Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Enthusiast Zone > Networking > Are you recommending Time Capsule?

Are you recommending Time Capsule? (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Dakar the Fourth
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the hearts and minds of MacNNers
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 01:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Or any other vendor that puts out a good wireless router... Granted, Apple is one of the first to the game in getting its wireless N stuff out early, but if you wait a little while I guarantee you could get a kick ass router cheaper than what Apple charges, just like you can get a wireless G router (the highest rated on NewEgg right now last I checked are put out by Linksys) that works quite well and is much cheaper than an Airport Extreme.
...but all this doesn't much matter since we're talking about Time Capsule.

Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Does this also apply to security settings that leave a WiFi network wide open?
No. The term Firewall should be in everyone's generic internet vocabulary by now.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 01:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth View Post
No. The term Firewall should be in everyone's generic internet vocabulary by now.

So, do you think that an Apple GUI makes it more likely for people to secure their wireless networks?
     
Dakar the Fourth
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the hearts and minds of MacNNers
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 01:36 PM
 
I don't know. I'll tell you when I use it. On my netgear you couldn't join without your MAC address added, I believe.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 01:43 PM
 
By default?
     
Dakar the Fourth
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the hearts and minds of MacNNers
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 01:46 PM
 
As far as I can remember. But netgear is pretty comon so I'm sure someone with a sharper memory can weigh in on that if need be.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 02:09 PM
 
My old Netgear router didn't do that. It was a first rev 802.11g router. The newer firmware which supported WAP never worked on my router properly, so I ended up having to use MAC address filtering for security like you, but it definitely wasn't setup that way by default. If it was, how would it let the owner of the network in to modify MAC address filter settings?
     
lklarson
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 02:28 PM
 
What many are missing in the discussions of the costs of alternate NAS methods is the fact that TC can be a WIRELESS NAS. If I was looking for an ethernet connected NAS, it could be bought cheaper elsewhere, but TC gives me the ability to position my client's NAS anywhere convenient. A Hidden closet (for theft-of-computer protection), an unattached garage or nearby neighbor's home (for fire loss protection). Off-site backup without a subscription fee. I have an accountant client who is sick of carrying flash drives around in her car. (Can you say, "Security Risk"?)
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 02:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Or any other vendor that puts out a good wireless router... Granted, Apple is one of the first to the game in getting its wireless N stuff out early, but if you wait a little while I guarantee you could get a kick ass router cheaper than what Apple charges
Do you not see what a weak argument this is? "Sure, there may not be cheaper options now, but there will be someday, so if you're buying now, you're such a sucker for not buying these products that aren't yet available!"

There will always be better products in the future. It's not fair to compare current products to those. You could conclude that a powerful homebrew PC is horrendously overpriced compared to where Apple's hardware will be in five years.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 03:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I value user interface,
Of course you do. Who would say they don't? The point is you're not willing to pay for it. Other people are. That's the whole difference. That's why some pay more for an AEBS or TC while others go for the cheap competition. I don't see what's so difficult to understand here.

How often do you interface with your router?
I interface with my AEBS about once a week. I value my time and I like to do things in a nice an rational way. I'm just not going to put it with clunky interfaces when it comes to something as trivial as a router.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 03:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Or any other vendor that puts out a good wireless router... Granted, Apple is one of the first to the game in getting its wireless N stuff out early, but if you wait a little while I guarantee you could get a kick ass router cheaper than what Apple charges, just like you can get a wireless G router (the highest rated on NewEgg right now last I checked are put out by Linksys) that works quite well and is much cheaper than an Airport Extreme.
That is the weakest argument yet.

Why wait for a good thing like n just to save a few Dollars? Why be happy with a slow g when I can get a fast n? Why wait for cheap competition when Apple offers good stuff now?

Look, ultimately you can go for cheap or you can go for leading edge. You obviously prefer the former while others like myself prefer the latter. In the case of TC there is a simple conclusion: It's not a product for you. You can wait another couple of months till competition catches up, then you can wait another half year till prices drop some more, and then you can buy. Others will chose to pay more, but get their stuff now. It's as simple as that.
( Last edited by Simon; Jan 23, 2008 at 03:29 PM. )
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 03:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
Do you not see what a weak argument this is? "Sure, there may not be cheaper options now, but there will be someday, so if you're buying now, you're such a sucker for not buying these products that aren't yet available!"

There will always be better products in the future. It's not fair to compare current products to those. You could conclude that a powerful homebrew PC is horrendously overpriced compared to where Apple's hardware will be in five years.
It wasn't an argument so much as it was a tangential point. However, there are non-Apple wireless N routers out now, so the weakness of my argument is still disputable... (I won't dispute this though, because I haven't put much research into wireless N routers. My Mac doesn't support N)
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 03:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Of course you do. Who would say they don't? The point is you're not willing to pay for it. Other people are. That's the whole difference. That's why some pay more for an AEBS or TC while others go for the cheap competition. I don't see what's so difficult to understand here.



I interface with my AEBS about once a week. I value my time and I like to do things in a nice an rational way. I'm just not going to put it with clunky interfaces when it comes to something as trivial as a router.

Can I ask what options you set on your AEBS weekly?

My point is simple: a router is an internet appliance - a set once and forget about it thing for most people. Therefore, while a better interface is a valid argument, this is relatively negligible for many users.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 04:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
That is the weakest argument yet.

Why wait for a good thing like n just to save a few Dollars? Why be happy with a slow g when I can get a fast n? Why wait for cheap competition when Apple offers good stuff now?

Look, ultimately you can go for cheap or you can go for leading edge. You obviously prefer the former while others like myself prefer the latter. In the case of TC there is a simple conclusion: It's not a product for you. You can wait another couple of months till competition catches up, then you can wait another half year till prices drop some more, and then you can buy. Others will chose to pay more, but get their stuff now. It's as simple as that.

That's not my argument. This is being twisted and distorted...

My original argument is that most people are simply looking for a network disk and not a network. Many machines do not support wireless N yet, for starters.

I also made a few other points, but I don't wish to repeat them, I'm running out of gas here... I get the counter arguments, and even agree with a lot of what is being said here. After acknowledging them, I was merely trying to explore some of this rationale, but this is starting to become repetitive and a growing sense of complete miscommunication. I'm to blame for this.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 04:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
- AEBS (prior to wireless N): overpriced (you could make the argument for Apple's wireless cards too)
I checked that a couple of years ago, when people were howling about the 802.11g base station.

And lo and behold, the cheapest g-based access point I could find that supported WDS was a flat €50 more EXPENSIVE. And THAT didn't support remote USB printing.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 04:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
My point is simple: a router is an internet appliance - a set once and forget about it thing for most people. Therefore, while a better interface is a valid argument, this is relatively negligible for many users.
Figure in the cost of having to pay somebody to come in and configure that "appliance" (yeah, right) vs. being able to do it yourself.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 04:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
My original argument is that most people are simply looking for a network disk and not a network. Many machines do not support wireless N yet, for starters.
All machines that ship with Time Machine DO support wireless N. And all machines that will ship from now on that support Time Machine DO support wireless N.

And what's the primary benefit of wireless N? Oh yeah, fast data transfers.

     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 05:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Does this also apply to security settings that leave a WiFi network wide open?
You've never set up an Airport Base Station.
     
Dakar the Fourth
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the hearts and minds of MacNNers
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 05:02 PM
 
schpla-dow! Quadruple post.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 05:12 PM
 
Okay guys, I'm going to conceed that my arguments are flawed. TC is not the best value for *everybody*, but I can't flaw it for being what it is, and when you stack up all of the features (needed or not), it is a good value.

The strongest argument remaining (that has been stated in other threads) is that TC does not offer data redundancy that other NAS solutions offer. For many people, having some sort of backup is a step in the right direction and more than what they have now. However, for others one drive is not ideal. I think that Apple should look into offering a RAID 1 dual drive option in a future rev of TC. Do we agree here?
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 06:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
The strongest argument remaining (that has been stated in other threads) is that TC does not offer data redundancy that other NAS solutions offer. For many people, having some sort of backup is a step in the right direction and more than what they have now. However, for others one drive is not ideal. I think that Apple should look into offering a RAID 1 dual drive option in a future rev of TC. Do we agree here?
Not really.

Time Capsule IS data redundancy.

It's not a corporate server NAS; it's a ****ing self-contained BACK UP appliance.

Who the **** cares about a RAID 1 dual drive option?
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 06:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
Not really.

Time Capsule IS data redundancy.

It's not a corporate server NAS; it's a ****ing self-contained BACK UP appliance.

Who the **** cares about a RAID 1 dual drive option?

Why do you allow yourself to get worked up over this stuff analogika? This is really not all that important.

It would be smart to care about redundancy if TC was your only backup. Not only is TC a backup, but it could also be a general purpose file storage system. A good backup system offers some degree of redundancy.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 06:25 PM
 
Sorry - had some stuff going on over here...



As for TC, take a look at the target market. And take a look at the marketing.

It is definitely NOT a "general purpose file storage system". THAT would be an Airport Extreme with attached storage (or any other NAS).

Why the hell would anybody looking for a wireless home backup system care about mirror raid systems?

I mean seriously: You keep throwing stuff out on these forums as suggestions on how to improve or replace Apple solutions that are just so *completely* removed from reality that I actually had you on ignore for a while for being a time-waster.

.Mac services are not aimed at people who enjoy command-line jockeying and setting up their own server backup cron jobs.

Time Machine and Time Capsule are not aimed at people who need to hone and fine-tune their corporate backup strategies and automate backup deletion or quadruple-RAID their back-ups with offsite storage in securely hardware-encrypted formats run on a custom-configured BSD server.

They WILL, however, possibly want to extend the range of their network using the little wireless music-player gizmo from Apple that they've hooked up to the living room stereo, so that they get wireless reception out in the garden shed. And they will probably want to print wirelessly.

Apple's slogan in 1984 used to be "The computer for the rest of us."

Think on that for a while, will you?
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 07:16 PM
 
analogika: why would Apple users care about encrypted disk images, stealth mode, IPv6? It's not like the user has to actually understand how this technology actually works to use it.

Redundant backups are a good thing, period.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 07:35 PM
 
Do you think that maybe the Mac Pro, the XServe, XRaid, and Time Capsule might be tailored to different markets?

Why do you think I referred to the idea of "target markets" and "marketing" in my post above?

The Mac OS is used by a hell of a lot of people, and indeed, most of them don't give a **** about stealth mode. A subset of them will be interested in Time Capsule.

Those who care that OS X supports IPv6 and encrypted disk images, and who spend time on these forums bitching about the firewall implementation will probably not.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 08:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
Do you think that maybe the Mac Pro, the XServe, XRaid, and Time Capsule might be tailored to different markets?

Why do you think I referred to the idea of "target markets" and "marketing" in my post above?

The Mac OS is used by a hell of a lot of people, and indeed, most of them don't give a **** about stealth mode. A subset of them will be interested in Time Capsule.

Those who care that OS X supports IPv6 and encrypted disk images, and who spend time on these forums bitching about the firewall implementation will probably not.

That's not my point. My point is that Apple provides high-tech options and implementations to the mainstream in such a way that they don't even have to understand what is going on behind the scenes. Since we're talking about Time Machine, let's use it as an example. Its implementation is actually pretty sophisticated and what it does is fairly complex. However, like you said, Joe average doesn't care about that, all he wants is a backup.

If Apple were to provide data redundancy, Joe Average wouldn't have to care about that either, but it would be there working behind the scenes and improving the integrity of Joe Average's data whether he knew it or not. I'm not suggesting that Apple should market a dual drive TC option as a RAID 1 solution, since Joe Average probably doesn't need to know that it is a RAID 1 solution. However, what would be wrong with calling it a "dual drive option - for additional backup security and integrity", or something like that? What does Apple offer a solid state drive option for the Macbook Air? Isn't this a super high tech option that ordinary users shouldn't have to care about?

Additionally, what happens when that lone drive in TC does fail? Is there some sort of warning ahead of time? Is there disk checking going on from time to time? Or does it just silently fail? Just wondering...
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 08:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
That's not my point. My point is that Apple provides high-tech options and implementations to the mainstream in such a way that they don't even have to understand what is going on behind the scenes.
I've got news for you Besson, the majority of people know now and don't care to know about the technical details behind the scenes. While you think that's a problem, its not, because that's not important for them. They desire a solution and faster computers and faster networks.

As analogika pointed out Time Capsule is not directed towards the hobbiest or person who wants to monkey with those setting. AEB has a great interface and TC has that interface plus a disk for backups.

If Apple were to provide data redundancy, Joe Average wouldn't have to care about that either, but it would be there working behind the scenes and improving the integrity of Joe Average's data whether he knew it or not. I'm not suggesting that Apple should market a dual drive TC option as a RAID 1 solution, since Joe Average probably doesn't need to know that it is a RAID 1 solution. However, what would be wrong with calling it a "dual drive option - for additional backup security and integrity", or something like that? What does Apple offer a solid state drive option for the Macbook Air? Isn't this a super high tech option that ordinary users shouldn't have to care about?
And do you think that by adding that, it would raise the price to a point that it would not be affordable or the customer would not be willing to spend that much money.

We're not talking about backing up mission critical stuff here. What your proposing is over-kill, too expensive and needless. Yes if the disk fails they lose their backups. What are the odds that both the main drive and the back drive failing at the same time, nill.

In your zeal to bash apple you over-complicate your solutions, fail to understand what's important to the average user and think your way is the best way. Clearly the way this thread went you can see that most people don't share your views.

Time Capsule is a great solution, many people, dare I say most home computer users do not back up their systems. TC gives them that ability without paying a premium and without over complicating the problem and without making it overly complex by introducing RAID-1.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 09:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacosNerd View Post
I've got news for you Besson, the majority of people know now and don't care to know about the technical details behind the scenes. While you think that's a problem, its not, because that's not important for them. They desire a solution and faster computers and faster networks.
Is that what I just said?

And do you think that by adding that, it would raise the price to a point that it would not be affordable or the customer would not be willing to spend that much money.
I said it should be an *option*, just like a solid state drive is an option for the MBA, for instance. Did you miss my saying this?

We're not talking about backing up mission critical stuff here. What your proposing is over-kill, too expensive and needless. Yes if the disk fails they lose their backups. What are the odds that both the main drive and the back drive failing at the same time, nill.
How do you know how important the data will be? If you want this backup to be transparent so that users don't have to care about this sort of stuff like you were talking about, why should we draw a line in the and provide one solution for people with not-so-important data, and another for people with important data? Why not provide the *option* so that users can make this choice for themselves?

Don't forget, Time Machine is also used for back peddling. The odds of somebody needing a file they deleted on a failed drive is high enough to warrant providing an option for a better solution for people that need it.

In your zeal to bash apple you over-complicate your solutions, fail to understand what's important to the average user and think your way is the best way. Clearly the way this thread went you can see that most people don't share your views.
I could reverse this and accuse you of being a big Apple apologist, but I've learned that that doesn't go over well, so perhaps we should dispense with the labels and characterizations? We don't need a Kevin replacement...
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 09:14 PM
 
I said it should be an *option*, just like a solid state drive is an option for the MBA, for instance. Did you miss my saying this?
What you think should be an option and what apple thinks their options should be are two different things. I trust their market research and experience in selling products over yours any day. Again you over complicate the solution, there's no need even to have this option for the general run of the mill computer user who doesn't even back up their data now. If he's wanting a RAID situation he'd be the first to say TC is not going to fit the bill.

How do you know how important the data will be? If you want this backup to be transparent so that users don't have to care about this sort of stuff like you were talking about, why should we draw a line in the and provide one solution for people with not-so-important data, and another for people with important data? Why not provide the *option* so that users can make this choice for themselves?
I don't but Time Capsule is directed to the typical home computer user, not the type of folks who are computing the mass of the sun. If they need a more robust backup solution then TC is not a good product for them and one that apple and they will quickly say some other product would work for them.


Don't forget, Time Machine is also used for back peddling. The odds of somebody needing a file they deleted on a failed drive is high enough to warrant providing an option for a better solution for people that need it.
right, and that's the great thing about it. If you think you need a better solution because you are running mission critical stuff then TC is not a good product for you, look elsewhere.

I could reverse this and accuse you of being a big Apple apologist, but I've learned that that doesn't go over well, so perhaps we should dispense with the labels and characterizations? We don't need a Kevin replacement...
You have and I'll take that as a compliment (both the Apple apologist and Kevin part)

Edit:
You have a clear history of bashing apple's products in a way that you try to portray your seemingly vast intellectual knowledge and how lowly apple could benefit from your wisdom. You fail to take into consideration what's important for most computer users and that you're posting on an apple forum. So it does not bother me if you wish to call me an apple apologist.
( Last edited by MacosNerd; Jan 23, 2008 at 09:18 PM. Reason: addition)
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 09:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I said it should be an *option*, just like a solid state drive is an option for the MBA, for instance. Did you miss my saying this?
Why?

Who on earth would buy that option and not just have it custom-built by their IT guy as part of the network storage package (or just build it themselves if they're savvy/desperate enough to want it)?


Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
How do you know how important the data will be? If you want this backup to be transparent so that users don't have to care about this sort of stuff like you were talking about, why should we draw a line in the and provide one solution for people with not-so-important data, and another for people with important data? Why not provide the *option* so that users can make this choice for themselves?
LOOK AT THE TARGET MARKET(ING).

Jeez.


Discussing stuff with you is like arguing with a kit car freak on a Mercedes forum!
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 10:30 PM
 
Now now... While I'll agree that besson3c's points are not at the same level as most of those made by analogika, they are valid points.

I think Apple has decided to sort of shotgun market Time Capsule rather than focus on a couple of particular types of users who could really benefit from it. Most people do not back up. I don't do it regularly enough. But having a NAS drive available for that hasn't changed my habits-I just feel a little guilty when I look at the drive. Now and then. A little. With an easy to use and configure backup suite, Time Capsule makes backing up easy (after the enormous initial full backup that is). This appeals to a lot of types of users. But the kind they really want to notice Time Capsule is the kind with plenty of money and a willingness to dump any and all of their existing network hardware to replace it with Time Capsule...

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2008, 11:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
Discussing stuff with you is like arguing with a kit car freak on a Mercedes forum!

Let's look at this a different way...

Part of the role and responsibility of a technological provider such as Apple is to figure out all of the high level tech stuff so that customers don't have to. Customers just want something that works.

Look at all of the great pains Apple has taken to improve security in OS X. Why? Their target audience isn't people that really benefit from all of this security, is it? Was Joe Average sending Apple feedback saying that we need warning when opening an application for the first time?

In the spirit of protecting users, a redundant drive as an option is not a bad idea.

Secondly, point #2: why did Apple beef up the Terminal application in Leopard? Clearly, they are making *some* attempt to reach out to advanced users. Why not provide an additional option and in doing so potentially lure in a few new advanced customers?
     
Timo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 12:34 AM
 
I'd love RAID-1 with Time Capsule -- then I could use it as a media server and a back up.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 04:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Can I ask what options you set on your AEBS weekly?
Most of the time it's because I'm adding or removing an entry from the MAC address list or I'm changing NAT settings (adding/removing ports and clients). Sometimes I'm just changing my DMZ.

My point is simple: a router is an internet appliance - a set once and forget about it thing for most people. Therefore, while a better interface is a valid argument, this is relatively negligible for many users.
I see where you're coming from. We might see this differently, but I'm not fan of these install CDs that do all kinds of auto-setup thingies. I also don't appreciate the cable guy coming to my house and setting up some black box for me. I want to do the setup myself so I know what the settings are. I want to get an idea what's going on. I want to be able to change stuff. For that I need to dive into the settings myself and understand what they do. And personally, I want to do that with a decent piece of software. I think AirPortUtility.app does a pretty good job at that. While I'm the first to admit it could use some improvements here and there, whenever I have to use one of these browser-based configs with some generic router I immediately notice how good AirPirtUtility.app actually is. OTOH I understand that if you just want to hook the router up, run the auto-setup and then never touch it again, you actually don't have to worry about UI at all and in that case paying extra for it would be spending too much.

My original argument is that most people are simply looking for a network disk and not a network. Many machines do not support wireless N yet, for starters.
Well in that case hooking up a USB disk to your already existing router should do the trick. But I guess you'll admit there are also people looking for a fast n router with a decent UI. Now wouldn't you agree that using TM to backup all their connected Macs to a 500 GB disk with one mouse click is a pretty smart thing? And if you consider that smart thing costs $120 it seems like a pretty solid deal for the people in that segment, doesn't it?

I agree with you that if you don't want n or you don't care about UI there are cheaper solutions. But assuming somebody does want n and they do care about UI AEBS seems like a pretty good deal to me. And if such a buyer also cares about backing up in the simple way TM does it, TC over AEBS appears to be a no-brainer.
( Last edited by Simon; Jan 24, 2008 at 04:29 AM. )
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 04:32 AM
 
Re: redundancy of TC. I think putting two disks in a RAID1 config into TC will make it too expensive (since most users will use it as a simple TM NAS). I also think adding software for the control of that RAID will make TC more complicated than it should be.

But what about a very simple and cheap solution: If the user hooks up a USB disk to TC and then hits the appropriate checkbox in AirPortUtility.app, TC will automatically clone its internal disk to the external once daily. Cheap and simple.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 03:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
Re: redundancy of TC. I think putting two disks in a RAID1 config into TC will make it too expensive (since most users will use it as a simple TM NAS). I also think adding software for the control of that RAID will make TC more complicated than it should be.

But what about a very simple and cheap solution: If the user hooks up a USB disk to TC and then hits the appropriate checkbox in AirPortUtility.app, TC will automatically clone its internal disk to the external once daily. Cheap and simple.

Why would you need software to control the RAID? The FreeBSD software geom RAID-1 is absolutely rock solid (and I believe OS X offers this). There is no interface needed.

If i didn't already doubly backup my stuff and was in the market for something like that TC offered, I'd probably go for the dual drive option. I actually had a problem once where a server was inaccessible, and the last backup job was missed because of a network outage. I've since learned my lesson and doubly backup stuff now to two different sites. My server also runs in a software RAID-1 pair. Good backup systems need redundancy, no doubt about it, it's just a matter of what that redundancy should be and how much is necessary...
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 04:30 PM
 
Another point: what happens when your drive fails? Are you going to be cool with being without a network while your TC unit is repaired/serviced?
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 05:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Why would you need software to control the RAID? The FreeBSD software geom RAID-1 is absolutely rock solid (and I believe OS X offers this). There is no interface needed.
No interface, but are we to believe that "the FreeBSD software geom RAID-1" is not software?

So now you're having Apple build a Time Capsule running a headless FreeBSD to manage the RAID-1 system?

Or is your idea of a secure backup using RAID one where the RAID is run from software on the remote Mac being backed up, over a WLAN?


Either way, there is software needed to run a RAID - and it would have to be built into the Time Capsule box.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 05:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Another point: what happens when your drive fails? Are you going to be cool with being without a network while your TC unit is repaired/serviced?
excellent point.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 05:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
No interface, but are we to believe that "the FreeBSD software geom RAID-1" is not software?

So now you're having Apple build a Time Capsule running a headless FreeBSD to manage the RAID-1 system?
Could you not add software RAID into the firmware of the device?

Or is your idea of a secure backup using RAID one where the RAID is run from software on the remote Mac being backed up, over a WLAN?
I think it would be very difficult to translate TCP traffic into kernel level requests to write to multiple drives. Otherwise, it would effectively double your network bandwidth to send the TCP traffic to two drives simultaneously.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 06:01 PM
 
I also wonder whether a drive could be swapped out of TC without voiding a warranty? Really, if RAM and an Airport card is considered a user serviceable, I would think that with a device like this swapping a drive could be made into a user serviceable sort of deal, no?
     
tinkered
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Oakland, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 08:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
- Apple displays: overpriced
- AEBS (prior to wireless N): overpriced (you could make the argument for Apple's wireless cards too)

- Mac Pros: overpriced (although since there really isn't another source for Mac towers other than Apple, this is always a tricky argument to make without getting into whether the value comes from software or hardware, or both.

- Apple mouse/keyboard: probably overpriced

- BTO parts such as bigger RAM/HD: overpriced (although other vendors such as Dell overprice their BTO components too)
By comparison to these examples I must admit I don't think Time Capsule is all that over priced. Particularly since it is so small and likely simple to setup.

So if you are asking: Would I recommend this to other tech savy people who can setup and maintain a separate router and NAS setup and don't mind finding the space for it? No, since they would think it was an overpriced solution with a lack of upgrade potential.

Would I recommend it to my parents, who call to tell me the internet is down when they accidentally unplug the router while vacuuming? Yes, because other wise they will never back up all their computers which all have "important" data. Also, they currently hide their wireless b router under a bed. The small size and low wire count make it a good solution for people who don't like technology to show.

Would I recommend a Time Capsule over a new AEBS? Yes, for anyone in the market for an AEBS, who doesn't already have a NAS solution and could benefit from one.
( Last edited by tinkered; Jan 26, 2008 at 08:21 PM. Reason: spelling)
17" MBP C2D 2.33/3 GB RAM/500 GB 7200 rpm/Glossy Display|-|
17" iMac CD|-|15" PB G4 1.25 GHz|-|iBook g4 1Ghz|-|Pismo
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 08:13 PM
 
tinkered: I think your assessment is very fair and reasonable, I find nothing to disagree with!
     
paduck
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 09:20 PM
 
To follow-on someone's earlier comment, TC is perfect for my mother. She has an Apple laptop, which she will probably be upgrading soon. Her home wireless network currently has a Linksys and AE (with a printer hooked up) which I set up for her. Her biggest fear right now is that her iBook hard drive will crash and she will lose all her photographs that she has stored over the years. Each time I see her, I backup her computer to DVD or my USB external HD. This gives her some level of data protection.

If she replaced her Linksys with TC, then she could have automatic backup via the network. It would all be transparent to her and she would have peace of mind knowing that there was a backup of everything she had. Her DSL connection is slower than her g-wireless network, so n will not help on the Internet side, but will for the backups. What she'll be paying the extra $120 for is integration and simplicity. She doesn't have the time or energy to set things up and tinker with all the parts. She just wants it to work. TC will give her that.

Lots of Mac users are in the same boat. You can pay a little less and spend a lot of time on configuration and maintenance. Or you can go with the integrated package. That is Apple's value-added in this case - the Apple Premium if you will. Plenty of people will go with alternatives, but there are plenty more who will buy it.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 09:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Does this also apply to security settings that leave a WiFi network wide open?
I'll be very interested to see what Apple's defaults are. It's not terribly effective to ship a device with WPA turned on; a good passphrase is going to be a royal pain to enter in the client machines. But all sorts of other things can be done to make sure the user thinks about the settings while "clicking through" the setup. I hope (a lot) that Apple thinks about this.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2008, 05:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Why would you need software to control the RAID? The FreeBSD software geom RAID-1 is absolutely rock solid (and I believe OS X offers this). There is no interface needed
I was assuming the user will need an interface to monitor the status of the RAID1 and an interface to recover if one of the drives in the RAID1 fails and is replaced.

On the other hand if this is done 'behind the curtains' then I guess we'd be looking at some major software on the TC itself. I don't see Apple putting even a stripped down BSD on that device. The question is then if something like this could be done entirely in firmware. I must admit I don't know.

I like the suggestion of redundancy in TC. But I'm still not convinced that the price increase (due to the use of two rather than a single disk in TC) will go down well within the intended market segment. Right now the 500 GB wireless NAS looks good at $120, but what if 500GB were suddenly $200. You'd be looking at a TC base price of $379. Implementing redundancy as an external option would keep the price of the base unit where it is now and still allow the 'power-users' to add what they want at a low additional cost.
( Last edited by Simon; Jan 25, 2008 at 05:53 AM. )
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2008, 07:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
I'll be very interested to see what Apple's defaults are. It's not terribly effective to ship a device with WPA turned on; a good passphrase is going to be a royal pain to enter in the client machines. But all sorts of other things can be done to make sure the user thinks about the settings while "clicking through" the setup. I hope (a lot) that Apple thinks about this.
Apple has been very very good about this in all previous iterations of the Airport Setup Utility; I'm sure nothing has changed in that regard.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2008, 07:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I also wonder whether a drive could be swapped out of TC without voiding a warranty? Really, if RAM and an Airport card is considered a user serviceable, I would think that with a device like this swapping a drive could be made into a user serviceable sort of deal, no?
I'd assume so, but I'll make my purchase decision as soon as I see one - the Airport Extreme Base Station is GLUED SHUT, so opening it up automatically voids the warranty - however, there's nothing "user-serviceable" inside.

If they glue shut the Time Capsule as well, I'll pass and probably resort to senseless violence.

BTW: I'm what you might call "tech-savvy", but I hit a point a couple of years ago where I *choose* no longer to waste my time tinkering with solutions other people can provide me out-of-the-box. In the case of Time Capsule, my time is worth way more than the "Apple Premium", such as it even applies to this box at all.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2008, 08:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
BTW: I'm what you might call "tech-savvy", but I hit a point a couple of years ago where I *choose* no longer to waste my time tinkering with solutions other people can provide me out-of-the-box. In the case of Time Capsule, my time is worth way more than the "Apple Premium", such as it even applies to this box at all.
I'm in that category, and my time is such that I'd rather get a turnkey solution then putzing around with something. They say time is money and I'd rather not spend it trying to get something to work anymore or building a solution.
( Last edited by MacosNerd; Jan 25, 2008 at 09:18 AM. )
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2008, 10:15 AM
 
exactly.
     
besson3c  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2008, 11:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
I'll be very interested to see what Apple's defaults are. It's not terribly effective to ship a device with WPA turned on; a good passphrase is going to be a royal pain to enter in the client machines. But all sorts of other things can be done to make sure the user thinks about the settings while "clicking through" the setup. I hope (a lot) that Apple thinks about this.
What happens now with an AEBS, do you know?
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:59 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,