Server Grade
Apple’s Time Capsule: is its HDD really ‘server grade’?
El Reg:
Indeed, Hitachi offers a server-oriented version of the 7K1000, called the Ultrastar A7K1000. Its specs largely match those of the standard 7K1000, but where Hitachi states the A7K1000 is good for 24x7 availability, it makes no such claim about the Deskstar model.
Cut and dry issue. The A7K1000 model which is the next step up from the consumer grade 7K1000 is advertised as a drive with “enterprise-class reliability and performance for lower duty cycle enterprise applications” while the 7K1000 that is placed inside of the Apple Time Capsule is considered by the manufacturer to be suitable for “networked storage servers” in consumer products.
Anyway, like the classic What is the definition of “is” debate, the nut of this story is what the definition of “server” is. There is plenty of wriggle room according to many in the comments section of the article.
These are the same drives in the Xserve. Therefore, by a retroactive marketing definition, they're server-grade.
The difference between the "server grade" and desktop Hitachi drive is probably minimal, as pointed out by the article. The charge on top of the server grade is most likely down to the warranty costs.
And "Server Grade" means what, exactly?
Not too bad, seems like there is some reasonable debate around cost per unit versus consumer value and Apple’s definition of “server quality” when selecting components for their flagship Xserve products. A few interesting gems are to be found further down.
Hitachi provide identical drives for desktop and server. (Hitachi Deskstar 7K1000 / Ultrastar A7K1000). The difference? Different firmware, different label, different price. Hitachi are probably allowing Apple server firmware, but won't let them have the Ultrastar label without paying the extra.
I doubt that Hitachi runs itself like a charity and just doles out server-grade firmware to needy customers. Hitachi is a business that has a bottom line and shareholders to answer to. An even more ridiculous poster asserts that Apple purchases drives and thoroughly tests them for errors, then flashes them with a SUPER SECRET FIRMWARE that they developed in house.
I think that "server" refers to Apple's selection process for the drives. When these drives are delivered to Apple they put them on soak for a few days and reject any with bad blocks - that's ANY errors. They then flash them with their own special firmware that allows for better error reporting and correction.
Bottom line being that somehow Apple can create a piece of firmware for to make a consumer hard drive “server-grade” and yet at the same time cannot release a reliable firmware for their laptop keyboards when Leopard is released
Most of this discussion about Apple, enterprise computing, and the definition of server is meaningless drivel since a startling number of posts in the new “Mac OS X Server” forum of MacRumors.com end up with posters recommending Linux solutions in place of Mac OS X Server.