[Message Prev][Message
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Re: Storage subsystem for HA server
> plus going the PC route seems to be a recipe for getting
sucked-in to
lots of unplanned costs over time ... which we've found tends not to be
the case with Apple ...
See, I just don't get this...
The only reasons I have ever had for upgrading my hardware are component
failure, or because my needs changed. If you have a windows server just
ticking away, doing it's do, then it will do the same job for years without
ever needing new hardware until something fails.
The unplanned costs over time are because the platform provides you with so
many new things to try that you grow the requirements beyond the original
and start asking the server to do more and more with each passing year.
The Xserve units always leave me cold - if you want a nice desktop OS, Macs
are great, and parallels brings a whole new dimension to that, but if you
want a general purpose server, you simply cannot beat Server 2003 R2, or
one
of the variety of Linux SME distros, if you have an anti-microsoft beef.
Xserve strikes me as not solving any technical need, just providing another
route for Mac Zealots to purchase from the Temple of Jobs!!
Ian.
UKHA_D Main Index |
UKHA_D Thread Index |
UKHA_D Home |
Archives Home
|