No storage--Apple may have done you a favor!

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by ibgb, Jun 14, 2013.

  1. ibgb macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Location:
    usa
    #1
    Perhaps one reason people are so upset with the new Mac Pro is that the existing Mac Pro comes as a design from the old Apple COMPUTER Corporation, and the new design comes from the new Apple.

    Now storage is one of the areas that people seem upset about. However, Apple may have done you a favor.

    In the old days people wanted Apple to supply all our needs: servers, storage, etc. Those products, Xserve and Xserver raid, are long gone. There are plenty of fine companies whose bread and butter is to supply those types of products. That is not Apple's mission.

    Apple is trying to be the digital Sony. That is consumer devices. It has been that way for some time. But that doesn't mean that your needs are unmet, rather you have to look outside of the Apple company for your solutions. There are many fine companies outside of Apple where your needs can be met. And probably cheaper, better, more reliable as well.

    Personally, I was looking for safe storage as everything is being stored in a digital format: music, photos, videos – all. And to save that information requires some planning and backup.

    The Mac file system, HFS, is rather old, and I was looking at a Mac OS based ZFS. That was wrong. There is not strong ZFS support in the Mac community. One is better looking outside of the Mac community at communities like Linux, FreeBSD, and so on. These communities have a very vibrant and thriving and actively developed storage solutions for free.

    For small business or home, a fine product from HP plus an install package from one of the above mentioned communities gives one a superior storage device, which is designed solely for that purpose, with an interested community supporting it. It also allows one to design or choose what is important for their storage needs: speed? Safety? Cost?

    I will probably purchase a HP micro server. Generation 7 can be purchased for under $300. It includes room for four+ discs, ecc ram, etc.. Add whatever software you want and you have a NAS or iSCSI San for cheap. Also, the low power box is accessible to all your computers. The one limitation is gigabit ethernet, but it does have a PCIe slot or two. Generation 8 Is coming out this month and has dual gigabit ethernet ports built in, ecc ram, Ivy Bridge processors and a server chipset.

    Google HP microserver.

    I have installed freeNAS in a virtual machine and it is definitely worth more than it costs.

    I just cleaned out some old floppy disks, don't miss that storage.

    The full details of the new Mac Pro we will have to see; it will probably not be as bad as people make it out to be. It changes things, probably for the better. I don't miss serial cables, floppies, etc.
     
  2. Topper macrumors 65816

    Topper

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    #2
    Now you've gone too far. Next thing you know, you'll be telling me you got rid of your eight track tapes.
     
  3. ActionableMango macrumors 604

    ActionableMango

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    #3
    In my experience inexpensive NAS units often do not have the computing power to handle transfers quickly. The cheap CPU/memory are a very confining bottleneck.
     
  4. ssgbryan macrumors 6502

    ssgbryan

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    #4
    Obviously, you haven't priced out TB external enclosures.

    I currently have 6 HDs inside my MacPro. That will mean at least 2 external bays with associated clutter.
     
  5. drsox macrumors 65816

    drsox

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Location:
    Xhystos
    #5
    Yes, I agree. Also depends on the number of drives running in the RAID. I spent enough to get a Core2Duo based NAS with 6 drives. Even with 5900rpm drives I get 90+ MBps Write and 100+ MBps Read rates through a CAT6 LAN.

    When I also bought the cheapie 2 drive version I only got 60 MBps max. (Sold it and bought another 6 drive)
     
  6. Dalton63841 macrumors 65816

    Dalton63841

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2010
    Location:
    SEMO, USA
    #6
    I ran Freenas back when it was just Freenas 7 for near 3 years without ever running into an issue. If you have a decent CPU and plenty of ram, and a Gigabit ethernet card, it had pretty impressive read/write speeds.

    Personally I am saving up for a 5 bay QNAP. They have a good reputation, expandable ram, and a built in HDMI port. Not to mention it has a native XBMC app.
     
  7. bsbeamer macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    #7
    Absolutely correct in my experience as well.

    The CalDigit HDPro2 is one of the best performing "single workstation" RAID-5 units I've ever used and starts at about $5500 - over 600MB/s read/write constantly, spikes over 750MB/s.

    Fast-performing fiber units are well over $10k, and that generally does not include the software/operating system, or the cards needed on each workstation. "Permissions" get to be a mess with the amount of clients connected at the same time, etc.

    The Avid Unity ISIS servers usually top out around 400MB/s, depending on the "client" load and amount connected. Believe they start at $38k.

    ...and did I miss something with the new Mac Pro not including ANY storage? thought it was shipping with PCIe flash-based storage that tops out at 1250MB/s.
     
  8. madmax14304 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    #8
    If the plan is to use a Mac Pro with a FreeNAS NAS holding all your data, be prepared for total disappointment.

    1.) You can use iSCSI on FreeNAS and the Mac, but be prepared to spend $200 on the Atto initiator software or deal with SNS's initiator. With iSCSI though, you'll get good speed. I had data corruption issues when I used the SNS initiator, plus my Mac no longer went to sleep.

    2) You can use AFP. FreeNAS's implementation of netatalk (AFP) is really slow on 1Gb. Maybe if you bound 4 1G ports on both the NAS and Mac Pro, it might be better.

    I like the idea of a ZFS backed storage device but I think we need a good initiator for iSCSI. Wish Mavericks included one. AFP on Ubuntu is dramatically faster in my experience but I haven't tried FreeNAS in the past 10 months or so.
     
  9. ibgb thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Location:
    usa
    #9
    True. The HP microserver has better system components pre-assembled for the price than you can put together yourself.

    Tests from the old (gen5? gen6?) unit:

    Local RAIDZ Bandwidth: 314 MB/s (2.5Gbit/s)

    So the single 1 gigabit ethernet seems to be the limiting factor.

    http://vocalbit.com/article/354/benchmarking-freenas-on-the-hp-microserver
     
  10. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #10
    Another Apple did us a favor by removing things and making us pay more for what used to be included thread by a 'newbie'. What is going on here? Are Apple trolling the 'rumors? Apple's mission is not a solid thing . It depends on what team is making them money and who or what is driving them into the ground. It has been a healthy 10 years. People forget...
     
  11. ScottishCaptain macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    #11
    +1.

    We are not living in 1996 anymore. I should not have to go out and buy the modern day equivalent of a SCSI disk drive to stack on my desk somewhere.

    When people feel the need to publicly attempt to convince themselves and others that their company of choice is doing the right thing by justifying it with a truckload of excuses, it usually means that the company in question has lost their way.

    -SC
     
  12. echoout macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    #12
    The investment in a 10Gbe-enabled NAS is huge. My QNAP is getting over 850MB/s reads. As someone who's been freelancing from a Thunderbolt setup for quite a while it's been a lifesaver.
     
  13. madmax14304 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    #13
    Isn't the only thunderbolt--->10Gbe device out there like $999? The new Mac Pro is going to make people direct attach their storage using thunderbolt because they cannot just throw in a 10Gbe NIC. Maybe we'll see some cheaper 10gbe thunderbolt adapters at some point.
     
  14. slughead macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #14
    This. I can't BELIEVE how much of a ripoff they are. At that price you can get SAS which is way better... or at least you could, before Apple took the PCIe slots out of its MP :X

    http://www.barefeats.com/tbolt01.html

    [​IMG]

    Thunderbolt RAID 0 with 6Gb/s SSDs appears to run into a bottleneck when you compare it to the SAS RAID 0 with the same 6Gb/s SSDs. I guess the 1000+MB/s theoretical bandwidth is... theoretical.​


    ----------

    As far as Apple "doing me a favor" by not allowing any drives but external thunderbolt and NAS, I think while the point is well taken that these external options exist and work well, they offer little benefit for people satisfied with 4-5 internal hard drives. They are also many many multiples the cost.

    I'm not digging it.
     
  15. Cubemmal macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2013
    #15
    I put all my storage out on a Synology 5 bay and couldn't be happier. Good transfer speeds too as I have 2xGigabit LAN to both the Pro and Syno.

    I think the lack of big internal storage options in the new Pro is a great decision. Too many external choices - NAS, Cloud, TB, USB3. Like it or not the future of storage is outside a rectangular box next to your desk.
     
  16. slughead macrumors 68040

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #16
    Why not have the CPU in that box along with the hard drives and call it a "personal computer"? It would save tons of money and require a lot less cabling? All you'd need is a few hard drive bays, as most motherboards come with 6gbps sata ports these days... with the obvious exception of the iTube.

    I'm sorry, that's kind of a strange thing to suggest: that the future of computing is MORE accessories connected by wires.
     
  17. dyn macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    .nl
    #17
    Try migrating your fancy RAID array... It's a lot easier when all you have to do is plug in a cable. Migrating a complete RAID array can end in complete hell (aka losing the entire array and thus all data; restore from backup isn't that quick).

    There are some downsides to the new way of doing things but there are definitely some advantages to it as well. Anybody needs to decide for themselves whether it's an advantage or a disadvantage.
     
  18. ibgb thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    Location:
    usa
    #18
    That is a simple view of things.

    There is a reason Microsoft is coming out with a new file system (Refs). There was a reason Apple was going to implement ZFS ( and as a consumer device company has no need to do that anymore). If you want a modern storage system, you will be looking outside of Apple, as they don't do those things.

    And there are many companies/software platforms which do provide modern storage. It's not available on Mac OS X, so even if you did hook up a bunch of drives you still don't have the software to support a modern storage system. It is more than sata cables.

    Google is your friend.
     
  19. MacVidCards Suspended

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Location:
    Hollywood, CA
    #19
    It's the Kool Aid Crew out in numbers. SOMEONE mobilized them.

    All over Mac Pro section and especially in the News Blog stories, lots of new or rarely active folks extolling the virtues of lack of choice and shininess.
     
  20. Cubemmal macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2013
    #20
    It's a fact. For most people the solution is Cloud. People who need lots of space are so small that they'll have to suffer with external enclosures, so that consumers/prosumers can get smaller and cheaper computers.

    The more I think about it the more I'm convinced Apple designed this with the prosumer in mind as well as the Pro
     
  21. Cisco_Kid macrumors 6502

    Cisco_Kid

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    British Columbia
    #21
    You are not so high and mighty video boy.

    I can appreciate the small powerful design of the new pro, it will work lovely in my lab, storage will be in another room where it belongs.
     
  22. deconstruct60 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    #22
    Nope. Well close.

    Small-tree

    $945 http://www.small-tree.com/Thunderbolt_Products_for_Mac_OS_X_s/192.htm

    (which is a little whacked since the 4 port 1gB is also $945 ... one of those two is kind of strange. )

    The upside with Small-Tree is that I think they have their own iSCSI initiator. At those prices I would expect it to come with the card/box.



    ATTO

    $995 http://www.attotech.com/products/product.php?cat=16&scat=32&prod=103&sku=TLNT-1102-D00

    But it is actually two ports. Which is a bit more sensible. And heck of faster if can do link aggregation on both client and server through switch. But probably too fast and would be throttled by TB.
    Also switching port cost with aggregation for would likely go through the roof.


    Intel's x540 was suppose to bring 'affordable' 10GbE to the masses.... not sure what the hold up has been. Now that Netgear has a $120-140/port 10GbE switch it is more than kind of whacked that the client cards have substantially higher per port costs.

    ----------

    Apple trolling. More likely same socket puppet show with folks just reversing roles. Before the sneak peak there was endless threads proclaiming doom with just about as unreliable information.

    I wouldn't be surprised if Apple was spinning a bit of it.... but it looks like indirect kool-aid. Smoke Apple feeds them and then regurgitated here.
     
  23. Topper macrumors 65816

    Topper

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    #23
    He has done a whole lot more for people in this forum than you have with your 85 posts.
     
  24. vladi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2010
    #24
    No. The future is in PCIe SSD that should be in PICe slots and not in some external boxes bridged by slower transfer technologies. Just saying how I see it.
     
  25. ssgbryan macrumors 6502

    ssgbryan

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    #25
    I am one of those "prosumers" - this "thing" has me looking a jumping platforms (again).:(

    I do 3d art - the software is inexpensive nowadays - Poser 2014 & Vue will take every core and every bit of memory that you can throw at it.

    The cost of the new Mac Pro & 2 additional external TB bays (to hold 6 HDs) will price it out of reach ($5K+).

    For the 1st time in 13 years, I am looking at a dell, because an iMac simply wont cut it......
     

Share This Page