When I saw the first tweets about Apple break off the Xserve in 2011 , I had two initial reactions :
Apple also publish aPDF talking up the “ new ” host solution , namely a Mac Pro running Mac OS X Server or the fellowship ’s Mac miniskirt with Snow Leopard Server product . The latter is a solid server , but the thought that you could interchange an Xserve with one is somewhat silly . You do n’t buy a Mac mini to do an Xserve ’s job . You do n’t even bribe four . You bribe an Xserve because you need a box with power that can decently jibe into a server room and that ’s designed to be a server . I ’m not going to say the Mac mini is not a up to server , but it ’s a different class of animate being .
The Mac Pro’s no server
This is not a waiter . The Mac Pro , while a knock-down machine that is sure as shooting able-bodied to act as a server , is but not designed to be a host . For starters , the fount design does n’t work well in a proper host surround . The supported setup for a Mac Pro is vertical . That ’s 12U of wrack space for a single host . If you want , you’re able to get two Mac Pros in that . In the same 12U of space , I can fit 2 maraud and 4 Xserves . Even if you put a Mac Pro on its side , that ’s still one Mac Pro in the same distance you’re able to put four or five Xserves . What ’s more , the Xserves are firmly attached to the wrack . There ’s no built - in means to firmly impound a Mac Pro to anything . So you have to set up some kind of strap system . Before you laugh too much , keep in mind that the tech epicenter of this state is in an active earthquake zone .
In addition , unlike the Xserve , there ’s no way to hot - swap anything with a Mac Pro — not drives , not ability supplies . To get at anything , you have to reach the case up . To get to the case in a rack contour , you have to completely dispatch the Mac Pro from the Rack .
On a smaller scale , the current Mac Pro design has no hold back time for the power electric cord . So , if there ’s a moment of negligence or you trip behind the rack , you might just traumatically shut down your host .
This is not a server.
The Mac Pro ’s components simply are n’t designed for server tariff . There ’s a single , massive power supply . If that croak spoilt , you have a brick . Want to get that power supplying out of the Mac Pro ? You ’re not doing that quickly or easily , because it ’s not design to be quick replaced . It ’s not presuppose to be customer - replaceable at all .
Here are footstep to take away and replace anXservepower supply . ( And notice that if you have two , you may do this without shutting the automobile down . )
That ’s it . You ’ve take and replaced the power supply on a functional server . If you had two , there was zero downtime . This was all done in the wrack by the style . No pauperism to move it anywhere .
Now THIS is a server.
Now , on theMac Pro :
That ’s what … 14 to 20 or more stairs just to slay the might supply , and if you do n’t have another server quick to go , you ’re completely down . Apple advocate close down the Mac Pro and waiting ten moment before you even originate to give the thing up . And it ’s the same way no matter what you postulate to swap out — more whole tone , more transmission line , nothing ’s designed to be spicy - swappable , and you have only one power supply . To get the same level of computer hardware redundance you had in a single Xserve , you have to buy two Mac Pros , and have them both configured either identically , or in a way they can easily take over for each other . That ’s almost a $ 2999 redundancy fee . And even then , by the fourth dimension you do swap a world power supply , you could have taken an Xserve from box to most of the way through almost any configuration you ’d employ it in .
Now THIS is a host . There ’s no LOM , or Lights Out Management , potentiality . Now , to be fair , it ’s not like Apple ever put more than the bare lower limit into the Xserve ’s LOM port , but it was there , and it was quite utile . Apple ’s root ?
Mac Pro does not tolerate the lights - out management ( LOM ) features that Xserve offers . Built - in power direction features and third - party index controller can provide an option to a subset of LOM functionality .
What ’s the specific subset ? Apple does n’t really tell you . What third - company power controllers ? No links . essentially , you ’d well get well-fixed with SNMP , ( Simple internet Management Protocol ) , because that ’s all you ’re going to have . Which is great , but perhaps Apple could beef up the SNMP data on the ironware , so we can have the same level of item . ( The party might , but again , we do n’t have intercourse . That ’s a heavy effect , which I ’ll get to in a second . )
The Mac Pro is a great box , but it is not design to be a host . That matters . The Mac Pro , in trying to touch the Xserve takes up 12 sentence the space , use more power , and stop up costing you twice as much if you do n’t desire a undivided constituent able to turn your server apparatus into a brick . If you ’re collocating your servers , the cost to colo a Mac Pro or two is going to be a lot in high spirits than for an Xserve , because you ’re going to pay more for power and a portion more for the wheel space .
Talk to me, Apple
But that ’s not the biggest problem I and other IT people have with this decision . Rather , it ’s Apple ’s double-dyed loser to really communicate this decision
What Apple has done is n’t communication — it ’s notice of a done decision , and it ’s a jolly weak one . For example , why was this decision made ? We do n’t know . If I had to guess , I ’d say it was probably washy sales . In price of hardware , the Xserve , while skillful , was slightly overpriced for what it did , and to be crude , Apple ’s endeavour to commercialize and improve the hardware were effectively non - existent . I ’m not surprised if the server did n’t sell well — it ’s not like Apple tried particularly hard to sell it . Considering the burden this conclusion will have on M of client worldwide , I think more selective information than “ we ’re moving away from the Xserve ” is warrant .
The attempt to agitate the Mac Pro as a replacement are , to any experient IT person , almost silly . The Mac Pro is not a waiter , it ’s a wolf of a tower play as one . Just likeMariska Hargitay is n’t in reality a NYC constabulary officer , the Mac Pro is n’t actually project to be a waiter . It can do the problem , but it ’s just not designed to do the occupation as well as it should be . Being fairish to Apple , some of the hardware issues could be fairly well remedied , because some of them are somewhat trivial . But the other issues would take a fairly radical variety to the Mac Pro ironware , and if Apple was willing to do that , it would have kept the Xserve .
However , this is Greco-Roman Apple to the IT community . The IT / Business customer is expected to place an almost unreasoning trust in Apple , and Apple in return does little out of doors of ship you merchandise . If you compensate many , many G of dollar , you get admittance to some really solid support folk . Even then , you ’re just getting comely IT documentation and support . If you want right proficient software documentation , you go to the developer surgical incision , and hope your hunt - fu is solid . If there ’s a certificate subject in the OS , you wo n’t know anything about a fix until it ’s expel , even if it involves a critical hole . Apple informs , Apple securities industry , Apple monologues , but Apple rarely , almost never , communicates .
What the future holds
The IT community is , rightfully , care about the orotund logical implication of the discontinued Xserve . Without dedicated server hardware , what is Apple ’s committal to Mac OS ecstasy Server ? Keep in mind , you still ca n’t fully deal iOS equipment with Apple software . That require third - party software , and in some case , Windows Server . Apple is push its iOS devices into the endeavour , and provide no actual aid with do them on a large scale ; it ’s not even offering counseling on how to go about managing those twist , outside of a few shadowy tech distinction . If Apple is n’t even fully capable to support its hottest - trade devices , is it any wonder that the IT residential area wonders about Apple ’s consignment to anything else ?
Sadly , Friday ’s announcement about the Xserve ’s future may have been the well - communicated conclusion of this nature Apple ’s ever made . But the company needs to do a wad more communicating if it does n’t desire to be seen as unreliable and a hazardous mate by the business go-ahead segment .
As for myself , I ’m not go to get sore and go set up Windows and Linux . I ’ve only got a few Xserves anyway;they’re all Intel , and they ’ll all last me for a few years . But when I get quick to replace them , it ’s not going to be with a Mac Pro . I do n’t have an superfluous rack for the 36U of blank it will take to interchange my Xserves with Mac Pros , and I do n’t see how the miniskirt will suffice . So , when it come meter to replace that hardware and those O licenses , I hope Apple has a more appropriate answer for me than it does now , and I desire Apple choses to severalize me , and my IT compatriots about those options before we ’ve reached the point of no recurrence .
[ John Welch is IT Director for The Zimmerman Agency , and a farseeing - time Mac IT initiate . He writes theAsk the Mac IT Guycolumn for Macworld . ]
