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

[kuwisdelu]

Well, personally I use wireless so I don't have to sit in the same place with my MacBook every time I want to use the internet, or--as the case would be with TM/TC--back up.

I use my computer in various rooms throughout the apartment (small as it is) from the couch while watching TV to lying in bed...

And that, my friends, is the point of wireless.

 

[tony-in-japan]

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.

Well (other than the hassle of plugging and unplugging cords), what about people who frequently move away from their main working area? Those who have multiple working areas.

Personally, I work in multiple places (different rooms) around my office, so even though I would have a TC on my main desk with laptop most of the time, I would also take my laptop and work in other rooms occasionally. This is where a wireless HD/internet/printing solution is ideal for me.

Does that answer your question for you?

 

[Tosser]

I think I need to clarify (this is fast becoming a caricature of a Q&A, lol):

I am not asking why people are using wireless. Hell, I use wireless myself, and I really enjoy it – essentially because I can get rid of clutter by moving the wireless items into a room I am not occupying myself.

I am asking why someone would choose wireless, yet choose not to reap the benefits from it by moving it away?

The way I see it, if you still have your wireless NAS next to your computer, why even go wireless, since it would be much faster to have a wired connection?


Man, I hope that (finally) clarifies what I meant


Add: The wired HDD's I have in my drawer/cupboard are used for other things, I don't want to spend the time fetching and saving wirelessly, and things I don't have to have wireless (essentially extra back-ups, libraries seldomly used etc.).

 

[tony-in-japan]

I am asking why someone would choose wireless, yet choose not to reap the benefits from it by moving it away?

The way I see it, if you still have your wireless NAS next to your computer, why even go wireless, since it would be much faster to have a wired connection?

Of course. It is pretty pointless to have a wireless NAS next to your computer if they both are permanently placed. Better, faster and more reliable to just be connected via firewire or USB.

What you’re implying is that people will just buy a Time Capsule and just place it next to their Mac Pro or iMac? Therefore making the wireless functionality pretty pointless bar saving an extra firewire/USB socket? I am not sure why people would do this, if indeed there are people who would. You think there would be many who would?

 

[Tosser]

Of course. It is pretty pointless to have a wireless NAS next to your computer if they both are permanently placed. Better, faster and more reliable to just be connected via firewire or USB.

What you’re implying is that people will just buy a Time Capsule and just place it next to their Mac Pro or iMac? Therefore making the wireless functionality pretty pointless bar saving an extra firewire/USB socket? I am not sure why people would do this, if indeed there are people who would. You think there would be many who would?

I hope there won't be many, but unless I misunderstood something one or two stated they had it sitting next to their computer. Unless, of course, that is a misunderstanding (which is rather likely). Nikiski and Pondie84 were the ones I was thinking about.

Anyway, back on track: So, what's with calling a high-end consumer hdd "server grade"!?

 

[tony-in-japan]

hehe... ah yes, back to the topic...

Damn Apple for deceiving us loyal customers by putting in Xserve hard-drives that are applicable to be used as networked storage servers into their Time Capsules! It should have been the enterprise-grade Ultrastar!! How dare they!!

 

[icoffee]

Hitachi drives are HIGHLY reliable. Only the 75GXP line had issues with bad bearings and that was a LONG time ago.

I currently have over 30 Deskstar drives in use over the past 6 years and have not had a single issue.

I wouldn't brag too loudly about that. I've had 3 in roughly the same period, sitting in well cooled desktops, and none have lasted. Heck, even my old cheapo Maxtor drives outlasted those.

 

[infomatique]

I pre-ordered as it was advertised as being Server Grade ... Over the last twelve months I have had problems with a LACIE 2T drive and a Buffalo 1T drive so I really want something that I can depend on.

Most people wont even notice the difference. Besides Apple could just remove the server grade line making it a moot point.


Me too. Better yet I would like a time capsule that can plug into my existing network.

 

[AidenShaw]

Don't be silly...

hehe... ah yes, back to the topic...

Damn Apple for deceiving us loyal customers by putting in Xserve hard-drives that are applicable to be used as networked storage servers into their Time Capsules! It should have been the enterprise-grade Ultrastar!! How dare they!!

Don't be silly - it's part of the game for Apple marketing to use lies, half-truths and ambiguities to dance on the line separating the misleading from outright fraud.

All the true members of the Cult of Apple are smiling under the Umbrella of RDF, knowing that their data is 100% completely safe, because The Steve said that the Time Capsule has a server-grade drive.

 

[jragosta]

Don't be silly - it's part of the game for Apple marketing to use lies, half-truths and ambiguities to dance on the line separating the misleading from outright fraud.

All the true members of the Cult of Apple are smiling under the Umbrella of RDF, knowing that their data is 100% completely safe, because The Steve said that the Time Capsule has a server-grade drive.

Funny, the only lies and half truths I see are coming from you.

Apple said that the drive in TC is server grade. Since Apple, Dell and Softjoy all use it in servers and the drive manufacturer (Hitachi) says it's suitable for server use, the use of the term 'server grade' is more than justified.

You seem to think that if you throw around enough lies, half-truths, and ambiguities of your own that you can somehow make them reflect on Apple. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

 

[BongoBanger]

hehe... ah yes, back to the topic...

Damn Apple for deceiving us loyal customers by putting in Xserve hard-drives that are applicable to be used as networked storage servers into their Time Capsules! It should have been the enterprise-grade Ultrastar!! How dare they!!

So why mention 'server grade' at all then? What was the point other than a slightly dubious marketing pitch?

 

[diamond.g]

...and about $2000...

SHHH!!! The wife isn't supposed to see the final number yet .

I actually plan on buying the disk drives more slowly. My original idea had me buying a Mac Mini and hooking the Drobo up to it. The 500GB TC was, as far as I am concerned, a better alternative. Especially since it won't force me to retire my W2k3 Server (actually I will be upgrading it to W2k8 soon).

 

[ascender]

So why mention 'server grade' at all then? What was the point other than a slightly dubious marketing pitch?

I'm still not sure I understand why everyone's getting upset over this. How is it dubious if Apple, among others, use the drive in their server products?

I'm assuming that all the people getting upset about this have cancelled their orders and complained to Apple?

 

[lugesm]

day after day apple is slowly turning into microsoft...

Please don't say that ! I just switched over from Dell Windows machines to iMac after 15 years of Microsoft.

 

[Callsign Razor]

So why mention 'server grade' at all then? What was the point other than a slightly dubious marketing pitch?

IMO it's just that... dubious marketing. If it was really "server grade" Time Capsule would have 2 drives configured for RAID 1.

 

[Tosser]

Please don't say that ! I just switched over from Dell Windows machines to iMac after 15 years of Microsoft.

But it's true. In some areas they even seem to already have surpassed Microsoft. What's worse is that Mac-fans seem to be in a league of their own, when it comes to fiercely supporting their favourite company. If you really want to break away from "big corps", you'd be better off buying a "normal" pc and install a linux distribution and OS X on it (making it into a hackintosh to ease the pain). That's what I'll do when this MBP dies. Unless Apple changes their behaviour, of course. But seeing how people'll buy anything, Thinkpad here I come!!

 

[AidenShaw]

Funny, the only lies and half truths I see are coming from you.

Lie - for example "first 64-bit desktop".

And, by the way, you should head to the genius bar and get your sarcasm detector re-aligned. I didn't think that a "</sarcasm>" would have been necessary on that post, but some people can be blind.

 

[ascender]

IMO it's just that... dubious marketing. If it was really "server grade" Time Capsule would have 2 drives configured for RAID 1.

How on earth is that "server grade"? You're just quoting a potential disk array configuration, not defining how good the HDDs are or what use they're recommended for?

Sorry, by adding another reply I'm just feeding the thread and am part of the solution rather than the problem, but I can't believe some of the stuff on this thread. Lots of it seems to be knowledge picked up from the web rather than from people who've actually worked with servers in a corporate environment. And I'm still wondering how many people on here have just joined in to be offended and upset when they hadn't actually ordered a TC or had any intention of buying one.

All very strange.

 

[Blue Velvet]

And I'm still wondering how many people on here have just joined in to be offended and upset when they hadn't actually ordered a TC or had any intention of buying one.

Being highly offended by Apple's perfidious machinations is par for the course around here. Because if you're not, then you're obviously suckered in by the RDF and have lost all sense of proportion. Ironic, no?

 

[AidenShaw]

I actually plan on buying the disk drives more slowly. My original idea had me buying a Mac Mini and hooking the Drobo up to it. The 500GB TC was, as far as I am concerned, a better alternative. Especially since it won't force me to retire my W2k3 Server (actually I will be upgrading it to W2k8 soon).

Yes, starting with two 1 TB drives with a Drobo would be reasonable. Newegg has enterprise-grade 1 TB disks for $310 each.

Note that with Drobo the space calculation is:

Add the space of all the drives,
then subtract the space of the largest drive​

This means that if you have four 500 GB drives, you have 1.5 TB usable.

If you replace a 500 GB with a 1 TB, so that you have three 500 GB drives and one 1 TB drive, you still have 1.5 TB usable.

If you start with two 500 GB, you'll have 500 GB available. If you add a 1 TB, you'll then have 1 TB available.

 

[AidenShaw]

So just take a breath and realize that it's a marketing term, not a specification.

Unfortunately, the term "server-grade" has confused people, including the author of post #1, to expect the "better" grade of server drives that many disk manufacturers produce.

When I first heard the term at MacWorld, I also assumed that The Lord God Jobs was talking about Barracuda ES or Ultrastar drives when he used the term. Since I buy hundreds of disks a year, I was familiar with the product offerings - and it seemed obvious that "server grade" must be referring to the "better" drives.

Apple should add a footnote to the Time Capsule docs to explain what "server-grade" means. Apparently, Apple is using an MTBF rating of 1 million hours as the factor to distinguish "server-grade" - they should simply say that. End of story.

If the marketing term can be misleading or subject to a reasonable misinterpretation, then it should be clarified. The point is that misleading marketing is misleading marketing, even if unintentional.

The people who drone on for page after page arguing that the Deskstar is a "server-grade" drive are missing that point completely. The point is not that the Deskstar doesn't meet Apple's criteria for "server-grade", it's that people are being misled because Apple does not explain what its criteria are.

Back to the subject. As soon as you put it in a consumer product, it's no longer "server grade" in any purist sense. So just take a breath and realize that it's a marketing term, not a specification.

By this logic, since my mother-in-law has an MBP (she didn't want the "cheap looking plastic laptop"), MBPs are not Pro machines.

 

[mactastic1971]

Maybe there should be a class-action suit in regards to Time Machine. After all, the name implies it is a time-machine, yet, try as I might, I have been unable to travel back to Nov. 5, 1955.

Didnt your TC come with the Flux Capacitor ???

 

[chickenninja]

its a time capsule dude, its full of things from the past, like last years enterprise grade HDD, whether its the best or not you can be sure its the best for the price.

 

[Callsign Razor]

How on earth is that "server grade"? You're just quoting a potential disk array configuration, not defining how good the HDDs are or what use they're recommended for?

Sorry, by adding another reply I'm just feeding the thread and am part of the solution rather than the problem, but I can't believe some of the stuff on this thread. Lots of it seems to be knowledge picked up from the web rather than from people who've actually worked with servers in a corporate environment. And I'm still wondering how many people on here have just joined in to be offended and upset when they hadn't actually ordered a TC or had any intention of buying one.

All very strange.

I put "server grade" in quotes for a reason, Time Capsule is an interesting single disk NAS device for home and small office users, it's not "server grade" unless there is redundancy... There isn't.

As far as the hard drives is concerned I'd love to see high end "server grade" drives... If Time Capsule is really using the 500GB and 1TB as the Xserve that great but without redundancy it's not IMO "server grade".

As an aside I've had made for server hard drives that have failed after 8 months and cheap consumer grade HDs that lasted 3 and 4 years... Drives fail regardless of what grade they are.

 

[matticus008]

Unfortunately, the term "server-grade" has confused people, including the author of post #1, to expect the "better" grade of server drives that many disk manufacturers produce.

And you continue to confuse them by assuming that there are two classes of drives to which hard disks belong.

As with most things, a little knowledge is just dangerous. A customer would expect a better drive than the ordinary and used in servers. The Time Capsule delivers a better drive than the ordinary (the Deskstar is better than both the Samsung F1 and the WD Caviar GP terabyte drives; it is arguably better than or equal to the Barracuda 1TB [better error rate, rumored but unconfirmed better MTBF, same start/stop], and it is somewhere below the ES and Ultrastar). A customer thinking 'server' means 'enterprise' is just confused in general.

Most sites cut direct to enterprise-products in their navigation links, because that's where the big money is. However, nearly all product pages produce at least three classifications (even Seagate, the only company to use "server and enterprise" and not just "enterprise", splits its 3.5" hard drives into three groups on the main products page).

You know what they say about assuming things. Anyone smart enough to find enterprise drives is smart enough to know that there are more than two broad classes of hard drives, and that the intended applications vary by manufacturer.

The point is not that the Deskstar doesn't meet Apple's criteria for "server-grade", it's that people are being misled because Apple does not explain what its criteria are.

The point isn't that the Barracuda doesn't meet Seagate's criteria for "server-grade", it's that people are being misled because Seagate does not explain what its criteria are.

It cuts both ways. If there's no clear definition, people would be whining because they "expected" a Cheetah when they had no reason to do so. There's no set term by any manufacturer, and the blustery "hold Apple to unusually high marketing standard for no apparent reason" is just a lot of hot air.