"But it still sure would be nice to give users the option of going total SSD for an iMac with absolutely no moving parts and for maximum speed. Power users would most definitely appreciate this."
Since the "Fusion drive" was announced by Apple, there's been all kinds of rumors and misunderstandings as to what it is and how it works.
I have no "inside track" to the truth, but from what I can see, the fusion "drive" is actually TWO separate distinct drives: a conventional rotating hard drive (1tb) and an SSD drive (which looks to be 128gb). The "fusion" of the two drives is done through the OS.
I think most reading this post will also have seen the posting about the guy who has discovered a way to activate "fusion" on two drives in an existing Mac, using terminal commands. If this is true, it looks to me like the fusion paradigm is built into the OS, and all that's needed to activate/deactivate it are the proper commands (aside: I wouldn't be surprised to see a preference panel or standalone app that can do this for the user).
Having said that, I believe that it's possible to actually DE-activate fusion on a "fusion-equipped" factory-built Mac. If one was to do this, one would be left with the combination above, i.e., a 1tb hard drive and a 128gb SSD. Again, all a matter of software.
The fusion drive certainly -looks- desirable at first, but I foresee a lot of problems with it in the future, especially for non-tech-savvy end users.
What Apple seems to be selling here is a "drive paradigm" similar to the "backup paradigm" they offer with Time Machine. That is, kind of a "RAID for dummies". All the increased speed, without having to acquire the technical knowledge that might be required for recovery if the combined drives fail.
Personally, I would not want anything to do with "fusion". Just like Time Machine, it makes things all-too-easy "up front", but -- in a moment of need -- the end user can be left hanging (aside: how many times here on MR do we see postings from folks who say, "I can't boot and my TM backup doesn't work!").
I have no problems managing multiple drive icons (and multiple partition icons) on my desktop -- and I know where things are. I normally keep no less than -8- volumes mounted on the desktop at any time. I don't like the idea of "all the eggs in one basket" -- particularly as shaky a "basket" as Fusion may prove to be with time.
But Apple assumes that for the average user, "two [drive volumes] is too many" -- hence, the notion that they will use software tricks to combine the two into one.
It may work, but then again, it may not when problems arise.
The jury is out on this. We'll just have to wait and see...
Since the "Fusion drive" was announced by Apple, there's been all kinds of rumors and misunderstandings as to what it is and how it works.
I have no "inside track" to the truth, but from what I can see, the fusion "drive" is actually TWO separate distinct drives: a conventional rotating hard drive (1tb) and an SSD drive (which looks to be 128gb). The "fusion" of the two drives is done through the OS.
I think most reading this post will also have seen the posting about the guy who has discovered a way to activate "fusion" on two drives in an existing Mac, using terminal commands. If this is true, it looks to me like the fusion paradigm is built into the OS, and all that's needed to activate/deactivate it are the proper commands (aside: I wouldn't be surprised to see a preference panel or standalone app that can do this for the user).
Having said that, I believe that it's possible to actually DE-activate fusion on a "fusion-equipped" factory-built Mac. If one was to do this, one would be left with the combination above, i.e., a 1tb hard drive and a 128gb SSD. Again, all a matter of software.
The fusion drive certainly -looks- desirable at first, but I foresee a lot of problems with it in the future, especially for non-tech-savvy end users.
What Apple seems to be selling here is a "drive paradigm" similar to the "backup paradigm" they offer with Time Machine. That is, kind of a "RAID for dummies". All the increased speed, without having to acquire the technical knowledge that might be required for recovery if the combined drives fail.
Personally, I would not want anything to do with "fusion". Just like Time Machine, it makes things all-too-easy "up front", but -- in a moment of need -- the end user can be left hanging (aside: how many times here on MR do we see postings from folks who say, "I can't boot and my TM backup doesn't work!").
I have no problems managing multiple drive icons (and multiple partition icons) on my desktop -- and I know where things are. I normally keep no less than -8- volumes mounted on the desktop at any time. I don't like the idea of "all the eggs in one basket" -- particularly as shaky a "basket" as Fusion may prove to be with time.
But Apple assumes that for the average user, "two [drive volumes] is too many" -- hence, the notion that they will use software tricks to combine the two into one.
It may work, but then again, it may not when problems arise.
The jury is out on this. We'll just have to wait and see...