or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Teardown of Apple's new Time Capsule reveals consumer, not server, grade HDD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Teardown of Apple's new Time Capsule reveals consumer, not server, grade HDD - Page 3

post #81 of 117
Marketing nomenclature aside, the key is to BACK-UP your data.

Here's an exemplary discussion and guide, co-developed with the US Library of Congress and the American Society of Media Photographers:
http://www.dpbestflow.org/node/262

There are loads "solutions" in the marketplace to address the task but following the 3-2-1 method will help filter the marketing noise from what method works best for your individual needs.

Backup, Redundancy, Archive, Availability, Hardware RAID, Software RAID, Uptime, Offline, Recovery Time, Disk Images, NAS, File Server, Backup Server, Data Migration, File Corruption, Bit-Rot, Snapshots, ZFS... oh, how the subject is vast and the options are plentiful (dizzying?).

What matters most is identifying your specific needs, creating a backup strategy to match your comfort and risk scenario, then picking the appropriate methods (see guide above). Armed with that in mind, you know the risk, reward, and expectation behind your backup approach.

Also, for those who haven't seen it, I suggest looking at this article from Small Net Builder on RAID. It suggests where and when they think it's appropriate.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/n...s-dont-do-raid


Again, everybody's needs are unique. A 60 TB rSync'd backup solution makes a lot of sense to some people, while a humble external drive, thumb drive, and a free Mozy, Carbonite, or Skydrive account might be the perfect fit for others.

Simply put, learn each method's risk/benefit on your own timetable. It's a whole lot easier than a crash course when you've lost those precious bits and bytes....

...and you need the free resources or paid services from this site I found for my sister,
http://www.myharddrivedied.com/
post #82 of 117
While the WD Green is a fine drive, "server grade" or "enterprise class" drives typically are designed for uses where reliability against failure is an important issue and they carry a longer warranty.
post #83 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary54 View Post

While the WD Green is a fine drive, "server grade" or "enterprise class" drives typically are designed for uses where reliability against failure is an important issue and they carry a longer warranty.

I wonder why the Apple-bashers think that if they keep repeating the same lie that it becomes true.

There is no such legal or standard definition of 'server grade'. Period. End of discussion (except that the Apple haters will continue to spread the same lie).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #84 of 117
Just to share my experience with you guys on the WD green 2TB drives.

I had one 2 months ago to store my iTunes musics and tv shows, and have it as an external drive attached to my mini via USB. 2 weeks later as I was watching a tv show in my iTunes while it's downloading some other shows onto the Hdd my iTunes hanged, and I had to force quit it. Afterwards it turned out that the WD hdd failed on me, brought it to the service centre and it was beyond repair and they gave me a replacement unit.

Now I only use it as a storage device where I only switch it on when needed and never put it under heavy workload, I would never go for a green drive from WD again as the last failure happened within 2 weeks and it totally messed up my iTunes library.
post #85 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeasar View Post

Just to share my experience with you guys on the WD green 2TB drives.

I had one 2 months ago to store my iTunes musics and tv shows, and have it as an external drive attached to my mini via USB. 2 weeks later as I was watching a tv show in my iTunes while it's downloading some other shows onto the Hdd my iTunes hanged, and I had to force quit it. Afterwards it turned out that the WD hdd failed on me, brought it to the service centre and it was beyond repair and they gave me a replacement unit.

Now I only use it as a storage device where I only switch it on when needed and never put it under heavy workload, I would never go for a green drive from WD again as the last failure happened within 2 weeks and it totally messed up my iTunes library.

From what I've read that is how HDDs typically fail. Id set, pretty much soon after you've started using them or well after the warranty is out.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #86 of 117
There's a wide variety of what can be considered "server-grade" hardware. I have all kinds of hardware in service in various customer datacenters.

In our customers' SANs and other arrays, we have variety of drives in several tiers of storage. SSD RAID1+0 would be the fastest storage you could build now, but most of our customers have FC or SAS 15k in their top tier and then lower tiers have slower drives or interfaces. Some customers have SAS 10k in their bulk storage, some have SATA 7.2k or 5.4k. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the disks in bulk disk arrays or in backup-to-disk arrays are WD Green drives.

I think many of drives we have in service have 4-16 MB cache right. 64 MB cache is quite a bit.
post #87 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I wonder why the Apple-bashers think that if they keep repeating the same lie that it becomes true.

There is no such legal or standard definition of 'server grade'. Period. End of discussion (except that the Apple haters will continue to spread the same lie).

So by your own admission one of the key selling points of the Time Capsule is a meaningless statement. Got it.

The stuff about those raising this issue being Apple-bashers, Apple-haters or whatever is frivolous name-calling.

Apple makes some great stuff that we all enjoy and love, but they're not perfect nor are they above reproach.

Yes, tech sites and some posters have an agenda in attacking all things Apple, but let's look at the topic at hand.
post #88 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary54 View Post

While the WD Green is a fine drive, "server grade" or "enterprise class" drives typically are designed for uses where reliability against failure is an important issue and they carry a longer warranty.

Indeed. My point remains. Either (A) "server-grade" means something, or (B) it doesn't mean anything.

A.
If "server-grade" means something, then it is reasonable to expect that the drive inside the Time Capsule is different from an average drive found in most non-server computers, regardless of how "good', "quiet" or whatever it is. Regardless of if this "server-grade" drive is just rebadged, or randomly pulled out of the standard production line. It doesn't matter if the WD Green is used in *some* servers, what matters is that it is used in *most non-server computers*, hence it is a common consumer drive. Apple acting in good faith should at least ensure that the Time Capsule hard disk it is somehow different, if not better.

B.
If "server-grade" doesn't mean anything, then it is reasonable to conclude that Apple is simply using a meaningless term as a key selling point of one of their hardware accessories. People can take it from there, whether to "bash Apple", file a lawsuit, or just accept it. Doesn't change the fact that an essentially meaningless term is used as a key selling point for an Apple product... Which is rare.
post #89 of 117
(Edit: Accidental Duplicate)
post #90 of 117
"Server-grade" used to mean to some that the MTBF was a million hours.

That ought to do it. Even if the numbers were fudged a bit, a drive that runs without dying for hundreds of thousands of hours is "server-grade" to me.

Both Caviar Green Drives are in the million hour MTBF range. But WD sells an ever higher-spec drive, the Caviar Blue, which is its new "server-grade" (meaning bestest) drive. They call it that, because they want you to buy it for more dollars per byte.

So the Time Capsule doesn't have those. So its spec can only suggest that the drives within are ONLY good for around 114 years on the average--the "old" spec. (The million hours.)

Who needs their drive to run continuously for over 25 years?

Show of hands?
post #91 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzMega View Post

Who needs their drive to run continuously for over 25 years?

Show of hands?

What, you don't have backups from 1986 still available on a fixed disk somewhere?
post #92 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuzzMega View Post

Who needs their drive to run continuously for over 25 years?

Are you implying today's hard drives never fail?
post #93 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonQ13 View Post

What, you don't have backups from 1986 still available on a fixed disk somewhere?

Side note... My Syquest disks didn't even make it past the 6 month mark sometimes.
post #94 of 117
Well, server grade or not, I bought one yesterday as my WD NAS died last week.
Very easy to set up as usual (I had an Airport Extreme), much faster than the WD and absolutely silent. I thought the Iomega I have as a media server was quiet but this is another level.
Impressed.
Now I need to decide whether to sell the AE or use it as a range extender.
post #95 of 117
My 4TB NAS has 2 of these WD Green Drives. It has seen heavy usage over an 18-month usage period (knock on wood) and the drives are super fast and completely silent! Of course, RAID 0 has a lot to do with the fast part and I have never connected them with eSATA but only with FireWire 800 and they still feel very fast. The best part is that they make no noise at all, because there is no fan and the design of the housing lets plenty of air to flow through.

I can only recommend Western Digital as a brand and in particular, these Green Drives. I need to make a purchase of another high-capacity storage device because my 1TB Time Capsule and 4TB NAS are filled to capacity (minus 10% left free on purpose). I was hoping to be able to hold out until there is a ThunderBolt device available, but I kind of need one now. It looks like LaCie will be first to market with their "Little Big Disk" or whatever they're called.

Question: How much of the drive's 10% that I've left free on both my TC and my RAID array can I safely use on a temporary basis? We're talking almost 1/2 TB, so it might be good enough for another month or two...

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply
post #96 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabberattack View Post

and I'll plug in my RAID 1 external storage. The Time Capsule does not convince me at all. WD Green is a poor quality harddrive, I would never buy it as my primary storage.

Of all the drives I've dealt with in 15 years of IT, Western Digital have consistently been the drives I've had the least amount of problems with followed by Fujitsu.

Seagate and Maxtor have both been the worst I've ever dealt with. I'd rather a Western Digital than any other brand for my data.
post #97 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

I think there are three flawed lines of thinking with some of the comments on this thread.

1. "Well, anyone using this for backup would use RAID anyway, so it doesn't matter if it is server-grade"
This is besides the point that Apple is advertising this as "server grade".

2. "Well, hard drives tend to last longer nowadays, so it doesn't matter if it's for servers or not"
This is besides the point that Apple is advertising the hard drives in the Time Capsule as somehow DIFFERENT from ordinary hard drives.

3. "The media is blowing this out of proportion and recycling an old attack on Apple"
This is besides the point that a non server-grade hard drive was found in the updated Time Capsule.

Any reasonable interpretation of Apple advertising the hard drives in the Time Capsule as "server-grade" would be:
A. These hard drives in Time Capsule are different than the ones in consumer computers
B. These hard drives in Time Capsule are normally used in servers

Where A and B are not fulfilled, Apple is not being truthful, ie. falsely advertising the Time Capsule.

It could be a mistake in the production line, or what I suspect is a product manager trying to shave some costs, and maybe Apple just hasn't updated the website to remove "server-grade" references.

Actually I have seen servers using these drives in their enclosures. HP sell them. They have them in their blades and their low end servers. Therefore your points are invalid as clearly they are server grade drives if they are being sold by the likes of HP in their SERVERS.
post #98 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Indeed. My point remains. Either (A) "server-grade" means something, or (B) it doesn't mean anything.

A.
If "server-grade" means something, then it is reasonable to expect that the drive inside the Time Capsule is different from an average drive found in most non-server computers, regardless of how "good', "quiet" or whatever it is. Regardless of if this "server-grade" drive is just rebadged, or randomly pulled out of the standard production line. It doesn't matter if the WD Green is used in *some* servers, what matters is that it is used in *most non-server computers*, hence it is a common consumer drive. Apple acting in good faith should at least ensure that the Time Capsule hard disk it is somehow different, if not better.

B.
If "server-grade" doesn't mean anything, then it is reasonable to conclude that Apple is simply using a meaningless term as a key selling point of one of their hardware accessories. People can take it from there, whether to "bash Apple", file a lawsuit, or just accept it. Doesn't change the fact that an essentially meaningless term is used as a key selling point for an Apple product... Which is rare.

or

C. 'server-grade' means something different than the definition you are making up.

In the real world (as opposed to your 'bash everything Apple ever does' fantasy land), 'server grade' means 'good enough to be used in servers'. Since people use these drives in servers, then they are server grade.

Whether you think it's a fluff marketing term or not is irrelevant.

Oh, and btw, it's hardly a 'key point' in selling TC. TC is being sold in the basis of its ease of use and capabilities. The fact that it uses a server grade hard disk isn't a key factor by any means.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #99 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Just one more excuse for the Apple hating trolls to get their panties in a wad over something stupid.

As opposed to a bunch of apparently mindless drones slavishly defending Apple?

Kettle, please meet Pot.
post #100 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

This is the exact same story as when the first Time Capsule came out and after a week or so of arguing about it, it turned out that Apple was not lying as per the actual definition of "server grade."

Five seconds of Googling tells you that a server grade hard drive is one that is rated a million hours MTBF and guaranteed as such.

The drive in question is the energy efficient model of one of the best hard drive series made. If Seagate or whomever wants to guarantee the MTBF then it's officially "server grade." It seems likely to me that this is just as much of a non-story as the first time.

Thanks for the post, best info on the issue.
post #101 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

As opposed to a bunch of apparently mindless drones slavishly defending Apple?

Kettle, please meet Pot.

How is pointing out that someone is flat out lying in attacking Apple for things that aren't true 'slavishly defending Apple'?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #102 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

As opposed to a bunch of apparently mindless drones slavishly defending Apple?

Kettle, please meet Pot.

Don't even try... he/she has called out two of the most pro Apple people on this board as "Apple bashers". Reason and logic will not suffice...
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #103 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I wish we could get the an iOS-based Apple Home Server. I have no need for a AEBS with a HDD for Time Machine backups. I want a multi drive cube that is the central hub for all media.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

iOS-based means the version of "OS X" that runs on ARM processors. Mac OS-based means X86-based processors. I don't see why Apple would use Atom or better processors in a home server when their A5 chips are fully capable of running a home server.

Depends on your definition of home server. Mine would need to be able to rip DVDs and do iMovie and iPhoto assuming that the rest of the household is running iPads. For that a mini + a 4 bay TB RAID array seems well suited as a home server.

If you assume something like an iMac or MBP in your home setup then any ol' NAS would work.
post #104 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartfat View Post

Oh friggin boo hoo. One file in a series of backups will get corrupted because of a bit. You shouldn't be relying on one backup anyway if your information is THAT critical.

Frankly, how or why you back up your stuff is irrelevant. If Apple markets something as one thing, and yet the MAIN component manufacturer say it is not, then obviously Apple is deceiving its customers, and the only real argument here is the degree of deception. How you intend to use it - even if you just stick it in your refrigerator as a weight to keep the taco shells from flying around when you close the door - doesn't give Apple the right to make spurious claims about its product. That is especially true for Apple, who certainly markets to the dull-witted crowd who want to able to blindly plug something in and have it "just work," and keep things so simple that the user never has much more to do than push the on'off switch.
post #105 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankinden View Post

Frankly, how or why you back up your stuff is irrelevant. If Apple markets something as one thing, and yet the MAIN component manufacturer say it is not, then obviously Apple is deceiving its customers, and the only real argument here is the degree of deception.

Where did Apple's component supplier state that it's not 'server-grade'?

Hint: the fact that they offer an even higher end drive doesn't indicate that it's not server grade.

Amazing how the Apple haters continue to make the same stupid arguments that failed 3 years ago.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #106 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Side note... My Syquest disks didn't even make it past the 6 month mark sometimes.

Oh Syquest... them and Iomega.
I'm so glad they had such low capacities: it limits the amount of data you lose when they fail

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #107 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Oh Syquest... them and Iomega.
I'm so glad they had such low capacities: it limits the amount of data you lose when they fail

post #108 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Where did Apple's component supplier state that it's not 'server-grade'?

Hint: the fact that they offer an even higher end drive doesn't indicate that it's not server grade.

This is at least the third time I am posting this:

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/06/...ime-caspule-v4
"[Update] According to Western Digital, this disk is a general public model. There are also similar models for servers, but they are more expensive as they have a lower bit error rate 1x1015 while this one has 1x1014, 600,000 load/unload cycles (300,000 for this one) and is covered by a 5 years warranty, while this one is covered for 3 years."
post #109 of 117
"Server Class" is such great marketing because it means absolutely nothing!! I just had the drive in my iMac 27 die ...my Time Capsule saved me but I'm going to be employing TC backup and iCloud backup in the near future to prevent catastrophic dataloss and yes pics of my pets getting lost would be catastrophic lol (actually I don't own pets but you get the point)


As for RAID


If I ever set up a RAID array it will be a RAID-10.

People ...avoid parity striping if you can rebuilds are slow. Remember that because a RAID-5 has to calculate parity and stripe it on every write you basically have 3 or more drives that do not write any faster than a single drives speed (you do get aggregate read) .

Now you take 4 drives and mirror a pair and then strip that mirror you get much better write performance and pretty solid read performance and if a drive dies in the mirrored pair the rebuild is fast.

RAID-10...don't buy an array without it.

Public Service Message
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #110 of 117




Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

The established distinction between a consumer grade and enterprise class hard drive is that enterprise class hard drives are tested more thoroughly as to guarantee over 1 million hours Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF). This assumes 24-hours-a-day, 7-days-a-week usage. Here is a good summary of the issue.

Sorry to say, but I didn't think that article was very good. It never even mentioned *what* hard drive was being used in the Time Capsule, let alone whether it was rated for more than 1 million MTBF. Yes, as you mention, this was found out later but through other means not mentioned or hinted at in the article.

Current Google searches for the definition of "server grade" is just littered with articles about the latest Time Capsule.

I'm willing to start to back off from this debate, we all clearly have established our positions and opinions. Thought I'd have a little fun with the meme above.
post #111 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I wonder why the Apple-bashers think that if they keep repeating the same lie that it becomes true.

There is no such legal or standard definition of 'server grade'. Period. End of discussion (except that the Apple haters will continue to spread the same lie).

I only have 5 Apple computers, an ATV, an AP base station, 4 express stations and an ipod in the house. I have owned dozens of Macintoshes and other Apple products over the years.

I bought my first Mac in 1994 and I was one of the die hard people who kept that company alive when everyone else declared it on its death bed.

I buy components, including hard drives. Every manufacturer who makes them has a "server grade" drive with a longer warranty (Typically 5 years rather than 3.) intended for commercial 24/7 use. The WD Green is not one. Its listed on WD's site as a consumer desktop drive with a 3 year warranty. If you want an "enterprise class" drive, another term for "server grade" or "server class" then you need to get one of the RE series which has a 5 year warranty.

Its still false advertising and you are being an apologist.
post #112 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary54 View Post

I only have 5 Apple computers, an ATV, an AP base station, 4 express stations and an ipod in the house. I have owned dozens of Macintoshes and other Apple products over the years.

I bought my first Mac in 1994 and I was one of the die hard people who kept that company alive when everyone else declared it on its death bed.

I buy components, including hard drives. Every manufacturer who makes them has a "server grade" drive with a longer warranty (Typically 5 years rather than 3.) intended for commercial 24/7 use. The WD Green is not one. Its listed on WD's site as a consumer desktop drive with a 3 year warranty. If you want an "enterprise class" drive, another term for "server grade" or "server class" then you need to get one of the RE series which has a 5 year warranty.

Its still false advertising and you are being an apologist.

Don't bother. Common sense and reasonable interpretations of "server grade" makes you an Apple-Hater!!!1!1!1!1
post #113 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

No, they aren't. In this case, the RE4-GP and Caviar Green use identical hardware. The RE4-GP has some firmware optimizations for use in RAIDs that no one using a Time Capsule will see, and a slightly better warranty. But the shorter warranty on the Caviar Green is still years longer than Apple's warranty on the Time Capsule.

The RE4-GPs are built to tighter tolerances. Whether you want to call this binning or better QA is up to you but they are slightly better drives and tested more. Not that it seems to matter all that much for DOA/Infant mortalities. The Carnegie Mellon study pretty much put to rest that the MTBF numbers provided by drive makers really meant a whole lot in actual use.

That said, folks here would STILL be bitching if Apple had used RE4-GPs since they top out at 2GB and cost more. Folks would also STILL be bitching if they used the AV-GP which are meant for 24/7 DVR-like applications since they aren't enterprise drives either despite having 1M hours MTBF.

Given that "server grade" is a meaningless term other than drives that appear in servers the WD is a great drive for the TC. Folks here would bitch that an Apple mini-based Home Server would be false advertising since it wouldn't be rack mountable, have ECC memory or have a Xeon inside. Oh yeah, and be packing a WD Caviar Green.

The old litmus test of being the same drives as in the XServes doesn't work anymore. I guess the nearest equivalent are the drives shipping in the Mac Pro Server. These are most likely Caviar Blacks like the regular Mac Pros. If they are then Apple's statement still holds...they're using the same class drives in the TC as they are in their "server" lines.
post #114 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

This is at least the third time I am posting this:

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/06/...ime-caspule-v4
"[Update] According to Western Digital, this disk is a general public model. There are also similar models for servers, but they are more expensive as they have a lower bit error rate 1x1015 while this one has 1x1014, 600,000 load/unload cycles (300,000 for this one) and is covered by a 5 years warranty, while this one is covered for 3 years."

You can repeat that until you're blue in the face. The fact that it is sold to consumers does not establish that it isn't server grade. The fact that they have even better drives does not establish that it isn't server grade.

Server grade means, quite simply, that it can be used it servers. It can be and it has been - so it is server grade no matter how much you may wish to whine and moan.

[QUOTE=Gary54;1890562I buy components, including hard drives. Every manufacturer who makes them has a "server grade" drive with a longer warranty (Typically 5 years rather than 3.) intended for commercial 24/7 use. The WD Green is not one. Its listed on WD's site as a consumer desktop drive with a 3 year warranty. If you want an "enterprise class" drive, another term for "server grade" or "server class" then you need to get one of the RE series which has a 5 year warranty.

Its still false advertising and you are being an apologist.[/QUOTE]

Why don't you show us WD's site where it says that you can't use the Green in a server? And tell us why you're not all over HP for using the Green in servers?

BTW, when did you make up the 'logic' that "enterprise class" means the same thing as "server grade"? Show me an official industry reference that supports that.

So far, in spite of endless whining and moaning over the 3 years, not a single person has come up with an industry standard or legal definition that precludes what Apple is doing.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #115 of 117
Just got off the phone after speaking to Drobo. They recommend the WD Black drives over the Greens simply because they are a better drive, not because any WD server advertisement. The Drobo tech said that the Green drives might have a bit higher failure rate but nothing to warrant against using them in a Drobo array or any other array for that matter. He said that all drives will fail no matter what and you get what you pay for. In short, Greens drives are good, while Black drives are better.
post #116 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You can repeat that until you're blue in the face. The fact that it is sold to consumers does not establish that it isn't server grade. The fact that they have even better drives does not establish that it isn't server grade.

Server grade means, quite simply, that it can be used it servers. It can be and it has been - so it is server grade no matter how much you may wish to whine and moan.



Why don't you show us WD's site where it says that you can't use the Green in a server? And tell us why you're not all over HP for using the Green in servers?

BTW, when did you make up the 'logic' that "enterprise class" means the same thing as "server grade"? Show me an official industry reference that supports that.

So far, in spite of endless whining and moaning over the 3 years, not a single person has come up with an industry standard or legal definition that precludes what Apple is doing.

can be used as a "server" Any old hunk of junk can be used as a server. Hell, I used to use a IIci as a server. Because a computer can be used as a server does not make a piece of hardware "sever grade" "server class" or "enterprise class" intended for mission critical 27/7 commercial use. That is a determination by the manufacture of the drive.

To suggest it is, is false advertising.

What would be accurate, to the point truth in advertising is "low power, cool running, long lasting green drive"

Which in consideration of the application, is a better hardware choice. No one needs a high performance drive in a Time Capsule. Low power, cool running is the ticket.

Say what you do and do what you say. We get enough spin doctoring double think out of DC
post #117 of 117
Any of you ever watch Steve Jobs' introduction of the very first Time Capsule @ Macworld in January of 2008? They were 500GB/1TB for $299/$499 at the time and Steve goes out of his way to re-iterate how it's server grade, as in not just any drive, it's "very reliable". The graphic behind him shows the Time Capsule with the blue "802.11n" logo to the left and "Server Grade" to the right of a giant picture of the first ever Time Capsule. It was actually the very first item of that now 3 1/2 year-old Macworld event. Yes, I've watched them all and that just goes to show you how sick I am. (<-- which is why I need that)

So that's really all there is to it as far as Apple's claims as to the meaning, or rather complete lack thereof, of the term "server grade". That's all Steve Jobs said about what "server grade" means to Apple as far as the product Time Capsule is concerned: "a really reliable hard drive". Wow, that's pretty specific.

And that really makes it only an opinion as to what server grade even means. The term was made up by Apple in 2008 and it essentially means nothing. It's advertising. People come up with all kinds of nonsensical terms to describe any given product and if there is one truth about advertising, it's that the claims are always overblown, overstated and to be taken with a grain of...well, in Apple's case, maybe make it a half a pound of something.

Steve may as well have said: "Time Capsule: A magical, revolutionary product at an unbelievable price".

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Teardown of Apple's new Time Capsule reveals consumer, not server, grade HDD