slbr549 Posted March 21, 2001 Share Posted March 21, 2001 I apologize if this question has been asked before. I am in the process of ordering a machine that will be used specifically for FMServer 5.0. I have read the minimum requirements for Mac and for PC, however, I would like to know what the general consensus is for the machine type/size, etc from those of you who have had must more experience than I. Currently, there are 9 people using a Mac and 1 person using a PC to access the FMP Files. I have them all set up to use TCP/IP. Any advice you can give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveOak Posted March 21, 2001 Share Posted March 21, 2001 I think you will find a division of opinion here. Many folks like a high end PC running Windows NT. We still seem to see a fair number of problem posts with Win2000, but other users have reported good results. I have experience with a number of G4 Macs (including a G4 Cube server farm). On the Mac side, I like using the RAM disk program RAMBunctious. It improves speed and stability and has better performance at a lower cost than RAID or fast hard drives. Some users report better performance using NT servers, but in my experience, I don't see an advantage. I would think a large consideration is what platform predominates in your network. If your are a predominately Mac shop, I'd go that way just from a support standpoint. (We should hear from the Win contingent with that recommendation ) -bd [This message has been edited by LiveOak (edited March 21, 2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee J Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 (We should hear from the Win contingent with that recommendation ) GO WITH WHAT YOU KNOW Well we sit on the fence G4 450 and NT 633mhz, the PC running win2000 Pro does perform better than the G4 in all areas (network, Disk access etc), despite many reports I have seen regards the G4 performing better than 600mhz pentiums! However, The choice is yours I would look at support issues and "The Comfort" factor, we are split 80% pc's and 20% Macs (Studio) so our knowledge base is in PC's. Mac or PC, Which ever way you go don't skimp on the Ram triple it, it's worth it in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatoli Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 Until Apple will have FM server on MacX, NT or 2000 is much faster. I guess the G4 with MacX FM server will be faster, than Pentium and NT/2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slbr549 Posted March 22, 2001 Author Share Posted March 22, 2001 Thank you for your input. I will definitely consider the comfort zone and beef up the RAM!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DykstrL Posted March 22, 2001 Share Posted March 22, 2001 I agree with LiveOak and byteworks - go with what you are comfortable with. What ever platform you choose, put as much RAM as possible in the machine - you want the cache hits at 99 or 100%. Disk hits slows performance. We have both MAC's and PC's running FMS and it does seem that the PC's running NT4 SP6 have some performance advantage over the MAC servers, especially with a lot of users logged on (50 or more users). Our theory is that FMServer on NT is running on top of Windows as a service as opposed to running in a GUI environment as in the MAC OS, but just a theory - no proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esteshk Posted March 24, 2001 Share Posted March 24, 2001 Although I agree with the feeling that you should go with the platform you are most comfortable with, let me add one more consideration. In my organization, there were some questions as to whether FileMaker was a resonable choice for an enterprise wide solution. Add to this the prevailing notion in the IT community that the MAC is not a robust enough platform for any server app. If I am to successfully deploy FMP solutions, I must be able to ensure solid performance at maximun speed. I am currently running about 50 FMP servers, about 50/50 Mac/Windows 2000 (no problems at all with W2K!). I am replacing all Macs with W2K machines. One significant advantage I can site on the W2K platform is the Terminal Services environment. Although FMP remote administration is a handy tool for FMP server admin., with terminal services, I can drive the entire machine remotely. This is a huge plus when you have multiple machines in multiple locations. So... there are performance advantages, administrative advantages, and the IT wonks are happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatoli Posted March 24, 2001 Share Posted March 24, 2001 The FM server was written for NT and not just ported from Macs. So it is using multitasking, multithreading and preemptive multitasking. Such things will be available on Mac, when FM will run natively on MacX. And chances are that G4 and Mach kernel and MacX will be faster, than NT/2K on Pentiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveOak Posted March 25, 2001 Share Posted March 25, 2001 For remote administration on the Mac side, we use Timbuktu. Timbuktu allows the "administration" of the whole machine, not just FM. The only thing you can't do is a cold start, only a restart. -bd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
This topic is 8441 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now