Apple updates Xserve -- "most powerful Apple server ever"

Apple just updated their Xserve boxes. Starting at $2,999, Apple's calling their new Xserve the "most powerful apple server ever." The speed comes via two (max) quad-core 3.0 GHz Intel Xeon 5400 series processors. That's 8-cores pumping away inside a 1U rack server. Two PCI Express 2.0 expansion slots provide up to 4x the I/O bandwidth of the previous Xserve in support of the latest multi-channel 4Gb Fibre channel and 10Gb Ethernet cards. We're also looking at built-in accelerated graphics to drive a 23-inch Apple Cinema Display and new front facing USB 2.0 to jack into. The three drive bays can support 73GB or 300GB SAS drives or 80GB and 1TB SATAs with a RAID option for choice of RAID 0, 1, and 5. Ships starting today.

[ruprecht @ Feb 5th 2008 9:33PM]

Wow, that was fun, reading all of the gratuitous commentary from so many bias minds. I'm in the market for a server, so came in here thinking there might be some sensible opinions. I have Mac Xserve software running on a tower and it has never dropped the ball, not once. I have a 'pc' (that is 'not apple') server running also that is older, HAS been absolutely bloody reliable - but is now becoming very flaky.

I'm a mac person which makes me one eyed, no less than the other camp though, who in this forum just epitomise why a person like myself would buy a mac, you guys, and all the 'white coats' (the IT people who make a living out of administering servers) are full of shit. You should all be in politics with the ego's you have.

I just want the best system for my dollar. I'm not an IT person by trade but even I can set up (as you would have it), 'a pathetic mac' server. I don't have 'the brains' for the other brands. But then who gives a crap, your 'flat earth' comments show up the denial you are practising. If I wanted to run the world with one server then yeah I'd go buy one of your non mac options, I expect one of you has a commodore 64 that's faster, big f'ing deal, my dad's a space man. How old are you??

Anyway, carry on with your mutual masturbation and back patting. I found there were some comments which were worth reading, sparsely scattered amongst the mass of pathetic commentary. I would gladly invest in a non mac server if it weren't going to be administered by such a bunch of toady IT tossers, but, you're still all out there, pedalling your crap, just go away back into your little worlds.

Ech, white coats, they make me sick, parasites feeding off of real people.

[Don @ Jan 8th 2008 8:44AM]

Imagine if every time Dell released a new PC with new hardware that was better than the previous they announced it as "The most powerful ever!" Boy, that would get annoying. The words "apple" and "server" in the same sentence makes me chuckle a little.

[Lee @ Jan 8th 2008 9:03AM]

You've got a good point there. I mean, it wouldn't make a hell of a lot of sense to release something that you had to pre-qualify with a phrase like "Not quite as powerful as the last one, but it is still a damn good machine thats costs at least as much as before." That's just not how technology works.
Hmm.

[eddie @ Jan 8th 2008 9:09AM]

'The words "apple" and "server" in the same sentence makes me chuckle a little.'
Are you kidding? I think Apple was made for servers! They're unfeasably expensive, unimaginably powerful and you know you're never going to get one!

[Jonathan Bergeron @ Jan 8th 2008 9:19AM]

They're unimaginably powerful? Are you actually serious or was that sarcasm? What does an unimaginably powerful computer do? Does it bend the space-time continuum; maybe it can tell the future? I can imagine quite a bit, so that would be one power computer if its "unimaginably powerful".

[zargon @ Jan 8th 2008 9:30AM]

"Are you kidding? I think Apple was made for servers! They're unfeasably expensive, unimaginably powerful and you know you're never going to get one!"

Apple servers are barely scarping by in the lower tiers of servers, which would be reflected by their cheap price.

If you need some real server power, Apple wouldn't be able to hold a candle. For instance our VMWare infrastructure, a Apple server couldn't even dream of running that.

[Josef @ Jan 8th 2008 9:36AM]

Wow. With a powerful Apple server like that, you could run really awesome MMO games of Diablo 2 and Burger Time.

[Jonathan Bergeron @ Jan 8th 2008 8:48AM]

So what does "most powerful apple server ever" mean? Does that mean it's slightly more powerful than a standard PC or is it in Cray's ring? Maybe they mean it's so powerful it can bend solid steel and throw buses 10 city blocks... These ambiguous statements are so fuckin stupid. Why do companies do that?

[thethirdmoose @ Jan 8th 2008 5:54PM]

More powerful than all those other apple servers?

[daniel.paluszek @ Jan 8th 2008 9:06AM]

I'm sorry, but companies like HP and Dell have been doing this for a long time. True, it's from Apple and it's geared toward enterprise-wide infrastructure, but these specs are very prevalent from other vendors.

[netposer @ Jan 8th 2008 9:15AM]

EVER? No Shit. Isn't that the way it works? Faster CPUs, RAM, HDD's, etc. etc..

[ark_v2 @ Jan 8th 2008 11:53AM]

They are just feeding the fanboys ;)

[zargon @ Jan 8th 2008 9:25AM]

Wow, Apple servers are pretty minimal. They would never get the job done for us excluding the processor. These really don't seem like servers.

Currently spec out servers for our roll out of System Center Operations Manager and Configuration Manager. Looking at HP DL360 (1U) and HP DL380 (2U), which both seem to support more features and overall more robust.

I can't really think of a reason to run a Apple server other than having Apples on the network, but even then, you don't need it and there are just as good solutions to run them on a Windows or Linux server.

[jrspur2003 @ Jan 8th 2008 10:30PM]

Too Funny... It might be the most powerful "Apple Server" built and i would of hoped it was more powerful that the model its replacing otherwise i would have to questions Apple's strategy but its no where near the power and capabilities of PC or Linux servers for that matter... Also think its funny how they are touting an accelerated graphics... Most rack mount servers and most businesses that get servers will have a basic monitor or no monitor at all attached... Kinda a waste of resources if you ask me

[apstewart @ Jan 10th 2008 5:27AM]

Wonder if Apple actually cares about these things now?

The ones we have at my work have zero on-board video. When (not if) they break, Apple's support is dismal. At least up to about a year ago they couldn't have cared less about these servers from a support standpoint.

Now we buy MD1000s from Dell.

[WatchDog @ Jan 8th 2008 9:50AM]

Who actually buys apple servers?

[MK @ Jan 8th 2008 11:26AM]

People running an apple network?
Sure you can serve OS X from a linux or Windows machine, but why?

[Ryan Trevisol @ Jan 8th 2008 11:31AM]

Broward County Public Schools, for one.

Ours doesn't have to be restarted as often or go down as easily as our Dell and IBM servers.

I just wish my XServe/XRaid installation was done that neatly :(

[brad77 @ Jan 8th 2008 12:29PM]

"Ours doesn't have to be restarted as often or go down as easily as our Dell and IBM servers."

No offense, but if your Dells and IBM's are going down regularly, you're doing something wrong.

Uptime a problem with these machines? Get real.

[saq @ Jan 8th 2008 9:58PM]

Apple fanatics buy Apple servers. Non-IT people making IT decisions, its pretty hilarious actually.
I wonder if the Penryn will help lower the heat output to the point where the Apple servers will stop warping and sagging in the middle because they used too soft of an aluminum.
Yes, XServe's warp because they were poorly engineered. Clearly a wise choice for a server.

[Allan @ Jan 8th 2008 10:16AM]

"...built-in accelerated graphics to drive a 23-inch Apple Cinema Display..."

How far can apple's marketing go at milking their fanbase? How about an etched name or node ID plate for a bargain $199? $25 for 2 lines or $49 for 3 lines of text with choice of font? $9.99 to have it preattached?

[Enzo304 @ Jan 8th 2008 1:30PM]

How about software support on this for $49,995? Check it out when you're "customizing" this server on their site- 3 tiers of support, from $5,995 up to $49,995...

[Owen @ Jan 8th 2008 10:23AM]

Sure, since it's the most recent, it must be the most powerful, huh? :)

[Kamal @ Jan 8th 2008 11:05AM]

I wonder it is anything like the iphone. You can only use it for what apple approves.

[peshue @ Jan 8th 2008 11:07AM]

Guh Apple servers, my school runs on apple servers and it's a massive pain in the ass.

[Alex @ Jan 8th 2008 11:29AM]

Yeah but will it play crysis/doom?

[Rae @ Jan 8th 2008 1:23PM]

your an ass

[SteveMB @ Jan 8th 2008 5:10PM]

And judging by the look of your picture, you're a dirtbag!

[SteveMB @ Jan 8th 2008 5:55PM]

Oh by the way, you left you forgot your asshat.

[SteveMB @ Jan 8th 2008 5:56PM]

Oh by the way, you forgot your asshat.

[luzzio @ Jan 18th 2008 2:08AM]

blend?

[Lotzosushi. @ Jan 8th 2008 11:54AM]

Dare you upgrade to every top spec and most expensive features/extras... it gives you a total of $83,041.00... I'd still like to have some money for personal expenses thank you very much. Not that I'd be buying an XServe anytime soon.

[zgafford @ Jan 8th 2008 1:17PM]

The Xserve is a great media server. We evaluated servers that were all similarly spec'd (as close as we could get) and the Xserve won hands down. We use it at our school to server audio/video streams and our radio station is powered by a Xserve.

The hardware specs might not be on par with what Dell and HP are offering but the software is what makes the difference. Windows can't even come close to the stability of OS X Server.

We just finished installing 1 rack completly loaded with Xservers and 3 racks completly loaded with Xserve Raids in our biology department. They are linked together using Xsan software.

Once the custom software is installed it will be one of the most powerful bio-simulators in the region.

[Silenthillnight @ Jan 8th 2008 2:20PM]

"The hardware specs might not be on par with what Dell and HP are offering but the software is what makes the difference. Windows can't even come close to the stability of OS X Server."

Just like a guy said earlier in the comments, if you're having issues with stability using Dell blades, you're doing something wrong.

I've seen Dell servers slammed by millions of college admissions from across the nation and not even break a sweat. You know what brings it down? An idiot manager who tries to upgrade it without reading any documentation.

[Prestwick @ Jan 8th 2008 12:25PM]

ARRRRRGH! Its on a two post rack! Back! BACK! SPAWN OF SATAN! *stabs wildly with a Dell server faceplate*

[jim the webguy @ Jan 8th 2008 12:55PM]

That is sooo funny, i have a quad core pc at home that i built for 890 bux that outperforms this...LOL, nice try though Apple.

[invincible @ Jan 8th 2008 3:32PM]

I think the lesson we can learn from the above comments is that computers and operating systems are only as good as the people who operate and maintain them. There's no room for fanboyism. I can totally understand why IBM have ditched the consumer market.

[Rob_Quads @ Jan 8th 2008 5:58PM]

While it might be a big 8 cores within 1U is that really that much.

Compared with a IBM Bladecentre its not - 9u gets you 14 blades each
dual quad core..that's 112 cores in 9U ~ 12.4 cores per U i.e. 50%
more!

And anyone who has blades crashing on them needs their IT guys
trained or sacked as they should be rock solid (I know ours have
been)

[A-kay @ Jan 11th 2009 2:51PM]

You people (most of you) are doucebags....seriously. "DOOD MY IBM SERVER ROOOLZ!! APPLE SUXORRZ! LOLOL1OL1OL!!!" Freakin morons. It's a damn server, who cares?