Apple's Xserve hits end of life, order yours before Jan, 31

A lot of people are overreacting about this. I doubt Apple would choose to discontinue their main server product if they hadn't found a way to achieve server-like performance on a wider scale without needing a server. There are two serious issues with current server technology: 1) Ability to pool a DDoS attack on a single machine (or a few machines). 2) Server security (or even desktop security) can never be maximized without resorting to a cryptoprocessor. I think it would be great if Apple came up with a way for each desktop user to use a certain percentage of their CPU, memory and hard disk for distributed server tasks. I think Apple may have already come up with a secure way to do this and they are choosing this direction because the other direction has its exploitable flaws as well as slim profit margins.

Apple’s decision to discontinue the Xserve is probably the worst decision Apple made in along time, and it will come back to bite them – hard I hope.

If Apple thinks that the Mac Mini Server can be compared to the Xserve, then they don’t have a clue what the Xserve means to the IT world. First, the Mac Mini doesn’t even come close to the processing power of the Xserve. Not to mention, the RAM in the Mac Mini maxes out at 8 GB whereas the Xserve is 96 GB with 10.6 installed. Then there is the hard drive configuration. Albeit you can mirror two hard drives, that is not the same as RAID 5; you will have to go to some external storage device after you max the internal hard drive out at 500 GB. If you append an external storage device, then you can only concatenate it to the Mini via USB or Firewire; both are considered bad practices for corporate use. There are many other technical disadvantages for the Mac Mini Server when compared to the Xserve when it is used in a corporate environment; however, when it comes to servers of any kind, you don’t want it to shout out “I’m a single point of failure.” The Mac Mini Server says that loud and clear in every aspect of its makeup.

Apple is also saying that the Mac Pro is an alternative to the Xserve. I really do like the Mac Pro. It is a well built and rock-solid computer with many upgradeable components. With more internal drive bays than the Xserve, and you can also add a solid-state drive to it, the Mac Pro has a better internal storage option and a higher storage capacity than the Xserve. Processors in both computers are tit for tat as well. So why not the Mac Pro as an alternative to the Xserve? It is not practical when it comes to mounting it in a rack. With a rack mount kit, you can lay the Mac Pro horizontally and that will use about seven units of rack space. If you left it standing vertically in the rack, you will use about 12U of rack space. Therefore, I hope you have lots of racks because if you have as many servers as I do along with other devices such as a 4U tape library, Xserve RAID (which was another good product Apple did away with), and APC battery backups, you will run out of space fast. The Mac Pro does not have lights out management capabilities. In its current form factor, the Mac Pro can only have one power supply. The absence of LOM and dual power supplies make the Mac Pro inferior to the Xserve. Again, as good as the Mac Pro is, it is not a good corporate solution as an alternative to the Xserve. It does not fit in the server room.

I conclude this by saying to Apple, if you are going to do away with the Xserve than you might as well slap all who supported the Mac in businesses, schools, colleges, and government in the face. Not only are you slapping us in the face, but you are putting a lot of doubt in our minds about Apple’s long term plans for Mac OS X Server software. Give me a good reason why I should continue down Apple’s server road when you are continually discontinuing what I will call your enterprise product line? Right now I can’t trust Apple on whether they will someday discontinue server software or some other product I rely on in business. I really feel as if Apple just called me STUPID for buying their product.

So what on earth is Apple putting in that great big data center they've built in North Carolina?

Don't tell me they are going to populate it with someone else's hardware running Linux or Windows?

Surely they are not going to put in a bunch of Mac Pros in tower configuration?

I would have thought they could use their brand spanking new facility as a test case to work out how to revolutionise the IT server room the same way they have the rest of the industry. On the back of corporate successes like the iPhone and iPad it is time for Apple to break back into the business side of IT - not shy away from it.

I feel a disturbance in the force. Hhhm .. how can I explain to my boss, that unfortunately, I'll need to shut down our 100TB XSAN with 10 frontend servers due to Apples -splendid, I may say- marketing decision to discontinue the XServe.
Let's do some rack math:
- 12 HU equals 12 XServe equals 48 cores, 576G Ram and 36 TB internal HDD
- 12 HU in MacPro means ... 24 cores ... 128G Ram and 16TB HDD
The discontinuation of the XServe Raids in favor of the Promise Raids was unfortunate with respect to health status checking and supervision (Raid Admin vs. stupid Java applet), but without XServes, noone will want to build a data centre. XSAN is the next logical deathrow candidate.
Thank you, well done.

This is a very very sad announcement :(

Combined with Apple's recent announcement that it will deprecate Java in the next OS, it sure sounds like Apple is getting out of the server business.

Well this really, really sucks.

Mac Pro's are great machines, but where are the redundant power supplies, SAS drive support, LOM support, rack mount solutions that don't take up an absurd amount of rack space, etc.

Sigh. We just ordered 4 new Xserves and 2 promise chassis' for an Xsan solution and this feels like a kick in the face. I'm starting to regret going with MacOS X server for this DAM deployment.

Post your comments here if you feel strongly about it.
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=12535918&#12535918

Well I have to say I will NOT be happy to see these go. I run 4 of these at my job. They are awesome servers. They are NOT expensive as some have claimed when compared to similar solutions from HP and Dell (which we also run).

The unfortunate thing is the kick in the butt to XSAN and Final Cut Server Users! It also may spell the end for Apple's OS X getting serious use in any data center since it does not run on any other hardware. Maybe it is time for Apple to consider allowing OS X Server to run on generic hardware, but I doubt it. Or reconsider allowing better use of VMWare at least.

We choose these instead of Windows Server or Linux whenever we could as there is far less care and feeding required than Windows Server and it is easier to use than Red Hat Linux. The Xserves were wicked fast and robust servers. We had no trouble with them and have run these for years. Now we may be forced to go Red Hat a lot more often. Clearly shows Apple does not care about the Enterprise.

I am not sure this is a very wise decision on Apple's part, but maybe they have a surprise for us.