Apple Home Storage Device with RAID, etc.

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
I have two iBooks and they both keep running out of hard drive space, not to mention the lack of data redundancy. I would like to see Apple release some kind of home storage server with RAID, remote-internet-encrypted-backup, etc. This device would then stream media/data to computers in the home, media centers, etc. and keep all downloaded movies, music, documents, etc safe and secure. I need this so bad, like YESTERDAY, and I'm suprised Apple hasn't released such a thing. And this type of device really needs to be made by Apple so that networking protocols, filesystem, etc. is all compatible with other Mac systems, etc. I would love to see this released on September 12th more than anything else. I don't want to drop $2,000 - $3,000 on a MacPro to get a system that will do this.



Second on my wishlist would be a Movie Download service, although I hate the thought of DRMed movies cuz that means the movies I "buy to own" will always be at the mercy and control of someone else. DRM is sortof the "mark of the beast" for digital content. I will stay away from DRM content as much as possible. I've bought probably only 20 songs from iTunes because I don't want to spend hundreds or thousands on DRMed files.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 28
    othelloothello Posts: 1,054member
    i have been looking for something like this for my studio. i don't think apple will ever release this, so i went for one of these:



    http://www.infrant.com/products/prod...=ReadyNAS%20NV
  • Reply 2 of 28
    Exactly... this is my first post and from seeing all of the information recently I will say that on Tuesday we see:



    > a home storage/raid "set top" (dumb) device with removable hd bays ala Mac Pro.. add more if you like... see the recent cube 2 patent illustration that shows a "handled" pull in/out aparatus. This sucker holds everything (music, photos, movies, etc.) and streams via wire to your home theatre setup... tv, etc.

    > a iPod-like controller with an on-screen non-touch interface... is it a true iPod? Hmmmm we shal see.

    > movie download service





    "My 2 Canadian cents"
  • Reply 3 of 28
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by othello


    i have been looking for something like this for my studio. i don't think apple will ever release this, so i went for one of these:



    http://www.infrant.com/products/prod...=ReadyNAS%20NV



    Yea, I've looked into the ReadyNAS in the past but how well does it handle the OS X native networking protocol, filesystem, long filenames with weird charachters, etc.????
  • Reply 4 of 28
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by othello


    i have been looking for something like this for my studio. i don't think apple will ever release this, so i went for one of these:



    http://www.infrant.com/products/prod...=ReadyNAS%20NV



    How bizarre. That ad on the link says NAS, NAS, NAS, but nowhere does it actually say what NAS is. That's just bad copywriting. \
  • Reply 5 of 28
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich


    How bizarre. That ad on the link says NAS, NAS, NAS, but nowhere does it actually say what NAS is. That's just bad copywriting. \



    They probably think their target market already knows what NAS is or can infer from the information given.
  • Reply 6 of 28
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Any Mac running 10.4 with acceptable hard drive space will do this.



    FWIW, I have a B/W G3 350MHz doing just this. 10.4 Disk Utility lets you RAID (mirror, stripe, concatenate) drives for backing up - I do a backup to the server from the laptops (rsync rocks), and then it makes the backup of the backup for me. Everything on the server is backed up automatically to boot.



    Grab any old cheap Mac and go for it.



    BTW, RAID over Enet or WiFi is really a bad idea, IMO. Too slow.
  • Reply 7 of 28
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kickaha


    Any Mac running 10.4 with acceptable hard drive space will do this.



    FWIW, I have a B/W G3 350MHz doing just this. 10.4 Disk Utility lets you RAID (mirror, stripe, concatenate) drives for backing up - I do a backup to the server from the laptops (rsync rocks), and then it makes the backup of the backup for me. Everything on the server is backed up automatically to boot.



    Grab any old cheap Mac and go for it.



    BTW, RAID over Enet or WiFi is really a bad idea, IMO. Too slow.



    Copying large files over wireless is definitely going to be very slow, though fine for the stated intended use of streaming media and storing excess files. I don't see how ethernet is going to such a liability now that the NAS boxes and all current Macs now have gigE, though the iBooks don't have gigE.



    The built-in mirroring is a little too inefficient anyway, a NAS box would offer RAID-5 so you get a decent balance of redundancy and space. It looks like there used to be a software RAID-5 package for OS X, but that company is gone now, as well as the company that they sold the program to.



    So far, it looks like Infrant is the only NAS box maker that even claims to do native OS X support though I've never had any trouble with just using SMB networking.



    I suppose I wouldn't buy any new hardware until the 12th, it's not that far away, but I'm skeptical that they will offer a large capacity network storage device. It's somewhat possible, so waiting a few more days isn't much of a delay.
  • Reply 8 of 28
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM


    Copying large files over wireless is definitely going to be very slow, though fine for the stated intended use of streaming media and storing excess files. I don't see how ethernet is going to such a liability now that the NAS boxes and all current Macs now have gigE, though the iBooks don't have gigE.



    True, I'm only comparing it to say, FW. (And honestly, I was thinking more of WiFi, since that's what my primary machines in the house (laptops) all access the network by.)



    Quote:

    The built-in mirroring is a little too inefficient anyway, a NAS box would offer RAID-5 so you get a decent balance of redundancy and space. It looks like there used to be a software RAID-5 package for OS X, but that company is gone now, as well as the company that they sold the program to.



    'Splain more please? How is the built-in mirroring inefficient?



    Quote:

    So far, it looks like Infrant is the only NAS box maker that even claims to do native OS X support though I've never had any trouble with just using SMB networking.



    I suppose I wouldn't buy any new hardware until the 12th, it's not that far away, but I'm skeptical that they will offer a large capacity network storage device. It's somewhat possible, so waiting a few more days isn't much of a delay.



    Agreed. The more the move to digital video, the more I expect a central media server of some form to make a debut.
  • Reply 9 of 28
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kickaha


    'Splain more please? How is the built-in mirroring inefficient?



    Sorry, bad wording. It's no more inefficient than any other mirroring, I'm just saying that it's less efficient than RAID-3 or RAID-5. If you have four drives in a stripe-mirror system, you get the equivalent space of only two drives. With RAID-5, you get the equivalent of three drives out of four.
  • Reply 10 of 28
    I would like Apple to provide a standalone wired and/or wireless storage product that can work as an Audio/Video server as well as support Time Machine for backups. I think that would sell very well.
  • Reply 11 of 28
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM


    ...So far, it looks like Infrant is the only NAS box maker that even claims to do native OS X support though I've never had any trouble with just using SMB networking...



    For 100% compatibility with OS X such a device needs to do the native OS X networking protocol - I forget what it's called. Is it AFP??? Also, the device must do the native OS X filesystem, HFS+. Without these two things one will almost certainly run into problems with losing file metadata, problems with filename lenths and characters when copying over the network, etc. I unerstand the Infrant ReadyNAS devices do AFP but I don't think they do HFS+. Am I wrong?
  • Reply 12 of 28
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    I would buy a NAS unit to put all of my photos and music on provided I could use it to get my content from wherever I was on the planet.



    That would be sweet.
  • Reply 13 of 28
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Macvault


    For 100% compatibility with OS X such a device needs to do the native OS X networking protocol - I forget what it's called. Is it AFP??? Also, the device must do the native OS X filesystem, HFS+. Without these two things one will almost certainly run into problems with losing file metadata, problems with filename lenths and characters when copying over the network, etc. I unerstand the Infrant ReadyNAS devices do AFP but I don't think they do HFS+. Am I wrong?



    I really don't know. How long of file name lengths are we talking about here? What kind of wierd characters? I've never run into that problem.
  • Reply 14 of 28
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TednDi


    I would buy a NAS unit to put all of my photos and music on provided I could use it to get my content from wherever I was on the planet.



    That would be sweet.



    Sounds like http://www.maxtorsolutions.com/en/catalog/Fusion/
  • Reply 15 of 28
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    A bargain at $799.



    Yeah, I'm kinda kidding about that.
  • Reply 16 of 28
    BTW, for those who don't know, NAS means networked attached storage. Think of it as a box with drives in it that you just plug into your network, and it shows up ready to go on your network. Does nothing but provide a external storage place for local users. Usually, but not always a RAID, which is what it should be IMO.
  • Reply 17 of 28
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blue2kdave


    BTW, for those who don't know, NAS means networked attached storage. Think of it as a box with drives in it that you just plug into your network, and it shows up ready to go on your network. Does nothing but provide a external storage place for local users. Usually, but not always a RAID, which is what it should be IMO.





    Thank you for the explanation. I was beginning to wonder if it wasn't an announcement from NASA or the DHS based on the clarity of the earlier posts.
  • Reply 18 of 28
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    799 is steep. Except for Apple!





    The maxtor solution would work but if it really seamlessly integrated into OS X and did provide for your easy attachability to iTunes, Aperture, etc. anywhere on the planet then I could see the price point being more easily justified.
  • Reply 19 of 28
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TednDi


    799 is steep. Except for Apple!



    You haven't looked at a lot of multi-drive NAS devices, have you?
  • Reply 20 of 28
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    Speaking of NAS storage, we started using a Yellow Box NAS RAID device at the office this week and I have to say I'm not that impressed. It replaced a single 300 GB USB 2.0 Hard Drive attached directly to the server and serves as a hot mirror/archive for files in case of problems with our primary systems. It has a RAID-5 configuration and is connected via NFS over 100 base-T.



    File I/O operations are about 1/4 the speed of the previous drive. This makes sense due to the relative speeds of the two technologies: USB 2.0 versus 100 base-T ethernet, plus overhead.



    For a concrete example: If I filled the entire NAS system to capacity (667 GB) it would take 24 hours to MD5 the entire contents of the "drive".



    So, IMO, with NAS go gigabit ethernet or keep your expectations low.
Sign In or Register to comment.