Quiet and decent cache. Not a bad trade-off I suppose. I don't see why Apple would call it server-grade for reasons already stated here but if Western Digital doesn't there's even less reason.
I've got 4 of them, which are in Micronet Fantom drive enclosures. 2 of them are over 2 years old and chugging along nicely. One of them is a Time Machine drive and has been in constant use for over a year. Micronet products are usually very well-built.
But really, it's not about the drive itself. It comes down to cooling and the quality of the controller. HDs often fail not because there is something wrong with the drive itself, but because of a bad controller, but the drive is fine.
I am confused by this story, who in their right mind expects a backup appliance with one disk to be server class? if Apple were selling a Drobo loaded with greens you may have a complaint...but shoot, its one dang disk - I dont care if you use a$50 5400rpm 500gb frive or a 3tb 15k rpm drive that costs near $500 - only one disk is not "server class" by any stretch. It is better than no backup at all, but it is not a solution I would rely on as my only backup...that said, in combination with a service like Mozy or Carbonite, this would be a decent on site solution for reallty small shops of 4 or 5 users and for home users, which is the target.
Why would apple even say "server grade"? that doesnt even mean anything anyway...the term in the industry is typically "enterprise class" - technically a server can be any computer that serves data, its about as sleezy as these commercials that sell weird medical shit as "scientifically proven" what does that mean? does that mean that one scientist said it or are there double blind studies to back up claims?
"[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."
I doubt disks of same model are manufactured to different standard. WD probably just pulled some sample from a batch, and if they meet some testing standard, then this whole batch gets labled "server grade". Just like how Intel lable their CPU to different speed rating even when everything came off the same line.
I've got 4 of them, which are in Micronet Fantom drive enclosures. 2 of them are over 2 years old and chugging along nicely. One of them is a Time Machine drive and has been in constant use for over a year.
To me, there is something wrong with the industry, and what we as customers accept as a quality product, when we use 1 or 2+ years of operation as some sort of evidence of a good drive. Not picking on Quadra 610s post, just using it as an example.
I have a Biege G3, and while it doesn't see much use now, the original drive worked in the Mac for 7 years (and still works, last time I used it). I had also added two additional drives (Maxtor) which were in the Mac for over 5 years without a single issue. One of them is now the Time Machine backup for an PowerBook G4, and the other is used as an emergency boot disk if I should ever have to repair any of the drives in my other computes. Both drives are now over 10 years old and continue to work flawlessly.
I think a few of my WD Studio drives use their Green drive, or an earlier version of it. They do run cool and quiet, but one of them failed and was replaced under warranty, but still a pain recovering and restoring all of the data on it. I just hope they can survive in the hot environment of the Time Capsule.
I am confused by this story, who in their right mind expects a backup appliance with one disk to be server class? if Apple were selling a Drobo loaded with greens you may have a complaint...but shoot, its one dang disk - I dont care if you use a$50 5400rpm 500gb frive or a 3tb 15k rpm drive that costs near $500 - only one disk is not "server class" by any stretch. It is better than no backup at all, but it is not a solution I would rely on as my only backup ....
They don't call it "server class" nor do they imply that it's a server class backup solution. It's for using Time Machine and Time Machine is just a way for the average user to find a file that they deleted and (for the first time for most people), have *some* kind of backup. That's it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer
Why would apple even say "server grade"? that doesnt even mean anything anyway...
They say "server grade" to distinguish the drive in the mind of the consumer from "just any hard drive." When the consumer is looking at buying the product, they are thinking "Sure, there's a hard drive in there, but is it a good one or just some generic POS drive?" By telling people it's "server grade" and defining that as 1 million MTBF, and then further saying that the manufacturer has guaranteed that level of performance/reliability, they are assuaging the fears of the consumer that the drive is some generic POS.
It's basically the equivalent of saying "It's a damn fine drive and it's not likely to ever fail for the time you are using it." Both of which are quite true.
I always use the Caviar Blacks, but the Greens are great drives with an excellent reputation. I think what all the angry people are really glossing over here is that this is one of the very best drives you could get from a company with an excellent reputation. What the hell else are they going to use in a consumer back-up appliance? What else is there out there that's better? For this purpose, probably nothing at all.
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.
The specifications for this drive are not listed either on Western Digital's website, or by Apple's. However, the previous version of the hard drive was rated at 1.2 MTBF (that information was listed in the product's support documents, not in the marketing material). That hard drive was also marketed by Western Digital as a consumer class hard drive. I doubt the manufacturer is going to decrease the quality of the drive when introducing a new model.
The term "enterprize-class" is sort of like the term "all natural" when you go grocery shopping. Even though the phrasing is thought to mean something, it has no real legal meaning. It can be used as a marketing term that means something different to each manufacturer or seller. Some companies like Whole Foods actually have a definition for the term, but it is not applicable to all sellers and producers of foods.
So to the case at hand, it is quite possible Apple's definition of enterprize-class server is different then Western Digital. Apple and WD have two different goals. WD wants to sell more expensive drives to businesses. Apple wants a quality drive for consumers at a reasonable price. If this drive exceeds the MTBF of one million (which it likely does), Apple will be satisfying the criteria of a enterprise class drive regardless of what WD markets this particular drive as.
Apple Insider should avoid misleading sensation headlines. At least do a little leg work, and outline the issues better.
You do realize that a RAID one is striped and if it fails, you lose everything right? Your solution is no better than Apple's. You might want to read up on RAID and start with at least a RAID five.
This is hilarious. I suggest you read up on RAID.
Folks advocating RAID 5 as a minimum probably should move thier bar up to RAID 10 given that HDDs have this annoying tendency to fail in lots.
A single drive Time Capsule is just fine for consumer on-site backup and archival/recovery. If your data is important you're also doing some sort of off-site backup. Either in the cloud or as drives you store offsite.
My important iPhoto and iMovie (aka family pictures and movies) lives on a 2TB RAID 1 array with a monthy (or so) backup to an external drive which I keep in my desk at work. I actually have a couple externals and just swap them. The one at the house I toss in the fire safe but in a fire it'll be ruined anyway because of how those safes work.
My time capsule I use just for recovery when I delete something stupidly on my machine...but it works REALLY well for this.
Why would apple even say "server grade"? that doesnt even mean anything anyway...the term in the industry is typically "enterprise class"...
If Apple can show any server shipping with a WD Green then the drive is "server grade". Even if it's a home server.
/shrug
WD greens are a decent enough drive. Studies haven't shown a huge reliability difference between SATA drives (which are mostly consumer grade) and FC/SAS enterprise grade drives. Google uses consumer grade SATA drives for their server farms.
Anyone care to bet that there are 3TB WD Greens in their servers and arrays?
I think there are three flawed lines of thinking with some of the comments on this thread.
{snip fallacious claims}
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.
No, the REAL flawed line of thinking is people who don't have any clue what they're talking about pretending the they're experts.
Your interpretation of what 'server grade' should be is irrelevant. There is no standard industry definition, nor is there any LEGAL definition (which is more important). Technically, if even one person uses this drive in a server, then it's server grade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwydion
No, "home" and "server" disks are different
Really? How. Show me the industry standard definition of 'home' and 'server' disks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xsu
I doubt disks of same model are manufactured to different standard. WD probably just pulled some sample from a batch, and if they meet some testing standard, then this whole batch gets labled "server grade". Just like how Intel lable their CPU to different speed rating even when everything came off the same line.
Exactly. It is very likely that drive manufacturers sell EXACTLY THE SAME DRIVE with different labels - just as Intel did with CPUs.
But even that doesn't matter. Since there is no standard definition - and since several people here admit that these use these drives on servers, they can be called 'server grade'. If the whiners want to object, they should write their Congressman to get a law passed as to what is server grade and what isn't. (But please don't - the government is meddling enough in things they don't understand).
Just one more excuse for the Apple hating trolls to get their panties in a wad over something stupid.
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.
People were talking about this issue with drives and time capsule a little over 2 years ago. So why would Apple continue in this vein knowing that the Caviar Green would be considered an issue?! (everyone and their grandmother is writing about this teardown).
People were talking about this issue with drives and time capsule a little over 2 years ago. So why would Apple continue in this vein knowing that the Caviar Green would be considered an issue?! (everyone and their grandmother is writing about this teardown).
Maybe because the drive met their quality and price targets better than the alternatives?
And maybe you should turn the argument around - since it was shown to be a non-issue 2 years ago, why are people still whining about the same darned issue? Are the Apple-haters really that incapable of learning?
Oh, and btw, 'everyone and their grandmother is writing about this' is nonsense. A few techy sites are discussing it, but I would bet that AT LEAST 95% of the target audience for Time Capsule has never even heard of the issue.
"server grade" or not, while I can appreciate the desire to backup to a single drive TC what are you getting? IMO, all you are doing is slightly improving your odds of recovering data. Personally, I just RAID 1 the system now at a minimum and move on.
Yeah, right. There is not a single server, anywhere in the world that uses the Caviar Green. Well I got news for YOU Mr. French Disassembly guy: LOTS of servers use this drive!!
1) Even if the drives aren't as rugged as some other drives if they use less power than other drives and come with comparable warranties I can see how many a server farm would use these drives.
2) There are few reason why Newegg would sell these in 20 packs. I'd say the most likely is for servers, though I suppose some mom-and-pop shops are buying them for the tower PCs they are making for customers.
I'm pretty sure when the first TC came out there plenty of debate over how "server class" is defined
I think there still is a debate, with no answer. I for one wouldn't say that MacNN is a site with enough tech clout to make a universal definition. Or that they pick sources with enough tech clout to be 'authoritative'.
That said, I wish we could get costs down to the point of having viable SSD back up drives. As I understand it they are faster and use less electricity. They probably wouldn't be considered 'server class' because of the TRIM issue but for local use like my home or office and its 2-10 computers they might be fine. And here in Cali with the constant risk of earthquake we love the idea of backups that aren't hard drives with their moving parts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
Western Digital has stated to Hardmac.com that there are distinct differences
But are those differences truly meaningful and don't take just Hardmac's word on that one. Judge it for yourself. What are the actual spec differences and are they likely to matter in a day and age when folks are using mac minis for servers as much as the old Xserve style systems. Or is it possible that in the end, those differences aren't really that meaningful but they are a great way to justify a different label and a higher price to make companies believe something was made 'for them' and worthy of the price tag.
And then ask yourself if the differences really made for the use they are having now. Is the difference between the drives being put in the TCs and the so called 'server class' so great that the drives in the TC are a dud. Probably not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaFox
Anyone here who thinks WD Green drives, especially 1.5 TB and higher capacity, are "high quality" drives needs to go read the customer reviews on NewEgg. It's seems 1 in 4 is DOA.
Seems is the key word here. One site who has had some vocal folks with issues doesn't necessarily reflect their whole sales or the sale everywhere else. They could have gotten a bad batch or perhaps Fed Ex man handled the stuff on the way to them and damaged them. Or who knows. It could be that those reviews reflect only a small part of their sales and that they reflect a small part of the sales everywhere.
That said, I wish we could get costs down to the point of having viable SSD back up drives. As I understand it they are faster and use less electricity. They probably wouldn't be considered 'server class' because of the TRIM issue but for local use like my home or office and its 2-10 computers they might be fine. And here in Cali with the constant risk of earthquake we love the idea of backups that aren't hard drives with their moving parts.
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.
As the Mac becomes just another device among the plethora of satellite computing iDevices I think a "Base Station Server" has to be in the works. If you look at the cost of these RAIDed home servers there seems to be plenty of money in it, perhaps even more than the iPod in the short run and for Macs in the long run.
Comments
http://products.wdc.com/library/matr...178-771112.pdf
I've got 4 of them, which are in Micronet Fantom drive enclosures. 2 of them are over 2 years old and chugging along nicely. One of them is a Time Machine drive and has been in constant use for over a year. Micronet products are usually very well-built.
But really, it's not about the drive itself. It comes down to cooling and the quality of the controller. HDs often fail not because there is something wrong with the drive itself, but because of a bad controller, but the drive is fine.
Why would apple even say "server grade"? that doesnt even mean anything anyway...the term in the industry is typically "enterprise class" - technically a server can be any computer that serves data, its about as sleezy as these commercials that sell weird medical shit as "scientifically proven" what does that mean? does that mean that one scientist said it or are there double blind studies to back up claims?
Where the heck is the FTC?
Western Digital has stated to Hardmac.com that there are distinct differences:
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."
I doubt disks of same model are manufactured to different standard. WD probably just pulled some sample from a batch, and if they meet some testing standard, then this whole batch gets labled "server grade". Just like how Intel lable their CPU to different speed rating even when everything came off the same line.
Exactly. "Server grade" is a meaningless term. If you really want a robust backup server, then buy a backup system with at least RAID 5.
I had to chuckle at this though in the context of the article, given the RAID originally stood for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks.
That's an excellent drive.
I've got 4 of them, which are in Micronet Fantom drive enclosures. 2 of them are over 2 years old and chugging along nicely. One of them is a Time Machine drive and has been in constant use for over a year.
To me, there is something wrong with the industry, and what we as customers accept as a quality product, when we use 1 or 2+ years of operation as some sort of evidence of a good drive. Not picking on Quadra 610s post, just using it as an example.
I have a Biege G3, and while it doesn't see much use now, the original drive worked in the Mac for 7 years (and still works, last time I used it). I had also added two additional drives (Maxtor) which were in the Mac for over 5 years without a single issue. One of them is now the Time Machine backup for an PowerBook G4, and the other is used as an emergency boot disk if I should ever have to repair any of the drives in my other computes. Both drives are now over 10 years old and continue to work flawlessly.
I think a few of my WD Studio drives use their Green drive, or an earlier version of it. They do run cool and quiet, but one of them failed and was replaced under warranty, but still a pain recovering and restoring all of the data on it. I just hope they can survive in the hot environment of the Time Capsule.
I am confused by this story, who in their right mind expects a backup appliance with one disk to be server class? if Apple were selling a Drobo loaded with greens you may have a complaint...but shoot, its one dang disk - I dont care if you use a$50 5400rpm 500gb frive or a 3tb 15k rpm drive that costs near $500 - only one disk is not "server class" by any stretch. It is better than no backup at all, but it is not a solution I would rely on as my only backup ....
They don't call it "server class" nor do they imply that it's a server class backup solution. It's for using Time Machine and Time Machine is just a way for the average user to find a file that they deleted and (for the first time for most people), have *some* kind of backup. That's it.
Why would apple even say "server grade"? that doesnt even mean anything anyway...
They say "server grade" to distinguish the drive in the mind of the consumer from "just any hard drive." When the consumer is looking at buying the product, they are thinking "Sure, there's a hard drive in there, but is it a good one or just some generic POS drive?" By telling people it's "server grade" and defining that as 1 million MTBF, and then further saying that the manufacturer has guaranteed that level of performance/reliability, they are assuaging the fears of the consumer that the drive is some generic POS.
It's basically the equivalent of saying "It's a damn fine drive and it's not likely to ever fail for the time you are using it." Both of which are quite true.
I always use the Caviar Blacks, but the Greens are great drives with an excellent reputation. I think what all the angry people are really glossing over here is that this is one of the very best drives you could get from a company with an excellent reputation. What the hell else are they going to use in a consumer back-up appliance? What else is there out there that's better? For this purpose, probably nothing at all.
The specifications for this drive are not listed either on Western Digital's website, or by Apple's. However, the previous version of the hard drive was rated at 1.2 MTBF (that information was listed in the product's support documents, not in the marketing material). That hard drive was also marketed by Western Digital as a consumer class hard drive. I doubt the manufacturer is going to decrease the quality of the drive when introducing a new model.
The term "enterprize-class" is sort of like the term "all natural" when you go grocery shopping. Even though the phrasing is thought to mean something, it has no real legal meaning. It can be used as a marketing term that means something different to each manufacturer or seller. Some companies like Whole Foods actually have a definition for the term, but it is not applicable to all sellers and producers of foods.
So to the case at hand, it is quite possible Apple's definition of enterprize-class server is different then Western Digital. Apple and WD have two different goals. WD wants to sell more expensive drives to businesses. Apple wants a quality drive for consumers at a reasonable price. If this drive exceeds the MTBF of one million (which it likely does), Apple will be satisfying the criteria of a enterprise class drive regardless of what WD markets this particular drive as.
Apple Insider should avoid misleading sensation headlines. At least do a little leg work, and outline the issues better.
You do realize that a RAID one is striped and if it fails, you lose everything right? Your solution is no better than Apple's. You might want to read up on RAID and start with at least a RAID five.
This is hilarious. I suggest you read up on RAID.
Folks advocating RAID 5 as a minimum probably should move thier bar up to RAID 10 given that HDDs have this annoying tendency to fail in lots.
A single drive Time Capsule is just fine for consumer on-site backup and archival/recovery. If your data is important you're also doing some sort of off-site backup. Either in the cloud or as drives you store offsite.
My important iPhoto and iMovie (aka family pictures and movies) lives on a 2TB RAID 1 array with a monthy (or so) backup to an external drive which I keep in my desk at work. I actually have a couple externals and just swap them. The one at the house I toss in the fire safe but in a fire it'll be ruined anyway because of how those safes work.
My time capsule I use just for recovery when I delete something stupidly on my machine...but it works REALLY well for this.
Why would apple even say "server grade"? that doesnt even mean anything anyway...the term in the industry is typically "enterprise class"...
If Apple can show any server shipping with a WD Green then the drive is "server grade". Even if it's a home server.
/shrug
WD greens are a decent enough drive. Studies haven't shown a huge reliability difference between SATA drives (which are mostly consumer grade) and FC/SAS enterprise grade drives. Google uses consumer grade SATA drives for their server farms.
Anyone care to bet that there are 3TB WD Greens in their servers and arrays?
I think there are three flawed lines of thinking with some of the comments on this thread.
{snip fallacious claims}
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.
No, the REAL flawed line of thinking is people who don't have any clue what they're talking about pretending the they're experts.
Your interpretation of what 'server grade' should be is irrelevant. There is no standard industry definition, nor is there any LEGAL definition (which is more important). Technically, if even one person uses this drive in a server, then it's server grade.
No, "home" and "server" disks are different
Really? How. Show me the industry standard definition of 'home' and 'server' disks.
I doubt disks of same model are manufactured to different standard. WD probably just pulled some sample from a batch, and if they meet some testing standard, then this whole batch gets labled "server grade". Just like how Intel lable their CPU to different speed rating even when everything came off the same line.
Exactly. It is very likely that drive manufacturers sell EXACTLY THE SAME DRIVE with different labels - just as Intel did with CPUs.
But even that doesn't matter. Since there is no standard definition - and since several people here admit that these use these drives on servers, they can be called 'server grade'. If the whiners want to object, they should write their Congressman to get a law passed as to what is server grade and what isn't. (But please don't - the government is meddling enough in things they don't understand).
Just one more excuse for the Apple hating trolls to get their panties in a wad over something stupid.
No, "home" and "server" disks are different
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.
Just one more excuse for the Apple hating trolls to get their panties in a wad over something stupid.
Well said.
If you are that concerned about the supposed quality of a storage disc then you aren't likely looking at the TC with it's single, spinning drive.
truest TC statement ever made.
People were talking about this issue with drives and time capsule a little over 2 years ago. So why would Apple continue in this vein knowing that the Caviar Green would be considered an issue?! (everyone and their grandmother is writing about this teardown).
Maybe because the drive met their quality and price targets better than the alternatives?
And maybe you should turn the argument around - since it was shown to be a non-issue 2 years ago, why are people still whining about the same darned issue? Are the Apple-haters really that incapable of learning?
Oh, and btw, 'everyone and their grandmother is writing about this' is nonsense. A few techy sites are discussing it, but I would bet that AT LEAST 95% of the target audience for Time Capsule has never even heard of the issue.
Yeah, right. There is not a single server, anywhere in the world that uses the Caviar Green. Well I got news for YOU Mr. French Disassembly guy: LOTS of servers use this drive!!
1) Even if the drives aren't as rugged as some other drives if they use less power than other drives and come with comparable warranties I can see how many a server farm would use these drives.
2) There are few reason why Newegg would sell these in 20 packs. I'd say the most likely is for servers, though I suppose some mom-and-pop shops are buying them for the tower PCs they are making for customers.
I'm pretty sure when the first TC came out there plenty of debate over how "server class" is defined
I think there still is a debate, with no answer. I for one wouldn't say that MacNN is a site with enough tech clout to make a universal definition. Or that they pick sources with enough tech clout to be 'authoritative'.
That said, I wish we could get costs down to the point of having viable SSD back up drives. As I understand it they are faster and use less electricity. They probably wouldn't be considered 'server class' because of the TRIM issue but for local use like my home or office and its 2-10 computers they might be fine. And here in Cali with the constant risk of earthquake we love the idea of backups that aren't hard drives with their moving parts.
Western Digital has stated to Hardmac.com that there are distinct differences
But are those differences truly meaningful and don't take just Hardmac's word on that one. Judge it for yourself. What are the actual spec differences and are they likely to matter in a day and age when folks are using mac minis for servers as much as the old Xserve style systems. Or is it possible that in the end, those differences aren't really that meaningful but they are a great way to justify a different label and a higher price to make companies believe something was made 'for them' and worthy of the price tag.
And then ask yourself if the differences really made for the use they are having now. Is the difference between the drives being put in the TCs and the so called 'server class' so great that the drives in the TC are a dud. Probably not.
Anyone here who thinks WD Green drives, especially 1.5 TB and higher capacity, are "high quality" drives needs to go read the customer reviews on NewEgg. It's seems 1 in 4 is DOA.
Seems is the key word here. One site who has had some vocal folks with issues doesn't necessarily reflect their whole sales or the sale everywhere else. They could have gotten a bad batch or perhaps Fed Ex man handled the stuff on the way to them and damaged them. Or who knows. It could be that those reviews reflect only a small part of their sales and that they reflect a small part of the sales everywhere.
That said, I wish we could get costs down to the point of having viable SSD back up drives. As I understand it they are faster and use less electricity. They probably wouldn't be considered 'server class' because of the TRIM issue but for local use like my home or office and its 2-10 computers they might be fine. And here in Cali with the constant risk of earthquake we love the idea of backups that aren't hard drives with their moving parts.
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.
As the Mac becomes just another device among the plethora of satellite computing iDevices I think a "Base Station Server" has to be in the works. If you look at the cost of these RAIDed home servers there seems to be plenty of money in it, perhaps even more than the iPod in the short run and for Macs in the long run.