Apple's Servers

B

BBenve

Apple seeder
Does Anyone have a lit of the customers that currentlym use Apple's Servers??? It appears that Apple itself uses only 8 % of its Server...a total of 50 server are used at Apple....and only 85 of them are Apple Branded....the majority are Suns......why so?

And who uses Appe's Servers?
 
Probalby because Apple does not provide a server on the scale of most Sun servers. Apple doesn't have enterprise servers like Sun does.
 
Apple and Sun have a pretty good relationship.

Before Mac OS X 10.0 Server, apple.com was hosted on a sun server.

I'm sure Apple has future plans to switch to more Mac OS X servers, but for now it's probably more efficient and cost effective to stay with what they have.
 
The last time Apple made servers of that scale (relative to the rest of the market) was with the 500 and 700 series servers. These ran on IBM's server version of the operating system AIX.

One of the reasons that Web Objects is designed to be deployed on Sun systems is because they make the best high end web servers. If someone else makes a great product in a market that Apple doesn't compete in, I don't see a problem with them using it. On the other hand, in the mid range server market, Mac OS X Server has a large price and use ability advantage over Sun's products.
 
I am not mad to them cause they use Sun.. , but


Cost effective??? THEY MAKE THE COMPUER::::WHY GETTIGN THEM FROM SOMEONE ELSE....to me is MORE cost effective to use what I produce..

OS X Server pricey??? they make it..it's free to them.



Again i am NOT mad... i am just curioiuus... since i am running a Server on Mac OS on a G4 ..and i am curious to see their reason not to...


if i believe in them why shouldn 't them believe in themselves?
 
Blah blah blah blah...

Ohh, sorry. I'm a bad poster. :D

Anyway, I think RacerX meant that Apple currently has Sun hardware. So it is more cost effective to keep the current hardware rather than switch to Apple hardware. It doesn't cost anything for Apple to make a copy of their software, but hardware will be an expense. Not as much of an expense as an outside company, of course, but it's still an expense. Another expense would be the labor required to switch everything over. So it's easier for Apple to keep using Suns as servers for the time being.

Please correct me if I misinterpreted, RacerX (or anyone else for that matter).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top