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.
Time Capsule Not Using Server-Grade Hard Drive As Advertised?
- Thread starter IntrinsicMac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Disk warranties from the original manufacturer generally don't mean anything for OEM applications of the drive. Your only warranty is with Apple; if the drive fails it's their job to replace it under the same warranty as the rest of the device. Hitachi won't touch an RMA request from you for a drive they sold for that use.
It's "server grade" as far as Hitachi is concerned, too. Nowhere does Apple claim it is "enterprise server grade".
Cause?
Ever wondered if they fitted the wrong hard drives to these early production time capsules?
Wouldn't be the first time early production got something wrong and aren't a lot of you always going on about Rev B.
Agreed you should never say one thing and do another but lets wait for the response from Apple before slinging the hard drive out with the wireless backup device.
John
Ever wondered if they fitted the wrong hard drives to these early production time capsules?
Wouldn't be the first time early production got something wrong and aren't a lot of you always going on about Rev B.
Agreed you should never say one thing and do another but lets wait for the response from Apple before slinging the hard drive out with the wireless backup device.
John
This is absolutely disgraceful, false advertising
\ They should change there website imediatly and and make an apology
\ They should change there website imediatly and and make an apology
From one of the comments on: http://blog.hardmac.com/archives/server-grade-hard-disk-in-time-capsule-lets-check
"Actually, I just looked at system profiler for a brand new Jan 2008 XServe with a set of TB drives in it and it has an Hitachi HDS721010KLA330 in it . so, your assertion that you wouldnt find it in an XServe is completely wrong."
"Actually, I just looked at system profiler for a brand new Jan 2008 XServe with a set of TB drives in it and it has an Hitachi HDS721010KLA330 in it . so, your assertion that you wouldnt find it in an XServe is completely wrong."
Now that we're a 2 mac household, we were going to get a 500gb model.
Now I hear it's Deskstars....forget it. I know they're long since moved away from the IBM Deathstar models that cased me a LOT of trouble and DAYS of lost work - but IBM's storage division ( now Hitachi ) handled that situation so badly, I, to this day, will not buy a drive from that line, and never will. It took a class action suit to get them to admit that product line was flawed. That it ever made it to consumers was a disgrace.
Forget the whole 'server grade' line, their selection of manufacturer has turned me off totally. No Sale.
Doug
Now I hear it's Deskstars....forget it. I know they're long since moved away from the IBM Deathstar models that cased me a LOT of trouble and DAYS of lost work - but IBM's storage division ( now Hitachi ) handled that situation so badly, I, to this day, will not buy a drive from that line, and never will. It took a class action suit to get them to admit that product line was flawed. That it ever made it to consumers was a disgrace.
Forget the whole 'server grade' line, their selection of manufacturer has turned me off totally. No Sale.
Doug
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.
A lot of over-reaction here. If Hitachi says it's suitable for a server, Apple is perfectly entitled to call it "server grade". End of story. Unless of course anyone can find a definition of "server grade" which contradicts this.
You've got to be kidding. There will be no lawsuits, just refunds. What a joke.
If it were me, and I had indeed bought because of the server grade claim, then I would simply request a refund.
You let me know when someone can prove damages based on a pre-order for a product which wasn't yet finalized for shipping. Other than a refund, and possibly a pissed off customer, thats all you are going to get.
Also, I would have to dig a bit; however "server grade", I am sure is not a de-facto set standard without tolerances, and I am sure there is wiggle room on what Apple considers server grade. Besides MTBF, there are other factors to consider, and even MTBF or warranty alone is not enough to classify it.
I am sure Apple is concerned now.
Deskstar series IS what Apple uses in their servers
At work we have three Xserve RAID units dating back to the original chassis with HSSDC2 Fibre Channel Ports. I knew all of the drives were Hitachi Deskstar's, but here are the part numbers used in Apple's official drive modules (grabbed via Xserve RAID admin just now):
500GB Modules - Hitachi Deskstar HDS725050KLAT80
400GB Modules - Hitachi Deskstar HDS724040KLAT80
240GB Modules - Hitachi Deskstar HDS722525VLAT80
180GB Modules - IBM Deskstar IC35L180AVV207-1
Not an Ultrastar in the bunch! They've been pretty reliable too, most of the drives we've had to replace are of the original 180GB variety from the oldest unit purchased in 2003. I don't remember replacing any of the 240/400/500GB modules.
At work we have three Xserve RAID units dating back to the original chassis with HSSDC2 Fibre Channel Ports. I knew all of the drives were Hitachi Deskstar's, but here are the part numbers used in Apple's official drive modules (grabbed via Xserve RAID admin just now):
500GB Modules - Hitachi Deskstar HDS725050KLAT80
400GB Modules - Hitachi Deskstar HDS724040KLAT80
240GB Modules - Hitachi Deskstar HDS722525VLAT80
180GB Modules - IBM Deskstar IC35L180AVV207-1
Not an Ultrastar in the bunch! They've been pretty reliable too, most of the drives we've had to replace are of the original 180GB variety from the oldest unit purchased in 2003. I don't remember replacing any of the 240/400/500GB modules.
This might just explain why the TimeCapsule was priced so competitively.
ie: "roughly" adding an Airport Extreme + Enterprise HDD = Didn't make financial sense, where as using a standard HDD did.
thats my AUS$0.02 worth.
Mac OS 9 had multi tasking, it was cooperative multitasking and not the preemptive variety found in OS X.
From Hitatchi's press info on the drive:
![20080301-8cdcd55rtmqg8h8qaq8d6xafqg.jpg]()
http://www.hitachigst.com/tech/techlib.nsf/techdocs/67A68C59B27368FC862572570080FC70/$file/Deskstar7K1000_010307_final.pdf
http://www.hitachigst.com/tech/techlib.nsf/techdocs/67A68C59B27368FC862572570080FC70/$file/Deskstar7K1000_010307_final.pdf
Apple LIES twice in two months !!!
That is false advertising, but is typical of Apple of late -- revisionist history.
Time Machine and Time Capsule have class action written all over them. This is TWICE in two months that Apple has stated one set of features, gotten early adopters to buy in, then switched to an inferrior offering when shipping. (Saying first that Time Machine would work with APE disks, then that Time Capsule would use server grade drives).
This is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE and is deceptive marketing practice that should result in the dismissal of some folks at Apple.
Lame.
That is false advertising, but is typical of Apple of late -- revisionist history.
Time Machine and Time Capsule have class action written all over them. This is TWICE in two months that Apple has stated one set of features, gotten early adopters to buy in, then switched to an inferrior offering when shipping. (Saying first that Time Machine would work with APE disks, then that Time Capsule would use server grade drives).
This is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE and is deceptive marketing practice that should result in the dismissal of some folks at Apple.
Lame.
