Mac Mini Server
-
But why spend money that you don't have to? Seems to me it's a poor choice when much cheaper and equally suitable options exist. Besides, a homemade server will be infinitely more expandable (not to mention better supported) and configurable than a Mac Mini.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001Cheaper and more expandable, yes. I agree. But, why better supported or more configurable? I am well aware of what can be accomplished with a Linux server. To be fair, much more of the features are available on a Linux server, than those that aren't compared to a Mac server. That is exactly why I am asking if it is worth it, since this is going to be a Mac-only network. I'm currently comparing the two possible options: Linux or Mac.
Where it seems there are only borderlines, Where others turn and sigh, You shall rise!
-
For real: http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/3357449/Bug.aspx[^]
Cpianism: I have a negative number in my Rep so please fix it. Chris Maunder: That isn't a bug.
Unbelievable! :laugh: Does he not get it? Thanks, that made my day!
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
If you want a network of only Macs, then it is well worth it. The $999 price for a server absolutely rocks. You may however need to connect some external USB drives to have time machine backups as the 500 GB will not be sufficient for 5 machines. The nice thing about the Mac mini server is the software and the cool hardware. Contrary, to what others say here $999 is a fantastic deal for the mac mini server. If you want a mixed network, I will go with something cheaper like the one I have Acer Aspire Revo..
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
The $999 price for a server absolutely rocks.
It is an awesome price, isn't it? Actually, after reading a blog post that has a title that ends with "for $999" got me considering it. XServe is quite an overkill in both money and power for what I need at the moment. The storage capacity is 2x500GB, so 1 TB. Nevertheless, adding more space through firewire is always an option.
Where it seems there are only borderlines, Where others turn and sigh, You shall rise!
-
Nothing from Apple is "worth it". It would be cheaper to build a Linux (or FreeBSD) server.If you just need a file server (NAS), there's even a NAS free package available based on BSD (like OS-X is). Total cost for the hardware should be less than $500 - less than half the price of Apple's Mini Server.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Linux (or FreeBSD)
Ok, you mentioned FreeBSD, so I still like you. ;P
Jeremy Falcon
-
Cheaper and more expandable, yes. I agree. But, why better supported or more configurable? I am well aware of what can be accomplished with a Linux server. To be fair, much more of the features are available on a Linux server, than those that aren't compared to a Mac server. That is exactly why I am asking if it is worth it, since this is going to be a Mac-only network. I'm currently comparing the two possible options: Linux or Mac.
Where it seems there are only borderlines, Where others turn and sigh, You shall rise!
By configurable, I mean what you put in the box. You can use a laptop hard drive for booting (or even a Flash drive if you want to deal with the DMA issues). You can also increase available disk space, use whatever kinds of drives you want/have on hand, change out the CPU, and type/amount of memory. Try that with a Mac Mini. It's simply a poor choice for a server.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
By configurable, I mean what you put in the box. You can use a laptop hard drive for booting (or even a Flash drive if you want to deal with the DMA issues). You can also increase available disk space, use whatever kinds of drives you want/have on hand, change out the CPU, and type/amount of memory. Try that with a Mac Mini. It's simply a poor choice for a server.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
By configurable, I mean what you put in the box.
I thought that was the expendable part. I understood configurable in the software kind of way. :)
Where it seems there are only borderlines, Where others turn and sigh, You shall rise!
-
See JSOP said nothing FROM Apple is worth is, you're creating software FOR Apple products. Big Difference. :rolleyes:
It's no use - he has an erection for Apple hardware, and no amount of logic is going to change his mind. I built my NAS for an initial cost of less than $300, and it's currently got 4 1TB of drives in it (and room on the motherboard for two more before I need to consider adding a PCIe SATA controller for additional drives). And oh, wait - I have one power plug to deal with. He's going to get his Mini and then add hard drives via FireWire. Whatever.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
It's no use - he has an erection for Apple hardware, and no amount of logic is going to change his mind. I built my NAS for an initial cost of less than $300, and it's currently got 4 1TB of drives in it (and room on the motherboard for two more before I need to consider adding a PCIe SATA controller for additional drives). And oh, wait - I have one power plug to deal with. He's going to get his Mini and then add hard drives via FireWire. Whatever.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
It's no use - he has an erection for Apple hardware
How on earth did you got to this conclusion? It seems to me that it is you who gets an erection when ranting against Apple. Have you ever tried the Mac Mini Server (I'll only mention that sine that is the subject of this thread)? You see, I asked if someone has any experience with it and there you are talking on and on again of how useless and expensive and stupid it is to own one and that you would never buy one. Do you own one? Do you have any real experience with it? If not, what the heck are you doing on this thread? I own a Mac... I work on it every day for at least 16 hours. I love the experience. I've never had any issues, slowdowns, crashes... Nothing. I need to set up a server for a Mac workgroup and am considering a Mac server. Is that so irrational? As I already mentioned, I am considering two options, Linux and Mac server. Since the Mac is more expensive, I think it is only logical to ask someone who's used it are the extra money worth it. You got a NAS for less than $300. WOW.. well, now, good for you... Congtratu-f*****g-lations. You've achieved Nirvana. Now, would you, please... pretty please with a cherry on top, let someone who's used it share the experience? Thank you.
Where it seems there are only borderlines, Where others turn and sigh, You shall rise!
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
It's no use - he has an erection for Apple hardware
How on earth did you got to this conclusion? It seems to me that it is you who gets an erection when ranting against Apple. Have you ever tried the Mac Mini Server (I'll only mention that sine that is the subject of this thread)? You see, I asked if someone has any experience with it and there you are talking on and on again of how useless and expensive and stupid it is to own one and that you would never buy one. Do you own one? Do you have any real experience with it? If not, what the heck are you doing on this thread? I own a Mac... I work on it every day for at least 16 hours. I love the experience. I've never had any issues, slowdowns, crashes... Nothing. I need to set up a server for a Mac workgroup and am considering a Mac server. Is that so irrational? As I already mentioned, I am considering two options, Linux and Mac server. Since the Mac is more expensive, I think it is only logical to ask someone who's used it are the extra money worth it. You got a NAS for less than $300. WOW.. well, now, good for you... Congtratu-f*****g-lations. You've achieved Nirvana. Now, would you, please... pretty please with a cherry on top, let someone who's used it share the experience? Thank you.
Where it seems there are only borderlines, Where others turn and sigh, You shall rise!
I'm not ranting against Apple. I just think that you're spending money that you absolutely don't have to spend. You drank the kool-aid and that's fine. With the $500 (or more) that you would save by NOT using a Mac Mini, you could quadruple your available hard drive space on the server. I just spent three months watching someone make really stupid decisions where server purchases are concerned (he wasn't spending enough in that case, and the money he *was* spending was spent on underpowered used hardware).
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
By configurable, I mean what you put in the box. You can use a laptop hard drive for booting (or even a Flash drive if you want to deal with the DMA issues). You can also increase available disk space, use whatever kinds of drives you want/have on hand, change out the CPU, and type/amount of memory. Try that with a Mac Mini. It's simply a poor choice for a server.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001In my experience the Max OSX server is worth the cost of the hardware when dealing with other macs. The things practically do all the work for you. Yes, a Linux guru is well able to do the same sort of stuff, but unless you are well versed in Linux you aren't going to have the server and clients up and running in the amount of time it will take for OSX. We had a network of 200+ machines running on a server in a day, fully configured with permissions set for different levels of users, groups set for labs so they could use specialized software other parts of the building couldn't and managed printing. That was me doing this sort of thing for the first time and not having any admin experience or any experience with OSX server. I was literally reading a manual and going through a check list of items needed. After knowing what I was doing I could probably set it all up in an hour. A lot of people fail to see that part of the price on Macs is the ability to run Windows, OSX and Linux if need be and that OSX is really designed to make the other two unnecessary. It is a lot more user friendly to me even now, and I am using Windows machines all the time.
