OS X - Server or "souped-up" Client?

S

SuperMatt

Matthew Smith
Hi folks,
We are getting ready to start an intranet for a small company with just over 100 employees. I know I can set up web sharing on OS X client as well as tools such as PHP and MySQL. However, since this intranet will be critical to us, is it worth the money to buy OS X server? Important things would be: Support from Apple, automatic rebooting (running on a G4/400 AGP), stability, administration tools, etc. We may also want to set up the server to share certain files on the network at some point in the future as well. We have Macs and PCs on our network, including a Windows 2000 domain (Active Directory of course). Thanks for any replies/insights!

Yours,
Matthew Smith
Manager of Information Systems
Sandy Cove Ministries
 
Personally,
I'd go for macosx non-server. See if I could pull it off. I serve my site off it, and it works great. And you can set up DHCPD, ftpd, httpd, mysqld, samba, and aparently now LDAP.

I think osx server includes some apache tweaks, a fancy GUI config tool, and that feature that makes it reboot if something goes really wrong (which probably could be set up under the non-server version).

Hope that answers some of your questions, and I hope your company goes well.
 
OS X Server=OS X+utilities. OS X is just as stable; the difference is in the administration tools. One factor to consider is that, when configuring OS X as a server, there is no predefined limit to the number of simultaneous connections; OS X is available with a ten-connection limit for $499 and an unlimited number of simultaneous connections for $999. If you have the tech skills to set up OS X, do it. If not, pony up the bucks and get the unlimited license for OS X Server. Ten connections won't do it for 100 users.
 
Through some experimenting, I have notice apple has made changes the unix kernel which causes some some dificulties. For instance, they don't use the printcap file to list printers. As a result, I have had trouble configuring a print server for windows pcs using a compile version of samba in OSX client. I suppose they did this so that Mac OSX will be easy use. As a result, I suspect tweaking around may cause some conflicts within the operating system. Since, Apple knows about the changes thus has built the server version around them to make it simpler to administer, I would use the server version over the client.

To sum: You get simplicity and Apple support which will save you time. If that isn't worth $999 to you, then don't even bother getting OSX client. Linuxppc would be better becuase it is free and it is better documented for server use than OSX client.

Note: Make sure your computer is compatible with that autobooter in OSX Server
 
I wanted to thank those who responded. We have decided to take the plunge with Mac OS X server. Easy administration is key, especially since if I ever leave to another job, it is unlikely somebody with sufficient Unix expertise/ambition will be found. Also, the G4/400 (AGP) supports the auto-reboot feature. In addition, Apple Support will be very helpful should any issues come up. The $999 will be worth it for these reasons and the security that comes with not having to worry that a system update will "break" something you took the time to set up on the Unix side of things.

Matthew
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top