3 ms·
I think the TLDR summary is that MacOS doesn't work very well in the datacenter. The hardware is not designed for rack mounting. The OS licensing is not frien
by nas 9y ago
I think the TLDR summary is that MacOS doesn't work very well in the datacenter. The hardware is not designed for rack mounting. The OS licensing is not friendly to running VMs. I wonder if this is going to bite Apple in the long run. Building datacenters that run Linux is so much easier and cheaper. Microsoft has been trying to up their game but Apple apparently has no interest or no clue. Maybe that's fine. They are awash in money from their iPhone hardware so why should they care.
Edit: photo of goofy setup here https://www.macstadium.com/datacenters/ https://www.macstadium.com/datacenters/
- GMBook 9y agoI'm not sure goofy is the word. Looks pretty neat to me. (recent tweet by their VP with a picture:https://twitter.com/brianstucki/status/897076500049969152 https://twitter.com/brianstucki/status/897076500049969152) But you're right, it needs to scale much better. I'm surprised how many people think macOS VMs are available at Amazon only to visit and see that's not the case. Maybe this is part of the reason for all the new Apple data centers...someday.
- eridius 9y agoThe OS licensing is friendly to running VMs as long as the underlying hardware is Mac hardware. Building datacenters that run Linux is easier and cheaper, but Apple is a hardware company, they want to sell you hardware, so there's not much incentive for them to allow people to virtualize macOS on non-Mac hardware.
- boris 9y agoI wouldn't call a limit to two VMs friendly. Plus Apple doesn't make suitable hardware for this.
- eridius 9y agoHuh, I didn't realize they limited it to 2 VMs, but I just checked and you're right. That said, since they don't make appropriate hardware for this, I'm not sure I'd want to tax a Mac mini with more than 2 VMs anyway ;)