Mac mini server array pro#

gavbon86: It seems thinks shaving 1 cent off the Core i7-12700K is worthy of being called an 'offer'.Did someone new not bother to ask if they'd been around - or did soвЂ¦ gavbon86: RT Er, what? These have been about for decades.If you want to know things about your serverвЂ™s temperature, RAID status, and the rest, youвЂ™ll have to rely on third-party tools. The main drawback of AppleвЂ™s current server hardware is lack of monitoring tools - the Server Monitor tool that continues to come with the Server Admin Tools download requires Lights Out Management (LOM) support in the hardware, and the XServes were the only Apple computers that did this.

Mac mini server array pro#

This, perhaps combined with a price drop, could make the Mac Pro Server a better choice than one or two Minis. The Mac Pro is still waiting on its 2011 refresh, which should bring both newer processors and (if the rumors are to be believed) a new, smaller case (since the current case design has remained largely the same since the Power Mac G5 came out eight years ago). ItвЂ™s a little harder to recommend, since the performance gap between the base Mac Pro Server configuration and Mac Mini Server configuration is smaller than it once was, and since the Mac Pro would take up so much space in a rack. The second is the Mac Pro Server, which can pack enough processing power and memory to host OS X Server and a couple of virtual OS X Servers if you wanted. Bump it up to 8GB of RAM (aftermarket, if youвЂ™re smart - friends donвЂ™t let friends pay $200 for a $60 memory kit) and youвЂ™ve got yourself a decent little server box. The Mini Server became easier to recommend after its recent refresh, where it gained the Sandy Bridge architecture and its quad-core processor in one fell swoop.