Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and without sneering teach the rest to sneer - Pope
|
|
|
Apple Mac Mini Server
Product Apple Mac Mini Server
Website http://www.apple.com/macmini/
Specifications Machined aluminium 'unibody' casing with integrated power supply, 2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM user upgradeable to 8GB, two 2.5-inch 500GB 7,200rpm Hitachi SATA hard disks, Nvidia GeForce 320M video controller, mini display port and HDMI connector with HDMI-to-DVI adapter, one Gigabit Ethernet port, integrated 802.11n Airport Extreme wireless adapter, four USB 2.0 ports, FireWire 800 port, SD card slot, integrated speaker, combined optical digital audio input/output, pre-installed Apple Mac OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard Server
Price £929
THE FIRST PRODUCT that springs to mind when it comes to network servers might not be Apple's Mac Mini. However, a server implementation of the popular Mac desktop is available, and it's not just for Apple aficionados.
The Mac Mini Server with the Mac OS 10.6 Snow Leopard OS has support for Windows as well as Mac clients, plus built-in web-based applications that anyone can use to collaborate and share information.
First impressions are that the Mac Mini can't possibly be a server. Smaller than most notebooks, it's almost identical to the latest Mac Mini desktop launched in June. That's because the same sleek 'unibody' casing is used to house both, machined out of a single block of aluminium and now with an integrated power supply rather than bulky AC 'brick'.
One obvious difference, however, is the lack of a DVD slot. Apple has ditched the optical drive to enable a second hard disk to be fitted inside.
There are other differences on the inside too, starting with the Intel Core 2 Duo processor which gets tweaked from 2.4GHz to 2.66GHz. Similarly, instead of just 2GB of memory, the server comes with 4GB, while both Minis can now be upgraded to 8GB in total using standard SODIMM modules.
Moreover, a new circular hatch in the bottom of the unit makes this relatively easy, and there's no need to prise the casing open with a knife as on the previous model.
The disks are also accessible through this hatch, and Apple has opted for 2.5-inch drives to fit the format. But don't get too excited, as notebook quality SATA disks are used here, rather than real server grade SAS drives, to keep the price down.
On the plus side, you do get two, with a capacity of 500GB each compared to a single 320GB disk on the desktop model. Spin speed is also upped from 5,400rpm to 7,200rpm.
The end result is a storage capacity of 1TB. Not a huge amount, but enough for a lot of small business networks. More than that, nearly all the space can be used for file sharing and email inboxes as well as to support the built-in web server and other applications.
Additional external storage can be added, the only disappointment being the lack of an eSata interface. Instead you have to use USB which is slower, or FireWire which isn't always implemented by drive vendors.
We cabled our Mac Mini server to the LAN using Gigabit Ethernet but, with only one port provided, a USB adapter is needed to enable the Mac to be used as an Internet gateway.
We tried Apple's own which sells for just under £20 and it just worked with no need for any setup. It is only 10/100Mbit/s, but that's not really an issue for Internet connectivity. An 802.11n AirPort Extreme adapter is built in, which can also be used for Internet access and local client connectivity.
Although delivered with OS X pre-installed, you do have to run through a few setup steps before clients can connect to the Mac Mini Server. There are a couple of options here. One is remote setup using tools provided on a CD-ROM, the other is to connect a screen, keyboard and mouse and set up the mini directly. It's the same procedure either way, local setup proving marginally easier in our case as the remote tools can only be run on a Mac.
Setup took less than 10 minutes. There's a mini video port to attach a Mac monitor and an HDMI port for use with TVs and monitors that support it, plus an HDMI-to-DVI adapter which we used to connect a standard PC display.
Likewise, we simply plugged in an ordinary USB keyboard and mouse to configure our server, after which they were all unplugged and VNC was running on a Windows PC used to remotely manage the Mac Mini Server over the LAN.
Setup and subsequent management tasks are well within the scope of a confident Mac or PC user, and the install process is kicked off by a simple Server Assistant tool that starts automatically on power up.
This does little more than ask what options you want to use, with a graphical Server Preferences tool to add users, define groups, configure printers and so on. This covers most of the day-to-day management bases, and there's a separate Server Admin tool for more advanced tasks.
In terms of features the core 64-bit Snow Leopard software comes ready to share files using Apple Mac and Windows protocols, and shared folders are created automatically when new users are added or groups created.
An SMTP email server with push notification and server-side rules processing is also built in which can be used with standard email clients or from a browser. However, we found the web client, based on Squirrelmail, very disappointing. It has a very old-fashioned and cumbersome interface that's miles behind the swish front ends of the other applications.
CardDAV address book and iCAL calendaring servers are among those other applications, plus a web server complete with integrated wiki/blogging applications. All come ready for immediate use, and we found them all very user friendly with lots of customisation options and a nice portal front end for user access.
A tool to help create podcasts is another option, as is VPN remote access, a chat server and support for Apple Time Machine backups. Of course, just about everything on the server is designed to work best with Mac clients, and services such as file, address book and calendar sharing were automatically configured the first time we connected. However, most can be made to work with Windows and, when using a browser, the platform doesn't really matter.
We liked the Mac mini a lot. It's not only small and easy to locate, but very quiet, efficient and cool running even with the new integrated power supply. At first glance it seems a little pricey, but the most obvious competition has to be Microsoft's Small Business Server, which can work out a lot more expensive.
To get some idea of how the Mac Mini compares on pricing we priced up a Dell PowerEdge T110 which, although not an exact match, came pretty close with a single Core i3 processor, 4GB RAM and two 500GB hard disks. List price was around £840, less than the Mac, but that was without software.
Adding Windows Small Business Server with just five user licences shot the price to over £1,600. Additional users would push it even higher, whereas the Apple server comes with an unlimited user licence which means the price you see is what you pay, regardless of client numbers.
Pricewise, then, the Mac Mini Server has a lot going for it compared to a server running Microsoft Windows, plus it's a complete solution with a good bundle of useful features and functionality built in as standard. It's also very easy to get up and running, although not entirely perfect.
Try to move beyond the core features and applications, for example, and management can get a lot more complex. Moreover, when things go wrong, as they did a couple of times during our tests, troubleshooting and fixing problems can be hard work, and very technical.
That said, the Mac Mini Server with Snow Leopard is a good product and definitely worth considering alongside other, more conventional, server platforms. Its main appeal will be to small businesses, predominantly those with Mac desktops, but Windows shops shouldn't dismiss it and could well find that it's all they really need.
In Short
Likely to appeal most to Apple shops, the Mac Mini Server with Snow Leopard is a complete server solution that meets most small business needs. It can also be used with Windows and, with no client access licences needed, beats Windows Small Business Server alternatives in terms of cost. A good looker, the Mac Mini Server is easy to deploy. However, expansion is limited and the ease of use claims don't always pan out, especially when things go wrong, when technical skills are quite definitely needed. µ
The Good
Small, efficient and quiet, unlimited user licence, user upgradeable RAM, cross-platform file sharing, bundled email, address book, calendaring and web servers, wiki and blogging tools.
The Bad
Limited expansion options, no eSATA interface for external storage, old-fashioned webmail client.
The Ugly
Nothing.
Bartender's Score
8/10
Share this:
Share
Anyone who dreams of running the Swiss Cheese that is MAC OSX for any serious business purpose needs their head examined.
It is UNIX based, and therefore just like Linux, is utterly insecure.
http://secunia.com/advisories/product/96/?task=statistics
OSX has nearly 4 times as many known vulnerabilities (1400+) as Windows XP (400), and 18 times as many as Windows 7 (80), and is even worse than hacker favourites Suse Linux 11 (925), or Redhat Enterprise 5 (1340)
Fair comment on the intended audience. I myself am familiar with many operating systems, but choose not to get involved with some (e.g. Linux), because there is the inherent expectation that you will Google a problem to death before doing the common-sense thing and just asking someone who might know. I tinker for a living - that does not mean I want to do it 24/7.
The Mac mini looks simple and cuddly at first sight, but the point of what I was saying is this: If you think you do not have to tinker with it, think again. OS X also does strange things - I set up my Mac mini again today, with a new domain name - and it worked fine for the first 2-3 times I logged in and used the server configuration panel. Didn't change anything drastic - just a couple of logging levels. Downloaded the latest updates, and then bang ... it wouldn't let me access any of the server configuration options again. No obvious reason why. No explanation. Just the Mac equivalent of "File not found." I found myself reinstalling the system - again.
There is value in this machine if you are looking for certain things (chiefly small footprint and power consumption), but that does not mean you should not know what you're doing. Administering this box isn't very straightforward - you have options scattered over three different programs (system preferences, server preferences, server admin) - and compared - even to Windows - it's a bit like going back 10 years in time to when I last used a Commodore Amiga.
Some may vaunt the Mac mini for costing a grand and coming with a server OS with unlimited clients, but the slightly more cynical (such as me, for example) might point to the fact that Apple had limited licences for Snow Leopard Server in the past, and found that people were simply not buying it. Windows may cost about £500 more on top, but I am fairly willing to bet that a fair proportion of non-experts will get fed up with the vagaries of OS X, and just reformat the thing with Windows Server.
Great comments by squeeze above.
This is what you nerds fail to understand: Not everybody is like us. Some people don't want to tinker as much as we do. The sooner we realise that, the better.
Comments on articles like this never cease to amaze me.
Before commenting, perhaps you could consider that *gasp* you are not the intended audience for this product! Maybe Apple aren't pitching this at people who know the difference between Solaris and Linux and can build a box at "half the price".
Also maybe there different people have *gasp* different attributes that they look for in a product! Perhaps some people aren't interested in the most performance for the buck! Maybe they are interested in a box they can go down to their local store, plug in, spend 15 minutes configuring and then chuck it in a cupboard and never have to think about again.
Just because you can't see the point in a product, doesn't mean no one else will and that it wont sell.
Oliver: Good review, thanks.
Comments on articles like this never cease to amaze me.
Before commenting, perhaps you could consider that *gasp* you are not the intended audience for this product! Maybe Apple aren't pitching this at people who know the difference between Solaris and Linux and can't build a box at "half the price".
Also maybe there different people have *gasp* different attributes that they look for in a product! Perhaps some people aren't interested in the most performance for the buck! Maybe they are interested in a box they can go down to their local store, plug in, spend 15 minutes configuring and then chuck it in a cupboard and never have to think about again.
Just because you can't see the point in a product, doesn't mean no one else will and that it wont sell.
Oliver: Good review, thanks.
Yet another thing: There is no way to disable the mouse acceleration on OS X, unless you write some code to call a couple of kernel calls. Or buy third-party software to "correct" this flaw.
That is unbelievably prehistoric!
How can a system so vaunted for its end user "experience" be lacking in such basic configuration options? It's fairly obvious to me now why the Mac gaming scene isn't what it could be.
You can always trust a Mactard to leap to the indefensible. Yeah, Steve, that's what Google told me, too, when I originally looked. That does not change the network hostname, though. The old name still remains in the system keychain; it also still remains on the console (if you open up a terminal, you are still greeted by the old hostname.) So yes, this point hat DID find the right option - according to the docs - but it just Didn't Work. (TM)
Which part of "it just works" does this subcategory come under? I suggest you try it for yourself - set up your system with a hostname of "speedport.ip" (this is what I did by mistake initially, because the bloody installer insisted on using 1080i and a TINY font, and wouldn't allow me to use a smaller resolution or bigger font that actually allowed me to read the text on the screen - but that is a separate gripe. I eventually gave up on configuring it through HDMI and bought a DisplayPort- VGA adapter.)
I'm not the only one to run into this problem, either. According to a poster named HollenEstelrim on one blog I read, apparently Snow Leopard from version 10.6.2 upwards has issues changing the network name, and the recommended workaround is a reinstall (!) or manually editing your .plist preferences. So I stand by my original point - the system doesn't bloody work as advertised. That blog, for the curious and slightly skeptical (found Googling for "mac change network name" - top result), is here:
http://www.askdavetaylor.com/how_to_change_imac_mac_name_on_network.html
I wonder if they have discussions like this over on the Top Gear forums? If they did I think it would go something like this:
I don't know why anyone would buy a Ford Mondeo when I can build a Caterham for half the price that would go waaay faster. And I could change the engine if I wanted to.
I suspect they do not.
What, you're a Solaris pointy hat and you can't figure out System Preferences- Sharing- Computer Name On Local Network- Edit to change the network host name? (it's on the line below Computer Name).
Perhaps if you spent a little time learning what it can do ...
Apple-hater that I am, I bought a Mac mini (server version) - it was just a lesser rip-off than picking a Mac mini with just one hard drive and half the memory for, to be frank, not much less.
Principal reason I bought a Mac is for iPhone development - no other reason - Xcode and the Apple development tools are not available on anything other than the Mac platform, so you have to have one to hack around on the iPhone. I will also use the thing to host games on a Windows VM, as the power requirements are not so high. I would have done this on my PC long ago, but my PC is not built for low power consumption; the Mac mini is. I regard this as a bonus; it's also one of the reasons I opted for the mini, and not an iMac (the other reason was I simply did not have space for another screen.)
The famed Apple user-friendly interface is, I'm afraid, just hype. It's okay if you want to change simple stuff like your screen background - but if you are after something more meaningful, like changing your machine's network hostname (I do NOT mean your "computer name"), for example, you have to resort to command line trickery (which half works - there are still remnants of the old name buried in the system, such as the keychain) - or a complete OS reinstall (better). As a Solaris sysadmin, I find this totally ridiculous. Changing the hostname should be straightforward on a server OS! I'm used to being able to do this sort of thing without even needing a reboot, so Snow Leopard Server falls down badly in this department.
On the other hand, there IS nifty boot support built-in: Do not waste money on a USB DVD drive - you can boot this puppy (and install) completely from a local network machine. Just hold down the Ctrl key for a few seconds, when you power on. Do yourself a favour and spool the install DVD into an image, and then mount the image as a virtual DVD before running the Apple tool on Windows - it takes AGES to install using a physical drive, because it seeks like hell. If run from a hard disc-mounted ISO image, it's almost like JumpStarting a Solaris box. :) The Apple boot screen will even tell you the volume name of the disc you are booting from, and the hostname of the machine it's hosted on - nifty - this is no PXE boot kludge; it's a proper boot environment, a bit like Sun's OBP.
If you are REALLY interested in a server, the chances are you're going to stick with Linux, UNIX or Windows. Snow Leopard Server is not that much easier than Linux, and you can quickly run into hassles that simply don't exist on more mature operating systems, like UNIX or Windows. For me, the purchase made sense, because I intend to use OS X for development purposes - your mileage may vary.
I would recommend this server ONLY if you actually NEED Snow Leopard Server, or if the power consumption of this device is actually compelling enough for you to consider dropping 1K on this box. (In my case, it was both.) As a server, this machine is mediocre at best (and with shared video memory eating bandwidth, it won't be terribly fast in comparison to a cheap Linux box, either.) Aside from memory (and, at a big stretch, hard discs), this system is not upgradeable - even the CPU is glued in place. So don't get any fancy ideas about upgrading to, say, a 2.8GHz Core2Duo (not even the 28W one.) You'll never get the old CPU out.
So there you have it - an unbiased opinion from an Apple owner, who also happens to own several PCs running Linux and Solaris (x86 *and* SPARC.)
Have you tried reading the post I was responding to? Since the comment in question read "Almost any regular mini-itx motherboard has at least 2 ethernet ports" then the point was directly relevant. If joe had said "almost all server class motherboards" then he might have had a point, but then their cost is a different order of magnitude to a cheap MATX/ITX.
Believe me when I say I've researched the costs of building a proper, server grade machine for SMB use. Nehalem Xeon CPUs, Intel S5500 series motherboards, hardware SATA RAID controllers, triple channel DDR3 RAM etc all add up. If you want to make a cheap (sub £1500 including software) small server then you've no option but to use consumer grade parts.
Most of the dedicated NAS boxes out there (from the likes of QNAP, Thecus etc.) are based on Celeron M or Atom CPUs, with the occasional foray into Core solo territory. They don't do much more than NAS and media sharing and yet they can exceed the cost of the Mini server. SMB servers from the likes of DELL and HP use consumer grade parts. Why get all self-righteous if Apple do the same?
Yeah, right. Now thanks to Apple everybody can have a small business server. After a while someone will make a report stating that 90% of small business' servers are insecure, badly maintained, etc. Let's face it: IT skills are necessary!
I mean, come on. I've seen small firms making file sharing in windows/mac nets by designating one usual machine and clicking "sharing..." on some dir. Same with printers. That's when usual IT skills end. To go further one has to be IT educated (one way or another). If you want full blown server with email and stuff you need an IT guy anyway to make it work longer than a month. So go Linux with same hardware half the price, screw M$ licences and Steve's design tax.
Are you seriously serious?
A quick survey of *server motherboards* reveals the overwhelming majority of them have dual LAN for the simple reason that this configuration is exceptionally useful on modern networks, particularly if you use separate private/public subnets or bridging. How can you not appreciate this?
Almost all Supermicro boards, all Tyan boards, Intel server boards - in fact, closer inspection reveals ALL current Supermicro boards - have dual Ethernet controllers.
Form factor is a complete and total irrelevance, unless you're the sort of mad consumerist won over by Apple's cutesy-wutesy looks, and in which case you shouldn't be in charge of the servers for a network.
Consider your knowledge on what constitutes a "server" exposed, and in addition, anyone arriving at the conclusion that they are in need of a server (and not only that, one that - quote - "will idle near silently on only 11 Watts of power and max out at 85 Watts...at the same time it's got to include file, email, web, calendar, VPN, address, authentication...calendar and IM servers, with unlimited client licenses for each") is going to be knowledgeable and competent enough to buy something less restrictive.
Apple loons. They're just not sane.
You seem to have forgotten about that. Window 2008 SBS with 5 CALs sets you back about £900. OK, you say, what about Linux? SUSE Linux server for example, with standard user support is going to set you back £550 for a single year.
YOU might have the skills to install and support a Linux server build yourself, but then the average small business doesn't want to employ an IT specialist to set up and maintain their server for them. It's almost certainly going to seriously exceed any possible saving on the cost of hardware.
BTW, the standard hardware can handle RAID 1 without any problems (it does contain 2 of 500GB drives) and, as previously mentioned, you can easily obtain RAID devices that work via USB or firewire. Also, given that the max power draw under full load is only 85W do you HONESTLY think that cooling is a problem? A cheap system built out of desktop parts will idle at about 100W and peak at between 200-250W, now THAT can be a problem.
As with many aPple products, a lot of shiny-shiny and not much actual usefulness. I could build a similarly specced machine which would use proper hard disks in RAID for half the price, not to mention supporting more disks, being better cooled and far more adaptable. aPple should stick to selling toys - they're no good at tools.
Your grasp of PC hardware isn't what you think it is. For example a quick survey of my favourite hardware site shows only 1 on 9 mini ITX boards with twin ethernet ports. They're not that common, and it's not that important for a small business (you think they all have multiple gigabit switches and an air conditioned server rack?)
As for external firewire drives not being reliable, I guess you've never seen one of these http://www.drobo.com/products/drobo-s.php, or it's bigger brother http://www.drobo.com/products/drobopro/index.php and don't forget that you can chain firewire devices if you need more than 12.5TB of RAID storage.
Obviously it's completely trivial for you to put together a compact Core 2 Duo system that will idle near silently on only 11 Watts of power and max out at 85 Watts. At the same time it's got to include file, email, web, calendar, VPN, address, authentication (kerberos), calendar and IM servers, with unlimited client licenses for each.
If you can work out how to do that, set it up so that users with only moderate IT skills can take it out of a box and have it up and configured in less than 15 minutes, provide user support and STILL make a profit from a significantly lower RRP than the Mini server then you're in the wrong job.
Is this some kind of joke? This thing they're trying to call a server?
2.5" hard drives and a single ethernet port, what market is this intended for? Almost any regular mini-itx motherboard has at least 2 ethernet ports. Having no room for hard drive expansion you'd be limiting yourself to USB/firewire external drives and shooting your reliability right in the foot.
Try FreeNAS with nearly any old box you have on hand; put a few hundred into multiple HDs, including some USB attached so removable to secure off-premises site.
Of course that assumes one could live without the cute shiny package, so it's not directed at Apple users.
All this text and everything falls flat because of two low grade HDD-s, without RAID support.
So this is not a server, nor would anybody smart consider it like so. That begs the question who would buy it and for what?!
-=*You make server laugh*=-