Time Capsule Not Using Server-Grade Hard Drive As Advertised?

[diamond.g]

How come this has never been a point brought up about *any* external hard drive, then, rather than just for Time Capsule? Something like RAID--hell, something like enterprise-grade--is really overkill for most peoples' backups if they're doing them right. A backup is a second storage of data, so if that data does happen to go *poof* then you still have the original data, and you re-back it up. Of course, anyone who's using an external--or any drive for that matter--as their one and only place to store critical data is asking for trouble anyway, and that's from their own stupidity, not out of any fault of the drive, should it fail.

Am I the only who thinks it's pretty silly to suggest the average consumer would want much more than what Time Capsule (or any external drive + wireless network) offers? Once you start asking for too much more, things start getting more complicated and more pricey than what the vast majority of people are looking for. (And anyone involved in this argument is pretty decidedly not average....)

You make a good point. Backups aren't seen as important to average users until they lose data. Then it becomes important. Time Machine finally makes backups easy (and fun). Time Capsule is a great start for getting people to backup data. It is also great as a media serving device.

I personally would be worried that unless you are backing up the TC to some other device that if you lose the drive you lose everything on it. Now for backups that may not be a big deal, but for other content that can be annoying. Now yes a RAID controller could die and you be out your data just the same, but that (from my experience) seems to happen far less often than a drive failure.

I am sure Apple could have added RAID tech to the TC and made it scarily easy to manage. I mean isn't that Apple's specialty?

EDIT: Pricewise? I mean you are already paying 500 for the 1TB TC. Really it doesn't seem like 600-700 is that much more. I mean it is an Apple product so just add 200 on top of whatever the DROBO cost and call it good right?

 

[matticus008]

Thank you for reinforcing my point that you have to dig deep into the websites to get the full picture

If three clicks from the main products page and clicking the same link as you would to get the drive's specifications generally is "deep", then sure.

Yes, because the use of undefined terms is misleading - especially since on the disk manufacturers' websites you find similarly named things that mean something different.

If the terms vary, it would be "misleading" no matter which definition was provided upon request for the advert. There's nothing misleading about the fact that it's an ill-defined term in a market of ill-defined terms. Advertising hinges on ill-defined terms, and they must simply respond to an inquiry with some factual support. They have plenty to choose from with this drive.

There's nothing wrong with letting the manufacturers choose more or less arbitrary dividing points between their product lines, as long as there are specs that can be trusted and compared.

Then there's nothing wrong with the 7K1000 being server-grade. If the dividing line is fluid and arbitrary at the manufacturer, then there's nothing to hold it to. Absent evidence it's not up to par (and there is none), it's a valid advertising claim.

The highest classification of drives is universally labeled enterprise. There's absolutely no reason to expect such a drive in this product based on any ad. Indeed, based on Hitachi's own drive selector, its own datasheets for the drives, and every applicable metric, the 7K1000 is a server-grade drive. The only metric where it falls short is in recommendation for enterprise use. That simply cannot be a base requirement for server use, or the manufacturers would not recommend non-enterprise drives for servers, period.

can someone explain to me why the mini, the ipod, the macbook, the imac and the apple TV don't have a big "SERVER GRADE HARD DRIVE" sticker on the box?

...because they use consumer hard drives?

Take the Hitachi 5K250 in many MacBooks. It's not a server-grade Travelstar E7K200. Its drive information says nothing of server use (unlike the "E" model). Then consider the Seagate SV35 drive found in some iMacs: not a Barracuda, and not marketed for use in servers.

A hard drive company makes two versions of a drive, the consumer version and the enterprise or server version.

Hitachi, in fact, makes seven different versions of the 7K drive: the Deskstar 7K, T7K, P7K, E7K, the Ultrastar A7K, the Cinemastar 7K, and P7K.

Enterprise or server refers to at least one, but more likely two or more, versions of the product. Unless server uniformly means enterprise, and it doesn't, your argument isn't dispositive.

This is at the very least intentionally misleading. I'm willing to bet that in California if not elsewhere, it is toeing the fraud line.

No. As has already been stated, in order to be misrepresentation in advertising, it must be dispositive of a false claim (in parlance, you must create a rebuttable presumption to even so far as establish the question), not merely ambiguous. Nothing about the drive suggests that it is not server-grade, and the existence of drives from every manufacturer that are not so recommended indicates that each manufacturer makes a distinction between server use and "less than server use". The Deskstar 7K1000 falls on the "server use" side of that line according to Hitachi. Unless you're accusing Hitachi of misrepresenting the drive, then it's not fraud by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[applebum]

Why none of this matters...

Just found this posting on Apple's support site. It was in a discussion about Time Capsule. This guy is an engineer and actually provides some very valid concerns - in contrast to this "fluff" argument over whether Apple lied by using the terms "server grade"

My opinion is based on experience as I'm a degree ME & EE and an avid Mac Fan. I work in designing components and have visited apple EE's in a past life.

I would not spend not $1 on the the time capsule.

1) Apple only offers a 1 year warranty on the device even though the drive is capable of lasting longer. The drives have a Apple OEM label from the HD manufacturer and you can not go to Seagate or Maxtor for warranty repair.

2) There is no adequate ventilation, Apple thinks conduction is sufficient. Convection via fan will help the drive last much longer as the lubrication on the drive won't break down as quick.

3) Seagate did not test the unit for 1 Million hours, sorry, this is calculated but a bad calculation at that. All components are test at room temperature 25C, open air. Time Capsule is enclosed. You have heat build up that reduces MTBF. Apple doesn't tell you this.

4) Most component on the motherboard of the HD are rated to 85C, especially the IC's. The closer you reach 85C the quicker you age your components. As long as time capsule lasts 1 year apple is okay. after that you are on your own. $500 down the toilet.

5) The Tantalum Capacitors on the HD start to lose the capacitance over time and will not last 100 years.

Solution:

If you want to back up your stuff, build your own Firewire Drive. Do not buy one with drives already on them like Lacie. Lacie and other make large purchases from seagate as an example at reduced warranties to avoid returns after the first year.

Buy a firewire 800 enclosure that accepts 1 or 2 SATA drives. Buy a seagate HD that has a 5 year warranty. Either run Raid 1 on your main drive or setup time machine as a stand alone drive.

Go to cooldrives.com & zipzoomfly for the drives. I just calculated that a 1TB drive build from scratch will run you $417, with a 5 year warranty on the HD.

Now isn't that piece of mind that if something fails on your hard drive at least you are not out the HD. Not to mention that backup speeds are way faster via firewire 800, no comparison.

I hope this helps as I believe your money is best spent on what benefits you and not Apple.

So it really doesn't matter how great the drive is or isn't in the Time Capsule, Apple is currently only offering their standard one year warranty. Until they start offering Apple Care for the TC by itself, it may be wise to wait or purchase a different backup solution

PS - if anyone can counter the concerns that this gentleman mentions, please do so as they certainly seem more relevant than the ongoing semantics discussion.

Link to discussion at Apple

 

[Digital Skunk]

Just found this posting on Apple's support site. It was in a discussion about Time Capsule. This guy is an engineer and actually provides some very valid concerns - in contrast to this "fluff" argument over whether Apple lied by using the terms "server grade"



So it really doesn't matter how great the drive is or isn't in the Time Capsule, Apple is currently only offering their standard one year warranty. Until they start offering Apple Care for the TC by itself, it may be wise to wait or purchase a different backup solution

PS - if anyone can counter the concerns that this gentleman mentions, please do so as they certainly seem more relevant than the ongoing semantics discussion.

Link to discussion at Apple

He sounds like he knows what he is talking about. I do disagree on the LaCie part of the story. Buying a case maker's drive isn't that bad, in fact it's about as bad as building your own IMHO.... note the IMHO.

I have a four year old LaCie that has been to hell and back and it's still ticking. I have filled it up to within 500MB at least twice and emptied it. I have three LaCie products and they have never failed. I have Hitachi drives and Seagate Drives (some of the ones LaCie uses) and they have given me NO problems. I would purchase a LaCie drive, G-Tech drive, or Seagate drive any day of the week.

Time Capsule.... I will still take my chances with it because it's cheaper than buying three external drives for the three computers that will need to be backed up. If it breaks within the year, I will get it replaced by Apple... if it breaks outside of the year... I will take it apart and put my own server class/enterprise class drive in there myself.

Peace

 

[kuwisdelu]

Time Capsule.... I will still take my chances with it because it's cheaper than buying three external drives for the three computers that will need to be backed up. If it breaks within the year, I will get it replaced by Apple... if it breaks outside of the years... I will take it apart and put my own server class/enterprise class drive in there myself.

Peace

My own sentiments exactly.

Although I also agree that none of this really matters nearly as much as we'd like to think it does...

 

[megfilmworks]

Time Capsule.... I will still take my chances with it because it's cheaper than buying three external drives for the three computers that will need to be backed up. If it breaks within the year, I will get it replaced by Apple... if it breaks outside of the years... I will take it apart and put my own server class/enterprise class drive in there myself.

Peace

I think that is going to be my plan as well.

 

[aquajet]

PS - if anyone can counter the concerns that this gentleman mentions, please do so as they certainly seem more relevant than the ongoing semantics discussion.

Anaylsis of field data from Pinheiro et al. suggest a more complicated story when it comes to hard drives and temperature. Refer to section 3.4 here. Notice the increased frequency of failure at the low end of the temperature scale.

I suspect most manufacturers don't use fans in their external hard drives because cost/benefit analyses indicate that there's no advantage to using fans in an external hard drive, assuming the enclosure is properly designed.

 

[diamond.g]

Anaylsis of field data from Pinheiro et al. suggest a more complicated story when it comes to hard drives and temperature. Refer to section 3.4 here. Notice the increased frequency of failure at the low end of the temperature scale.

I suspect most manufacturers don't use fans in their external hard drives because cost/benefit analyses indicate that there's no advantage to using fans in an external hard drive, assuming the enclosure is properly designed.

It seems that external drives would probably need fans if the drives are constantly running. Or at least that would be my first thought from the howl of external drive arrays (with constantly spinning drives).

 

[nikiski]

After reading much of the discussion, I think the concern of most people here is that hard drives do fail. However, I think from Apple's perspective, Time Capsule (or Time Machine, if that matters), is to provide a no-brainer solution to back up your file in case there are accident deletion or modification. It is in no way to prevent hard drive failure.

If it is the failure you want to protect, get a RAIDed SAN, NAS, whatever. Right?

Here's my take.

1) Apple only offers a 1 year warranty on the device even though the drive is capable of lasting longer. The drives have a Apple OEM label from the HD manufacturer and you can not go to Seagate or Maxtor for warranty repair.

Now this is exactly the core of the matter. Hard drives fail no matter what. Sooner or later. There is one important thing to point out though. It's that the warranty does not cover the data backed up on Time Capsule. It can be expected that you have at least 2 copies of what you are backing up anyways (one on the original machine, one on Time Capsule). If one does fail, too bad and move on. Get another hard drive or so. Even if Apple offers 1000 years of warranty for it, you'll just get a new drive.

2) There is no adequate ventilation, Apple thinks conduction is sufficient. Convection via fan will help the drive last much longer as the lubrication on the drive won't break down as quick.

From the take apart I can see a fan inside though. And the Time Capsule is not air tight. It may not have the best ventilation, but it does allow for some. I don't understand why people like fans running at full speed that it can blow near by paper away?

Besides, in the case of the AirPort Extreme Base Station (N), I think the whole top is supposed to act like a heatsink. I don't know about the Time Capsule, but if they look reasonably similar I think it's safe to assume it has similar construction.

3) Seagate did not test the unit for 1 Million hours, sorry, this is calculated but a bad calculation at that. All components are test at room temperature 25C, open air. Time Capsule is enclosed. You have heat build up that reduces MTBF. Apple doesn't tell you this.

Like I said, the Time Capsule is enclosed, may be, but in no way sealed. It's still considered open air in my books. One test shows that temperature does not affect a hard drive's life significantly. Only during extreme heat does it affect it slightly. (Sorry, no links as I have forgotten where I read that, might have been from earlier posts that links to another article.)

4) Most component on the motherboard of the HD are rated to 85C, especially the IC's. The closer you reach 85C the quicker you age your components. As long as time capsule lasts 1 year apple is okay. after that you are on your own. $500 down the toilet.

I doubt that it will actually reach 85 degrees, but I'm no expert on thermal dynamics, I can only tell from experience that it doesn't get that hot. My fan-less 3.5" external eSATA enclosure houses a 500GB hard drive and SMART reports the temperature being around 46 degrees when the ambient temperature is around 22 degrees.

5) The Tantalum Capacitors on the HD start to lose the capacitance over time and will not last 100 years.

100 years? Whoa. Electronics are supposed to last that long? I'd love to see someone using it after 100 years. That'd be a headline

Finally, the Time Capsule is a back up feature that protects you from file deletion, modification, corruption, etc. It may, to some extent, provide some hardware failure protection as well, but if it is hardware failure protection, you'd get a RAIDed drive. Whether it's NAS, SAN, whatever.

 

[AidenShaw]

Those data should scare everyone!

Anaylsis of field data from Pinheiro et al. suggest a more complicated story when it comes to hard drives and temperature. Refer to section 3.4 here. Notice the increased frequency of failure at the low end of the temperature scale.

Note that those charts are showing annualized failure rates of 2% to about 10%....

Between one out of 50 to one out of 10 disks failing each year!

 

[jragosta]

No matter what, it can't possibly be a "server grade" drive.

This is at the very least intentionally misleading. I'm willing to bet that in California if not elsewhere, it is toeing the fraud line.

So we can establish that the two of you haven't read anything here except Aldenshaw's posts.

The drive manufacturer says it can be used in servers. Apple, Dell, and Softjoy use it in servers. Claiming that it's not a server grade drive is inane.

Like I said earlier I am more suprised there is no uproar over the 1 yr warranty for the HD. When the OEM clearly has a 3 (or 5) year warranty for it.
Plus it is a bummer that the only Time Machine compatible NAS device lacks any sort of RAID option. Oh well, I want one still so I can start backing up more often (and without having to constantly manage it).


Probably not many. If you can show them that their data has less of a chance of going *poof* due to drive failure, I reckon they would be pretty happy.

It makes it seem like Time Capsule isn't truly a robust option. I mean how is it good that you can possibly loose your backup drive and thus all your backups with it (and be out of a backup system for however long it takes to fix)?

Most consumer electronics have a 1 year warranty. That doesn't mean they won't last much, much longer. As I showed previously, all the other entry level NAS devices also have a 1 year warranty.

The advantage here is that Time Machine regularly hits the drive, so if you have a drive failure, you're going to find out about it while your computer is still working (and you have the original version of at least the current data intact). With competitive products, you might not find that the drive had failed until you needed it.

It's not meant to be a 'robust' option - at least not in the enterprise sense. No one in their right mind would expect that for $300. But it's a great product for the average consumer.

It's an opportunity for Apple - the hot-swap capable Time Capsule Pro.

It is possible to sell RAID-like storage to the masses, you don't need to call it RAID.

So you've established that there are other NAS devices out there. Big deal. That doesn't mean that Apple's solution is bad. If it is, why aren't you demanding RAID 5 on the iMac and MBP?

 

[matticus008]

So it really doesn't matter how great the drive is or isn't in the Time Capsule

Well, that's certainly not what he said; the drive does matter, but it will always be limited by its environment. A good quality drive will outlast a drive not listing reliability figures at all (except maybe "load cycles")--whether you call it server-grade or something else entirely, drives that advertise reliability by start/stop, error rate, availability quotient, and/or statistical MTBF will get you farther, all things being equal.

Trouble is, all things aren't equal:

PS - if anyone can counter the concerns that this gentleman mentions, please do so as they certainly seem more relevant than the ongoing semantics discussion.

He's referring to reliability calculations not taking everything into consideration, and he's absolutely correct. A hard drive won't really last for a century, and MTBF is frequently criticized as a metric for the exact reasons he lists. They're all statistical generalizations, and imperfect ones at that, with varying testing liberality. He's saying that even if it were an enterprise drive, it's not in an enterprise environment, and so it's a pointless waste to put one in there.

Where I'd disagree is that the Time Capsule is a worthless product. It is no more so than prepackaged external drives. If you're just after a backup drive, it'd be silly to buy a Time Capsule. He's right that $420 will get you a 1TB USB/FW backup drive with a good enclosure and allow you to use any drive you like. You can even throw in a router with USB mass storage support for the price of the TC. But people by far prefer the prepackaged solutions, even if you can do better on your own.

It's obvious that Apple selected a high-quality drive above your basic consumer unit as dictated by the product's price point. Going further would (a) be more expensive and (b) be unlikely to produce better results, because of those things mentioned in the Apple post, so it would be an unnecessary waste.

 

[AidenShaw]

So we can establish that the two of you haven't read anything here except Aldenshaw's posts.

Alden thanks you for the kind words....

 

[kuwisdelu]

It's not meant to be a 'robust' option - at least not in the enterprise sense. No one in their right mind would expect that for $300. But it's a great product for the average consumer.

I think that's what lots of people are missing here. It IS still a consumer product. It's a consumer product with a better than average drive--one which is, however vague some people think the term is, "server-grade." Anyone expecting a fool-proof, "enterprise-grade" option with Time Capsule's price tag is being rather silly.

Where I'd disagree is that the Time Capsule is a worthless product. It is no more so than prepackaged external drives. If you're just after a backup drive, it'd be silly to buy a Time Capsule. He's right that $420 will get you a 1TB USB/FW backup drive with a good enclosure and allow you to use any drive you like. You can even throw in a router with USB mass storage support for the price of the TC. But people by far prefer the prepackaged solutions, even if you can do better on your own.

Exactly. Sure you can make something that may or may not be more reliable, with a longer warranty, on your own, and it will even be cheaper, but many people--myself included--don't want to do that. Part of the price tag associated with Apple is the incredible ease of use you get with their products. People won't buy Time Capsule because it's the most durable, most secure, best backup option available. It's not. People buy Time Capsule because it's the easiest, most convenient backup option available at a reasonably affordable price. I'm sure I could set up something marginally more reliable, with a longer warranty, at a cheaper price, but I'm a very busy person, and would much rather buy something that's more convenient and "just works." I'll take that extra little risk. Seeing as I've never actually had a hard drive failure in all my computers so far, I'm not too worried about Time Capsule failing. If it ever does, like Digital Skunk said, I'll put another hard drive in it, and I'll still have my original data on my computer. But the likeliness of Time Capsule failing before my MacBook's HD that gets tossed around in a bag all day is pretty slim. I'll take that gamble.

 

[Tosser]

I don't understand why people like fans running at full speed that it can blow near by paper away?

Who here will use a wireless back up solution next to your computer? Hands up, everyone!

Seriously, though, am I missing something here?

To me, the entire point of a wireless solution (i.e. even as slow as such things will be for back ups) is to remove it from the place you work (and have papers). Just like wireless printing: To be able to print from any of my/our computers and do so without having the noise of the laser printer where I work.
What am I missing?

I do audio, so I'd do anything to remove sources of noise. But I'm serious with my question, though: Are there reasons for having a wireless back-up solution not placed somewhere else than where you sit/stand/work?

 

[manhattanboy]

Last time I checked, server-grade was not a term defined by any industry standard.

That may be so, but why would you want to mislead people?
A more accurate description should be "fast hard-drives with big capacity that will probably fail soon because the Apple enclosure does not provide enough ventilation"
I WANT a time capsule partly because I want my HDD to last more than 6 mos. I am dog tired of having to replace my HDD in my iMAC every 6 mos-year.

 

[diamond.g]

That may be so, but why would you want to mislead people?
A more accurate description should be "fast hard-drives with big capacity that will probably fail soon because the Apple enclosure does not provide enough ventilation"
I WANT a time capsule partly because I want my HDD to last more than 6 mos. I am dog tired of having to replace my HDD in my iMAC every 6 mos-year.

My solution to the problem? 500GB TC + Drobo (with four 1 TB drives). Basically it is a working AEBS + Drobo. So you get to use the Drobo's redundancy for TM backups and you have extra space (500GB) for whatever.

 

[AidenShaw]

Are there reasons for having a wireless back-up solution not placed somewhere else than where you sit/stand/work?

Not really, any networked NAS system should work as a target for backups. No need for a wireless solution if you can put a network storage server appliance anyplace on your wired network. Close or far, copper doesn't care.

My solution to the problem? 500GB TC + Drobo (with four 1 TB drives).

...and about $2000...

 

[Tosser]

Not really, any networked NAS system should work as a target for backups. No need for a wireless solution if you can put a network storage server appliance anyplace on your wired network. Close or far, copper doesn't care.

What I meant was, who would use wireless and then just place it next to your computer? I mean, the whole point of going wireless is to remove it from the work area, no?
The only harddisks I have next to my computer when I use them (otherwise, they're in a drawer) is wired ones.
I think I am missing something here. Not enough ports or something like that.

 

[pondie84]

What I meant was, who would use wireless and then just place it next to your computer? I mean, the whole point of going wireless is to remove it from the work area, no?
The only harddisks I have next to my computer when I use them (otherwise, they're in a drawer) is wired ones.
I think I am missing something here. Not enough ports or something like that.

The point of wireless is that there aren't 'unseemly wires', which is how these products are usually marketed. I don't particularly think wires are particularly ugly if kept in order. I'd say just as many people keep wireless products close to workstations as in any other location.

My AEBS is right next to my main computer.

 

[Tosser]

Well done everyone, now we've got people worried about buying Time Capsule or concerned they've ordered a duff product.

Got to love the internet.

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/5092487/

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/5092491/

 

[Tosser]

The point of wireless is that there aren't 'unseemly wires', which is how these products are usually marketed. I don't particularly think wires are particularly ugly if kept in order. I'd say just as many people keep wireless products close to workstations as in any other location.

My AEBS is right next to my main computer.

But since you already "disconnected" it, why still have it next to your computer? That's what I don't get.

I know – apparently I'm not able to convey what I'm really asking. Bloody useless school english :-(

 

[pondie84]

But since you already "disconnected" it, why still have it next to your computer? That's what I don't get.

I know – apparently I'm not able to convey what I'm really asking. Bloody useless school english :-(

Well, why not? If the purpose of making things wireless is to get rid of the wires, it doesn't particularly matter where the physical box sits. You could choose to sit it anywhere, and I choose to sit it close to my computer. I suppose I could have it next to my fridge if I wanted.

 

[Tosser]

Well, why not? If the purpose of making things wireless is to get rid of the wires, it doesn't particularly matter where the physical box sits. You could choose to sit it anywhere, and I choose to sit it close to my computer. I suppose I could have it next to my fridge if I wanted.

Yeah, that's what I meant. I just somehow assumed, that if one wanted to get rid of clutter one would also choose to move the actual box away.

 

[aquajet]

Note that those charts are showing annualized failure rates of 2% to about 10%....

Between one out of 50 to one out of 10 disks failing each year!

I'm not surprised, really. To bad we don't have hard and fast AFR data by hard disk brand. I'm sure there's a wide variety of opinion on that matter.

A more accurate description should be "fast hard-drives with big capacity that will probably fail soon because the Apple enclosure does not provide enough ventilation"
I WANT a time capsule partly because I want my HDD to last more than 6 mos. I am dog tired of having to replace my HDD in my iMAC every 6 mos-year.

Refer to the linked article above for an explanation why there's not a whole lot of basis for this statement as is. If you're really having to replace you iMac's hard drive every 6 months to a year, I would say there is something else going that you haven't thought of.