Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
OS X Businesses Operating Systems Apple

Review - Mac OS X Server 10.3, Part 1 469

Posted by pudge from the i-feel-like-a-mama-cat dept.
What is the point of Mac OS X Server? Mac OS X is Unix. I have Apache, bind, sendmail, (and whatever I want) already on here. My Mac OS X box is a server already, right? I have a home network with a half dozen Macs, and have a box that does some serving, and I want it do more. So, I set out to figure out what this Server thing is. (Read on for the rest.)

Sure, I can read. I can go to the Mac OS X Server web site and read all the documentation for things related to "standards-based management," "share printers and files," "n-tier" solutions. Yawn. I know all about this stuff, and I know I can do it already. If I am paying good money for this, it better have value I can't already get for free.

First Things First

Essentially, Mac OS X Server is the same thing as Mac OS X (a.k.a. Client). It's the same core OS, it has the same versioning (10.3.2 as of this writing), it runs the same programs. But Server comes with programs and tools and configurations geared toward being a server, rather than a user's workstation.

Server comes in two flavors: a 10-client version for $500, and an unlimited client version for $1000. The only difference between the two is that the 10-client version limits file and windows sharing to 10 simultaneous clients. You can have any number of users, but only 10 can connect to those services at the same time.

With that money, you also get 90 days of "up-and-running" support covering the software that ships with Server. So if you've read the frelling manual and still can't figure out why the firewall doesn't seem to be working, you can get some help. After 90 days, you can still get help -- including more advanced topics -- but it will cost you from $6,000 to $50,000.

Hardware

The Xserve, Apple's rack-mountable computer, comes with the unlimited client version of Server preinstalled; and really, Server is built with Xserve in mind. Server Monitor, included with Server, displays uptime, temperature, drives, power, network usage, fans, and security of Xserve boxes.

You can configure Xserve boxes automatically with Panther Server preinstalled. Design your configuration on one machine, set up an LDAP server and put it in the DHCP server settings, and add your configuration file to the LDAP server. Turn on the other servers for the first time, and each one will find the DHCP server, find the LDAP server, find the configuration file, and configure itself automatically. You can also put the configuration file on a USB key or somesuch, and the machines will configure themselves that way, too.

My test box is a dual G4/1.25 GHz Power Mac; it performs with nary a hiccup. If I had a large network or many users, I can imagine wanting more power: with a Power Mac or Xserve G5, I'd be able to take advantage of an OS that is optimized for the 64-bit CPU. For me, however, this would result in a depressingly, perpetually, low CPU load.

Initial Security Considerations

Out of the box, assuming no one has set up a rogue DHCP server on your network, Mac OS X Server is mostly secure: only SSH is on by default. As other services are turned on, more security concerns are created, because new security holes may be opened.

For the most part, the default configurations of the various services are secure, but that largely depends on your specific environment. Mac OS X Server is excellent at making advanced server configuration easier, but this ease of use comes with a price: you may be opening yourself up to attack. Mac users are often not used to the idea of making themselves vulnerable just by clicking checkboxes.

This may look like a Mac, and may be easy to use, but it is no substitute for having a real live sysadmin on hand to -- at the very least -- audit the security of the system. It'd be nice if Server included audit tools; I envision UI elements that warn you when you have conflicts, or when you've opened up a hole, or when you've violated predefined security policies. On the other hand, it would be more reliable to have a third-party system to do the audit, on basic principle. But that's so un-Mac-like.

Open

Tom Goguen, Director of Marketing for Mac OS X Server, says that Apple is 100% into using open standards and open source in the core operating system.

Mac OS X Server has always been largely based on open standards, but the Panther incarnation has gone even further. Gone are Apple's proprietary mail systems; they are replaced by postfix, mailman, and cyrus. Mostly gone is NetInfo; it is replaced by LDAP. Rendezvous, also an open system that others can plug into, is a bigger part of Server now: FTP, LPR, and web services are all announced via Rendezvous.

Of course, as always, Server -- just like Client -- is based on FreeBSD (now version 4.8, with some of 5.0 stirred in), and most of the Apple core OS itself is under the Apple Public Source License.

A Case for Case

New to Panther is case sensitivity in HFS+. For many years, Mac OS has used the HFS as its file system, which treated "Foo" and "foo" as the same file. Some years ago, HFS+ was introduced to overcome many of the limitations of HFS, but case sensitivity -- seen more as a usability feature than a limitation -- remained.

But in Unix, this certainly is a limitation for many people. "Makefile" vs. "makefile" and "head" vs. "HEAD" have caused many a headache for Mac OS X/Unix users. But now case sensitivity is a formatting option.

Because case insensitivity is still seen as a usability feature, this feature is not available by default on Client, although you could always connect your drive to a Server to format it. It is also possible, in theory, to format a drive with case sensitivity in Client using various tricks.

Setting it Up

My server is connected to my home network via a 100BaseT switch, to which is also connected a cable modem and an AirPort Extreme base station. My PowerBook G4/867 connects to the network via AirPort or the switch. My wife has an iBook G3/600, and I've got a PowerBook G3/400 in my stereo closet for playing MP3s. The PowerBook doesn't have internal AirPort, and instead is connected to another switch and another Extreme base station, configured to do WDS. I've also got the PS2 connected in there. Everything is running Panther Client (except for the PS2, last I checked).

Looking at the various services offered by Server, I can already see many things I want to set up: file sharing (Apple Filing Protocol, or AFP), DHCP for guests, DNS, FTP, SMTP, printing, and web. I have most of those already set up now, but I wouldn't mind if they were easier to configure and manage.

After surveying my situation, I installed Panther Server and took a look around.

The first thing I wanted to see was what my configuration options were. And lo, there in my Dock were not the expected iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto, and the like, but icons that a mouseover revealed to be representative of programs like Workgroup Manager, the aforementioned Server Monitor, and Server Admin.

Workgroup Manager uses a lot of terminology that is completely lost on me, and I am not managing any users, really. My wife doesn't need the file server -- we can exchange files via iChat, or I can copy them to her machine via scp -- and she keeps all her own files on her machine. We won't be using any print quotas. I do use Workgroup Manager to create some basic user accounts for friends, but I don't need any features more advanced than what is in Client.

Server Admin is what I want to sink my greedy little digits into. I opened it up, clicked the "add new server" button, typed in my server name ("Sweeney.local") and password, and started playing.

As I started looking around, I remembered that there was an extra CD in the distribution called Admin Tools. It allows you to install these tools on any Client machine, so you can manage the Server remotely. I want to go hang out in my La-Z-Boy while I configure my server, so I installed the tools on my PowerBook. Nifty.

Server Admin lists each machine and the services available to it, with an icon next to each describing its status. If you select a machine's name, you see several tabs: Overview, Logs, System, Graphs, Update, and Settings. Overview reports the system version, names, and dates. Under Logs, you can view the system log, watchdog log, etc. System reports what network interfaces and volumes are available. Graphs displays CPU and network use in pretty pictures. Update runs Software Update. Settings controls the system names, the date and time and timezone.

This is basic stuff, and each service is laid out in similar fashion. All of them have at least two tabs: Overview and Settings. Most also have a Logs tab. Some have other tabs like Connections, Graphs, Clients, Activity, Accounts, Queues, and Jobs.

The available services are AFP, Application Server, DHCP, DNS, Firewall, FTP, Mail, NAT, NetBoot, NFS, Open Directory, Print, QuickTime Streaming, VPN, Web, and Windows. Somewhat conspicuous in its absence, to me, is MySQL, which is included in Server, but doesn't have an interface in Server Admin.

Server Admin does have its problems. It will crash on occasion, but I see no evidence of my settings being corrupted, or any other lasting ill effects. Some of the lists are not sortable, though they appear to be: for example, the DNS zone listings are not sortable, even though clicking on the column headers indicate otherwise.

Also, it can be slow to update. This is understandable, but annoying. Logs don't refresh immediately, and when you hit reload, the wrong log is selected, instead of the current log being refreshed. When restarting services or viewing logs, I will sometimes use the command line tools, as they are more efficient; it would be nice if Server Admin would display the path to the log you are looking at, so you can easily find and tail it in a shell.

Sharing

Some of these services are available in a minimal form in Client, in Sharing under System Preferences: file sharing, Windows sharing, web, FTP, and printing. In Server, the Sharing preferences are still there, but contain only three items: Remote Login, Apple Remote Desktop, and Remote Apple Events. Remote Login is simple: it allows users to connect with ssh/scp, and can be turned on or off. The other two require, perhaps, a bit more explanation.

Apple Remote Desktop is a way for an admin to control client computers. Previously, the client was distributed only as part of the software package of the same name, but now the client is included with Panther. It is, of course, off by default, and once turned on, each machine must define what users have access to what resources (this can be done via the command line, too). I most commonly use ARD for controlling and viewing the screen of another computer, installing packages, and copying files.

Remote Apple Events has been in Mac OS for many years, since back in version 7-dot-something. It allows controlling "scriptable" Mac applications -- such as with AppleScript -- over the network. It used to run over AppleTalk, but now runs over plain old TCP/IP. Not many people make use of remote Apple events in my experience, but I use them often; for example, I have a Perl script that queries iTunes on a remote box, and sets the current track in iChat.

Windows

I don't use Windows, and therefore can't really test the new Windows integration in Panther Server. But from what I can tell, Apple has added quite a few improvements. Samba has been updated to version 3, and the lists of Unix and Windows users can be united via Directory Services. But I confess to a crippling ignorance and apathy about this small corner of the computing world. Sorry.

To Be Continued

Tomorrow, I'll get into the details of setting up the services I use on my network.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Review - Mac OS X Server 10.3, Part 1 More

Review - Mac OS X Server 10.3, Part 1

Comments Filter:

  • So what (Score:3, Insightful)

    by wpiman ( 739077 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:19PM (#8047140)
    Yawn. I know all about this stuff, and I know I can do it already. If I am paying good money for this, it better have value I can't already get for free. You may be able to do it- but to those who cannot a simpl GUI on top makes a world of difference. Different strokes for different folks- don't buy it.

    • Re:So what (Score:4, Funny)

      by Golias ( 176380 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:30PM (#8047297)
      So if you've read the frelling manual

      "Frelling" == Old and busted.
      "Goram" == New hotness.

      Firefly forever be-otch!

      (A Firefly vs. Farscape cuss-word-substitute flame war... possibly the only thing nerdier than vi vs. emacs. What fun!)

    • Re:So what (Score:3, Informative)

      by pudge ( 3605 ) *
      You apparently don't understand the concept of a review, wherein I try to find out whether or not the GUI is worth the expense.

    • Re:So what (Score:3, Insightful)

      by henben ( 578800 )
      He's adopting a skeptical position as a rhetorical device to frame his review. Uh, assmunch.

  • Boy (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:19PM (#8047146)
    Tomorrow, I'll get into the details of setting up the services I use on my network.

    iCan't wait for more of this.

  • the point (Score:2, Insightful)

    by AnonymousCowheart ( 646429 )
    the point of it the same of any company; to make money. Duh, imagine that, apple trying to profit!

  • Let's see some pictures, eh? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Gizzmonic ( 412910 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:27PM (#8047244) Homepage Journal
    I'd like to see your setup.

    I'm getting an Xserve G5 soon and I haven't used OS X Server at all. Tell us about Netbooting. The idea intrigues me...I must know more about it.

    What other things are fun to use with it? The Xserve will be running PHP/MySQL, I don't know much about Mac OS X Server so please let me know!

    I ffropgaermgaeromgaegoSRAGKWgaer/.

    • i have some picts of his house, dogs, office, and beautiful wife and kid - but i'm afraid that my server would melt under the load.

      oh - and i'm sure there's enough people that want to kill him that he's not interested in his picture being all over the internet.

      also - i'm installing 7 G5's with two fully populated RAIDS. I'll put the pictures up later on... somewhere.

    • Re:Let's see some pictures, eh? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Mikey-San ( 582838 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @09:06PM (#8050643) Homepage Journal
      NetBoot is a function based partially in Open Firmware that allows a client to be booted by a Mac OS X Server machine via ethernet. You connect the client to the ether and hold "n" while after you hit the power key. (You can also hold option to get a list of all bootable partitions/devices connected to the machine, which will include valid NetBoot servers.)

      We use it at work to image machines for a school system. There are a couple of dozen schools, each with its own image, and when we need to reimage a machine, we hook said machine to the Xserve's switch and bang, the machine boots and a program called NetRestore (third-party) is run to reimage the machine. (You don't need NetRestore, but it makes our day easier.)

      NetBooting is really fast and really elegant, and on top of that, it's /really/ easy to set up and maintain on the server end.

      I 3 NetBoot.

  • Costs? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ericdano ( 113424 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:28PM (#8047258) Homepage
    Where did you get this "After 90 days, you can still get help -- including more advanced topics -- but it will cost you from $6,000 to $50,000." quote? Link? Facts?

    • Re:Costs? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by midifarm ( 666278 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:52PM (#8047599) Homepage
      I've been using OSX Server for over two years now (first time on an iMac!) and have NEVER had to pay for support for server. From the guys that I've talked to at Apple, they've stated that they don't want to charge the Server customer because they WANT that customer. They've been very helpful in the few problems that I've encountered even getting me to an actual programmer!

      Peace

      • whoa.......a.......REAL..........programmer?

        *Faints*

        Gotta love Apple. Great company. First the transition from 680X0 processors to Power PC, then from OS 9 to OS X. Pretty damn good I think.

    • Re:Costs? (Score:5, Informative)

      by jeffehobbs ( 419930 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:50PM (#8048435) Homepage

      Yeah, that's not actually... true. I called Apple a couple months ago about a really odd password problem with Mac OS X Server (you could log in as any user on my server by entering a blank password!), and while they did charge me, it was only $100.

      Now here's $100 worth of secret, annoyingly undocumented Mac OS X Server information: you can use the password of an Admin account to log in via AFP as any user on the system. For example, if one of your admin passwords is "fl0nk", you could use "fl0nk" as the password to test any user on the system.

      So make sure your Admin passwords are strong! And secret! And not blank!

      ~jeff

      • Re:Costs? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        That's actually an option.

        If you configure your AFP server, there's a checkbox right there that allows you to use admin password to masquerade as another user. That's not the exact wording, but it's pretty close.

        I highly doubt this isn't documented, though - since it's just a checkbox in the GUI. It's under the "help" menu at the very least.

      • Re:Costs? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by pudge ( 3605 ) *
        Now here's $100 worth of secret, annoyingly undocumented Mac OS X Server information: you can use the password of an Admin account to log in via AFP as any user on the system.

        Hm, maybe I should have mentioned that in the review. Oh wait, I did! :-) And it is documented, in Panther Server, anyway. And you can turn it off, as noted in the review.

  • The main reason for XServe... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:28PM (#8047271)
    The main reason Apple developed the XServe is because their original server, the iRack, was inadvertenly taken over by the US military due to a typo.

  • Userland is mostly based upon *BSD+GNU not FreeBSD (Score:5, Informative)

    by chrysalis ( 50680 ) * on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:31PM (#8047304) Homepage
    Please stop saying that MacOS X unix tools is based upon FreeBSD.

    Apple actually took parts of NetBSD, FreeBSD and OpenBSD.

    Most tools actually come from OpenBSD.

    If you got MacOS X and if you need a proof, just try :

    ident /usr/bin/* /bin/* /sbin/* /usr/sbin/* 2>/dev/null | fgrep OpenBSD | wc -l
    ident /usr/bin/* /bin/* /sbin/* /usr/sbin/* 2>/dev/null | fgrep FreeBSD | wc -l
    ident /usr/bin/* /bin/* /sbin/* /usr/sbin/* 2>/dev/null | fgrep NetBSD | wc -l

    Here's what I get on Darwin 7.2.0 (Panther, everything up to date) :

    OpenBSD : 303
    FreeBSD : 258
    NetBSD : 143

    The rest is mostly GNU tools.

    • Interesting.. I got 287/224/126. I wonder whats different about our boxes. I've got everything updated, as well.

    • Re:Userland is mostly based upon *BSD+GNU not Free (Score:5, Informative)

      by Guy Harris ( 3803 ) <guy@alum.mit.edu> on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:00PM (#8047691)
      Most tools actually come from OpenBSD.

      Most source files that, when compiled, have RCS IDs in the resulting object file, and that are used to build tools, came from OpenBSD.

      Try running a script such as

      for i in /usr/bin/* /bin/* /sbin/* /usr/sbin/*
      do
      echo $i:
      ident $i 2>/dev/null | egrep '(Free|Net|Open)BSD'
      done

      and look at the output. Many tools have no RCS IDs in the binary. Some of them have multiple RCS IDs in them, as more than one source file for a tool in that set has an RCS ID in it that shows up in the object file.

      If we prune that output to leave, for each tool, only one line for each OS for each tool, we get 85 lines for NetBSD, 75 lines for FreeBSD, and 19 lines for OpenBSD - OpenBSD is overrepresented in your results because, for example, the OpenSSH stuff came from OpenBSD, with each tool having multiple source files, and most if not all of those files put the RCS ID into the binary.

      NetBSD is slightly overrepresented by the counts I gave, as Panther's yacc came from NetBSD, and its skeleton parser puts an RCS ID into the object file; if we remove those 7 lines, we get 78 for NetBSD.

      Of course, there are a lot of commands that don't have any RCS information at all. 171 commands do, but there are a total of 928 commands. This means that your counts and my counts don't necessarily give any believable information about the number of tools that came from FreeBSD, NetBSD, or OpenBSD, unless all the tools without RCS IDs came from elsewhere (GNU, Apple, etc.).

    • Re:Userland is mostly based upon *BSD+GNU not Free (Score:4, Informative)

      by Octorian ( 14086 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @07:00PM (#8049326) Homepage
      Running those same commands on my FreeBSD 4.9 server, I get the results: 60/6769/440

      The *BSDs share so much code between each other, and most source files have ident tags from different *BSDs, that Apple could have mostly pulled from FreeBSD and may still produce the numbers you saw.

  • How about an article using older macs for server? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ericdano ( 113424 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:31PM (#8047312) Homepage
    I'd love to see someone post an article using older, PCI macs (9500 or something) running XPostFacto [macsales.com], a G4 card in it, and a huge IDE system (with RAID or without) AND running Mac OS X Server [apple.com].

    I think Apple missed the boat not supporting these Macs with OS X. They make great little OS X workhorses.

    • Run yellow dog or geentoo linux..
      • If you have a x100 lying around, or a 7200, your options consist of MKLinux or MacOS. Unless developers have made serious progress on that front, and personally, I can't imagine there being much motivation to do so. :)

        The only major issue I've had with linux on older mac hardware is the usual X11 nightmare, specifically with motherboard video on 8500s/7300s. Back when it was a priority for me, the one x11 config I found was wrong. THAT was a fun experience....

        Another issue I've had - which is largely d
    • , a G4 card in it, and a huge IDE system (with RAID or without) AND running Mac OS X Server. I think Apple missed the boat not supporting these Macs with OS X. They make great little OS X workhorses.

      I don't think so, especially when it comes to the MacOS X Server. Remember that the 90-days "up and running" support is included in this package. PowerMacs of the 9xxx series are unable to run MacOS X without a third-party G3 upgrade card. So now Apple would have to test and support their system not on the A

      • Mmmm... headless. (Score:4, Informative)

        by solios ( 53048 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @07:12PM (#8049446) Homepage
        An important feature of OS X Server is the Server Administration tools. My own home server, which has the internal 6 meg ATI chipset (see above post in this thread) is a slug when I need to hit the gui. But I don't. Apple has provied Server Admin Tools with OS X Server, and the tools for Jag run very well under Panther client. These gui tools allow me to add users, manage shares, manage printers, quicktime streaming (if in use), configure Apache to an extent, DHCP, Netboot.... basically, everything you DO with a server that you don't do with client. And the tools can be installed on ANY machine running OS X. Load them up, they ask for a server IP or domain name. Enter it in, it asks for your password for the server (admin accounts only, naturally). And BLAM!

        I have complete remote control of all of my server functions from my workstation, and the ones I can't access via the gui tools can be hit through the command line. With the older Server 1.x, you needed a web browser to manage shares, which was both interesting (the convienience) and annoying (security, you needed to be at ANOTHER MACHINE that WASN'T THE SERVER to do it).

        Yeah, you can do hardcore awesome amounts of remote management with linux (I recently recompiled a kernel, formatted a RAID array, installed and set up samba, netatalk, and genrally completely configured a linux server from my desktop through a slew of terminal windows. SO SEXY OMG), but the gui tools for OS X are AWESOME for admins with limited command line fu- I got Jaguar Server up and completely configured just how I wanted it without help, compared to both of my monitors being strewn with google searches and man page entries with my linux configuration process. Some people don't want to do it the hard way, and can't afford the new toys. :-)

        As for compatability and stability of G3 boards... I only had stability problems if I diddled with the defaults on the control software. So I didn't. I've run OS X, Linux, and MacOS 9.x on g3 upgraded machines, rock solid, without difficulties.

        And concerning the 8 gig limit- that only affects Beige G3s and the original iMacs. And only on IDE drives. My workstation had to be partitioned (80g- 8/2/$), my iMac had to be partitioned (60g, 6/54), and my server didn't (9g SCA). It's an IDE thing, not a SCSI thing, and the old beige machines such as the 9600 are SCSI. :-) And I've never had problems with hard drives bigger than 8g running OS X on IDE host adapters- I had 10.1 installed on a 60g in a 9500 awhile back, and it was Just Fine. This is due entirely to the controller- the system sees it as a SCSI drive. :D

    • Re:How about an article using older macs for serve (Score:5, Informative)

      by solios ( 53048 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:55PM (#8048496) Homepage
      Heh. A 9500 only has two drive bays- three if you feel like ripping out the floppy and boring holes in the case with a dremel. When it comes to internal drive capacity, you want a 9600, 8600, or beige G3- all of which have internal tray capacity for five drives (one 3.5, then four in the front that are universal trays with mounts for floppy, zip, hard drive, and CDRom- you can easily drop out the floppy and smack in a hard drive). Alternatively, you can add a few firewire cards and load in several drives, but you're still limited by the system bus. :P

      My home fileserver is a beige G3/266 with 256 megs of ram. Two IDE hard drives - a 60 and an 80- UWSCSI for an internal 4g disk, an Adaptec 29{3|4}0 card for the outboard 9g SCA drive that holds the OS, and an Apple rom 10/100 ethernet card. It's running 10.2 Server (10.2.0- I've never bothered to patch it up) and runs out basic file services to my home network. Runs like a champ, minus the initial pains in the arse of getting the OS actually ON. All of the SLOW one experiences in OS X is totally at the graphical userland level, in my experience- which isn't something the server uses. My workstation (also a biege G3, running Panther Client thanks to XPF) is a slug, and it has 128 more ram than the server... but I use it largely for gui stuff, and the OS is (UNFORTUNATELY) on an IDE drive- the big SCSI went into the server. :)

      I could easily do the server on my 9600 with the Sonnet ATA/66 card that's in my 7300, but the ATA card seems to be a bit flaky, and the 9600's already running linux just fine....

      Alternatively, I could toss on Server 1.1 without using XPF at all. It's neat to play with if you can find the media, although I personally wouldn't use it for anything other than Apple File Services.

      It is less hassle to get 10.2 or 10.3 onto a beige mac, if you don't have much linux experience- but linux has this funny habit of supporting older hardware that OS X screams about. :D
  • ...but I confess to a crippling ignorance and apathy about this small corner of the computing world.

    I'm not sure if this is a joke or if this is a typical Mac user's view of the computing landscape today.

  • eh, how many clients? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 192939495969798999 ( 58312 ) <[info] [at] [devinmoore.com]> on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:32PM (#8047323) Homepage Journal
    How many clients can connect to OS X Client? That would be interesting to know. Granted, the server version comes with tools, but what tools are really there that aren't available for free somewhere?
    • There's the rub, you're paying for the support - a grand isn't *that* much for unlimited clients if you get support (especially unlimited free, as somebody has claimed). How much is RH Enterprise?

    • Re:eh, how many clients? (Score:5, Informative)

      by sootman ( 158191 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @07:17PM (#8049524) Homepage Journal
      If you are asking "If I set up a computer with non-server Mac OS X and use it as a server, how many other clients can connect to it at a time?" then the answer is "Ten."

      Paying for Server gets you the fancy tools, which you may or may not need depending on what you're going to do with the box. Also, Server comes with all of those things installed and ready to go. Putting things like a mail server onto OS X non-server requires work and manual admin, whereas turning on the mail server in Server is a few clicks.

      There are also a lot of advanced settings that aren't available (or close enough for mere mortals) in non-server, such as the ability to make and manage multiple AFP and SMB mount points. For example, if you connect to a non-server server via AFP, you can mount your own home directory, anyone else's public directory, or a volume. That's it. No more "make a folder and share it out as..." like Windows and OS 9 have. (Although snb.conf will do whatever you tell it.)

      Oh, and some things, like using it for a NetBoot server, are close to, if not totally, impossible. So things like sendmail and samba can work as well as any other UNIX, but Apple tools, like AFP and NetBoot, can't.

      We use plain-vanilla OS X for a file server (light use, just a repository for application installers mostly) and a web server without a hitch. File serving is 4x faster than Personal File Sharing was in OS 9.

      Oh, and Apple doesn't support the use of non-Server as a server. So, if we were to call up one day and say "Our OS X box keeps dropping connections in the middle of large file transfers" they wouldn't help.

      PS--I suppose there is the same 10-user limit in Samba that there is in AFP, but I haven't seen it first-hand and nothing is jumping out at me from smb.conf, though of course that limit could exist elsewhere. But, I did indeed try to connect 11 boxes to an OS X non-server and got a warning on client #11.

  • OpenDirectory is the key feature (Score:5, Interesting)

    by caseih ( 160668 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:35PM (#8047374)
    While you can easily do everything that Panther Server does on your linux box, what Panther excels in is integration. Specifically the binding together of OpenLDAP, Samba, Apache, Postfix, IMAP, POP, and CUPS with the OpenDirectory password server. OpenDirectory's password server is essentially a SASL password store that they've hacked all the programs mentioned to interact directly with it for all authentication. Think of it similarly to what pam does for linux. The nice thing about OpenDirectory is that a password change from any of these mechanisms (say via samba) then all of the password hashes in the database are automatically synced (even kerberos is synced). This makes for very slick administration of users all from one central console. In the past on Linux, it was not uncommon to have to hack together some scripts to syncronize ldap, samba, and kerberos authentication stores. Even in the best case right now, samba password hashes have to be kept in the ldap database along with either an md5 hash for unix logins, or a pointer to kerberos. With OpenDirectory, there are no passwords stored in ldap itself. Instead an Apple Password field points to the password database which can provide md5 challenges and responses, samba challenges, and general password verification.

    Essentially OpenDirectory brings all the technologies together that we already use and make them into a service that competes very well with Active Directory or NDS.

    Another bonus is that since OpenDirectory (all its parts including the SASL password database and patches to cups, samba, etc) is open source, we could build a complete OpenDirectory-compatible system on Linux. I plan to do this over the next year or so. Most likely there will have to be a pam module created, and some patches made to OpenLDAP, Samba, etc. But it's a very exciting example of how to put open source projects together and have them work really well.
    • and I can't help but weeping in desperation for the weeks spent shoehorning configs, outdated schemas, shoddy howtos, help calls to usenet groups go get the same stuff up on various MDKs, FreeBSDs, RHs etc... Well, we needed a unix office server... we could have gone IBM... the XServe is shipping this week... :-) Linux is cool, but all the mentioned distributors didn't manage or care to do what Apple did. I'm starting to think that the corporate desktop is quite ready for Macs...

  • The future... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by thrillbert ( 146343 ) * on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:37PM (#8047390) Homepage
    You know, a lot of friends and colleagues have been laughing at me when I tell them that Mac is the new force to be reckoned with. I've been watching them for a little while now and ever since they integrated FreeBSD into their OS, they've taken on a new direction which seems a lot more proffitable.

    Don't get me wrong, I still have my two Linux and two OpenBSD boxes at home along with the obligatory windows boxes for the wife, daughter and gaming.. but you know what? I'd love to get my hands on one of them OS X boxes..

    If you don't think I'm right.. that's your opinion.. but I know if I had OS X experience, I might be able to get a job Here! [pixar.com]

    ---
    No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife in the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.

    • Re:The future... (Score:3, Informative)

      by ScottSpeaks! ( 707844 ) *
      I know if I had OS X experience, I might be able to get a job Here! [pixar.com]

      I'm sure it would help, but looking over the specs for Pixar's software [pixar.com] (available for outside licence) indicates that, not only does it run on Windows and other Unixes, but some of it is not available for OS X.

  • Waiting for the other half, but.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Chordonblue ( 585047 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:38PM (#8047419) Journal
    ...I really do want to know why I should use this in a Win2K environment. My boss wouldn't care what I get as long as it does the job. What I want to know is: Can this server provide me with tools to form a good bridge between Windows, Apple, and Linux clients?

    SAMBA 3, from what I read is GREAT, but it in no way yet compares to the ease of use of MS's Active Directory tools (at least in configuring Windows clients).

    • Re:Waiting for the other half, but.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by caseih ( 160668 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:53PM (#8047609)
      The Workgroup Manager (as mentioned by another poster) combined with OpenDirectory and Samba 3.0 make a killer competitor to MS's Active Directory. Definitely very cool and very easy to use and set up to server your windows needs. Panther Server is probably the best solution to bridge between your Windows, Apple, and Linux clients. Combine this with very good, cheap storage (2 TB fibre channel raid), and it's hard to beat.

    • Re:Waiting for the other half, but.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by uncitizen ( 730931 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:03PM (#8047733)
      Yes, yes, and yes. its like a multipart tool. You would use Samba for Windows connectivity and the native *Nix/MacOS protocols for Linux, *BSD, MacOS, and Classic MacOS. Users groups would be controlled by open directory. Again, via samba, the MacOS X server could be a PDC.

      There are a couple points of note. First, MacOS X cannot do group policy. Nothing other than a Win2k server can--so it could be harder to lock down workstations if that is a goal. Second, MacOS X has a little bit of difficulty joining a Win2k domain (ie, a file server in a Win2k Domain). *BSD does not have nss, so Apple drew up a little " AD Integration" tool. Its a great concept and basically does what nss does, but it is still far from perfect*.

      *=This is as far as I know--Apple's own forums tell of horror stories about the subject. I have not attempted to use AD Integration with Panther Server. I had a developer preview CD that I DID attempt AD integration, however, this was quite broken and there was no documentation. It was a developer release. It also wasn't very important. It way my home I'm-a-big-nerd-with-a-home-lab-that-has-too-many-O Ses-installed lab. Once I can afford a copy for home use, I'll know for certain.

  • applause! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by torpor ( 458 )
    i just want to say that i enjoyed this review, and i'm looking forward to tomorrow's followup.

    in light of the fact that its so easy to complain about /. quality, i figured that i'd actually do the opposite for a change and congratulate the editors for a 'stuff that matters' moment... i thought this article was fun to read, and not just because i too am an osx/linux weenie.

  • Workgroup Manager (Score:3, Interesting)

    by raaum ( 152451 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:41PM (#8047452) Homepage

    To me, Workgroup Manager is the reason to buy OS X Server (assuming you are running a Mac OS X network with multiple users and OS X clients). It is a nice, zero effort way to manage multiple users and client computers - controlling who can use which client computers and which files/folders will follow them around from computer to computer.

  • I'm sorry, but this is kind of lame. (Score:5, Informative)

    by netsrek ( 76063 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:45PM (#8047507) Homepage
    You're missing the killer server features.

    You know how Kerberos can be a real pain to set up and manage? Well with Panther Server, if you've set up a box as an Open Directory master, it automatically integrates itself as a KDC.

    Any boxes which log into that OD/LDAP directory automatically retrieve the relevant Kerberos information from the LDAP store, no extra configuration required.

    The AFP server, the SMB server, the POP/IMAP/SMTP servers are all Keberized, as is the ssh daemon, and the loginwindow of any client machines.

    It's probably worth discussing the fact that Apple have finally gotten their shit together with regards to command line administration, as in that everything you can do with the GUI tools you now have *simple* command line equivalents.

    ie, no more screwing around with NetInfo and inserting properties by hand to construct mounts/users, you now have proper tools.

    Apple finally did the smart thing and followed what most OSXS admins have been doing for a few years, they've dropped their proprietary AppleMailServer in favour of postfix+cyrus.

    They've pretty much dropped NetInfo for network directories, it's now just restricted to a local store, and LDAP publishes this information by default. You can still run a NetInfo directory, and indeed I've got boxes logging into both my old NetInfo directory and my new LDAP directory so that I can do user migration more easily.

    There are a wealth of features that weren't even touched upon by this review, it's just kind of lame to read a home user's review of a server product.

    • So... what does Kerberos do for me ? Besides let me say that "I run Kerberos" ? I'm talking real, actual value, as opposed to PHB-compliance.
      • Single Sign On.

        Basically once you're logged into the Kerberos realm as a particular user, any Kerberized service will automatically recognize you as that user, so you don't need to enter in another password/username combination.

        This takes centralized user accounts to another level, where not only do you have the same username and password for all your services, but you only have to enter that combination in once. The default on OS X is for Kerberos tickets to last 10 hours before expiring.

  • I use an old G4 as a server (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MarkWatson ( 189759 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @04:47PM (#8047531) Homepage
    Not OS X server edition - just plain old OS X.

    I have been a Linux user for about 10 years (when I first got Slackware over a 1200 baud modem) and until recently I was using a super-cheap Linux box to run Java server side stuff for my little NLP software business.

    I switched over to using an old G4 Mac for running web services about 4 months ago. It is a little too early to tell, but I seem to be spending less time taking care of the G4 server (approxametely 1 hour a month - and I think that I used to spend 2 or 3 hours a month messing with my Linux server).

    Anyway, a life for old Macs :-)

    -Mark

  • My review of OSX Server (Score:4, Funny)

    by stratjakt ( 596332 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:08PM (#8047780) Journal
    Hi, I have pac man fever so I bought the most expensive box at the store - OSX Server.

    I put it on my computer, and then put a laptop on top of my stereo.

    And then I dont really use it for managing stuff or sharing files theres only me and my cat in the house, also I dont know about technical stuff like kerbones because I'm not much of a computer guy I just know the most expensive stuff HAS to be the best.

    So all in all I give Mac OSX Server a 10 out of 10 it is very cool and has wonderful animated icons, and not too many buttons on the mouse to confuse me.

    Stay tuned for part 2 of my review, where I plan to put my iPod next to it and take pictures!

  • Any word on NAS featuers? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NetJunkie ( 56134 ) <jason.nashNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:18PM (#8047961)
    I looked at the XServe for a NAS solution but couldn't find any information on things such as snapshots. Is it there? Coming?

  • Scripting... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by RAMMS+EIN ( 578166 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:26PM (#8048081) Homepage Journal
    ``Remote Apple Events has been in Mac OS for many years, since back in version 7-dot-something. It allows controlling "scriptable" Mac applications -- such as with AppleScript -- over the network. It used to run over AppleTalk, but now runs over plain old TCP/IP. Not many people make use of remote Apple events in my experience, but I use them often; for example, I have a Perl script that queries iTunes on a remote box, and sets the current track in iChat.''

    Does this mean that, on macs, you can

    1. Script GUI apps
    2. Script them over the network

    ? That gives the traditional unices a run for their money, I should think...

    • Re:Scripting... (Score:5, Informative)

      by emoon ( 30871 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @06:05PM (#8048617) Homepage
      Does this mean that, on macs, you can

      1. Script GUI apps
      2. Script them over the network

      Yeah, it does.

      As mentioned in the article, this capability was present in the System 7.0.x days (late '80s/early '90s). When you enabled filesharing (Localtalk based), there was an option to enable program sharing.

      If you enabled that, you were able to script applications on a remote machine (assuming you had an user account with the rights).

      What was really nice about Apple's scripting engine was that you didn't have to do anything extra to enable remote scripting in an app. If you took the effort to make your app AppleScriptable, you got remote scripting for free.

  • Say "BSD", please. If you say "UNIX" SCO will sue Apple and Darl McBride will institute "introductory" OSX license pricing of $1000 a seat.

  • Apple technical training (Score:5, Informative)

    by plsuh ( 129598 ) <plsuh&goodeast,com> on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:28PM (#8048107) Homepage
    <Blatant Plug>

    For those folks interested in learning more in depth about Mac OS X and Mac OS X Server, you might want to look into Apple's technical training courses [apple.com]. There are a variety of hands-on courses and certifications covering all of the OS in great detail, some of it written by yours truly. :-)

    </Blatant Plug>

    --Paul
    Trainer/Curriculum Developer
    Apple Computer

  • I am using FreeBSD-CURRENT at home and I am happy with it. And sometimes I'm getting sad about how crippled Mac OS X Server got, because Apple decided to make GUIs for most things, which:

    • Don't have all the options, you need.
    • Erase your manual configuration.

    Let's take cyrus-imapd, e.g.

    • It lacks support for group-ACLs, which is essential for bigger companies, who use shared IMAP-folders.
    • It does not have any GUIs to set ACLs.

    Secondly, I don't like the Classic environment. It is highly unstable i

  • No more OS X Server! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Random BedHead Ed ( 602081 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @05:54PM (#8048478) Homepage Journal
    I've been totally turned off to OS X Server. I help a lab that has two servers (one is a backup/mirror). When I first started helping them they had AppleShare IP 6. This was useable, but it crashed frequently. We upgraded to OS X 10.2 Server hoping to get some added stability from UNIX, but ran into immediate problems.

    When I had both machines in place I ran into an issue where I had to rebuild the main one, so I transferred the data to the secondary server and planned to swap them. I changed their settings and IP addresses ... and all of the user accounts on the primary file server disappeared.

    This was odd.

    I Googled for it and came up with the answer: if you set up a password server on 10.2 Server you can't change the machine's IP address. This has to do with how Apple built the LDAP system that manages passwords, so it's a requirement if you want Windows file sharing (Samba in disguise) enabled. Which I did.

    I called Apple tech support and they confirmed it: if I wanted to do Windows file sharing, I needed to set up a "password server" (LDAP). And if I set up a password server, I couldn't change the IP address of the machine. Ever. If I did, the users and groups would vanish into thin air. I asked if I could back up the user and group databases and then upload them again ... and they said no. Not without stripping the passwords out. So I'd have to have my users reset their passwords.

    I was stunned. The inability to back up user account information, complete with passwords, and to change the IP address is ridiculous, and not the mark of a true, flexible server OS. So right now I'm migrating them to PPC Linux with Samba. I know 10.3 Server probably addresses these issues, but Linux is just simpler. Heck, all I have to do with Linux/Samba is replicate the passwd, group, shadow and smbpasswd files between the machines. Instant mirror servers. And it'll just work.

    Besides, tar and mt will give me better control over tape backups than Retrospect did. Retrospect was always propting me for tapes of a particular set, and rejecting tapes that were from the wrong set. I don't give a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys about backup sets. On Linux, it's just "See that tape drive? Put the data there, and shut up about it." And it does. And it's good.

    End of rant.

  • Great Mac OS X Server Admin Site (Score:5, Informative)

    by pmorelli ( 42134 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @06:11PM (#8048664)
    I found this while googling around for how to install spam assassin on 10.2.

    http://afp548.com/ [afp548.com]

    It's a great site with lots of very informative, down and dirty technical articles [afp548.com]. They also have a forum [afp548.com] where you can post questions.

    The same guys produce some utilities designed to make VPN and DNS easier...

  • Be VERY Careful with the 10-client license issue (Score:5, Informative)

    by alexhmit01 ( 104757 ) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @06:41PM (#8049092)
    If you run a Mac network, you can do really cool stuff with Automount points. All my Macs mount a /Network/Application, /Network/Library, and a few other mount points thrown in. The GUI land includes /Network/Library in the search path for stuff, (/System/Library for system installed stuff, /Library for stuff installed by the Admin, ~/Library for stuff installed by you, nice and clean and straightforward).

    Each AFP mount counts against the license, no biggie... 7 Macs, all permenantly connected, and we had 3 connections left for laptops.

    Incorrect. While all my connections, once logged in, go through one AFP connection, the Automount connections are done anonymously. Oh no, 2 AFP connections from machine->server, anonymous automounts, then w/ permissions mounts. It's worse! Each automount creates it's OWN connection.

    So we were automounting: /Network/Applications (server installed apps with drag-and-drop, really nice) /Network/Library (frameworks for custom Cocoa apps, etc) /Network/Software (software installers, why not, right) ... and the Users share, that unfortunately can't be automounted as /Network/Users

    well, I had 4 (at the time) automounts, so the first two machines to boot were fine, but machine 3 was all messed up.

    Took forever to diagnose and realize that we needed an unlimited license.

    Took a few hours with Apple support to diagnose, and they didn't figure out the problem until I started at Server Admin and had the problem. Users couldn't log in, because starting with machine 3, they couldn't get their home directories.

    I REALLY like OS X Server's admin tools. LDAP went from scary and impossible to point-and-click. However, even with Panther Server, MUCH better than Jaguar Server, it has some issues.

    Alex

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday January 22, 2004 @02:48PM (#8057714)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

Slashdot Top Deals

I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"

Close