[starman]

Hi all,
I'm thinking about ditching Windows XP as my home's network server in favor of OS X Server. However, I'm not used to OS X Server at all. I use Windows every day so I know it like the back of my hand (IIS, File sharing, etc.).

I'd like opinions on the following:

How well does file sharing work in a mixed environment?

How does Apache compare to IIS?

I already screwed up the initial install of OS X Server by changing the IP address of the machine which caused services to crap out on the next reboot. What other bonehead things can mess it up?

How is printer sharing (in my case, an Epson 785EPX)?

Could an Apple Cube run OS X server well? I'm not doing anything heavy.

Any other advice would be great. Thanks.

Mike

[trusted_content]

Originally posted by starman:
How well does file sharing work in a mixed environment?

Very well. I've been using OS X server for 4 months now; when I was using it at school I was sharing a nice warez and mp3 collection via both Appleshare and Samba (for all the Windows users on campus). OS X Server lets you configure shares and users with a lot of detail (although you can achieve the same with SharePoints and some .conf file editing in OS X Client)

How does Apache compare to IIS?

Very stable, more features and support for open standards (PHP, OpenSSL, etc.). Very few r00t exploits; definitely more secure than IIS. I'd also say it's faster, but that's more the domain of Apache 2.x which I haven't tried yet (they switched to a multithreading model to handle new connections, which is supposed to have sped it up quite a bit).

I already screwed up the initial install of OS X Server by changing the IP address of the machine which caused services to crap out on the next reboot. What other bonehead things can mess it up?

Well, I think that can be fixed in your hosts file... its in /etc somewhere. But I've tweaked my OS X Server quite a bit (installed my own PHP, Perl and Apache) and I haven't screwed it up yet. (ONE kernel panic since install... that was last night)

How is printer sharing (in my case, an Epson 785EPX)?

Haven't given it a shot yet, although I hear there are some major caveats necessary (there's definitely not much in the way of configuration options for it). I know you can share printers via AppleTalk and Samba.

Could an Apple Cube run OS X server well? I'm not doing anything heavy.

Should be able to. I'm running it on an iMac FP 17" with an 800 mhz. G4; I don't see it as being unbearably slow on the 450 mhz. G4 you get in a Cube. From my experience, it's actually been marginally faster than OS X Client.

Any other advice would be great. Thanks.

Mike

Hope that halped.

-Mike

[Angus_D]

When I had a play with OS X Server, I found it overkill and went back to OS X. It's evil.

[Sarc]

I have workes quite a bit with OS X Server and I must say i like it a lot. Much simpler yet equally or more powerful than IIS and every other service than Win2KServer I have used.
The only thing I don't like is the FTP daemon, wich I replaced.

Very stable, a good server.

[Angus_D]

The thing is, will you actually be using much of the functionality of the server anyway? All the standard bits come with OS X. I mean, if you really need a spiffy gui to Apache, even iTools is cheaper.

[pliny]

Yes in a home environment why not just use the client's networking and printer sharing tools? I've seen posts here and other places from time to time saying the server is a bit more performative than the client but ymmv.

Unless you're really keen on using the server app of course.

[Cipher13]

Everything you've mentioned can be accomplished with OSX Client.

I use OSX Server at work, but only because we have a massive environment (~3000 users each with their own homes, email, etc etc), and because we need Novell/MacOS 9 integration (DAMN LDAP TO HELL).

Anyway... Apache kills IIS.

You'll find OSX Client more than adequate, I think.

OSX Client has samba and AFP - theres your mixed environment support.

[Truepop]

server is truly over kill for a home setting. There are a lot of open source apps (more don't have the nice aqua gui) that do jobs like what you want great, fast with much lower cpu over head than 10.2 server tools and free.

since you have a cube you might want to check in to Mac OS X Server version 2. its Mac OS X but with a classic interface and does all the stuff the new version does. look it up. and the best part is you can (if you are luckly enough to find it) get it for near free.

[starman]

Well, it's late and I'm on my way to bed, but I'll be sure to look into doing what I want with OS X Client. I knew, of course since it's UNIX that it all COULD be done, but historically I've had a problem with keeping up with all the "little things" that need updates.

Currently, all I have is a TiBook. Internal drive is my trusty OS X, and my external Firewire drive has OS X Server on it which I'm using to test Server with and see if I like it. I don't have a Cube yet, it'll be shipped tomorrow.

Mike

[Simon Mundy]

Client seems to be less fussy about 'customisations' than Server. I guess it's because most of the GUI configuration tools depend on prefs being in certain places and appearing in predefined ways.

I like beefing up Client with a bespoke list of apps rather than utilising the pre-made Server style. Anyway, for some purposes (like DNS, for example) you still need to do things via Terminal to get what you want, so why spend extra $$$ to achieve it?

I've just setup Server for one of my clients, and I must say the only things that I see adding real value are the remote administration apps (Workgroup Manager, Server Config and Server Status), which are nice brain-dead ways of checking up on your server. Otherwise, make SSH your friend.

There's also a few tweaks Apple have made to Server over the Client version - disk journalling is slightly faster on Server due to some memory caching, Sharing Mountpoints are easier to setup and more reliable (IMHO), and it is way easier to get mail services up and running.

If you're looking at getting the OS X Client version on-par with OS X Server and saving a few $$$, here's what I installed on my G3 iMac on our local network:

- PHP 4.3.0 (plus the Zend Optimiser)
- MySQL 4.0.12
- Sawmill (awesome web stats app)
- Postfix (as powerful as sendmail and slightly easier to configure)
- BIND 9.2 (see www.serverlogistics.com)
- Brickhouse (for easy firewall configuration)
- SQUID 2.5 (for caching your static web content)
- SharePoint (for applesharing volumes)

And don't forget www.macosxhints.com for a great repository of hints and tips to sort yourself out when you find yourself in a sticky mess

Good luck

[Angus_D]

Originally posted by Truepop:
since you have a cube you might want to check in to Mac OS X Server version 2.

There is no such thing. OSXS v1.2 was powerpc-apple-rhapsody5.5 and OSXS v10 was powerpc-apple-darwin1.0 (big version jump, but nowhere near as big as Marathon 2 to Marathon Infinity )

[Powaqqatsi]

Just use OSX Server, it adds to the coolness but yeah you can do everything you need with OSX Client.

[chris v]

Read the TOS you signed with your internet provider. Chances are it's illegal for you to run server software on their system.

Technically, I'm breaking my Roadrunner TOS by running OS X at all. One of these days, they're gonna bust me over me using my Cube as an FTP server.

CV

[Telusman]

I use OS X Server, merely for the experience of using OS X Server, About 3 weeks of using OS X Servers built in GUI Tools, i ended up switching to Command line tools for a lot of common things.

I Think X server is great, runs good on my iMac 400Mhz G3 with 384mb of ram. I run DNS, Web, Pop Server, IMAP server, AFP, SSH, Printer sharing, Sendmail, etc etc etc. Do not use Apples built in mail server, it allows the server to be used as an open relay... i found this out only after about 3000 e-mails went through m ys erver in a day, play it safe and use the builtin sendmail app.

DNS is included but just like on OS X client, you need to do all the manual configuration, the only thing the GUI for bind does, is turn it off, and on. thats it.

I had pretty much all the same stuff configured and usable when i was using OS X Client, except it was all done through the command line.

Some of the X -Server tools are flakey, and sometimes dont behave as you would expect.

I like it and i'll continue to use it to gain experience, but if your looking at it as a replacment for OS X client to serve your local network, don't bother. Client is cheaper and is just as configurable as Server 10.2

[starman]

Originally posted by chris v:
Read the TOS you signed with your internet provider. Chances are it's illegal for you to run server software on their system.

Technically, I'm breaking my Roadrunner TOS by running OS X at all. One of these days, they're gonna bust me over me using my Cube as an FTP server.

CV

Illegal != "breaking the terms of the agreement". Cops aren't going to come to my house. There are no local/state/federal laws against setting up a server.

People like to throw the word "illegal" around like the internet cops are waiting to pounce on the first person in town that accidentally starts web sharing.

Besides, they'll only know if I use common port numbers.

Mike

[chris v]

Originally posted by starman:
Illegal != "breaking the terms of the agreement". Cops aren't going to come to my house. There are no local/state/federal laws against setting up a server.

People like to throw the word "illegal" around like the internet cops are waiting to pounce on the first person in town that accidentally starts web sharing.

Besides, they'll only know if I use common port numbers.

Mike

You're right, illegal was a poor choice of words. I didn't mean in a criminal way,

I'm so sick of dealing with ISP's I occasionally dream about getting a T3 connection and an xServe and doing it all myself.

CV

[starman]

Originally posted by chris v:
You're right, illegal was a poor choice of words. I didn't mean in a criminal way,

I'm so sick of dealing with ISP's I occasionally dream about getting a T3 connection and an xServe and doing it all myself.

CV

That would be nice.

I've been reading the Comcast threads on DSLReports.com and lots of people use servers and don't get caught. In fact one guy says that he's been using port 80 for years! I dunno... I wouldn't mind paying more for the ability to have a server since that cost I wouldn't have to pay to the web host companies. The problem is that it's currenly $99/month which is a bit excessive. $75/month wouldn't be bad.

Mike

[legacyb4]

OS X Server runs quite capably on older hardware; we are running it as webserver for work as well as providing mail and FTP services. User management tools for larger number of users is well managed and managing multiple websites is a piece of cake.

I'd have to disagree about AMS; any mail server will become an open relay if not properly configured. Take the time to go through all your settings and configure it before bringing it online and you won't have any problems (assuming use of OS X Server 10.2 at least).

For DNS, grab Bindery or other GUI-based DNS configuration app and you'll be up and running in no time.

Probably the biggest reason you would want OS X Server aside from the management tools is:

1) use as a domain server (be it AD, LDAP, or NetInfo)
2) serving up AFP for more than 5 clients (or whatever the limit is on OS X client)

Cheers.

Originally posted by Telusman:
I use OS X Server, merely for the experience of using OS X Server, About 3 weeks of using OS X Servers built in GUI Tools, i ended up switching to Command line tools for a lot of common things.

I Think X server is great, runs good on my iMac 400Mhz G3 with 384mb of ram. I run DNS, Web, Pop Server, IMAP server, AFP, SSH, Printer sharing, Sendmail, etc etc etc. Do not use Apples built in mail server, it allows the server to be used as an open relay... i found this out only after about 3000 e-mails went through m ys erver in a day, play it safe and use the builtin sendmail app.

DNS is included but just like on OS X client, you need to do all the manual configuration, the only thing the GUI for bind does, is turn it off, and on. thats it.

I had pretty much all the same stuff configured and usable when i was using OS X Client, except it was all done through the command line.

Some of the X -Server tools are flakey, and sometimes dont behave as you would expect.

I like it and i'll continue to use it to gain experience, but if your looking at it as a replacment for OS X client to serve your local network, don't bother. Client is cheaper and is just as configurable as Server 10.2

[Xeo]

Moving to the Server forum.

[alex_kac]

Originally posted by starman:
Illegal != "breaking the terms of the agreement". Cops aren't going to come to my house. There are no local/state/federal laws against setting up a server.

People like to throw the word "illegal" around like the internet cops are waiting to pounce on the first person in town that accidentally starts web sharing.

Besides, they'll only know if I use common port numbers.

Mike

Breaking your contract is illegal. Even if you don't agree with it.

[starman]

Originally posted by alex_kac:
Breaking your contract is illegal. Even if you don't agree with it.

Bullshit. Prove that. Nobody's ever been arrested for only opening port 80 on their network connection. The best they could do is fine you, and even that's stretching it.

Mike

[Moose]

Originally posted by starman:
Bullshit. Prove that. Nobody's ever been arrested for only opening port 80 on their network connection. The best they could do is fine you, and even that's stretching it.

Mike

Arrests are only made for violations of criminal law (United States v. Starman), and breaking a contract is a violation of civil law (MacNN Forums v. Starman).

Bringing a civil suit against a customer breaking a contract generally wouldn't be cost-effective, so ISPs just close the account.

[tooki]

OS X Server basically provides only a few major features vis-a-vis OS X Client:

- Netboot server
- remote administration
- priority tweaking so server processes perform better


For most home use, you'll be just fine using OS X Client. But yes, you'll need some third-party utilities to activate some of it.

Tenon iTools is WAY overpriced. Almost anything iTools can do, Webmin can do for free!

If you're not comfortable editing config files, but have a decent grasp of what needs to be done, I highly recommend installing Webmin, even on OS X Server.

tooki

[legacyb4]

Agreed.

If you are not having to dish out services for more than a household, roll up your sleeves, do a bit of dabbling in CLI, and you will be up and running in no time.

I finally got around to enabling BIND (using Bindery) as well as Postfix over this past weekend which took no more than an hour including installation and configuring for my specific needs.

Cheers.

Originally posted by tooki:
OS X Server basically provides only a few major features vis-a-vis OS X Client:

- Netboot server
- remote administration
- priority tweaking so server processes perform better


For most home use, you'll be just fine using OS X Client. But yes, you'll need some third-party utilities to activate some of it.

Tenon iTools is WAY overpriced. Almost anything iTools can do, Webmin can do for free!

If you're not comfortable editing config files, but have a decent grasp of what needs to be done, I highly recommend installing Webmin, even on OS X Server.

tooki

[drjoe]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by legacyb4:
[B]OS X Server runs quite capably on older hardware;

Indeed it does. I have an old 8500/120 decked out with a Sonnet 450 G3, lotsa of ram and a couple of 18 GB scsi drives. I use it to run file/print/web[Apache] and mail[Post.Office] for my home and office. Runs flawlessly. using OSX client. Macs seem to run forever

[geekstud]

There is need for a product from Apple that does not currently exist - a "SOHO" version of the server OS. Apple has created this need with its success in selling multiple units into small office and especially home situations.

Now that OS X is the standard Apple OS, customers are getting used to the idea of using multiple user accounts on the systems. For example, in my home, each member of the household has their own user account on the "family" iMac setup in the kitchen. Works great at keeping the kids out of mom and dad's files, etc - but a complication arises when the second iMac and first and second iBooks show up on the scene. Now, how shall we distribute the user accounts across those four systems? What if we want to be able to have any user login to any system and be able to have access to a standard account look and feel, complete with one shared home directory?

The answer in a larger environment would be to use a Mac OS X Server on a dedicated system to manage the accounts. Now: what's the answer in that home setting? One option would be a smaller, cheaper, and easier version of the current server product that would provide a simple, as close to "one-click" GUI setup of the server system and client systems to use those family user accounts. Another option would be to extend the rendezvous metaphor and have user accounts "roam" over the LAN from any "home" system to any "remote" system. Either way, there doesn't seem to be a current offering from Apple to address this need.

Cheers,

-Nathan

[RobL]

Originally posted by geekstud:
There is need for a product from Apple that does not currently exist - a "SOHO" version of the server OS. Apple has created this need with its success in selling multiple units into small office and especially home situations.

Now that OS X is the standard Apple OS, customers are getting used to the idea of using multiple user accounts on the systems. For example, in my home, each member of the household has their own user account on the "family" iMac setup in the kitchen. Works great at keeping the kids out of mom and dad's files, etc - but a complication arises when the second iMac and first and second iBooks show up on the scene. Now, how shall we distribute the user accounts across those four systems? What if we want to be able to have any user login to any system and be able to have access to a standard account look and feel, complete with one shared home directory?

The answer in a larger environment would be to use a Mac OS X Server on a dedicated system to manage the accounts. Now: what's the answer in that home setting? One option would be a smaller, cheaper, and easier version of the current server product that would provide a simple, as close to "one-click" GUI setup of the server system and client systems to use those family user accounts. Another option would be to extend the rendezvous metaphor and have user accounts "roam" over the LAN from any "home" system to any "remote" system. Either way, there doesn't seem to be a current offering from Apple to address this need.

Cheers,

-Nathan

That's exactly what interested me in OSX Server. Having four different accounts on four different machines is tedious and confusing at times. Your SOHO version idea has lots of merit, or even a Netboot that works with OSX client vers.


How easy/safe would it be to ignore the other parts of the server os that would be of less use to me? My ideal setup is OSX Jag with Netboot and ARD.