Tallest Skil
macrumors P6
The 160MB HDD in my LC 575 that we bought in 1994 hasn't failed. HDD failures are zero to none.
Except for the Seagate 1.5TB. That thing is a worthless piece of...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New iMacs Shipping January 2009?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The 160MB HDD in my LC 575 that we bought in 1994 hasn't failed. HDD failures are zero to none.
Except for the Seagate 1.5TB. That thing is a worthless piece of...
fleshman03
macrumors 68000
NT1440
macrumors P6
lol, thats what Im saying tho. There are certain drives that fail more often than others, i was just wondering if there have been any statistics done on the average fail rate. I know its low, and having a backup drive kinda protects you almost entirely, but some people always live with the "just in case" mentality. Not necessarily a bad thing.
That's a good question and I have the impression that it's not such a widespread problem but if you use your machine to make a living you surely wouldn't want that to happen to you, right? 😉
Actually my point isn't about the necessity of BD in the new iMacs, I was just responding to the user who pointed out the HDD solution for backups. Of course I already use them but from work I got this habit to use DVDs to back up as I feel much more confortable this way, and I think that the BD drive option would be very useful to me.
If it won't be added then I'll be fine anyway.
NT1440
macrumors P6
Well really, what are the odds of both your internal HD and your external backup failing at the same time??
But yes, other than licensing, i dont really see a reason blu-ray shouldnt go into their desktops.
Most consumers don't know dog poo from a computer!
The problem with Apple is that they market to two crowds. One crowd knows nothing about computers and just trusts Apple to sell them a machine that will do the job. The other is the Mac Pro power user crowd that is never happy with machine performance.
In between there are people, like you, that have good reason to want more processors in a reasonably priced machine. It is a very large group that Apple has not addressed well at all recently. Basically it is the group of users that would benefit from a machine with desktop chips and a bit of expandability.
It is interesting that I see Snow Leopard and OpenCL driving what Apple considers to be a minimal system. The fact that Mac Book got a much better GPU, one that supports OpenCL, indicates to me that Apple has new expectations as to what is required to support their software properly in the future. It is in a way Apple defining what is required for the intended market. Since MB has never been about gaming the intended market is the modest user. Thus Apple is saying that the intended user class of the modest or novice user will need an OpenCL compliant machine in the near future. Notably this class of user has no idea what all of this means.
Dave
By intended audience I'm think more about how Apple designs a machine and how they get to a performance level for a PC. Let's face it the vast majority of people buying computers don't know RAM from a Goat and would be shocked at having to figure out what processor counts or OpenCL support means to them.
The problem with Apple is that they market to two crowds. One crowd knows nothing about computers and just trusts Apple to sell them a machine that will do the job. The other is the Mac Pro power user crowd that is never happy with machine performance.
In between there are people, like you, that have good reason to want more processors in a reasonably priced machine. It is a very large group that Apple has not addressed well at all recently. Basically it is the group of users that would benefit from a machine with desktop chips and a bit of expandability.
Exactly. It is a group of people whom could truly benefit from somthing more than an iMac but less than a Mac Pro. It is the group of people that understand desktop systems and the demand that they place on them.
It is interesting that I see Snow Leopard and OpenCL driving what Apple considers to be a minimal system. The fact that Mac Book got a much better GPU, one that supports OpenCL, indicates to me that Apple has new expectations as to what is required to support their software properly in the future. It is in a way Apple defining what is required for the intended market. Since MB has never been about gaming the intended market is the modest user. Thus Apple is saying that the intended user class of the modest or novice user will need an OpenCL compliant machine in the near future. Notably this class of user has no idea what all of this means.
Dave
Google!
it may be a year or two old now but Google once had a very detaled analizise of disk failures in their data centers. At least I think it was Google. If anybody should know about disk failures it would be them.
In any event there is always the risk of the interface causing " disk failures ". I've seen more than a couple examples of this myself.
Dave
it may be a year or two old now but Google once had a very detaled analizise of disk failures in their data centers. At least I think it was Google. If anybody should know about disk failures it would be them.
In any event there is always the risk of the interface causing " disk failures ". I've seen more than a couple examples of this myself.
Dave
I would like the option of a higher-resolution display. Actually, I'd rather like high-res displays as default with the option of a lower-resolution one.
You could not be more wrong, or more naive.
I work in a company that had 3 workstations. The HDD's on all three died. The replacements, all died. That was IBM Deskstar drivers for you. 6 out of 6 failures.
We have a large number of WD and Segate drives for video based projects. I would rate failures at about 1 in 20 across a sample of 60 or so drives.
Laptop drives - two failures, probably used 10 in my time.
HDD failures zero to none? Good luck.
I don't. It's crap. I even bought a time capsule, and it's utterly unusable. If someone wants my 500gb Time Capsule - they can have it for £100 inc UK postage.
NT1440
macrumors P6
I was just saying thats the reason its there. Apple thinks backups to disks is way too cumbersome for your average user so they introduced something easier.
What exactly is it you dont like about time machine. Also note that time capsule != time machine.
Apple does not pay for that - the manufacturer of the hardware/software does and that price is passed on tot he consumer - so it is not a function of cost - to Apple. And what is more portable? A 128GB Flash Drive? Yes. A 250GB external HD? No. A small spinning BR disc? You bet! And with the disc the limitations hat can be imposed on portable media do not exist.
D
Funny how only the most high Steve has this problem, huh? What about the other companies that offer it as an option? Do they have those problems? The problems and fee structures are over-hyped to cover the ass of Apple. Period. Have you read the agreements for BR? I might suggest it. It would help you form an opinion more logically.
D
NT1440
macrumors P6
Sounds like you think you have!
The appearance of a lack of logic seems to be flowing in the other direction. Step back a moment and look at all the trouble iTunes goes through to sell digital music. All of that due to the content providers restricting the sales behaviour of iTunes and the way the content is delivered.
It is not like Steve Jobs or Apple in general want to be involved in excessive DRM but rather they have limited choices.
Dave
The other company would be MicroSoft. I'm not sure if SUN supports Blue- Ray or not, if they do that would imply joining the club and paying the fees. Besides those two who else has an interest in supporting Blu-Ray in their OS?
Have you? Do you really think that playing in this club comes free of charge. Further do you really believe that MS plugged up their OS with overbearing D because they wanted to or for that matter the studios themselves have put significant restrictions on how their digital content can be delivered.
The appearance of a lack of logic seems to be flowing in the other direction. Step back a moment and look at all the trouble iTunes goes through to sell digital music. All of that due to the content providers restricting the sales behaviour of iTunes and the way the content is delivered.
It is not like Steve Jobs or Apple in general want to be involved in excessive DRM but rather they have limited choices.
Dave
Tallest Skil
macrumors P6
I think that the general complaint against a multitouch iMac in its current form factor is "tired arms".
I guess this applies to that one touchscreen HP desktop, as well.
I can't even reach my iMac from where I sit without having to lean across the desk. 😀
YMark
macrumors 6502a
My complaint would be fingerprints on my screen. I can't stand looking at a screen with fingerprints.
...and still I have jet to purchase the very first blue-ray disc myself.
I own a PS3 and have never felt the urge to watch a movie on blue-ray, so possible the interest isn't as wide-spread as one might think.
Just a guess...
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
HD failure rate is 100%
Hard drive failure rate is 100%, unless you turn them off and throw them away before they fail.
Most of my good data is on RAID-60 drives with online hot spares, and even then I take backups.
Hard drive failure rate is 100%, unless you turn them off and throw them away before they fail.
Most of my good data is on RAID-60 drives with online hot spares, and even then I take backups.
Wouldn't logic dictate that the upcoming update would merely be a spec bump and any major revisions/redesigns would be saved for the introduction of the new chipset in late '09?
