4 ms·
>What's wrong with that? Functioning as a server is a use case. Labelling the desktop / embedded grade hardware as server grade is false marketing in my my op
by c_o_n_v_e_x 3y ago
>What's wrong with that?
Functioning as a server is a use case. Labelling the desktop / embedded grade hardware as server grade is false marketing in my my opinion. Celeron is a desktop or embedded grade CPU (as per Intel's own classification).
>A server can have any kind of CPU.
You can use any kind of CPU to "serve." From a hardware point of view, there are categories of CPUs that are classified as server grade with specific feature sets. Intel Atom (C series) and Xeon are server grade (again per Intel's classification). The lines between Intel's server and desktop grade CPUs used to be very clear, however they are blurring over time. For example, new Core series CPUs support ECC memory which used to be a server specific feature however they still lack RAS features.
Xeons have support much more memory, have higher core counts, have ECC and RAS, support multi sockets, etc.
- colejohnson66 3y agoJust because “server” has the connotation of a 28+ core-each dual-Xeon setup does not mean that this isn’t a server. After all, a “server” just means a computer that serves content, and this qualifies. No one is recommending one put this processor in a data center, and, at the same time, no one is recommending I put a multi-thousand dollar Xeon in my NAS.
- c_o_n_v_e_x 3y ago>a “server” just means a computer that serves content From a software point of view, you are correct. You can use any machine you want for that use case. It's one thing to say - "You can use this computer as a server / to serve content." It's something different to say "this is computer is a single board server" when it actually isn't. I know I'm being pedantic but I work in Product for a server manufacturer. I'll stop now.
- colejohnson66 3y agoYou’re correct, and maybe I was a bit harsh in my response. But there’s not really a good word for “a file store and a bit more” besides “server”.
- snitty 3y agoThis is a really fun argument we're having where the various parties don't agree on the definition of the thing they're arguing about.
- KomoD 3y agoThey never labeled it as "server grade"...?
- c_o_n_v_e_x 3y agoStraight from the copy on their website - "Zimaboard is a low cost single board server designed for makers and geeks like you." Or this one: "World’s First Hackable Single Board Server Starting at $119.9"
- hrrsn 3y agoCalling it a server is not the same as saying server grade hardware.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y agoCalling a piece of hardware a server is indeed the same as saying the hardware is server grade, whatever that may mean (if it doesn't meet the grade to be used for servers, whatever that grade might be, logically you shouldn't call it one). Otherwise, every computer is a server, making the term "server" extraneous. It isn't extraneous, though, therefore server and computer must not mean exactly the same thing. One could also argue this isn't a server because it isn't serving anything, it's just a powered down computer in a cardboard box in a warehouse, waiting for you to order it and tell it what to do, like any other computer (maybe you want it to serve stuff, maybe not).
- viraptor 3y agoThis is effectively a prescriptive vs descriptive language issue. And prescriptive side always loses, because the people adjust the word meaning for a reason. The expected usage here is: This device goes under the desk / into some closet, runs headless, runs 24/7 and provides some services on the network. It's a server. That's how people use this word these days, RPi is a server device too. (See /r/selfhosted)
- 3y ago