Low Powered Mini-Server for the Masses 351
ServerSam writes "Sudhian has a review up on EmergeCore's "IT in a Box" IT100. Designed for small business use, it comes equipped with a Transmeta Crusoe 533MHz, 128MB RAM, 20GB IBM TravelStar, 802.11b Access Point, and boots from a 32MB Flash card. The IT100 is powered by a 60 watt external PSU and is smaller than a PS2."
Feel the energy (Score:2, Funny)
I think my Cisco router has more behind it...
Re:Feel the energy (Score:3, Funny)
Wait until the nano-itx boards come out. I have a *TINY* pc planned. 1Ghz CPU, DVD and TV tuner included.
Is that a PC in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?
My 486 gateway is only 24 watts! (Score:2)
Granted, it is a Compaq Contura laptop, but I thought that Transmeta systems were supposed to be conservative on power?!
Re:My 486 gateway is only 24 watts! (Score:3, Informative)
Cowards! (Score:2)
So they have it run Linux but behind a "web interface". I don't get it -- what's wrong with a user interface?
Re:Cowards! (Score:2)
Re:Cowards! (Score:4, Insightful)
-fren
Slashdotted Already? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Slashdotted Already? (Score:5, Informative)
Enjoy
Re:Slashdotted Already? (Score:4, Informative)
hrmm
Overall recommendation: Recommended
Editors' rating: 7.6 out of 10 (Good)
Setup and ease of use: 8 out of 10
Features and security: 8 out of 10
Performance: 7 out of 10
Service and support: 7 out of 10
Okay, I guess I'm stupid. 5 out of 10 would be average, more than that would be positive, and an average of 7.6 puts it in the top 25%.
When did anything less than 9 out of 10 become crappy?
Re:Slashdotted Already? (Score:3, Funny)
Slashdotted ALREADY (Score:2, Funny)
Other than size... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not just size (Score:5, Insightful)
I think... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I think... (Score:2)
Er... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes
Re:Er... (Score:5, Insightful)
What matters is that most people who make business decisions to use commercial software believe that the vendor is liable, and continue to believe it despite any evidence to the contrary, such as "we do not guarantee that this software will do what it is designed to do".
They also believe (Score:2, Informative)
They also believe, or at least behave according to, the old chestnut "no one ever got fired for buying IBM" (substitute well known brand in any technology realted field for "IBM" to adapt this to any category). Those in large organizations don't want to take risks that will jeopardize their careers, but at least they are more likely to have IT departments to make recommendations. In
Re:Er... (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, suppose TurboTax makes a certain error in filing that affects a certain percentage of its customers, who are then punished with fees/audits by the IRS. If the case is publicized and the error is strictly TurboTax's, could TurboTax really afford to say that they're not liable because of their EULA? What would that do to their sales the following year? And what would consumer recourse be if they used a non-commercial tax package instead of TurboTax? Who would they hit up for their fees and damages?
Additionally, there's no guarantee that all EULAs would stand a legal test in a liability case. I believe that was what UCITA was all about, strengthening EULAs to limit software liability. If EULAs were always legally biniding, UCITA would probably be unnecessary.
I don't claim that commercial software vendors will always be liable, but there are formal and informal ways of accountability available with commercial vendors. It's not fair to claim that businesses are being completely irrational in continuing to believe this.
Cobalt RaQ and Cobalt Qube? (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, as an operator of a Cobalt RaQ for many years, I found it to be very limiting once we did figure out how to really use it and how little the custom interfaces allowed, but it was great for people who just wouldn't learn that stuff.
I hope no one thinks these are patch-proof though,. Our Cobalt needed patches and even with them had trouble avoiding a few compromises since patches were so delayed. Now it runs Debian and I couldn't be happier with the little box.
-N
Re:Cobalt RaQ and Cobalt Qube? (Score:5, Insightful)
I started my site on a 33MHz Quadra. It'd still be using that if I didn't rely on quite a bit of PHP in places. There was no reason to jump up too far, so a PPC601 [danamania.com] was the next machine up.
What the whole experience has taught me is how to keep things running efficiently by knowing the system well, and remembering never to do stupid things, like post the URL on slashdot.
Re:Cobalt RaQ and Cobalt Qube? (Score:5, Funny)
and remembering never to do stupid things, like post the URL on slashdot. :)
Looks to me like your URL is posted to slashdot every time you post a message. http://www.danamania.com appears under your username.
But don't worry - your secret's safe with me ;-)
Re:Cobalt RaQ and Cobalt Qube? (Score:3, Funny)
I shall remember to mention in each message not to click on the above link. That could have done some real damage!
(PS. Don't click on the link)
Smaller than a PS/2? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Smaller than a PS/2? (Score:2)
Re:Smaller than a PS/2? (Score:2)
Hey, and it really IS smaller than my PS/2! And just as quiet.
Re:Smaller than a PS/2? (Score:3, Funny)
Damn thing probably weighed 40 pounds.
Re:Smaller than a PS/2? (Score:4, Funny)
-Peter
Uh oh! (Score:2)
Like, say, from /. for example?
"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:4, Insightful)
Think this is going for a server, the real meaning of server is 24*7; so heat is your enemy here
Re:"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone else notice that Newegg seems to have stopped carrying mini-itx boards? Why is that?
Re:"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:3, Informative)
Re:"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:3, Informative)
Re:"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:4, Informative)
At $1,395 this is hardly a "mini-server for the masses". To me that implies personal use. This is the mini-server for small businesses.
Re:"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:3, Insightful)
$1395?! Why not just buy a laptop?
Consider the cost of the time spent configuring the laptop or PC to work as an office server and add that to the cost. Keep in mind that most people aren't Unix experts and even the ones that are will likely have to spend several hours reading HOWTOs and man pages before they can get everything working. The advantage of one of these devices is that you plug it in, turn it on and it just works. That means, you can go back to doing profitable work sooner.
I have no dou
Re:"The IT100 did it all at a cost of $1,395" (Score:2)
Multiply the difference in power consumption by a year or two and by the price of electricity, and it might come out cheaper than an xbox.
However, I'm sure there are better and cheaper alternatives.
mini-itx (Score:2)
Re:mini-itx (Score:3, Funny)
Wish the link wasn't Slashdotted. (Score:2)
Re:Wish the link wasn't Slashdotted. (Score:4, Informative)
At $1150 (?) and odd, it really isn't worth it. You're better off building your own mail server from scratch. Cheaper and better than this.
Re:Wish the link wasn't Slashdotted. (Score:2)
Not really what?
Even one of those el-cheapo $199 things from Walmart or an old Celeron or P3 would give this thing a run for its money.
Understandable. And at $1,150 (I couldn't get to the site to the see the price) - it's not worth it. But the small size [linitx.com] interests me. I don't want to have another Desktop case or Mid Tower in my house. I have enough of them already.
Re:Wish the link wasn't Slashdotted. (Score:2)
The thing is that if you get the components, you can build one of these smaller ones yourself for not more than $500 - we have a space constraint in our lab and do this all the time. Works wonders and is cheap, and keeps the profs happy
In fact, I think its much higher - $1395 or something, which is *waaaaay* more than what this thing is really worth.
Come on,
Re:Wish the link wasn't Slashdotted. (Score:2)
I don't doubt it. And as I pointed out in my first post - I have been looking at a way to do it myself [soekris.com]
Re:Wish the link wasn't Slashdotted. (Score:3, Informative)
Lots of small (but bigger than the MicroServer), low power machines at Mini-ITX [mini-itx.com]
Ripping off (Score:3, Informative)
The things people get ripped off with these days.
Re:Ripping off (Score:5, Insightful)
for small businesses, appliances make a lot of sense. they just want stuff to work and be simple to understand from a high level - they don't want a custom hack job (as fun as that may be).
these boxes (along with the slew of thin client appliances out there) often run open-source software, and not all are as expensive as this baby. i, for one, welcome our black box toaster overlords - at least at the mom&pop level.
No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:4, Insightful)
you wouldn't be smart to use an appliance like this for file serving applications, but for DC/AD/NIS/DNS/BOOTP/DHCP, static web content, it would be a good choice for a small business if you skip the HDD and use a bigger CF card. no moving parts, longer useful lifetime and poor-man's N+1. perfect for a no-nonsense small bus.
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:2, Insightful)
#1. You can set it up yourself, with minimal costs, and skills.
#2. If a drive fails, you have no problems. No time/cost to you for backups.
#3. You could build a server for much cheaper than these premade "small cheap" ones.
#4. Dont go for the trendy small things so you save costs, or if you do, build your own and build your own box for some creative input.
I realize that not everyone has amazing computer skills, but to setup a
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:5, Insightful)
With raid-1, you dont even have to make backups.
That's a common misconception with RAID. Redundant disks only protect you from hardware failure. You still need to make backups to recover from human failure. If Bob in accounting deletes your Quickbooks files, they're gone. I just had to restore a giant spreadsheet from tape a couple days ago, onto a RAID 5 system.
RAID won't save you from Bob.
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:2)
I meant no excessive amount of backups of your entire system, in case you need to restore all your services.
And we are talking small business here...you dont have Bob in accounting, you the boss are also the accountant.
And if you did have Bob, you would fire him.
For big business, you should have appropriate enterprise content management which will not let you delete important files like that without permissions, but will let you update a new "version" of the fi
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:2)
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:2)
Because it's much easier and quicker to recover from a PSU or fan failure.
I just replaced a PSU in a PC in the office this week. Downtime - less than two hours from failure to fully functional, including the travel and shopping time for a replacement unit.
If this had been a server hard disk, with no redundancy... we're talking several hours and no sleep until it's done.
If you can't afford a hot spare for your server, RAID is your best f
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:2)
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:3, Interesting)
RAID alos wont protect from...
Viruses/Trogens that wipe the file-system.
Bad memory sticks that cause file-system corruption.
Flaky RAID controllers that randomly screw up a stripe now and then.
A netowrk card that sends bad packets and causes the filesystem to bork.
Bugs in your uber-filesystem that cause corruption. (NTFS I'm looking at *YOU*)
Power spikes that go through tour surge protector
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:2)
1) most of the neighborhood kids working on the local widget shop's computer do not have experience using or maintaining hw or sw raid systems.
2) if a drive fails, you have to know about it and no how to replace it.
3) no shit, but ma and pa can't send it back the vendor when you break the cupholder or fry a drive because they have no clue
4) don't tell me what to do, and btw it has nothing to do with trends, but common sense and experience w
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:2)
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:2)
I was going to suggest that this thing could use an external drive and software RAID. But then I noticed that this brand new design has USB 1.1 and not Firewire or even USB 2.0. What a crying shame; you'd think for $1,400 they could have done that.
Re:No Fault Tolerance? No Server (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to nitpick myself, but believe it or not I've run across a Compaq Server (less than 2 years old) that couldn't boot properly while the 0+1 array was being rebuilt. Yes, the data was preserved, but having to wait a few hours to get the machine back up was agonizing.
Fortunately we had a backup server (with just
Re:Filesystem corruption (Score:2)
It protects you from disk hardware failure. Nothing more, nothing less. As data is your most important IT asset, and the most time consuming to recover, redundant disks are an important part of a healthy CBO strategy which, of course, includes off-site backups.
Look at the power of emergicore! (Score:3, Funny)
Warning: mysql_select_db(): A link to the server could not be established in
Warning: mysql_query(): Too many connections in
Warning: mysql_query(): A link to the server could not be established in
could not execute query
Warning: mysql_num_rows(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in
Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in
Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in
Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in
Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in
Re:Look at the power of emergicore! (Score:2, Funny)
Just think what a geek can do with $1100 these day (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, I know that not everyone can build his own box and load it with Linux. But for this money, I'm thinking you could do pretty well with a Duron, a couple of ATA 133 drives, and a cheap 1U box. If you can run a web interface such as the one described here, you probably could do alright with Webmin, too. And think how much more useful and trustworth a thing you'd have.
Ah, well - - aren't the do-it-yourselfers among us lucky?
Re:Just think what a geek can do with $1100 these (Score:4, Informative)
Too much work for you? Go to geeks.com and pick up some refurb'd HP desktops for $500 each, with 17" monitors, CDRW, DVD-ROM, 120-160GB disks, keyboard, mouse, fucken speakers fer chrissakes... and a ~2.2 GHz celery chip.
The fact is that the vast majority of people have space to put a full size computer for a server. It's only in very unusual environments where space matters so much that your only server must be smaller than a shoebox. Aside from such special cases, assuming anyone buys this device, it will mostly be people who don't understand computers, and think it looks really neat.
Re:Geek perspective on the masses. (Score:2)
Please also expain why MY combination of hardware is not goo
Re:Just think what a geek can do with $1100-Ramen. (Score:2)
No Ramen noodles for me, friend - - I'm on on Atkins. And even if I weren't, neither I nor anyone on my staff is the least bit worried about IT employment on the eastern seaboard of the U.S. - - plenty of demand for people who can do Windows/*nix/DB administration and security. My financial services company expects to double its IT staff in the next three years. Like I said, cheap carbs just don't do it for me anymore.
I like the YellowDog/Terrasoft briQ more... (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/products/briQ/in tro.shtml [terrasoftsolutions.com]
Small Servers? (Score:5, Insightful)
I thought cooling, data transfer rates and reliability (redundant PSU's etc) were the main considerations. Processor speed and storage capacity are definitely up there as well.
But Size?
I don't understand
Re:Small Servers? (Score:2)
I have a home server, but I just put the thing WAY up hi on a shelf and it works
128MB? (Score:2)
Re:128MB? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now there's some exageration. RAM was about $50/MB in 1993, making 128MB $6,400.
Re:128MB? (Score:2)
Whereas for something that's exposed to a slashdotting... um...
TigerDirect (Score:2, Interesting)
I Don't know about this... (Score:3, Interesting)
1.) It includes 802.llb. How strange. Does anybody really feel a wireless server is a good thing? With 5 or 6 clients on an 802.llb network, things other than simple, tiny file transfers are going to start to slow down alot.
2.) Crusoe Processor - I mean, why not a celeron? Heat issues? Power consumption? Why use a processor intended for mobile applications in a server??
3.) The price - this thing should not break a grand. I work at a fairly major (Fortune 1000) computer reseller, and If I had a small office customer call me looking for an inexpensive server, I could sell them an IBM X series 205 for $769. It has a P4 2.4 GHZ and 256 megs of RAM. Its an honest to god server class machine.
Unless you have 8 guys with notebooks that travel and need a traveling server, what is the point of this? And for the price, if you did have those 8 guys, you could jsut have a 9th notebook, and have better specs, AND be battery powered.
CF for boot? (Score:2, Insightful)
this seems pointless (Score:2)
Why would someone use this rather than buying hosting from someone else? Obviously there are advantages to hosting your own site, but I don't think this machine particularly exposes them. Is the idea for momandpop.com to serve their site over their cablemodem or business DSL connection using this thing? They'd be much better off buying their hosting from someone else.
If bigwebdevcompany.com needs a dumb, low-power
Re:this seems pointless-Homo Logicus. (Score:2)
A web server is not the same as a toaster. A new ergonomic grip and translucent color styling does not matter when you're purchasing servers for your company.
Sure, this thing is probably easy to administer than a "real" server. Is it easier to administer than a server hosted by someone else? Obviously not. And the latter solution is likely to be cheaper, able to handle more requests, and connected to a fatter pipe than you could afford for the sa
$1395? I can top that at $450 (Score:2)
Even lower power home server (for the tinkerer) (Score:2, Informative)
I purchased the device from embeddedx86.com [embeddedx86.com]. The model is TS-5400. You can see a picture of my finished server here [virosa.net] and here [virosa.net]. (It's in a boring-as-hell grey box... with a CD next to it for comparison - it's to the left of the access point)
It runs Apache (with PHP extensions), NAT masquerading, and provided me with a great introductio
at a cost of $1,395. (Score:3, Insightful)
So I can get a tiny underpowered computer for $1395. Big deal. I can get a better computer for a lot less (even if I shell out a little extra for one of those small cube cases and M.B.) And at that price this toy is underpowered in every way, including hard drive space and memory. And a real computer will be less expensive in the long run, even after it's expected life this toy's power savings doesn't come close to justifying the price. Who can it be aimed at? The individual isn't gong to pay this and needs more anyway (or thinks he needs, if he thinks he needs a server at all), and can likely spare the space a single small format PC would take up as well as this. No large cluster of these is likely to be built (certainly not at this price), people who need lots of servers because of space will use Blade systems (and Google will continue to prove these are other low cost but amazingly functional approaches).
Waiting for wearable server+client (Score:2)
I want to be able to browse a SuperPDA webapp all on one small wearable computer.
Big, er Small Deal (Score:2)
Rebel Netwinder (Score:2)
Use a Network Attached Storage instead (Score:2)
Of course, that only functions to serve files, but it works very reliably.
What is the draw for small business? (Score:2)
Cost: Well instead of buying a handful of modern boxen, buy some cheaper, slower models (800-900 Mhz) and with the money saved buy a nice high powered (+1.8 Ghz) box dedicated to the purpose of the "server in a box". And
speed not required (Score:3, Insightful)
Firstly, disregard all of the useless comments about "it's not fast enough", these come from techie speed freaks who ignore the economics in favour of the sports-car. Most businesses don't want nor need sports-cars.
I have a mini-itx at 500mhz running BSD: it handles 512K dsl + bluetooth + 802.11b+ + samba + nat + firewall + print server + http + everything else quite well - most of the time it idles at 10% CPU. Sure I could use an overblown 576ghz-latest-pentium, but it's just simply not necessary. Power consumption is also low. It's a perfect home server. Kernel build times are pretty good as well. It also hosts development environments for 4 web sites.
I could have have purchased a fast machine, but what's the point ? I have a 2ghz desktop for power-use. In fact, I now wish that I'd gone for a smaller form factor. Even the mini-itx is too big: looks like a DVD player. PC/104 or smaller form factor would be perfect.
Also, ignore the comments about "price": sure you could get a cheaper and faster commodity pc: but then you have to pay for the techie to install and configure the OS and enable everything else. What this appliance is offering is an out-of-the box solution, and you definitely pay for the added value. They're not in business to give things away
What is this crap? (Score:3, Insightful)
Okay, so it's pretty and unassuming...looks just like a typical SOHO router. Big whoop. With the mass of Ethernet cables and power cords behind it, it's looks won't garner any awards I'd reckon.
That makes a whole lot of sense...I suppose that folks who want a VPN don't deserve a firewall too?
Yeah...I've heard a lot of clamoring for that feature in the SOHO market. Glad they decided that was worthy of the cut....
A whole public folder, huh? And no folder or file level permissions? I suppose that granular Read/Write/Modify/etc. permissions are out of the question too then? Now I see why you may want multiple domains....
Does this mean it won't actually validate logins on say...login? Or that the reviewer couldn't figure it out? So much for replacing a domain controller, I guess....
Okay, Bob, you're username is bob@sub.domain.local^H. Guess I'll have to fire Richard.
Yep, it's a good thing I spent $1400 on a server so that I can resort to peer-to-peer networking. Won't this make backing up and finding files fun again?
Yeah, I guess since the firewall in this thing sucks ass, you would be opening your desktops to the rest of the world....
I know I always recommend running your dynamic content webserver on your domain controller and fileserver. Especially when your firewall (which is on the same box) sucks.
Re:Already slashdotted... (Score:3, Informative)
Link here to the Sudhian Forum [sudhian.com].
If the current state of their server is any indication of this thing's performance, its sad
I don't trust them either... (Score:2, Funny)
I believe that they are all members of the Borg collective just waiting to have critical mass to assimilate us all...
If you just put on a tinfoil hat, you too will see the real conspiracy. The Borgs have brain altering waves to make you trust them...
Re:hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
My friend, silence is the future of computing. I really hate, I mean I - HATE - those god awful gianormous skyscraper towers that blast out 90dB of concentration breaking whirring and grinding sounds. Not to mention the heat and wasted space. Who needs 8 PCI slots, 12 drive bays, and a 600W power supply?! That's legacy garbage from the
Smaller, faster, QUIETER. That is the future.
You sound like one of those "old timers" that likes inefficient crap just because that's all you know.
You would probably take a CRT over an LCD any day, right? (*)
* By the way, CRT's do have there uses in high speed games (Quake) but other than that they just burn your retinas.
Re:hmm (Score:2)
Hell, yeah! As I grow older my tolerance for this kind of noise diminishes, for some reason. I'm seriously considering buying one of those noise cancelling headphones [amazon.com] for the times I have to work in the server room. Not only are there about 50+ machines plus switches/routers etc, each with multiple fans, but there's a couple of AC vents on the floor t
Re:hmm (Score:2, Funny)
Re:hmm (Score:3, Insightful)
Do not confuse issues. Silence and space are perpendicular. Or may be not. It's much easier to silence tower than those tiny boxes. If you have powerfull proce
Re:hmm (Score:4, Interesting)
I so happen to have one of "those god awful 'mini' 'cube' PCs" and it's fantastic, thank you very much. I used to be a vocal opponent of those things because they were kludgy and underperformant, but I got myself one of them "mailboxes" some time ago and it's been great. I had the mother of all great big cases, the Antec 1080 [antec-inc.com], which I loved (and still do, for its purpose it's the best case out there), but I realised that for normal PC operation, something that weighs 35 kilos and has eight fans is overkill.
When it was time to upgrade, I was simply going to get the same only smaller [antec-inc.com], but a friend sold me into getting one of "those god awful 'mini' 'cube' PCs [shuttle.com]" and I must say, it's one of the best computing choices I've made.
With a combo drive it can do everything a regular PC can, without significantly more noise/heat, while being smaller, lighter, and looking damn cool in black. I already upgraded the system twice with no worries, and as the time draws near to update the system again, I'm thinking about going 64-bit, but whatever I do you can bet it's going to come in a tiny black box [shuttle.com].
It's 10 am (Score:2)
And look, it's running full screen my 2.53 p4 in the house!
'course, you can't see the p4 if I took a picture.
Pictures Mirrored (Score:2)