Help
Post your comments for Help wanted: Apple using Oracle, IBM servers in data center here
Help wanted: Apple using Oracle, IBM servers in data center
#3
cv 
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 384
- Joined: 08-December 06
Posted 29 June 2012 - 03:29 PM
lkrupp, on 29 June 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:
This will be fodder for the trolls but OS X is Unix under the hood after all.
I don't know why anyone would deny it. OS X has been registered as Open Brand UNIX 03 since October 2007 starting with OS X 10.5 "Leopard" running on Intel processors.
#4
kosh
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 52
- Joined: 23-January 12
Posted 29 June 2012 - 03:33 PM
lkrupp, on 29 June 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:
This will be fodder for the trolls but OS X is Unix under the hood after all.
This is no different than the "trolls" who trash Microsoft for having their TV commercials created on Macs. Credibility is an important consideration. Before telling customers to replace their Xserves with Mac Pros and Mac Minis, Apple should have done it in their own server rooms in order to be taken seriously. If Apple can't use their own "servers", why should anyone else?
This post has been edited by kosh: 29 June 2012 - 03:35 PM
#5
cv
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 384
- Joined: 08-December 06
Posted 29 June 2012 - 03:45 PM
Apple has been using big UNIX server iron for enterprise-level services for a long time, including various iterations of their consumer e-mail (.Mac, MobileMe, etc.) using Oracle Messaging Server (or whatever it's called now).
Only a naive fool would think that Apple should be running these kind of enterprise applications on their own hardware.
It's not like Intuit is using QuickBooks for their own finances. If you're a Fortune 500 company, you are probably using Oracle or SAP for your company's enterprise software. Only Oracle and SAP are running their own products, everyone else is using either company's solutions.
Only a naive fool would think that Apple should be running these kind of enterprise applications on their own hardware.
It's not like Intuit is using QuickBooks for their own finances. If you're a Fortune 500 company, you are probably using Oracle or SAP for your company's enterprise software. Only Oracle and SAP are running their own products, everyone else is using either company's solutions.
#6
Stewsburntmonkey
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 2,150
- Joined: 03-July 07
Posted 29 June 2012 - 05:38 PM
kosh, on 29 June 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:
lkrupp, on 29 June 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:
This will be fodder for the trolls but OS X is Unix under the hood after all.
This is no different than the "trolls" who trash Microsoft for having their TV commercials created on Macs. Credibility is an important consideration. Before telling customers to replace their Xserves with Mac Pros and Mac Minis, Apple should have done it in their own server rooms in order to be taken seriously. If Apple can't use their own "servers", why should anyone else?
You would never run a server farm like this on XServes either. Apple has never made servers for this sort of application.
#7
macmanmk
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 120
- Joined: 18-February 05
Posted 29 June 2012 - 09:28 PM
No surprise here. We got a tour of their Cupertino data center five years ago and once you got past the stack of XServes behind glass just beyond the entrance, all of the back end systems were being run on Sun hardware.
#8
Spock
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 49
- Joined: 22-December 09
Posted 29 June 2012 - 11:01 PM
kosh, on 29 June 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:
lkrupp, on 29 June 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:
This will be fodder for the trolls but OS X is Unix under the hood after all.
This is no different than the "trolls" who trash Microsoft for having their TV commercials created on Macs. Credibility is an important consideration. Before telling customers to replace their Xserves with Mac Pros and Mac Minis, Apple should have done it in their own server rooms in order to be taken seriously. If Apple can't use their own "servers", why should anyone else?
Actually, this is very different.
Apple never claimed to make servers running business-critical applications for Fortune 500 level businesses. Nor did it ask Amazon or IBM to run their enterprise applications on Minis. So, it is perfectly OK for them to use Oracle or SAP running on custom high-end hardware in their data center.
Microsoft, on the other hand, claims to make both OS and applications that are better than Apple's offerings. MS also claims that PC hardware is better than Apple's Macs. If that is correct, they should not be using Macs or Apple software to create their ads. If it is good enough for your customers, then you should use it yourself - in similar applications.
#9
chasbo
- Newbie
-
- Group: New Members
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 28-June 12
Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:20 AM
I doubt Microsoft did their commercials in-house. It's more likely the agency they worked with had a base of Apple hardware installed. Conversely, Pixar is known to have used HP workstations in spite of Steve Jobs involvement. You use the tool for the job. Trolls, on both sides, are basically idiots.
#10
IanGosso8n5
- Member
-
- Group: New Members
- Posts: 17
- Joined: 28-August 11
Posted 30 June 2012 - 04:31 AM
Power is emphatically NOT the same as PowerPC, which MacOS ran on for some years; that chip architecture is derived *from* the Power series. Look it up.
#11
Spock
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 49
- Joined: 22-December 09
Posted 30 June 2012 - 06:32 AM
chasbo, on 30 June 2012 - 04:20 AM, said:
I doubt Microsoft did their commercials in-house. It's more likely the agency they worked with had a base of Apple hardware installed. Conversely, Pixar is known to have used HP workstations in spite of Steve Jobs involvement. You use the tool for the job. Trolls, on both sides, are basically idiots.
Actually, Microsoft used Macs in their in-house design department.
#12
veggiedude
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 961
- Joined: 30-August 04
Posted 30 June 2012 - 07:29 AM
Stewsburntmonkey, on 29 June 2012 - 05:38 PM, said:
You would never run a server farm like this on XServes either. Apple has never made servers for this sort of application.
I recall Virginia Tech used G5 Macs to create the worlds 7th super computer.
http://www.apple.com...ofiles/vatech2/
#13
Stewsburntmonkey
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 2,150
- Joined: 03-July 07
Posted 30 June 2012 - 07:37 AM
veggiedude, on 30 June 2012 - 07:29 AM, said:
Stewsburntmonkey, on 29 June 2012 - 05:38 PM, said:
You would never run a server farm like this on XServes either. Apple has never made servers for this sort of application.
I recall Virginia Tech used G5 Macs to create the worlds 7th super computer.
http://www.apple.com...ofiles/vatech2/
They did do that, but they weren't running this sort of server farm. It was a quick and cheap build to run some scientific calculations. They were also able to sell off the computers as they upgraded to recoup some of the money.
Google has done a similar thing, using off the shelf consumer hardware to run data centers, but it's not reliable so you have to distribute everything to provide reliability. However, in Google's system you need a lot of cheap hardware, which Macs really aren't.
These days the space and energy requirements of large data centers make these approaches much less realistic.
This post has been edited by Stewsburntmonkey: 30 June 2012 - 07:38 AM
#14
Frost7
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 212
- Joined: 09-February 05
Posted 30 June 2012 - 05:34 PM
IanGosso8n5, on 30 June 2012 - 04:31 AM, said:
Power is emphatically NOT the same as PowerPC, which MacOS ran on for some years; that chip architecture is derived *from* the Power series. Look it up.
Actually, IBM unified the POWER and PowerPC ISAs in the years since Apple moved to x86. They dropped POWER, and the current Power processors run what used to be PowerPC, albeit a more modern and way the hell more powerful version.
