MacWorld 2008 Predictions

[Jugger Grimrodd]

Two things:

1. Why do we need a built in HDD in an AEBS? Doesn't the current AEBS allow you to connect an external HDD with AirDisk? Why can't Time Machine target volumes connected to the AEBS? Isn't it the same thing? I know Apple is in business, but I feel like I was given "the business" today (being the owner of a AEBS).

2. What happens when the HDD fails (and they do). You lose backup functionality until it comes back from the shop? Oh ya, if you send out your Time Capsule for repair, you won't have a wireless connection until it gets back. I couldn't live with that.

I agree that it is a good value for what you get. It's just unnecessary considering the existing product line (unless there are technical reasons that preclude Time Machine working with attached HDD's). I am now convinced that Apple has limited the effectiveness of TM to boost hardware sales.

[Raven]

Oonch, valid points, Jugger! Hadn't thought of those. I may have to wait and see what the first-adopter reports say....

[Jugger Grimrodd]

I might also suggest that if you are looking for Network Attached Storage devices, there are a lot of choices out there. Most give you more functionality (though at an admittedly higher cost), and will not handicap your network if there is a problem.

For example, you can buy a Drobo (drobo.com) for $499 USD or less (not including drives). This little nugget of innovation allows you to install up to four HDD's that mount as a single volume of up to 2TB. It offers the additional benefit of protecting the data (it uses data parity, virtualization, and magic - I am not sure how exactly it works) as it is spread across the drives. This allows you to buy cheap drives and attain a big, contiguous storage space. When a drive fails, you pop a new one in, it doesn't matter what capacity, manufacturer, or model and voila - you have all your data. You can also expand the capacity of the Drobo at any time by swapping lower capacity drives with larger ones. Apple should have been working on something like this - not the Time Capsule! AIEEEEEEE!

I just don't get why Apple released the Time Capsule?!?! I was hoping that I would be able to attach my Drobo to my AEBS to handle Time Machine backups. I have been a fool!

Apple made my heart cry.

[Jugger Grimrodd]

I will from this day on refer to the Time Capsule as the "Time Crapsule" and the keynote of 2008 as "Steve Job's Crapnote".

In addition, I will refer to my Apple MacIntosh computers as "Crapple MacIntrash" for a period of 24 hours (only for 24 hours - I just can't stop loving them).

[Raven]

As much as I love the concept and the look of the Drobo, at 499$ not including drives OR a network solution - the DroboShare tacks on another 200$ - it's just too expensive for my blood.
Then again, the AEBS really was too - the only difference is that now, 299$ gets me both the AEBS and a 500 GB hard drive at once. That I can justify.
This does not change the fact that I think Time Machine should be modified to do backups over wireless to ANY NAS, not just Apple's. The limitation is unfair to everyone, from those with AEBS' and Drobos to those with WD externals and d-link routers - like me! - and silly to boot. If it can be done, it can be done, and that's all there is to say.

[Equin]

Hopefully someone will reverse engineer whatever is required to make a target for time machine backups and release it, that way we can turn regular servers and nas into "time crapsules".

[Yuiichi]

@Equin - I, too, was thinking the same thing. Can't be long before it happens.

@Jugger - I do see your points about the Time Capsule (I affectionately call it, as I'm still completely enamored), but I think you're looking at it in the wrong way. Time Capsule isn't meant to be a device for everyone, just like Time Machine isn't meant to be the backup solution for everyone. I'm pretty sure that those who want to use NAS and devices like the Drobo (which I also pine for) would be using a more robust solution like SuperDuper!.

The Time Capsule is a phenomenal device for those who are the target market for Time Machine: the Mac users who really couldn't careless about third party solutions to their backup "problem" (of which, they didn't think was a problem) and want Apple to provide them with something. Time Capsule does just this.

Your concerns are legitimate and I really don't know why Time Machine doesn't support backing up to an AirDisk. Only time will tell. But I still think that the Time Capsule is an incredibly attractive device - one that I do plan to purchase. I may not be one of those users who waits for Apple to hand them everything, but they've sure made backing up look attractive to a person that doesn't bother.

Or could it be that my wallet is too tight for an external HDD and I've been waiting for a great value

[divigation]

Well I have to say that Apple is slipping. So we had an Apple TV upgrade and a NAS that weren't actually leaked, though the latter was widely predicted. The iPhone firmware was well documented, the rentals were discovered some time ago and the Air was the talk of all speculators for some time. The Air is nice, if you dont actually do anything serious with a computer. Were I wealthy and had a Pro and an MBP, an Air would be a nice toy to have as a third machine.

@Yuiichi I too was struck with the NAS being such a good deal. I have no need for it myself, I have external drives already and push too much data to backup wirelessly anyhow (far more exciting on this front, SuperDuper Leopard! almost here! so excited!)

I have to say I like rentals for when I am on the road working and wont a movie to watch, but otherwise it is a bit much to pay for rentals and 24 hrs? WTH? I remember when rentals were for 24 hrs back in the 80's.

The Apple TV bump is long overdue, they should have had all of this implemented before the initial release.

And the iPhone bump is welcome, was quite annoying to have seen all the new features and not have them yet, most of them are nice and useful.

[notabadname]

I'm really surprised they didn't upgrade the iPhone to 16 GB to match the Touch. 3G would have been nice too, but I thought that was more of a stretch.

[philbowell]

Originally Posted by notabadname

I'm really surprised they didn't upgrade the iPhone to 16 GB to match the Touch. 3G would have been nice too, but I thought that was more of a stretch.

I'm not after all the issues they had with the price drop, can you imagine the response to the addition of 3G? It would've been chaos! Maybe a capacity bump, but I think it adds something tot he touch, it is after all only an iPod not a phone with iPod.