Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: Why Apple compare Apache on OS X with IIS on NT

Author:Chuck Shotton
Posted:3/19/1999; 6:11:52 PM
Topic:Why Apple compare Apache on OS X with IIS on NT
Msg #:4322 (In response to 4319)
Prev/Next:4321 / 4323

A: Photoshop isn't a $100 app.

B: They can easily sell 50,000 copies of it.

When will there be 50,000 copies of Mac OS X Server running? The demand for Mac-based servers that run Unix has never been shown to exist (persist) at this level. If I want a commercial Unix server, I'm going to go buy a HP box, a Sun box, or even a SGI box before I try out Apple's latest experiment in the Unix world.

Mac OS X Server seems to provide one single compelling application that cannot be realized with any other platform. It provides a way to make the iMac work as the NC it was originally designed to be. The network booting and centralized administration will be nice for Macs in a lab. But as any sort of Unix-based application server, it's just not going to have the base of tools to draw on that more mature platforms in the market enjoy (like the ones I mentioned above.) If I was going to be in the business of writing enterprise applications for Unix servers, I'd do it for something with a proven market share.

I can see we're beating a mostly dead horse at this point. I interpret that you are focused on the value of the technology itself and I am examining the business merits of supporting Mac OS X. I won't debate the technology merits. Apple has shown year after year that the marketplace doesn't recognized superior technology.

People buy platforms with lots of inexpensive, supported, functional, reliable software. It is very risky to base a production Internet server installation on a platform as new and untested as Mac OS X Server. If I was setting up a lab of Macs, I'd be all over this platform. But name one other thing that it does better than its server competitors right now. That's why I don't see the market growing and why I don't see it as a viable platform to build on.

I'm going to leave it at that. I'm beginning to repeat myself and for those who got my point in the first message, I apologize for being pedantic.

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:48:55 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.