Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Enterprise, OS, Xserve, Mac mini, Mac OS X Server, Snow Leopard
Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard Server pricing is good for business
In this morning's rush to figure out what had changed at the Apple Store, one of our readers pointed out that Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard Server (US$499 for an unlimited license) was priced lower than Leopard Server (US$999 for unlimited users). While this is nothing new -- we've known about the price change since June -- it bears repeating. For businesses with small, single offices to large enterprises with racks full of Xserves, Snow Leopard Server makes a lot of sense. That $499 license provides a lot -- a mail server (not Exchange-compatible, however), CalDAV server for group calendars, group-wide Time Machine backups to a server, a podcast producer, a wiki server, an iChat server, and the new Mobile Access Server, in addition to a plethora of other administrative and client management options.
Along with the Xserve, which I've found to be comparably priced to other enterprise-class servers, and the Mac mini, which makes a great little inexpensive headless server for small offices, Apple has created a set of powerful business tools. Considering that it's now half the price of Leopard Server, Snow Leopard Server is something that more system admins may want to look at, especially in Microsoft-dominated shops.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
codylc said 1:58PM on 8-30-2009
I think you kind of point out the largest problem with Mac Server though:
"not Exchange-compatible, however"
And this isn't something that will change in the near future. Until Apple understands the importance of a synchronized mail option on a server, Snow Leopard doesn't have a whole lot of potential to be useful (at least in 99.9% of my customer's offices).
I think the closest Apple has even come to offering something similar is MobileMe. While it's a fantastic feature set on paper, Apple has still yet to execute the full potential of this product and truly support this product. Not sure if I'm the only one here who's had issues with getting MobileMe glitches resolved, but it's a long, painful, e-mail only process that can never succeed in a business environment.
But again, until Apple offers a true synced mail client, Snow Leopard has very little use for me.
Reply
JKAlphabet said 2:41PM on 8-30-2009
Doesn't IMAP (which SL server supports) get you synchronization (as well as now 'push')? With some of the issues I've seen recently between Exchange 2003 and 2007, it seems even Exchange isn't always compatible with Exchange.
MRCUR said 2:45PM on 8-30-2009
Completely agree. I'm pretty much the admin for our sole Apple server (running Leopard server right now) at school and we briefly had it running as a Blog/Wiki server (with AD auth), but that wasn't reliable. We looked at it for providing email (we we're moving from GroupWise), but the no-sync and pretty much no business features was an issue. We're now happily running Exchange 2007.
ds said 8:44AM on 8-31-2009
Kerio has been filling the gap nicely so far. Love to see Apple take them and install MailServer in place of postfix.
MRCUR said 2:47PM on 8-30-2009
But did Apple fix all the little annoying bugs? How about the inconsistency of AD auth working for the Wiki/Blog server? Or how about the fact the Wiki/Blog server imply didn't work in Advanced mode? Or how about the fact even in the dumbed down Workgroup mode the Web server still had to be stopped and started after ever reboot (and sometimes then it didn't even work)?
I would love to trust and enjoy using Apple's server product, but after using Leopard server they have zero trust from me. I'd much rather run a Windows or Linux server any day now. They just work.
Reply
itguy08 said 2:49PM on 8-30-2009
Who cares it's not Exchange compatible? Exchange is a POS on so many levels it's not funny. From the tie/lock to AD, the horrid "all your mail is a huge database", to the nightmare admin I fail to see why people think Exchange is good. It is not.
If you look at the tech specs for Snow Leopard server, it's got them all - push mail, calendars, iCal server. And iCal server is just calDAV so you need a client that supports that. Sadly the other POS from MS called Outlook doesn't support CalDAV (wonder why) but there are connectors available.
In short, Skip the POS Exchange and save your company lots of $$ by using Snow Leopard server. :)
Reply
MRCUR said 3:44PM on 8-30-2009
Well of course you need AD for Exchange. it's MS' email product running on their directory infrastructure. Just like you need OD for Apple's email solution in their server product. Your gripe goes both ways buddy...
TheLonePixel said 2:57PM on 8-30-2009
Why don't you save your clients a ton of money and utilize a hosted exchange solution provided directly from Microsoft? For $10/month per user your get the full communications suite without all of the hassle.
Reply
bart said 3:35PM on 8-30-2009
Or, open a Google Apps account for $40 per user/year, and you have all those features hosted 'in the cloud'. $10,-/month for just exchange seems like a rip-off.
ItGuy said 3:42PM on 8-30-2009
Cause it's still the same POS called Exchange. There's no reason to use Exchange - it's utter garbage.
You'd be better off with Google or roll your own from a webhosting company.
The only reason people use Exchange (and the majority DON'T) is because of the POS called Outlook. Never got that either - it's another horrible app from Redmond.
MRCUR said 3:43PM on 8-30-2009
I believe Google Apps Premier is $50/user/year. But I have to agree with the hosted Exchange. It's a beast to run and manage yourself.
TheLonePixel said 3:47PM on 8-30-2009
Just to clarify I hate exchange! However if you are going to use it, you might as well use the hosted version as you avoid having to maintain it. Also Google Apps is $50 per user per year.
Reply
Joanna D said 4:18PM on 8-30-2009
No business in their right mind is going to trust Time Machine with their backups.
Reply
pherplexed said 4:23PM on 8-30-2009
actually, we rely on it every day. it's been great...saved our butts on more than one occasion.
Rob said 6:23PM on 8-30-2009
I don't know why anyone would use a MS server or a Mac OS X Server.
Linux or FreeBSD servers are very robust and reliable. Most websites on the Internet are either using Linux or FreeBSD. Best of all the software licensing cost is $0.
Reply
Cy Starkman said 8:33PM on 8-30-2009
Thanks for the review of 10.6 server's price.
Yeah...
Now how about a review of 10.6 server.
The new AddressBook server for contact sync on a network (something which as yet on any platform excluding dedicated databases work well; exchange, sorry buds, that's just woeful and causes terrible fragmentation of company contacts and user confusion); improved mobile account management, inclusion of iPhone as a managed client for contact, mail and calendaring. Push from the mail server (and does it work well yet).
Some would like to actually know about this stuff, meaningful stuff...
And while you are reviewing the price?!?! how about some kind of comment at LEAST on the current lack of the 10 CAL version, so what exactly are small businesses running on a mac mini going to do now, upgrade to unlimited to service their 3 computers and 3 phones.
Reply
Steven Sande said 8:55PM on 8-30-2009
Cy -
A review of OS X Server Snow Leopard will come as soon as I get my NFR copy from the Apple Consultants Network program. As much as I would have loved to have gone out and spent $499 out of my own pocket to make our readers happy, I don't make enough blogging for TUAW nor do I get reimbursed for purchases like that.
The point of the review, which might not have been apparent, was that the server version of Snow Leopard is an amazing bargain.
Steve
Cy Starkman said 11:18PM on 8-30-2009
Thanks Steve,
looking forward to it, suprised they have been slack in getting a review copy to you.
I do get the point of the article, right up until it becomes bad value for a 10cal upgrader. My clients aren't big enough for unlimited licenses.
scott said 9:31PM on 8-30-2009
Oh here we go again... Microsoft sucks... Mac OS X sucks.. Blackberrys are the best.. NO Iphones are the best....You suck.. no YOU SUCK! Why can't we just come to the conclusion not every product is good for everyone? Mac OS Server works beautifully for my 19 member company - and we have all the same requirements of big companies. And guess what? It cost me $499 a machine and we can expand all we want. We were a M$ shop but the money it cost to maintain windows servers and exhange CALs was prohibitive. We couldn't afford it anymore. Mac OS X Server was a godsend for us. Will it be for you? Maybe - maybe not. Accept the fact it works for a lot of us and if it doesn't for you? Oh well. Now let's get down to the facts and give us a review of how this product works in the field.
Reply
from.com.apple.Boot.plist.com said 9:34PM on 8-30-2009
Steve,
For 10-client Leopard Server customers, the new pricing is a disaster:
There is no 10-client upgrade--you have to pay full price.
If I needed >10 clients, I'd have bought an unlimited license in the first place. Unlimited clients have ZERO value for me.
So why exactly does Apple think it's OK to hose me with a $500 "upgrade" for my $500 Leopard Server 10-client license?
Adam
Reply