<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New Mac mini Runs OS X Server for $999</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 17:42:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: shawn!</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359857</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[shawn!]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 05:06:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359857</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wow...this reviewer needs help...he understandings nothing about needs in the market.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow&#8230;this reviewer needs help&#8230;he understandings nothing about needs in the market.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MacMiniAdmin</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359856</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MacMiniAdmin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:35:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359856</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[OS X Server is very simliar to the normal operating system. For the most part, OS X can do everything the server version can. The biggest seller in my opinion is the hardware changes, specifically the memory and disk configuration. I recommend immediately setting up RAID 1 mirroring (http://www.macminiworld.net/blog/mac-mini-server-raid1-configuration)

If your considering a server I recommend checking the Apple specs for features you want. There are some neat tools, but remember with a little skill you can normally replicate that stuff using open source software. The back end is -- after all -- UNIX.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OS X Server is very simliar to the normal operating system. For the most part, OS X can do everything the server version can. The biggest seller in my opinion is the hardware changes, specifically the memory and disk configuration. I recommend immediately setting up RAID 1 mirroring (<a href="http://www.macminiworld.net/blog/mac-mini-server-raid1-configuration" rel="nofollow">http://www.macminiworld.net/blog/mac-mini-server-raid1-configuration</a>)</p>
<p>If your considering a server I recommend checking the Apple specs for features you want. There are some neat tools, but remember with a little skill you can normally replicate that stuff using open source software. The back end is &#8212; after all &#8212; UNIX.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Regi</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359855</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Regi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 04:27:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359855</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Conrad says: &quot;Do you need to run “Snow Leopard Server”, or can you run “Snow Leopard” {the non-server version} as your server?&quot;

So, this is exactly the doubt I have now,  I mean for a home or small business use. Any one could help with this doubt, please?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Conrad says: &#8220;Do you need to run “Snow Leopard Server”, or can you run “Snow Leopard” {the non-server version} as your server?&#8221;</p>
<p>So, this is exactly the doubt I have now,  I mean for a home or small business use. Any one could help with this doubt, please?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frustrated OSX Server Admin</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359854</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frustrated OSX Server Admin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:24:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359854</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REALLY?  Just &quot;set it&quot; and &quot;forget it.&quot; Hmm. You are dreaming.

Good Luck!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REALLY?  Just &#8220;set it&#8221; and &#8220;forget it.&#8221; Hmm. You are dreaming.</p>
<p>Good Luck!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conrad</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359853</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Conrad]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359853</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The new Mac Mini server is a great idea. 

I would immediately pull the two 500GB drives, sell them on eBay, and install whatever size SSD drives I felt I needed, either in RAID 0, with an external back up like a 2TB drive via Firewire, or back up over ethernet.  Another option, that would keep the whole package tiny, is to use RAID 1.

SSD&#039;s make a Mac Mini blazing fast, and they are reliable.  

RAID 0 would nearly double your access speed.

I&#039;m not sure RAID 1 would be needed with reliable SSD drives, but on a server you need some redundancy don&#039;t you?  I&#039;d lean towards RAID 0 and remote storage over ethernet--which puts your &quot;back-up&quot; at a different location for true redundancy.

The big advantage of the SSD drives is they run much cooler than hot running spinning disks in the poor thermal environment of the Mini.    

I don&#039;t enjoy checking temperatures constantly.  I use software to spin up the fans to manage heat with the hotter conventional disk drives.  I&#039;d rather rely on cooler, more reliable Solid State Drives, and save energy too.  

So the last issue is cost.  It is still cheaper to use a Mac Mini server with SSD&#039;s than any other brand server with SSD&#039;s.  For many applications a large SSD is not necessary--so size it appropriately.  

The real question is this:  

Do you need to run &quot;Snow Leopard Server&quot;, or can you run &quot;Snow Leopard&quot; {the non-server version} as your server?  

That would keep costs down and still provide great performance. 

Older, slower Mac Mini&#039;s can do the job as well as the new Server Version.

The newest, fastest processor has one advantage: 

----with Solid State Drives, a faster processor does make a significant difference keeping the data moving.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The new Mac Mini server is a great idea. </p>
<p>I would immediately pull the two 500GB drives, sell them on eBay, and install whatever size SSD drives I felt I needed, either in RAID 0, with an external back up like a 2TB drive via Firewire, or back up over ethernet.  Another option, that would keep the whole package tiny, is to use RAID 1.</p>
<p>SSD&#8217;s make a Mac Mini blazing fast, and they are reliable.  </p>
<p>RAID 0 would nearly double your access speed.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure RAID 1 would be needed with reliable SSD drives, but on a server you need some redundancy don&#8217;t you?  I&#8217;d lean towards RAID 0 and remote storage over ethernet&#8211;which puts your &#8220;back-up&#8221; at a different location for true redundancy.</p>
<p>The big advantage of the SSD drives is they run much cooler than hot running spinning disks in the poor thermal environment of the Mini.    </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t enjoy checking temperatures constantly.  I use software to spin up the fans to manage heat with the hotter conventional disk drives.  I&#8217;d rather rely on cooler, more reliable Solid State Drives, and save energy too.  </p>
<p>So the last issue is cost.  It is still cheaper to use a Mac Mini server with SSD&#8217;s than any other brand server with SSD&#8217;s.  For many applications a large SSD is not necessary&#8211;so size it appropriately.  </p>
<p>The real question is this:  </p>
<p>Do you need to run &#8220;Snow Leopard Server&#8221;, or can you run &#8220;Snow Leopard&#8221; {the non-server version} as your server?  </p>
<p>That would keep costs down and still provide great performance. </p>
<p>Older, slower Mac Mini&#8217;s can do the job as well as the new Server Version.</p>
<p>The newest, fastest processor has one advantage: </p>
<p>&#8212;-with Solid State Drives, a faster processor does make a significant difference keeping the data moving.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BitGolum</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359852</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[BitGolum]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 07:33:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359852</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The precious will be mine. Oh yes!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The precious will be mine. Oh yes!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Saber</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359851</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Saber]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:31:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359851</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Really (matwyn)???  You must be a robot that never sleeps.  Since you would have to install one of these every 3 business days, to install over 40 in just 6 months (stretching the truth a bit, hey?). Do you just install and run? Leave the configuration and support for someone else to clean-up.  No wonder you think this is great.

I haven&#039;t seen a post about backing this thing up.  Can anyone say RAID or at least mirrored drives?  How about the cost of the external drive for Time machine?

This is a CHEAP solution.  I&#039;m not so sure how great it is.  I guess if you don&#039;t mind the downtime when a drive fails or you&#039;re just going to drop $599 to replace the system at the first hardware failure.   Maybe it&#039;s great if your reselling Mac minis.  As a long term solution for a small business that might decide to put all of their business data in one basket, I don&#039;t think it a good idea.

Spend another $800 - $1000 for external storage or maybe a fail-over Mac mini and then you might have a solution a business can rely on.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really (matwyn)???  You must be a robot that never sleeps.  Since you would have to install one of these every 3 business days, to install over 40 in just 6 months (stretching the truth a bit, hey?). Do you just install and run? Leave the configuration and support for someone else to clean-up.  No wonder you think this is great.</p>
<p>I haven&#8217;t seen a post about backing this thing up.  Can anyone say RAID or at least mirrored drives?  How about the cost of the external drive for Time machine?</p>
<p>This is a CHEAP solution.  I&#8217;m not so sure how great it is.  I guess if you don&#8217;t mind the downtime when a drive fails or you&#8217;re just going to drop $599 to replace the system at the first hardware failure.   Maybe it&#8217;s great if your reselling Mac minis.  As a long term solution for a small business that might decide to put all of their business data in one basket, I don&#8217;t think it a good idea.</p>
<p>Spend another $800 &#8211; $1000 for external storage or maybe a fail-over Mac mini and then you might have a solution a business can rely on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kendall Tawes</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359850</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kendall Tawes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:35:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unlimited License Mac OS X Sever used to cost $1000 by itself. For that price I now get a Mac Mini with two 500GB drives too. I would say that&#039;s a great deal indeed.

And yes the base Mac Mini should be $499. There is no reason for it to be $599 anymore.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unlimited License Mac OS X Sever used to cost $1000 by itself. For that price I now get a Mac Mini with two 500GB drives too. I would say that&#8217;s a great deal indeed.</p>
<p>And yes the base Mac Mini should be $499. There is no reason for it to be $599 anymore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DBX</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359849</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DBX]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:33:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359849</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ll join in the praises of the new server.  It&#039;s the first time in five or six years that Apple has put out a headless Mac that meets my needs.  It&#039;s good value for money, it has a low enough power draw to leave switched on which I&#039;d think is a rather important spec for a server, and having a server OS that doesn&#039;t require an IT guy is kind of nice too.

The only thing overpriced here is the standard Mac Mini.  $599 was steep before -- given the new server and iMac choices, it&#039;s inexplicable now.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ll join in the praises of the new server.  It&#8217;s the first time in five or six years that Apple has put out a headless Mac that meets my needs.  It&#8217;s good value for money, it has a low enough power draw to leave switched on which I&#8217;d think is a rather important spec for a server, and having a server OS that doesn&#8217;t require an IT guy is kind of nice too.</p>
<p>The only thing overpriced here is the standard Mac Mini.  $599 was steep before &#8212; given the new server and iMac choices, it&#8217;s inexplicable now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vanni</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/apple/new-mac-mini-runs-os-x-server-for-999/#comment-359848</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vanni]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/?p=34525#comment-359848</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well here is someone with some very usefull information o nteh new mini servers:

http://www.macminicolo.net/state2009.html]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well here is someone with some very usefull information o nteh new mini servers:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.macminicolo.net/state2009.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.macminicolo.net/state2009.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

