MacWorld Expo Traffic Analysis 296
Bioanarchism writes "MacWorld Expo has been the receiving end of the brute force of the Internet surfers. Netcraft also reports on the Internet traffic that other Apple websites have gotten since Steve Jobs gave the opening keynote." The Windows Server 2003-based MacWorld Expo site folded under all those hits, while Apple's sites, running Mac OS X, were only knocked into sluggishness. (Server load is a complex thing, of course -- more complicated than what OS is on the servers.)
Probably slightly dodgy (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:2)
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf05/ [apple.com]
That was posted within the hour after the conclusion of the keynote. Also, several sites had live coverage during the keynote, AND the satellite program was broadcast live, in the clear, on Galaxy 3, Transponder 23, 4160 MHz Vertical, 93 deg west.
Now I know why your initial post was so wrong. You don't have any idea what you're talking about.
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:2)
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:2)
The sites that did live coverage did not have explicit permission; Apple was making an effort to NOT have any live coverage from within the event. (There are multiple theories why this would be, but they're irrelevant for the purposes of this message.)
The satellite program was produ
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:5, Funny)
The keynote at MacWorld Expo 1985 was broadcast on the web live?
I missed that... wonder if my C-64 could have handled it.
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:2)
Ok...the first time since Macworld was first broadcast on the web live that it hasn't been broadcast on the web live.
This is why I hate posting to slashdot.
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:2)
And it was posted well before 5; it was on the web by 3PM ET.
Webcast is Available (Score:3, Informative)
Here is where you can watch it. QuickTime and streaming access to the Internet required. [akadns.net]
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:5, Informative)
After the keynote, once all the new products got posted, www.apple.com slowed down, but was always consistently reachable (I had to collect product information, specs, and photography). store.apple.com performed very poorly for about the first 15 minutes, was closed periodically, and then performed well from about a half hour after the keynote on.
So this isn't "dodgy" at all; I know for an absolute fact that www.apple.com was reachable at what I would consider its "normal" performance during the entire keynote. Of course, that doesn't really matter, since it's AFTER the keynote (when information is actually posted) that matters; but then, too, it was reachable (albeit slower).
You are slightly dodgy (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you sure?
Here are tons of people, myself included, telling you that Apple.com was not reachable. And here is you - one guy who got in but knows "for an absolute fact" that the site was good. Should we believe one person's experience or what the rest of the us actually experienced?
I
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Probably slightly dodgy (Score:4, Informative)
The way Akamai works (I think) is that they do distributed DNS with local DNS servers in a particular region of the world. Their DNS servers direct you to regional servers for some portion of the content. The policies on which content gets Akamaized differ from site to site, and I have no idea about Apple's policies, but as an example, the main page text might be served from www.apple.com while the graphics might come from a-9096.akadns.net or whatever. The quicktime stream of the conference appears to be entirely coming from Akamai.
Thus, it's very possible for a local Akamai node to die under the load, which could result in some temporary regional disruption. Of course, this disruption could also be caused by your ISP's connection to their servers being overloaded, by your ISP's connection towards the U.S. being overloaded, or any number of other local phenomena.
At least from where I'm sitting, www.apple.com was working just fine after the show. Not that this is saying much, since I'm only about half a millisecond ping time away from it, but....
Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Like I posted the other day, I was looking at a Power Mac this past weekend, but the $2800 price (without a monitor!) was a bit much. The Mac mini is much better priced for my first Mac. I'm really looking forward to using it.
Normally I stay away from add-on warranties, but I went ahead and got the Apple Care package for it. I figure it's an entirely new model and there may
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Huh? (Score:2, Informative)
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
So why present it in such a flamebaiting way?
Re:So... (Score:2)
Re:So... (Score:2)
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
Timothy actually read the article before posting the story. You should be happy about that.
Re:So... (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, well we all know about Netcraft's bias against BSD-based operating systems.
Let me explain (Score:3, Funny)
*Apple* MacWorld event almost killed *Microsoft* Windows Server 2003-based site.
Mwa-ha-ha!
that's obvious (Score:2, Insightful)
The real question is why the submitter had to act like there was some other reason for the difference. Oh yeah, unless you bend over backward and consider all software equal, or everything inferior to M$, you are a Zealot.
Sorry, but reality is not always what the Microsoft PR department wants. The Netcraft people did not mince words.
What happens when hordes of Mac enthusiasts stress-test Apple and Microsoft products in head-t
Re:So... (Score:2)
Not a fair comparison of OSs (Score:4, Insightful)
Complex thing, yeah... (Score:2, Insightful)
This is the modern "complexity" diversion tactic: "It looks like Y causes X. However, X is very complex."
This causes the reader, ideally, to forget about the idea of finding other simple causes of X. For shame.
Re:Complex thing, yeah... (Score:2)
site A:
<html>
Hello World!
<\html>
site B:
<?
while $i < 999999999 {echo "I suck bandwith!<br>";}
?>
for those who don't know PHP, Site B would produce a very large file to be transmitted, while Site A would be tiny.
Add in seperate image servers and database servers and all the cross-communication versus having a single Apache or IIS server handle the works... it does get more complicated (foo).
akamai? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:akamai? (Score:3, Interesting)
Lea
Re:akamai? (Score:4, Informative)
www.apple.com maps (forwards and backwards) to 17.254.0.91, in Apple's good old class A netblock (aka
OTOH, images.apple.com points to Akamai's horde of Edge servers, which includes two addresses within my local network (YMMV).
Re:akamai? (Score:2)
Chip H.
Re:"Powered by Mac OS X" (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, because I care about what's inside. It works great, it looks great, it's easy to configure, it runs reasonably fast, it has few known security problems, let me just throw it all away if the code is a mess of kludgyness.
Last I checked, that's something Apple programmers have to deal with, not me. Even if it were entirely open source, I still wouldn't care.
Apple store couldn't take my order (Score:5, Informative)
I went back a couple hours later and I could add one to my cart, but couldn't complete the transaction.
Hours after that, my "impulsiveness" subsided and I have re-thought if I really want to spend that money.
So it looks like Apple may have lost a sale due to an inadequate web server.
Sam
Re:Apple store couldn't take my order (Score:4, Interesting)
...that's why I used a PHONE. (Score:3, Informative)
With a SuperDrive, Bluetooth 2.0 + Airport Extreme, 512MB RAM (will probably crack open and put in a 1GB module), an 80GB drive, and .Mac (for antivirus and etc.) it came to $999
Re:Apple store couldn't take my order (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Apple store couldn't take my order (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Me too, Another lost impulse buy. (Score:5, Informative)
Mac mini: $499
1GB PC2700 DDR from Pricewatch: $85
Keyboard & Mouse )Use the USB keyboard and mouse you already are using as you post on Slashdot with your crappola PC): $0
Bluetooth (as if you actually need it): $50 (less if you buy a USB Bluetooth after-market solution)
Throw in 802.11g for $79, and that gets you up to $663. Shipping is currently free.
Re:Me too, Another lost impulse buy. (Score:2)
Re:Me too, Another lost impulse buy. (Score:2)
um... (Score:5, Insightful)
Then why did you bring it up and only mention what servers they were running?
Because that's all they knew. (Score:3, Insightful)
Because that's all they knew and all they could say. OSX up, OSX up and sluggish, M$ down all day. That's the news, and it's a common story.
Worms are another complex and common story.
Microsoft competitors software not working on Microsoft OS are another complex and common story.
BSA raids are another complex and common story.
When you look into the details of these complex stories you usually find something unflattering to Mi
Not even a G5... (Score:5, Funny)
To prove a point, Jobs had Apple's sites all run in a single Mac Mini. iTunes has been running on a daisy chain of seven iPod Shuffles.
Re:Not even a G5... (Score:2)
unusable (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:unusable (Score:2)
The main web site (www.apple.com) was fine (albeit slow) after the keynote.
But yeah, the store performed very poorly and was essentially unusable for about the first half-hour, was closed briefly, and then was fine from about the first hour on.
Re:unusable (Score:2)
Ahhh.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ahhh.... (Score:2)
Re:Ahhh.... (Score:2)
Re:Ahhh.... (Score:2)
Re:Ahhh.... (Score:2)
Re:Ahhh.... (Score:2)
Re:Ahhh.... (Score:2)
Re:Ahhh.... (Score:2)
F = Fear
You are afraid of something if you don't know what to expect. With MS stuff you pretty much do know. It's so omnipresent no-one can fully evade it and people know their bad and better sides from personal experiences.
U = Uncertainty
You mean I, having read the article, would be uncertain whether to use or not MS product as a server? Boo.. I'm _certain_ I won't use it for anything remotely important by my own good will if I want to do my job well because _certain
Same all over (Score:2)
Re:Same all over (Score:2)
Re:Same all over (Score:2)
What to do? (Score:4, Interesting)
Do they need to spend to cope with once yearly spikes in traffic or just let the sites fall over - which in itself creates a 'story' and free advertising.
It seems with most 'big' news online there is always a secondary story regarding the number of visits to the website, and usually the event is seen as bigger if the webservers crash and burn under the load...
Re:What to do? (Score:2)
Re:What to do? (Score:2)
Hell, then
Coincidence? (Score:4, Funny)
Yea, and i'm sure the fact that author linked Macworld Expo site from a slashdot article just a *pure coincidence*
Apple good. Microsoft bad. (Score:2)
> Mac OS X
> Server load is a complex thing, of course -- more complicated than what OS is on the servers.
But hey, here on Slashdot we'll take any excuse to bash Microsoft and applaud Apple!
Not Just Apple, but fan-sites as well... (Score:5, Informative)
MacRumors was pretty much down after iWork was announced.
MacNN had a 403 between when iDVD was discussed and when the Mac Mini was mentioned.
Mac Teens performed the best, but started to get intermittent towards the end (probably due to a cascade effect of people fleeing from one working site to another)
Engadget was fairly unreliable, but a little better off than MacNN.
Yawn, (Score:5, Informative)
I mean come on people. How much *money* you spend on your net infrastructure dictates how well it will
survive.
Apple spent enough, Macworld didn't. Get over it. Why is this a story?
Re:Yawn, (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Money and Software. (Score:2)
So, basically, 1000 load balanced OS X servers + offloading the images to Akamai and their page only started crawling, and you're gonna chalk up a win for Apple? It's easy to see how 2 MS boxes crumbled under that load, but 1000 OSX servers that are serving up nothing but HTML? Shouldn't have even blinked, much less have the store go down. I think I'd put the score at OSX 0, MS 0.
Seriously, i
Akamai... (Score:3, Interesting)
If I remember correctly it wasn't like this last year... I guess Apple created a lot of buzz this time.
Keynote speech download? (Score:2)
Cheers,
Ian
Netcraft (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Netcraft (Score:2)
Just curious... (Score:2)
Re:Just curious... (Score:2)
MacWorld Expo is really run by IDG [idg.com], which also runs the LinuxWorld Expo. The LinuxWorld Expo [linuxworldexpo.com] website also runs Windows Server 2003.
A new converter (Score:4, Insightful)
I do 95% of my programming at work on MS Windows systems, and after watching the Mac Expo, I think it would be a real joy to come home and use a Mac. While I am not a Steve groupie, I have to say that the guy is 1,000x more "cool" then Bill G was during the CES show MS did. Bill was so stiff and dry, now I know why MS brought in that late night talk show host, to try to bring some life to the show. Bill G. made the keynote as exiting to watch as paint drying.
In contrast, Steve was cracking jokes and made watching actually fun. Steve had a small systems glitch, just like Bill/MS did. However, Steve paused for a moment, and then said, "this is why we have backups", flipped a KVM switch and had another Mac ready to roll in on second, and the show went on smooth-as-silk.
The demos were actually very good, and I was surprised to see Steve do them all, well except for the Pages demo. Bill's demo of the new media center was _very_ boring, and when the remote didn't work, they had no backup system and just "moved along", the same thing happened when their XBox blue-screened. Come on MS, get a little style and maybe next time take a tip from Apple and have a backup system.
I am looking forward to the Mac Mini and iLife 05. The only thing I wish the Mac Mini had was more video memory. 32MB is a little low for todays standards and it doesn't look like you can upgrade the video. Other then that, it looks like a great system. Maybe the Mac Mini can hook my wife on Apple and she won't complain when I try to buy a G5 box. ; P
Re:A new converter (Score:2)
Still it was better than Steve's demo of the Apple Media Center, because there isn't one. They're 2 years behind the rest of the field in the living room convergence market, which coincidentally is also the market I'm shopping in.
Maybe in a few more years, Apple will catch up, just like they've finally gotten around to offering small Flash-based MP3 players like other companies were doing back in the '90s. Or maybe Microsoft will have established mar
Simple question (Score:2)
No Live Broadcast (Score:2)
Re:No Live Broadcast (Score:2)
Interesting that no one seems to have made note of what I thought was the most important announcement [prnewswire.com] - iPod integration with the audio systems from several car manufacturers. I use iTunes but don't have an iPod. I would get one in a second if my car supported this feature.
Another thought, what does this mean for satellite radio?
No wonder... (Score:2)
Apple website didn't slow down from the show floor (Score:2)
I kindof wonder if Apple has a whole set of servers dedicated to connections coming from the show floor. So Steve's presentation stays snappy when he plays with the iTunes Music Store. Hell, maybe they have a whole set of servers physically at MacWorld, so they don't have to worry about internet connectivity while Steve does his thing.
Netcraft confirms it (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Bashing (Score:2)
and while we are at it, lets trow in linux. i wonder how it would have reacted if it was the webserver in question
Re:Bashing (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft vs Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
So why even mention it?
Not trying to be an MS apologist, but it's not as if the Macworld Expo site has any where near the hosting capability that apple.com does. Probably one, maybe two servers running the expo site.
Re:Microsoft vs Apple (Score:4)
The probelm that this is standard for mac world expo. High bandwidth high loads are the norm. Normally they stream that keynote live to thousands.
This year they didn't want to due to bandwidth restrictions, and they still went down. What idiot put that system into place? Even without the OS debate. Somebody really screwed up.
Re:Microsoft vs Apple (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft vs Apple (Score:2)
It's called caching. The could of setup a short term cache setup. It's tough to do with LIVE video, It's why apple.com went down from some domains and not others. It's who got to the cached files.
Microsoft uses a caching service for their hardest hit sites. That service uses Linux , If you ever wonder why netcraft comes back with IIS(MSFT) on Linux that is the reason. It's business. It does make sense.
thousands? (Score:3)
Try millions...
Re:I had no problems with apple.com (Score:2)
Re:This is just the TCP/IP stack (Score:2)
Re:This is just the TCP/IP stack (Score:2)
Re:This is just the TCP/IP stack (Score:2, Interesting)
Hotmail was purchased by MS ('97) and run for several years (transition started in 2k) before making the transition.
Infact, here's a slashdot article [slashdot.org] on just that topic.
~Lake
Re:This is just the TCP/IP stack (Score:4, Informative)
I recall years ago having a 450 MHz AMD K6-2 LINUX box with 128 MB of RAM consistently beating out a 900 MHz Athlon with 768 MB of RAM (running Windows) when it came to downloads over my broadband connection.
Quite the scientific study you did there. Case closed on the case of the kludge TCP/IP stack! This has nothing to do with served content from Apache versus IIS 6 running on hardware designed to serve content. Lets instead ask the important questions, like how much hardware is backing each site up? How many requests was each site receiving, and how much content was it serving for those requests? How much hardware does each site have backing it up? I'll bet that macworldexpo didn't have Akamai and their 3000 linux servers mirroring content like apple.com does. Microsoft runs Windows 2003 and IIS 6, and their web servers didn't choke while serving 100meg downloads of XP SP2 to how many millions of machines?
I might also point out that Hotmail for a time (and may very well still be) was using FreeBSD for its DNS servers... that's because when MS tried using their own "dogfood" (Windows 2000), it keeled over.
Maybe you should do a little fact checking before randomly repeating something you think you remember hearing something about.
Hotmail used a BSD variant and Apache before they were purchased by Microsoft in 1998. Since then they have moved over to Windows and IIS [netcraft.com]. As it took a while to switch over the entire production enviroment, the Microsoft runs Apache jokes surfaced. Hotmail also went from a subsrciption base of 9 million in 1998 to over 100 million in 2001 while they switched over. Microsoft fun "facts" regarding Hotmail [microsoft.com]
XP has some serious flaws, but Server 2003 is a pretty strong OS, and IIS 6 is rock solid compared to IIS 5 and even Apache. More Linkage [msdn.com]
Re:This is just the TCP/IP stack (Score:2)
OS X's TCP/IP stack: uses BSD code
Windows' TCP/IP stack: uses BSD code
Hmm.
Re:How stupid can you get... (Score:5, Informative)
Let me ask you something, Timothy. Why do you think Apple used Win2003 at MacExpo, instead of plugging in a couple of their magical little OS/X based servers?
Obviously someone at Apple decided Win2003 was a better tool for the job.
Yes. How stupid can you get? IDC runs and promotes the expo not Apple.
Someone at IDC decided that Windows 2003 was the way to go to host their entire website, not just the MacWorld portion.
Want proof?
Registrant:
International Data Group, Inc. (DOM-373425)
5 Speen Street Framingham MA 01701 US
Domain Name: macworldexpo.com
Registrar Name: Markmonitor.com
Registrar Whois: whois.markmonitor.com
Registrar Homepage: http://www.markmonitor.com
Administrative Contact:
International Data Group, Inc. (NIC-14208833) International Data Group, Inc.
5 Speen Street Framingham MA 01701 US
legal@idg.com +1.5089354686 Fax- +1.5084244807
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Donna Moschella (NIC-14208849) IDG World Expo Corp.
3 Speen Street Framingham MA 01701 US
donna_moschella@idg.com +1.5084244801 Fax- -
Re:How stupid can you get... (Score:3)
Microsoft.com only gets brought to its knees by virus-infected zombie computers because no person cares when Microsoft announces something new.