I just shelled out on a mini server and a promise 8TB. My migration from 10.5 to 10.6 had gone extremely smoothly, so I was expecting nothing less. Boy, was I wrong.
Not only failed the old server to mount in target disk mode, the migration from the Time Machine backup failed the first time and kind of completed the second time. Nevertheless, all the promises Apple has made in their documentation are for someone else, but not for me. I couldn't get certificates to work because of some unspecified error (specifically said, that User intervention was not possible!). All other input was greyed out. I finally managed to get something done via the certificate assistant - not sure it works though as access to the mail server was still not working (STARTTLS was the smtp message incoming mail received) and users couldn't connect.
My server also acts as a router and does NAT b/w the outside world and the internal network. I work with static IPs and have about 60 or so addresses. Whereas in SLS you could define your internal network with whatever number combination you wanted (10.0.xxx or 192.168.xxx.xxx, etc.), I only found out after about three more hours, that LS only allows an internal network of the type 192.168.2.1 (see Gateway Assistant). Now, how stupid is this?
Another thing which I discovered: whereas in SLS, everything is neatly controlled in Server Admin, LS does away with this. NAT is set in Server Admin, but the detailed configuration is then to be found in System Preferences -> Sharing -> Internet Sharing. Somehow, Apple managed to tear the whole management process apart, with some things being specified in Server, some in System Preferences and some residual settings in Server Admin.
Server Admin gave you a lot of granularity about specifics of file sharing and the permission levels, introducing Access Control Lists, etc. Again, splattered about a number of different locations, one can only guess how to get this working again. I have a number of 'custom' settings for access. But there is no way to view or edit them sufficiently.
My verdict for the day is very bleak. If Steve had been more involved, the person heading this piece of software would not work at Apple anymore. It's a disgrace.
I am sitting now on a nice, but useless machine with a huge 8TB Thunderbolt drive.
My old SLS server has gone back online and is performing nicely.
I might go down the route of installing Parallels and running SLS in Virutalisation format as suggested in a previous post.
But for today, I am just shaking my head at what Apple have done. The signs are not good. First Final Cut Pro X being a complete disaster, now LS, what next????
One more thing: I think I will start another thread about alternative server environments for people frustrated with LS...