Time Capsule vs Airport Extreme+Ext HD

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by Chic0, Jan 16, 2008.

  1. Chic0 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    Hi

    I'm new on here. Even though I've been a mac user and regularly visit the site, I just never got round to signing up :-s So hello everyone!!!!!!

    Just wondered if someone has some information on the following .........

    For my setup at home, I recently purchased a Airport Extreme base station and have my external 500GB HD connected to it via USB. I am able to access this drives over network and have my entire 90gb iTunes library stored on it.

    Now as you all know Time Machine is unable to work for me with my Powerbook G4 and Airport drive setup.

    I have been toying with the idea of selling my AE and ext HD and just buying the Time Capsule with 500gb HD instead.

    I know Time Capsule is not yet released yet, but does an yone know if there will be significant increase in performance when using the drive over network?

    Currently I am using 802.11g. When playing music fro mthe ext HD and trying to do anything else with it, it is quite slow, sluggish and sometime painfully unresponsive. Do you think Time Capsule with built in server-grade HD will resolve these issues?

    Any help/advice would be great

    Thanks

    C
     
  2. Jshwon macrumors 6502

    Jshwon

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    #2
    Welcome. I am planning on doing the same thing. I have a Mac Mini as a media center to my TV and was planning on buying a LaCie 500GB drive for storage. When I saw this from Apple I thought it would work perfect for my needs since the LaCie is roughly $300 anyway. This way I have a router and HD bundled together with wireless N.

    As far as the durability goes I would have to guess that Apple took this into consideration. Steve mentioned it was a "server grade" HD. Not sure what that means but I'm guessing it points to its durability. Also I think wired data transfer would be improved using accessing a built-in HD rather than one connected via USB.
     
  3. bilbo--baggins macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    While Time Capsule sounds like a good idea, Apple have proven their incompetence by not sorting out the problems with Airport Disk. Particularly since Leopard, many people cannot get their Airport Disks working properly. I'm not talking about Time Machine (though I think it's quite ridiculous that Apple should decide not to support it with Time Machine) but any reliable connection at all.

    If there is a technical reason why AE + Airport Disk cannot work reliably, or with Time Machine, then Apple should make a statement explaining why, and offering to replace AE + Airport Disks with a new Time Capsule.

    Until the Time Capsule is proven to work reliably I would be very reluctant to trust it with my backups.

    Apple should be ashamed of themselves.
     
  4. Jshwon macrumors 6502

    Jshwon

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    #4
    Why wouldn't Time Capsule work as it has been marketed to do specifically wireless backups over the network? I think the existing problems with AE are a completely separate issue and have no bearing on TC. No doubt hardware and software are different between the two. I doubt Apple would center the whole expo around "Air" (wireless) then release a notebook focused on being wireless and not have TC work. Same with not having an optical drive. They dont want you to buy the usb drive, they want you to use remote disk. Air (wireless) is the whole agenda they are pushing. Hence TC working wirelessly is a big proponent of that.
     
  5. Chic0 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    I appreciate all the responses. Thanks

    Bilbo, I do agree with though. I think that Apple have purposely disabled being able to use Airport disks for backup, so that we will buy Time Capsule. I cannot see a reason why this should not work.

    You're also right in that Airport disks do not work that well with Leopard. I have problems fairly frequently. One constant annoyance htough is the sluggishness of the solution. I know 802.11g is not as fast as 'n', but at times it can be labouriously slow in data transfer and the like.

    I do feel disappointed with Apple and would hope they would offer some kind of rebate for adopters like ourselves. I mean, I only bought my AE+ext HD about 2months ago :-s

    Anyway, this is slightly veering off what the topic of the thread is about. Apple label this new hard drive in TC as 'server-grade'. Does anyone know what this really means. I mean obviously they are using HDs intended for server use, but what are the benefits of using these over consumer HDs? Will there be an increase in performance for data transfer?
     
  6. bilbo--baggins macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    I don't know anything of the technicalities but I gather that server-grade hard drives are somehow optimised for the type of data access required of servers, where typically lots of small bits of data are accessed simultaneously. I presume the difference is largely in how it caches data. I expect someone else will be able to give a more accurate explanation. I also get the impression that they are designed to be more durable under constant access.
     
  7. bacaramac macrumors 65816

    bacaramac

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    #7
    My guess is the HD is connected using the SATA connection with the higher cache of 16mb and 3 Gb/S data transfer rates. Atleast for the price on the 1TB I hope so.

    Just a guess as I am currently looking at HD's to updgrade my media storage and this seems to be the Higher end HD that you could say are "Server Grade"
     
  8. coopermac macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #8
     
  9. Chic0 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #9
     
  10. SheenL macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    #10
    Hack to use time machine with Airport

    There is a Hack to use time machine with Airport
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_hAqdnLJ7o
     
  11. patp77 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    #11
    The difference between a server grade hard drive and a consumer grade hard drive is based on a specification known as MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures). A server grade hard drive is tested more rigorously so that it has an MTBF that is generally rated at 1 million hours. A consumer grade hard drive does not have an MTBF (that I am aware of) so it is not tested as rigorously and could potentially fail sooner. Keep in mind that most servers are on 24X7X365 so they need to have a hard drive that can withstand being on continuously unlike consumer machines which are generally turned off at least once a day.

    Still, it's definitely a plus that Apple has chosen to go with a server grade hard drive as the Time Capsule will more than likely be on 24X7X365 and this added reliability should keep the rates of early failures to a minimum.
     
  12. SheenL macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    #12
    I agree, I would love to buy a time capsule. but I already have a airport extreme and back up drive.. It sucks that apple cut time machine support for old airport owners.. unless you use the hack.
     
  13. ascender macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2005
    #13
    I know there's lots of conspiracy theories about how Apple dropped wireless backups due to Time Capsule coming out, but I think its starting to look more like it was dropped because Airdisk is flaky and unreliable.

    I've struggled to get disks working reliably via the AEBS for any purpose, let alone Time Machine. Other people have posted the same and that makes me think that the fact is using USB and/or the different variety of HDDs out there are causing problems.

    Don't get me wrong, Apple are at fault for releasing Airdisk and not fixing it as things stand, but I think Time Capsule was always planned, possibly because its much more reliable than connecting a disk via USB. That also gives Apple control over what model of HDDs are used internally.
     
  14. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #14
    I can confirm that Leopard is the problem with AirPort Disk. My fiancée and I have identical MacBook's, mine with Leopard, her's with Tiger.

    Her laptop functions perfectly with the AirPort Disk, mine is very much broken!

    Stupid Leopard!
     
  15. killerrobot macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #15
    The Time Capsule looks awesome -but as others have pointed out, leave it to Apple to create a whole new product to try to get around the fact that TM wasn't working as it's suppose to.
    That makes me think that TC might not work perfectly either - also whenever I transfer files wirelessly betweens my macs, the connection is so slow that it says it will take several hours to transfer a 30k .pdf. When I connect them through a patch cable, it takes 3 minutes to transfer a 1g movie.
    It's a great concept and I need a new external (so the airport would be a big bonus) - but I'm definitely not buying until I know that it works, and that it works very well.
     
  16. aosman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    #16
    Thats weird, I am running a MBP and using a shared disk on an iMac (both running leopard btw) and TM is doing its thing fine. Maybe its something else that is messing with the leopard and TM
     
  17. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #17
    Maybe I'll try doing a fresh install of Leopard to see if that fixes it.
     
  18. SheenL macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    #18
    Time machine is working fine with my Airport

    What ever the reason is that Apple cut support for Time Machine and Airport, its still crap that they are leaving original airport users in the dark.. If there is a problem they need to address it, before coming out with more hardware.

    I have been using TM with my Airport connected to a Drobo for 3 days now and so far its been working. The initial backup was a brutal 22 hours but after that its small backups..

    I have 1 Drobo Connected to Airport Extreme and 1 macbook and 1 iMac backing up via time machine.
     
  19. Aegelward macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    is it known that the time capsule will even allow normal use for storage?

    nothing on the apple side indicates that it can be used for anything other than time machine
     
  20. BullsEye macrumors newbie

    BullsEye

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #20
    From the Apple page for Time Capsule:
    I too will wait to hear the reviews and comments on TC before plunking down more $$'s on another backup system. It seems attaching separate external hard drives will be easier, more reliable and cheaper in the long run. Just wished more hard drive vendors would come out with a "white" enclosure.
     
  21. SheenL macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    #21
    iTimeMachine

    Google iTimeMachine . Will allow u to use airport disk for time machine. Believe it does the hack described previously automatically.
     
  22. katorga macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    #22
    Drobo?

    How do you like the Drobo? I've been interested in that one for a while.

    I noticed they have added a NAS module for it as well, but no work if it does AFP (required for TimeMachine).
     
  23. Chic0 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    What's this thing called Drobo?................
     
  24. SheenL macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    #24
    DroBo is Nice

    Drobo is Nice, Time machine only protects you from Accidental data loss. Drobo will protect you from data corruption and drive failure so together they provide total data protection.

    I have my Drobo Hooked up to Airport so no need for their NAS module. It works with Time machine as long as its not formated with Journaling enabled.
     
  25. SheenL macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    #25
    DroBo is Nice

    Drobo is Nice, Time machine only protects you from Accidental data loss. Drobo will protect you from data corruption and drive failure so together they provide total data protection.

    WWW.Drobo.com
     

Share This Page