Next message: Nick Scalise: "Re: [WinMac] OS X vs Win2000?"
Ok, point taken. My thinking was that if you could marry the security,
stability and scalability of BSD with the user-friendliness of the Mac GUI
and the efficiency of RISC-processing, you could end up with the makings of
a potent server.
And rack-mounting the G4 keeps it pretty well out of harm's way. Let's see:
2 SCSI cards and an additional NIC *would* just fit... ;^)
Well, we'll see how it all plays out. There are some small signs that Apple
*might* be starting to consider the enterprise market again. But perhaps
you're right in that they should address it with an appropriate case design.
Hal
----------
Dan wrote:
> Hal,
>
> The Apple Network Server 500 & 700 series machines were basically IBM
> RS/6000 machines. There was a rumor that they could boot the MacOS 8.0 CD,
> too; although they ran AIX 4.1.4 with Helios' AFP/IP server.
>
> The lack of PCI slots is a BIG handicap for using a G4 MT; but an even
> bigger handicap is the lack of MLB-based SCSI. Servers generally have a much
> longer life cycle than workstations, and the G4 MT hardware just isn't
> sturdy enough for 24/7 duty for 4 or 5 years nonstop.
>
> Oh, and that pesky lack of PCI slots is a dealbreaker when it comes to
> clustering: Generally clustering is done between private high-speed NIC's...
> And there goes a precious PCI slot.
>
> The trick when assembling ANY computer system is to use the RIGHT hardware
> & software for the job at hand. You wouldn't want to use a notebook for a
> mission critical web server, just as you wouldn't want to use an iMac for a
> portable. Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.
>
> Cheers!
> Dan
*** Windows-MacintoshOS Cooperation List ***
FAQ: http://www.darryl.com/winmacfaq/
Archive: http://www.darryl.com/winmac/
To unsubscribe, send mail to winmac-request@lists.best.com
with just the word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29
: Thu Jul 06 2000 - 08:55:56 PDT