6 Replies Latest reply: Dec 27, 2011 11:35 PM by capaho
One Big Wookie Level 1 Level 1

This is more of a general question, and partially relates to some potential career path goals. 



What types of businesses are adopting OS X Server (and Mac in general).  A related question would be what types of businesses are purposely making the switch away from that "other" (inferior  ) OS to Mac?  I'm currently working on the ACSP 10.7 certifciation (mostly for my own personal knowledge), and am considering purchasing Lion Server and perhaps taking the ACTC 10.7 certfiication.  Just wondering what the overall demand is for people knowledgable in both OS X client and server admin and troubleshooting.



Thanks for your help and input.




MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.7.2)
  • FL_MacTech Level 2 Level 2

    Most companies still use windows on the back end. I manage macs worldwide at my job. My advice learn bash and as many languages as possible. Embrace windows and Linux it's what is used in most companies. Learn how to use JAMF, puppet, munki, simian, chef, etc.... Master some of that and and you can write your own ticket.

  • capaho Level 4 Level 4

    My company does software development and IT.  We used Linux servers for many years before I switched to Mac minis running SL Server a couple of years ago.  The admin tools in SL Server were approaching those available for Linux and I was impressed enough to make the change.


    However, Lion Server appears to be a step backwards and is a disappointment after investing in Mac minis and SL Server.  Apple appears focused on the home server market for the uninitiated.  It's hard to take Lion Server seriously as a server for business.  I will likely go back to Linux servers when it's time to retire the minis.


    As for Windows, I don't like IIS for a multitude of reasons and would never seriously consider it for my servers.

  • goeres Level 1 Level 1

    Since using mac os x we reduced our it department and have less trouble.

    Yes it is true the 10.7 server got much simpler with less blows and wristlets. But do we need all the blows and wristles?

    We have been using Microsoft than saw the advantage of CLI in Linix and ended with the early Mac OS X server as it had both worlds GUI and CLI. We used in production 10.4 &10.6 (by the time we were ready with 10.5 10.6 came out) we are thoroughly working to adopt 10.7 and asking ourself if we need all those features from earlier versions? Apple (S Jobs) tough us to keep things simple and easy.

  • capaho Level 4 Level 4

    goeres wrote:


    But do we need all the blows and wristles?


    Yes.  Lion Server out of the box does not allow for complex custom configurations short of manually editing text configuration files, which is an ironic step backwards from SL Server considering Apple's commitment to ease-of-use GUIs. 


    Instead of improving the admin tools that were available with SL Server, they simply removed too many of them.  That would suggest that they've given up on the market for business servers to focus on the market for toy servers for home use, which is a bit disconserting considering that Lion Server's security is also woefully lacking out of the box.  It's hard to figure how any IT professional could take it seriously.


    The Internet is a dangerous place to play with a server.  Apple's quest to simplify OS X Server with Lion has resulted in a server package that is dangerously simplistic.  If Lion Server becomes popular for home use, I expect to see a rapid expansion of botnets.

  • Robert Goeres Level 1 Level 1

    In my humble opinion the Lion Server got simpler to avoid the possibility to open to much security issues. But that is everyone's personal interpretation.

  • capaho Level 4 Level 4

    Robert Goeres wrote:


    In my humble opinion the Lion Server got simpler to avoid the possibility to open to much security issues. But that is everyone's personal interpretation.


    Lion Server is a security issue.  Its default security settings are inadequate and its lack of support for the Apache security module is inexcusable.  There are going to be a lot of compromised web sites out there.