In-Depth with Mac OS X Lion Server
by Andrew Cunningham on August 2, 2011 8:00 AM ESTFile Sharing
Click the edit button, and you can control access permissions to each individual folder, as well as what protocols the folders are offered over - AFP for OS X clients, SMB for Windows clients, and WebDAV for iOS clients (many apps, the iOS iWork apps among them, can only connect via WebDAV - this useful new feature is one of the few that could truly justify OS X Server in a home environment).
You may remember from our Lion review that Apple changed up its SMB implementation in Lion. As in the client version, the change shouldn’t affect most server users either: Windows 7, Vista, and XP clients can still connect to SMB shares hosted by OS X Server without issue.
Podcast and Podcast Composer
The Podcast service (which needs the Wiki service to be fully functional, it would seem) works together with the Podcast Composer (another of the Server Admin Tools) to provide end-to-end podcast recording, editing, and hosting. Turn on the Podcast service (and the Wiki service if you haven't already) and then fire up the Podcast Composer.
This program is pretty straightfoward - it builds a podcasting workflow, asking you what you'd like to use to record, what file formats you'd like to export to when done, what fades and wipes you'd like to use - everything a newbie podcaster needs, really (though this does seem to be tailored more to internal-use-only recordings and less to something you'd download from the iTunes store - just an observation). You'll want to specify your server's address under the Publish heading in the default workflow, where you can also specify whether you'd like to save any of the raw files along with the final product.
Once you've successfully published, they're up on your server for everyone with appropriate permissions to see.
Time Machine
In that sense, the Time Machine service actually makes more sense now that Apple server hardware and software are both within reach of the home user. While the Mini’s 500GB of storage (assuming you’re RAIDing your drives, as a good server admin would) might not be enough to backup the two dozen Macs that a small business would have, but it’d be great for the 1-3 Macs that a home user would have. It gives you a good network backup solution if you don’t want to splurge for a Time Capsule or something.
Whatever the case, it’s easy to setup - like most OS X Server services, it’s up to you to decide if it makes sense for you or your organization.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
77 Comments
View All Comments
Wizzdo - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
Lion's web server IS Apache. LOL.jigglywiggly - Tuesday, August 2, 2011 - link
I am too much of an elitist fag to succumb to this.I just installed my Debian GUI-less server today to replace my o'll ubuntu 10.04 LTS GUI server, got everyhting setup, mysql, apache, php, samba settings, everything gud to go with only 100 megs of ram usage.
Sure it took much longer to setup, but I am an elitist fag
don_k - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
Since when is netboot unique to OSX server? Last I checked all *nix variants have had that ability for decades.But really, organisations concerned about the sticker price on their server software are not going to go get an apple 'server' for $1k when they can download an iso in 5min and get going are they?
Not to mention the complete lack of necessary system tools (archiving, compiing especially) without installing macports or something.
Call it like it is - 1k to manage all those damn pads and phones everyone in the company demands they are able to access the company intranet.
johnbouy - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
Time Machine took a big step backwards with Lion Server. In Snow Leopard Server you could allow time machine backups on individual share points. This allows you to partition a disk and set up individual partitions for specific Time Machine backups. I use this to control how much disk space is allocated for a backup. In Lion you get to nominate one share point/partition as the Time Machine backup storage point. Hence any client that backs up to the server uses the same disk space. A real step backwards!Another issue is that Server.app rewets .config files when started up so you potentially lose any changes you were forced to make due to the lousy Lion Web service interface.
digitalzombie - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
I like the idea but still... I wouldn't do it. Apparently they got desperate enough to offer it for 50 bucks. Good job for noticing that no one give a damn since Linux is free and both Linux and Window is established already. I still wouldn't give em my money when they tried to charge in the past an arm and a leg. Who the hell do they think they're going fool? The platform isn't the most active for server development tools. Linux got cloud all up in there and it's actively evolving in many area especially server. Don't even try to bring out that pathetic iCloud. It's not open so nothing is going to back that crap other than Apple, openstack have 50 vendors, big companies, backing that project up compare to iCloud. Apple probably won't ever be able to compete in the server sector but they can leverage their UI and simplicity for their user base, such as the gui sys admin tools described in this articles. They should just stick with consumer base products, trying to compete in the server space market is going to kill em.matthi - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
On page 4 of this review, it says ".. our next entries are Accounts and Stats under the Status heading". 'Accounts' should be replaced with 'Alerts'.slayernine - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
If only this was a review of Windows Server it might be useful. I have never met a fellow tech person/geek who uses any version of Apple Server products. (aside from one customer about 3 years ago who was curious about them).It is just the simple facts that apple products are know for a lack of an ability to upgrade, locked to features that Apple thinks you should have and a lack of price efficiency. Windows and Linux offer far superior server products that will run on pretty much any hardware that suits your needs and the only reason I can see there being a point to review this product is due to Apple padding your pockets.
Schafdog - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
I know that it seems like Apple (or Steve) has lost faith in the PC as a hub, but I would really love seeing a iTunes Server that multiple users can control using iOS devices playing on Airplay or iOS device itself.Some NAS is now getting this features, so I might drop the OS X Server for one of those instead.
sodi - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
What kind of crazy organization would use a Lion Server? At works, standard is a necessity. A Lion Server is just oddball.Oscarcharliezulu - Thursday, August 4, 2011 - link
This seems a bit like OSX Server Lite and Easy rather than a true upgrade to Snow Leopard Server. I wasPthinking of converting an older 'mini to Lion Server (to serve a small business which has MBPs and iMacs, but now I think getting a copy of Snow Leopard Server would be better if I could somehow get it cheap (yet legal).