest?” Add $5999 for the base RAID. Come on.. wtf? OS X has so many f’n layers going on in that damn thing there is no way in HELL it can outperform FreeBSD or another one of those. So, lets couple that with a 1U box, from penguin computing say, for $2459. Where is this ratio? I have been dying to find out.
Please explain that from a state of mind not affected by marketing *hype*, yes *hype*, yes Apple pays a premium for *hype*.
Big Al: I hate to shit on your parade, but before you manage a network of computers, you need to get some f’in skills first. I know, every MCSE will swear up and down that a lovely little gooey is all you need, but lemme tell you from experience, it aint true. Go to night school. Thanks.
Umm… questionGuy… you asked a question and I answered. Perhaps you shouldn’t bother posting if you aren’t interested in intelligent discussion?
Seriously. I’m so tired of hearing “I can build a linux box for $300 that just kicks an XServe.” Sounds great if you are using it for a game server. But come on. The XServe and XRaid are both nicely built computers, backed by a real company, 24×7 support. Go ahead, get a job, and use your Athlon box stuffed with the cheapest stuff running a downloaded version of RH. When something goes wrong and 100’s of workers are down, explain to the CEO how you saved a couple of dollars by not going with a solution that is actually backed by a company. You could buy a rack full of XServes and XRaids for a couple hours of downtime. If the /. crowd (that includes question Guy) doesn’t know that, it is the reason most will be stuck in lower levels of IT forever.
Don’t get me wrong. My UT2k3 server is a roll-your-own RH box. But would I trust my job and the company I work for on it, hell no.
My university’s department picked up an Xserve at the beginning of the school year to run their mac and pc labs, and are quite happy with it too. It was good for their budget.
All I have read if you really compare Apples to apples is that it was and is a fair deal. Well within the price/performace for other brand name U1s.
Go do some price comparisons and Google some “professional” reviews of the XServe. It is you who is obviously biased. The XServe has received high praise all around, except for the RAID aspect, which they have now.
First of all, question guy was comparing a $2500 1U box, not a $300 Athlon machine, so you are the idiot here.
As far as companies supporting, I have worked as Technology Director/Network Admin for a couple of school districts (as I have said before) and I personally found Apples support to be severely lacking, even when you pay for it. (as I have stated here before countless times).
As far as this “need” for a company to back it all up, how obvious is it that you have no clue what you are talking about. Stop fragging for a couple of hours and read some tech news.
Is Google running XServes with good old Mac OS X? Nope. IS Pixar? Nope.. The list goes on. Plenty of real companies are doing just fine without the idiots at Apple supporting them.
And they all run beautifully… Most run several labs around campus… A few test servers, etc…
I’ve also found Apple’s tech support to be pretty good. I know I don’t have any complaints.
What are you using them for? Workgroup management? Fileserver?
” Is Google running XServes with good old Mac OS X? Nope. IS Pixar? Nope.. The list goes on. Plenty of real companies are doing just fine without the idiots at Apple supporting them.”
Is that the point of the XServe? I don’t think so. They obviously aren’t trying to conquer the world with XServe so just take it for what it is, an easy to use but powerful server with a unix base.
Application servers for user labs mostly (big university
) and a few test servers for future lab set-ups, etc…
“I personally found Apples support to be severely lacking, even when you pay for it.” – truthteller
Hmmm… I’ve been using Macs since 1988. I’ve never had to call Apple’s tech support, so I really can’t comment. Can you explain?
Something like Google or Pixar are looking solely at the $$/MIP of the final product, with as many CPU’s as they can get their hands on. They may not get the fastest CPUs, but because of the scalability of their application, more slower CPUs is better than fewer faster CPUs when the sole judge of the output is number of queries or frames rendered per unit time. And they can easily benchmark the application.
Now, of course, 99.9% of the applications on this planet DON’T scale this way or this well, so price/performance gets a lot muckier.
However, my question is how does something like the XRaid compare to the other dedicated storage boxes like EMC and such. Half of the equation is software, and the other half is hardware. It would be interesting to see some actual performance comparisons between these systems, particularly since Apple is running ATA drives vs. SCSI.
SCSI may be dead on the workstation level, but it’s still making a lot of noise in the NAS/SAN scene.
Can the XRaid be plugged into any OS, or only Mac OS now? What kind of drivers would it need? Can you throw one of these onto a Lintel box or a Sun?
It’s simply a JBOD, right?
“OS X has so many f’n layers going on in that damn thing there is no way in HELL it can outperform FreeBSD or another one of those.”
The fact that OSX has many high level layers/API’s doesnt mean it runs slower as a server. Except if you have a full time monkey in a cage draging windows around all the time :-). If you dont use the layers it doesn’t take up clock cycles. OSX uses a lot of the same low level sw as FreeBSD.
Is Google running XServes with good old Mac OS X? Nope. IS Pixar? Nope.. The list goes on. Plenty of real companies are doing just fine without the idiots at Apple supporting them.
I don’t think any of those are in the Xserve’s key demographic. I think the Xserve finds its userbase amoung large networks of Mac workstations and a server solution which best integrates with that sort of network is desired.
Who better to provide a central server for a network of Macs than Apple?
The fact that OSX has many high level layers/API’s doesnt mean it runs slower as a server. Except if you have a full time monkey in a cage draging windows around all the time :-). If you dont use the layers it doesn’t take up clock cycles. OSX uses a lot of the same low level sw as FreeBSD.
Well, the semantics may be a bit off but the point remains valid. XNU is built of largely antequated components. The VMM and process manager are more or less ’80s kernel technology and both come directly from Mach. I don’t know how well Apple did integrating the FreeBSD UBC onto the Mach VMM, but I don’t believe they fit together that well. Beyond that, the only FreeBSD components are the VFS and networking… the rest is Mach. (except for the driver architecture)
Compared to a kernel like Solaris’s, or even Linux/FreeBSD, XNU just isn’t that good.
The mach/xnu combo is about equal to Solaris, with some pro’s and con’s. Linux doesn’t come close – macros and such in the kernel?!? Nah, come again later. It doesn’t compare to FreeBSD, though – FBSD 5, even now is lovely – and when it’s been vetted and considered stable? Might be one of the best kernels I’ve worked with.
Peace,
‘Rithm
PS
Not (really) knocking the Linux kernel. It’s a workhorse, and does a pretty good job. However, the stock kernel (without specialty packages/patches/modules) isn’t the best out there. I’ve used it and done scheduler development there.
>The mach/xnu combo is about equal to Solaris, with some pro’s and con’s.
Hardly (or, depends what you want to do). Solaris scales like hell. OSX doesn’t.
Ok cool, you have been using Macs since 1988. I have been using Apple products since the II+.
Are you speaking of using 1 or 2 macs at a time since 1988? Or are you talking about overseeing the Macintoshes of a school district of 19 school, where each school has at least 100 Macs on board. Throw into that the issues of dealing with a rapidly changing network environment, with new technologies, platforms, etc.
Remember “Apple Network Server”? Or how about “Apple Share IP”? Now imagine trying to bolt the usage of those products into above described network. Then imagine M$ coming along and selling the higher ups on using NT3 to use as fileservers for all of the macintoshes on said network.
Do you think there might be a reason to spend some time with Apple on the phone with their support, ever in a situation like that?
Since you are such a genius, there is probably no reason to ever call Apple. Cos Apple “just works” and its “easy to use” and other clap trap.
BTW: Said problems with ANS and ASIP were solved very simply. Linux + Netatalk +LDAP.
I use Mac OS X and FreeBSD, and I don’t really like Linux very much… but you’re a moron, TLFord. Macros in the kernel, yes. All BSDs use that, and so does XNU.
Why the hell shouldn’t they? You’ll have to do A LOT better than that to pick on Linux (you could start with its poor SCSI subsystem, for example).
I’m of the opinion that the BSD kernels -do- in fact have a superior architecture compared to Linux and XNU in pretty much every way, but your post is ignorant and unsubstantiated.
So the FreeBSD kernel “might be one of the best kernels” you’ve worked with? Why?
And what “packages” does the Linux kernel need, that makes it the best kernel (it has to become the best with them, otherwise why would you say it’s not the best kernel without them)?
In what areas doesn’t Linux “come close” to XNU?
What makes XNU “about equal to Solaris”? It’s not nearly as stable or standard-conformant, for example.
Thank god that you are the all seeing, all knowing internet presence.
Because of your past dealings with Apple and your documented work experience with hundreds of Apples and Macs in the jurassic period , I will never consider buying an Apple product.Thank you for the truth.
I wonder (really) then, why there is all this fuss about new Apple software and hardware. You must continue to be vigilant in telling the truth everywhere about the Macs and Apple.
All of the Unix vendors offering a complete solution, namely Sun, HP, IBM, and SGI, all have very mature, high performance kernels as part of that package (Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, and Irix respectively)
Unfortunately, HP, IBM, and SGI are finding the high end server market slowly being gobbled up by Sun, who is in turn losing market share to distributed low-end solutions, which are, for the most part, either NT or Linux based.
Apple doesn’t have a high performance kernel to offer, but they are targeting the low end market with the Xserve, mostly at existing Macintosh networks, and touting its ease of administration over raw kernel performance. Judging by the Xserve’s sales figures, Apple’s approach seems to be working.
I thought of a somewhat off-the-wall idea which Apple will probably never try, but might have interesting results. There already exists a mature, high performance Mach based kernel, one slated by its current owner for destruction. I’m talking about Tru64, which HP acquired when it purchased Compaq. HP has already voiced their roadmap… Alpha and PA-RISC are to be deprecated, and Itanium is to take their place. Tru64 is slated for death, being replaced by HP-UX.
Perhaps Apple might consider purchasing Tru64 from HP, and swapping some of the existing Mach components out of XNU in favor of the improved Tru64 components. Together with the IBM GPUL, this might help Apple break into the midrange server market.
Here is a little tip for ya:
http://carcino.gen.nz/images/index.php/00b9a680/463c5922
Boy howdy dude, that’s so last century (like your work experience w/Apples (pre-mac).
Maybe you can discuss this topic without calling people idiots and making fun of disabled kids (I bet the school system you worked for would be very proud).
So your incident with Apple’s support wasn’t the best, that wasn’t my point. It is just that you cannot simply compare price of an Apple server or RAID w/ support to a generic box with a free copy of linux. I have no problem if you want to compare prices of Dell+Win, IBM+RH advanced server, Sun, whatever to a fully backed Apple solution. That is a fair fight, but please, no Penguin Computing with copy of Debian comparisons. Too many people just look at the spec sheet and not the total cost of ownership. When someone even moans about the price of an XServe, that is usually a good sign of being naive about not pricing out a real, supported small to medium range server solution. When I’m not playing games, I do get a chance to *glance* at the IT trade mags. Almost all have said that the XServe is a bargain. Sun’s small servers are not. However, I don’t recall anything about Penguin Computing…
Why are you so against having a 3rd party fully support your solution? Granted if you have little money to lose, go ahead, read every mailing list. Compile your own kernals, build your own server farm from spare parts. So, servers are down at a school, I guess the kids go watch a movie, read, go play in the gym or something. What did that downtime actually cost? Probably not much. However, if design company’s server goes down and each person bills out at a certain rate per hour, the extra money paid to an Apple, IBM, Sun, MS, RedHat Adv Server (even if it worthless, in your opinion) is a no-brainer of an insurance policy. Is it the one and only plan? I guess I would have to be an idiot if there were no backup plan.
Hey. best work on some reading comprehension, because I said I have been using Apple products since the Apple II+, only an idiot would think that what I was describing as my work experience was with Apple II+’s.
Thanks idiot. You made my day, laughing at your idiocy.
Tell me, did AppleShare IP run on Apple II+’s? Is it possible to use NT to serve to a network of Apple II+’s?
Dood, my ANS ran AppleDOS! It rocked!!
Thanks for being stupid. Now, lemme tell you I have been managing macintosh networks, large ones for the last 8-10 years. Currently. So I get to see all this *magic* Apple stuff coming out now too.
Now piss off.. Thanks
The XServe seems like a nice box… but it’s still far too expensive compared to x86 servers.
For the price of the basic 1-processor model, I can get 2 roughly equivalent x86 1u rackmount machines, which I can then setup to failover or load-balance. Running Linux or FreeBSD, the x86 machines are also software RAID-capable, which the basic XServe is not. The RAID-capable XServe comes off worse still price-wise compared to hardware RAID x86 machines.
If I’m running a datacentre, there’s no contest. 2 machines in a failover or load-balancing configuration are always better than 1, even if Apple’s support is exemplary and the x86 manufacturer’s isn’t. I can get twice the performance and better uptime with the x86 solution, for the same price.
That said, I expect the new XServes to do well amongst Mac users and maybe even a few NT refugees, but I can’t see anyone who’s already using a Unix or Unix-alike switching.
mi readdin iz fin,tanx, soze mi spellin.
I was facetiously referring to your work experience,so I’m glad I made you laugh (although I have the feeling you were laughing in the same vein as you laugh at kids like the one in your nice little troll link).
What a mean spirited, little person you are.
i think you need to Zap your PRAM…. lighten up feller.
oh yeah, Macs “just work.”
you cannot compare a supported product, Apple, to some frankenstein unsupported pc.
What happens when you leave the company that you built this custom super stable machine, and they want to change the firewall config, or the ip address or add a user, or any other number of tasks? Granted if they hired someone smart to take over they could figure it out if they didn’t already know. But what if they hired someone not so smart? Could they call a company? No because you downloaded that version of RedHat Linux. And the new admin suggests that since Linux is so cryptic they install windows on it.
And what happens if a motherboard dies out, or if the fan on that processor falls off and the cpu dies? Who do they call?
When you install a server for a company it needs to be supported. Either by contract by you, or by a company such as apple sun dell etc. Your 1337 skills of making boxes ain’t gonna cut it.
have you considered seeking professional help?
from my research the Xserve isn’t much more expensive than the Dell PowerEdge 1650
*= upgrade to make equal as possible
Dell (small business) Xserve
$2562 (after special $400) $2799
P3 1.42* G4 1.33
256MB 256MB
Rails * Rails
Redhat Linux* Mac OS X Server
Remote Access card* Remote access card
73GB 10K SCSI 160* 60GB ATA 133
gigabit ethernet* gigabit ethernet
VGA card? VGA included
Cd rom CD rom
Remember the xserver can also add up to four 180GB hard drives while the Dell only can hold 3 146GB HDs.
They seem pretty even. I know most of you would rather build or buy an off brand 1U rackmount server, but the majority of people will not. The price of the Dell also doesn’t include the Microsoft Tax (the os that 70-80% of small business’ would choose). If you added that in ($3126 for 25 clients) then the Apple (which included unlimited clients) is by far cheaper. Not to mention faster.
I’m not an Apple apologist. I use both Wintel machines and Apple powermacs. This is one of the few times where Apple makes the better product.
Xserve gets thumbs up in reviews
———————————————————————- —
posted 10:46am EST Mon Oct 14 2002 – submitted by Shane
NEWS
Apple’s Xserve got the nod from both eWeek and PC Magazine in their reviews. eWeek calls Apple’s Xserve “impressive,” and PC Magazine concludes that “Apple scores with able server hardware and software.” Xserve’s ease of use, functionality, and cost were the main reasons that it was given such high praises in the reviews. The eWeek review noted that the Xserve could do pretty much everything its reviewers tried with it, right out of the box. Additionally, the PC Magazine review noted that the Xserve’s base configuration was priced lower than Dell’s PowerEdge 350 by several hundred bucks. Check out our previous Xserve coverage.