More robustness to iMac, ssd with USB3 hd what do you say?

[Overg]

I was thinking in order to add robustness to the iMac, to buy the 246gb ssd instead of the fusion, this way I eliminate any moving parts inside the machine. And for files an big data to add 1 tb usb3 hd connected outside.

What do you say?
Any other future iMac buyer think te same.?

[\-V-/]

Originally Posted by Overg

I was thinking in order to add robustness to the iMac, to buy the 246gb ssd instead of the fusion, this way I eliminate any moving parts inside the machine. And for files an big data to add 1 tb usb3 hd connected outside.

What do you say?
Any other future iMac buyer think te same.?

I'm thoroughly enjoying the USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt ports for external storage right now. I can finally tolerate working with external drives at the speeds I actually need for once. There's nothing wrong with going with an SSD and just putting most of your files on external storage... but the Fusion drives are pretty fast, though.

[Scrapula]

Originally Posted by Overg

I was thinking in order to add robustness to the iMac, to buy the 246gb ssd instead of the fusion, this way I eliminate any moving parts inside the machine. And for files an big data to add 1 tb usb3 hd connected outside.

What do you say?
Any other future iMac buyer think te same.?

I'm going with the standard 1TB drive. The cost/benefit ratio is just not good enough to convince me otherwise.

[Overg]

Originally Posted by Scrapula

I'm going with the standard 1TB drive. The cost/benefit ratio is just not good enough to convince me otherwise.

How about knowing that nothing can go wrong in the computer, and nothing moves there.
?
because usually the HD fail first. and cause most of the problems.

[excommie]

I always found Firewire 800 drives as fast as the internal sata drives. They feel just as fast as internal. My WD Black 2TB drive scores higher benchmarks on FW800 than the original Hitachi Deskstar drive that was originally installed insdie my iMac. I always stayed away from USB as USB puts additional strain on CPU.This might not be an issue with newer chipsets and more powerful CPUs.

[Steve121178]

Originally Posted by Overg

How about knowing that nothing can go wrong in the computer, and nothing moves there.
?
because usually the HD fail first. and cause most of the problems.

Who told you SSD's can't go wrong?

[MojoRisinSD]

Originally Posted by Overg

How about knowing that nothing can go wrong in the computer, and nothing moves there.
?
because usually the HD fail first. and cause most of the problems.

I am going with the standard HDD in the 27" also. I have an external Time Machine backup in case anything goes wrong.
I am placing my bets that we are going to be able to get into these iMac's to install our own storage, and I will do that later on when SSD is more reasonably priced.

[jmcgeejr]

Originally Posted by Overg

I was thinking in order to add robustness to the iMac, to buy the 246gb ssd instead of the fusion, this way I eliminate any moving parts inside the machine. And for files an big data to add 1 tb usb3 hd connected outside.

What do you say?
Any other future iMac buyer think te same.?

I am actually going the opposite direction. I have a C300 ssd (256GB) in my mini and I still have one more that i havent used yet. I am going to order my 27" with the 1TB 5400 rpm, will install OSX on my c300 in my lacie thunderbolt enclosure and then make my 1tb internal my Time Machine backup device.

[Siderz]

Originally Posted by Overg

I was thinking in order to add robustness to the iMac, to buy the 246gb ssd instead of the fusion, this way I eliminate any moving parts inside the machine.

It still has a fan.

[Apple fanboy]

Originally Posted by Overg

I was thinking in order to add robustness to the iMac, to buy the 246gb ssd instead of the fusion, this way I eliminate any moving parts inside the machine. And for files an big data to add 1 tb usb3 hd connected outside.

What do you say?
Any other future iMac buyer think te same.?

I don't think this is an option. If you want to go SSD only you better be a lottery winner or bank robber. You can only select Fusion drive, standard HDD or 756GB SSD according to the keynote.

[pukingpixels]

There's no BTO option for a 256 GB SSD.

I was thinking the same but now I pretty much have to go for the 1TB fusion drive instead cause I don't find it cost efficient to get the 756 GB SSD.

[NT1440]

Originally Posted by Overg

How about knowing that nothing can go wrong in the computer, and nothing moves there.
?
because usually the HD fail first. and cause most of the problems.

SSD's fail just as HDD's do. The secret is to make sure you have time machine enabled on an external drive for when they do

[Hakone]

Originally Posted by Siderz

It still has a fan.

I guess he'll just have to turn off the fan!

[Scrapula]

Originally Posted by Overg

How about knowing that nothing can go wrong in the computer, and nothing moves there.
?
because usually the HD fail first. and cause most of the problems.

I've been using Macs since 1992 and have had one hard drive fail. The data was able to be pulled off successfully and put on a new hard drive. The price of the two hard drives would still be less money than the SSD. I'm planning on adding an external drive for backing up.

I'm pretty sure that 768GB SSD drive is going to cost over $1,000. Way too much money.

[AFPBoy]

Originally Posted by jmcgeejr

will install OSX on my c300 in my lacie thunderbolt enclosure and then make my 1tb internal my Time Machine backup device.

Are the new Lacie's with thunderbolt easy to open?

[flynz4]

Originally Posted by Overg

How about knowing that nothing can go wrong in the computer, and nothing moves there.
?
because usually the HD fail first. and cause most of the problems.

While SSDs are more reliable than HDDs... claiming that nothing can go wrong is a gross overstatement.

The key advantage of SSDs is performance. Not in Gb/s (even though they are better)... but in IOPs. The difference is IOPs is stunning.

/Jim

[mchoffa]

I'm going for a fusion drive inside for general working, and might buy a USB3 (or thunderbolt?) enclosure to put a 512GB SSD in it for my 17,000+ photos (aperture) + videos, with a backup of that drive in the form of a plain old HDD just in case. This way, the mac won't be overloaded with all of my big stuff trying to transfer to/from the 128 inside the fusion, but I'll still benefit for my daily use files. Thoughts?

[Overg]

Originally Posted by flynz4

While SSDs are more reliable than HDDs... claiming that nothing can go wrong is a gross overstatement.

The key advantage of SSDs is performance. Not in Gb/s (even though they are better)... but in IOPs. The difference is IOPs is stunning.

/Jim

I am not claiming nothing go wrong, but it reduce the possibility of malfunction.
An avarge mechanic hd fail every few years (. I know that very well as in every computer I have since the year 1990, this was the thing that usually cause to all the troubles).
While the solid state memory can go broken, it is rare thing.
( I mean when was the last time you saw that happen on iPhone? Or any portable device for that matter, that use flash memory)

[Scrapula]

Originally Posted by Overg

I am not claiming nothing go wrong, but it reduce the possibility of malfunction.
An avarge mechanic hd fail every few years (. I know that very well as in every computer I have since the year 1990, this was the thing that usually cause to all the troubles).
While the solid state memory can go broken, it is rare thing.
( I mean when was the last time you saw that happen on iPhone? Or any portable device for that matter, that use flash memory)

Yes, they have no moving parts but the fail rate for standard hard drives is very low. We have a few Acer Unix Servers from the 1990's still running with the same hard drives that we installed on them. SSDs are great for laptops that get moved around, shaken, dropped, etc. Desktops are pretty stable.

Unless you need the speed, why pay $1,000 more? Even then, you have to really take a look at what you are using the computer for. For me, the SSD will boot faster but I never turn off my computer. The only time I reboot is after an OS update. That would be faster - but worth the extra money?

I cannot think of anything that I do on a computer that would really benefit from the extra speed. The fusion drive will be much more affordable and I might consider it.