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.
Xserve RAID and Xserve Updates
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
New xserve
could almost be used as a stand alone desktop!!
I might be in the very small minority, but I would prefer a desktop form a la my Beige G3. All the 1U Xserve needs is a SuperDrive and it could be used as an (expensive) desktop model!!
Otherwise a very appetising update!
could almost be used as a stand alone desktop!!
I might be in the very small minority, but I would prefer a desktop form a la my Beige G3. All the 1U Xserve needs is a SuperDrive and it could be used as an (expensive) desktop model!!
Otherwise a very appetising update!
springscansing
macrumors 6502a
It can handle over 200MB/sec using ATA drives. Is SCSI really necessary?
That isn't a retorical question, I honestly don't know. Is that fast enough?
That isn't a retorical question, I honestly don't know. Is that fast enough?
SCSI is not "must have" any more. And the way the Xserve works, with ATA/133, it's actually faster than SCSI based servers. AND, ATA is much cheaper...
MacCoaster
macrumors 6502a
yzedf
macrumors 65816
From my experience with SCSI and IDE drives, I would want SCSI just for the reliability.
Remember the big row a few months ago when most companies (including IBM, WD, Seagate, Hitachi etc) started reducing IDE warranties from 3yr to 1yr?
I am supposed to trust these inferior (reliability wise) drives for mission critical server work?
What is the point if I have to keep swapping out dead drives every month after the first 14-18 months?
Dude, this is a great deal. I highly, highly doubt the drives are at all unreliable. Besides, its fully redundant - and the PRICE is 3X less than the comparable DELL offering.
Top XServe RAID - $10,999
DELL EMC CX200 - $30000
Apple's comparison chart is here.
Throw in a (couple!) XServes, and you are still way below the price of just DELL's storage!
Top XServe RAID - $10,999
DELL EMC CX200 - $30000
Apple's comparison chart is here.
Throw in a (couple!) XServes, and you are still way below the price of just DELL's storage!
trebblekicked
macrumors 6502a
Sweet
i'm not in the market for an xserve, but i am debating how to backup my DVD masters/vid projects. i was considering the cheap-o rout (DC'ing an bunch of FW HD's together) but the entry level pricepoint for the raid is affordable. I think this was a good release. I look to buy around the time they will actually ship (late march? is that the best guess?)
My experience with ATA has been more than acceptable. I don't miss SCSI, really.
i'm not in the market for an xserve, but i am debating how to backup my DVD masters/vid projects. i was considering the cheap-o rout (DC'ing an bunch of FW HD's together) but the entry level pricepoint for the raid is affordable. I think this was a good release. I look to buy around the time they will actually ship (late march? is that the best guess?)
My experience with ATA has been more than acceptable. I don't miss SCSI, really.
Sayer
macrumors 6502a
SCSI too limiting for Xserve RAID
Apple discusses the "whys" of Xserve RAID design in the various product web pages. Go read them instead of sitting on MacRumors.com scratching your head and posting questions to a forum full of people equally as uninformed about a brand new product as you are.
Apple discusses the "whys" of Xserve RAID design in the various product web pages. Go read them instead of sitting on MacRumors.com scratching your head and posting questions to a forum full of people equally as uninformed about a brand new product as you are.
maybe they're waiting for serial ATA?
what do think? maybe that's why they didn't use SCSI maybe they're waiting for the second gen or maybe even the third? cuz I read somewhere that the first gen isn't going to have much of a perfomance boost...
this great! apple has updating everything except the iBooks and the iPods... so i guess we'll have to wait till next week 😛 this is good! GO APPLE!
THANK YOU
MaT
what do think? maybe that's why they didn't use SCSI maybe they're waiting for the second gen or maybe even the third? cuz I read somewhere that the first gen isn't going to have much of a perfomance boost...
this great! apple has updating everything except the iBooks and the iPods... so i guess we'll have to wait till next week 😛 this is good! GO APPLE!
THANK YOU
MaT
yzedf
macrumors 65816
Re: SCSI too limiting for Xserve RAID
PR trash is not helpful. real facts are.
fact - most IDE drives now come with 1yr warranty.
fact - as prices have dropped, so have reliability.
fact - servers are all about reliability
fact - speed is not most important feature of a server
fact - every other release apple has done in the near past that has been delayed has had problems within days of release. (both hardware and software)
fact - expectations of a server are much harsher than that of a shiny little notebook.
this may be why the sales of this machine, in the past, have not been what apple expected/wanted. this is the land of reliability. uptime here is measured not in days or hours... but months.
3rd quarter (calendar year) sales shall show us if this new product is up to snuff.
i merely point out why many may choose not to purchase this right now. if it is good, and the facts bear this out in 6-12 months, then apple might have an unqualified success on their hands. as of right now, they do not.
time will tell.
IMNSHO, YMMV.
PR trash is not helpful. real facts are.
fact - most IDE drives now come with 1yr warranty.
fact - as prices have dropped, so have reliability.
fact - servers are all about reliability
fact - speed is not most important feature of a server
fact - every other release apple has done in the near past that has been delayed has had problems within days of release. (both hardware and software)
fact - expectations of a server are much harsher than that of a shiny little notebook.
this may be why the sales of this machine, in the past, have not been what apple expected/wanted. this is the land of reliability. uptime here is measured not in days or hours... but months.
3rd quarter (calendar year) sales shall show us if this new product is up to snuff.
i merely point out why many may choose not to purchase this right now. if it is good, and the facts bear this out in 6-12 months, then apple might have an unqualified success on their hands. as of right now, they do not.
time will tell.
IMNSHO, YMMV.
I am really disappointed it used ATA. ATA is merely half duplex, and in major applications you need the drives to be able to read and write at the same time for maximum speed.
It's a good lower to possibly mid range server.
BTW, When did Hitachi and IBM's Hard Drive Division merge? Did this just happen or did I miss it?
GPT
It's a good lower to possibly mid range server.
BTW, When did Hitachi and IBM's Hard Drive Division merge? Did this just happen or did I miss it?
GPT
Re: Re: SCSI too limiting for Xserve RAID
I have to agree whole heartedly with this comment.
People just don't understand why servers are so different, and if they have never doen any high end apps like large oracle databases or large centralized file share systems they never really will :\
I have to agree whole heartedly with this comment.
People just don't understand why servers are so different, and if they have never doen any high end apps like large oracle databases or large centralized file share systems they never really will :\
yzedf
macrumors 65816
It has been a while. Initial plans in April... then this a few months later:
http://www.ibm.com/news/us/2002/06/033.html
Apple's website says the XServe has the fastest bus speeds ever.
Weren't they already at 167 MHz?
Weren't they already at 167 MHz?
sparkleytone
macrumors 68020
Well Crap. IBM will probably start up a new HDD division in 5 years once the economy picks back up 🙁
Damn, and IBM made some of my favorite drives too.
nuckinfutz
macrumors 603
NO bashing ATA!
Now keep in Mind the Xserve has dedicated controllers for each pair of drives. ATA's Half Duplex limitation can be ameliorated somewhat by having seperate controllers for each drive or pair of drives. Since the controllers are much cheaper than the comparable SCSI controllers you're still ahead.
Now keep in Mind the Xserve has dedicated controllers for each pair of drives. ATA's Half Duplex limitation can be ameliorated somewhat by having seperate controllers for each drive or pair of drives. Since the controllers are much cheaper than the comparable SCSI controllers you're still ahead.
Re: Re: SCSI too limiting for Xserve RAID
As generally true as your statements may prove to be, they are far from facts. For instance, its your opinion (and probably that of countless others) that the reliability of drives has dropped. And in the rare instance of a liberal use of a server, speed can be the most important factor of a server.
It's just that you came off a little to hardedged and seemed to be basing things off of general truths, not facts.
MhzDoesMatter
As generally true as your statements may prove to be, they are far from facts. For instance, its your opinion (and probably that of countless others) that the reliability of drives has dropped. And in the rare instance of a liberal use of a server, speed can be the most important factor of a server.
It's just that you came off a little to hardedged and seemed to be basing things off of general truths, not facts.
MhzDoesMatter
yzedf
macrumors 65816
Re: Re: Re: SCSI too limiting for Xserve RAID
When the warranty issue came up, I had a very long talk with a sys admin friend of mine who is very much the hardware guru. He is young enough to not be overly nostalgic for "the good old days" yet realistic enough to see the differences over time.
RAM seems to be better, and cheaper. Not nearly the number of duds that there used to be.
HDD are faster, bigger, quiter (mostly), and more likely to break. Most of the drives in his domain are of the small 2gig variety. They have turned out to be slow, quiet, and safe. The newer whiz bang fast drives have been far more prone to failures (of the rattling ball bearing in a can kind). Even tried buying slower new drives. They were better than the fast drives, but worse than the older stuff.
My personal experience with cheapo drives through the years has been fairly consistent; they all suck.
Nearly every IDE hdd on the market is not designed for 24/7 use. They tend to fail, in a big way.
I hope this is not what is in the xserves. Apples customers do deserve better. They expect good quality hard/soft ware... and they pay for it.
Best of luck.
🙂
When the warranty issue came up, I had a very long talk with a sys admin friend of mine who is very much the hardware guru. He is young enough to not be overly nostalgic for "the good old days" yet realistic enough to see the differences over time.
RAM seems to be better, and cheaper. Not nearly the number of duds that there used to be.
HDD are faster, bigger, quiter (mostly), and more likely to break. Most of the drives in his domain are of the small 2gig variety. They have turned out to be slow, quiet, and safe. The newer whiz bang fast drives have been far more prone to failures (of the rattling ball bearing in a can kind). Even tried buying slower new drives. They were better than the fast drives, but worse than the older stuff.
My personal experience with cheapo drives through the years has been fairly consistent; they all suck.
Nearly every IDE hdd on the market is not designed for 24/7 use. They tend to fail, in a big way.
I hope this is not what is in the xserves. Apples customers do deserve better. They expect good quality hard/soft ware... and they pay for it.
Best of luck.
🙂
MrMacMan
macrumors 604
Is it just my Attention to Details or is
Mac OS X Server 10.2.4 Not out yet?
I might just have to make another topic out of this...
Whoops apple slipped... I mean software update doesn't show anything for me... hm...
The 1.42 GHZ are just too hot right now to be running in those. Look at the rack the heat would spread and they would all melt into one big metal clump. 🙁
Ouch.
Mac OS X Server 10.2.4 Not out yet?
I might just have to make another topic out of this...
Whoops apple slipped... I mean software update doesn't show anything for me... hm...
The 1.42 GHZ are just too hot right now to be running in those. Look at the rack the heat would spread and they would all melt into one big metal clump. 🙁
Ouch.
So you have 14 drives, and you can only read or write to each one. So the problem there lies that if you can't read from a drive to get the final part of a file or even the first part because it is writing you slow down, who cares you can write or read from all the drives simultaneously if they can only do one at a time...
all i can say is CHEAP LOW END SOLUTION
🙁
At least as desktops apples really kick booty 😀
all i can say is CHEAP LOW END SOLUTION
🙁
At least as desktops apples really kick booty 😀