[Doxxic]

The growth of the laptop market, the success of the MacBook and the coming of Time Machine, would make you think that Apple is creating a market for fixed drive stations with wireless capabilities, wouldn't it?

So what do we expect?

Airport Xpress with a Firewire port for connecting harddrives?

Mac minis marketed to people who need this? Wat features would they have?

HomeServe with wireless capabilities?

Nothing?

[chucker]

Hopefully, we will see the growth of the NAS market, with more sophisticated solutions.

[Wyatt]

Originally Posted by Doxxic Nothing?

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! I honestly don't think it will spur any new products.

[intlplby]

i still find gigabit ethernet too slow to be preferable to firewire

[Doxxic]

Originally Posted by chucker Hopefully, we will see the growth of the NAS market, with more sophisticated solutions.

What's a NAS?

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Doxxic What's a NAS?

Network-attached storage.

[Doxxic]

Originally Posted by intlplby i still find gigabit ethernet too slow to be preferable to firewire

I suppose that even for you it depends what you use it for.

Of course, no-one wants to have to access media they're working on via ethernet, let alone a wireless LAN (which I was talking about).

But backups and music and video streams for entertainment require a lot of harddrive space and less bandwith.

This is the kind of media use that makes Apple money (hardware intensive), and that Apple is obviously supporting with practically all software they make.

And once we have 802.11n, in july 2007 maybe, this could be a very attractive option.

[hobbit.2]

I'd assume that Time Machine will gobble up a lot of HD space, which is still scarce on laptops. And having laptops mostly connected to an external HD kind of defeats the purpose.

The idea of an AirPort base station with a FireWire port is brilliant. Yet Apple is not in the business of selling hard drives; and selling AirPort base stations won't make them lots of money either. I would speculate they'd much rather sell you another desktop machine to become your central hub. A Mac mini at least, preferably a low end Mac Pro.

If you look at the rumored or hinted future products, a wi-fi enabled iPod, a 'MacBook Thin' or the iPhone then another Mac is almost required to get them to their full potential. An AirPort base station with an attached HD won't do.

But my guess would be that Steve's masterplan is not merely based on a Microsoft inspired 'media center' hub. It would likely go far beyond that. I remember Jobs said at one point that data is the most important part of a computer system and that users don't really care where it is, whether locally, somewhere on the network, on a remote server or even somewhere on the Internet. As long as they can get to their data seamlessly and find it in an instant they're happy. Perhaps this is Apple's strategy. Keep your data wherever you want, locally, on another Mac, even on your iDisk. Such a vision could include network storage solutions too.
Just to add to that: Spotlight in Leopard will support searches on other Macs on the network.

[BarracksSi]

Originally Posted by Doxxic The growth of the laptop market, the success of the MacBook and the coming of Time Machine, would make you think that Apple is creating a market for fixed drive stations with wireless capabilities, wouldn't it?

Definitely. I very much enjoy using my iBook without having it tied down to other hardware -- in fact, I don't even have a desk for it.

Airport Xpress with a Firewire port for connecting harddrives?

That's what I would like. If I really needed to, I could plug in the extra HD and boot off of it or whatever, but maintaining a backup wirelessly would be immensely convenient.

[Brave Ulysses]

I think Apple conveniently did not make much mention of the backup options and how all this data would be backed up.

I foresee a major .Mac expansion to include enormous backup capacity.

[BarracksSi]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses I think Apple conveniently did not make much mention of the backup options and how all this data would be backed up.

Yup. That'll leave their options open for the actual release.

[Wyatt]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses I think Apple conveniently did not make much mention of the backup options and how all this data would be backed up.

Actually, they did:

Originally Posted by Apple.com The first time you attach an external drive to a Mac running Mac OS X Leopard, Time Machine asks if you’d like to back up to that drive. Set up the drive and Time Machine takes care of everything else, automatically, in the background

[userinterface]

Hell, I just want apple to put out a "VERY, VERY SIMPLE" software update that makes my USB port on my airport extreme allow me to plug-in a usb2 hard drive? How hard would that be. Instant network storage, it could all be done as a software update. They already updated the airport, so it supports USB hubs, now you can plug more than one printer into an airport extreme basestation.

Come-on apple let me plugin a drive to the airport. I'll put a terabyte on there and it's the "universal" disk for everyone on the house to dump backups and photos, music, and video too.

[Kickaha]

A TB.

Over WiFi and USB.

*twitch*

(I agree with you in theory though... )

[userinterface]

many companies already sell "network drives" or dlink sells a simple hub that lets you plug in USB drives to your wifi devices. Its' actually pretty fast. No granted it's not sata fast, but it's more than fast enough for me to stream full 1080p content off of it...

Either way, just using it as general backup would be nice. While it's no NAS, it's a simple solution to the common problem of backups, and having an central back that everyone in the house can backup too without carting around a portable drive

[Doxxic]

Originally Posted by userinterface Hell, I just want apple to put out a "VERY, VERY SIMPLE" software update that makes my USB port on my airport extreme allow me to plug-in a usb2 hard drive? How hard would that be. Instant network storage, it could all be done as a software update. They already updated the airport, so it supports USB hubs, now you can plug more than one printer into an airport extreme basestation. Come-on apple let me plugin a drive to the airport. I'll put a terabyte on there and it's the "universal" disk for everyone on the house to dump backups and photos, music, and video too.

Wow, how could we overlook the USB option?

So now I suppose the only thing keeping Apple from doing this is the current Wireless LAN bandwith?

[Kickaha]

No argument there. Right now I use custom rsync scripts and a centralized home server for backups for all the laptops. Having a slick Apple-ized version would make it just that much nicer.

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by fcgriz Actually, they did:

Actually they didn't mention it during the keynote address. They were very vague only mentioning an external hard drive once. An external hard drive is a VERY unApple way of doing things and also would not be like Apple to ship new machines that didn't neccessarily take advantage of the feature since they don't come with an external hard drive.

Apple does things differently because they control everything. What better way to leverage their .Mac integration than to tie Time Machine into it.

[Doxxic]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses An external hard drive is a VERY unApple way of doing things and also would not be like Apple to ship new machines that didn't neccessarily take advantage of the feature since they don't come with an external hard drive. Apple does things differently because they control everything. What better way to leverage their .Mac integration than to tie Time Machine into it.

Ok but then you still need to buy the optional .Mac account. And hope it's fast enough.

For the same reason, Apple could have some new (harddrive based?) device in the works, which might be pushed this way (among others, of course).

But, indeed, the underlying question of all this is: What the heck is the benefit of Time Machine when you have just spent all your money on a MacBook, and can't afford an external drive?

Are we getting the same situation as we have with Win XP? Right after installation, XP starts warning that the system is insecure because I don't have anti-virus software installed. I need to buy that in order to stop these warnings.

I hope that right out of the box, the presence of Time Machine on my computer will be more than a useless reminder to spend more money on external devices.

[Swing]

Doxxic, get real. You are complaining about the release of a product you may or may not use, and which is free with Leopard. The MS warning of which you speak was mandated by MS lawyers seeking exculpation for the terrible Windows kernel security.

If you do not want Time Machine then just don't use it. IMO many users will be pleased to have an easy means of backup. And most of these users aleady have external backup devices. And if you do not want to back up with Time Machine then, again, just don't use it.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Doxxic But, indeed, the underlying question of all this is: What the heck is the benefit of Time Machine when you have just spent all your money on a MacBook, and can't afford an external drive?

Er... if you didn't budget in for a backup mechanism of some sort, you're a fool. Sorry, but it's the truth.

That's like buying a car, and then being pissed you have to buy gas.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Doxxic What the heck is the benefit of Time Machine when you have just spent all your money on a MacBook, and can't afford an external drive?

Are you saying you don't have a single backup measure? Nothing? When your hard drive decides to die, you'll have lost Gigabytes worth of files you cannot recover?

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Er... if you didn't budget in for a backup mechanism of some sort, you're a fool. Sorry, but it's the truth. That's like buying a car, and then being pissed you have to buy gas.

Are you saying you don't have a single backup measure? Nothing? When your hard drive decides to die, you'll have lost Gigabytes worth of files you cannot recover?

Yes you dorks, that's exactly what he's saying

And its perfectly fine for him to say that. The majority of people do exactly the same thing. Have you not watched the keynote presentation and Apple's reasoning for writing and implementing this software? In theory it is great but if it requires the user to lug around an external hard drive that they have to purchase and manually connect and disconnect every time they need to backup then no matter how great Time Machine is it will see the same lack of use as previous backup utilities.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses The majority of people do exactly the same thing.

I realize that, but they at least don't openly admit it.

In theory it is great but if it requires the user to lug around an external hard drive that they have to purchase and manually connect and disconnect every time they need to backup then no matter how great Time Machine is it will see the same lack of use as previous backup utilities.

So use an internal partition.

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by chucker So use an internal partition.

Not sure how that resolves the issue.

Certainly not an ideal or realistic solution on a laptop. And the last thing I really think Apple wants users to have is another partition. Frankly, I think having 2 with Boot Camp makes it more confusing for newbies.

[chucker]

So get an NAS. You won't need to connect to it since you can use WiFi.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses Not sure how that resolves the issue. Certainly not an ideal or realistic solution on a laptop. And the last thing I really think Apple wants users to have is another partition. Frankly, I think having 2 with Boot Camp makes it more confusing for newbies.

Yeeeeeah, BU, I think you're expecting miracles here. You don't want an internal partition, but you don't want an external drive.

Internal, external... it's gotta go *somewhere*, right?

And, did you miss the part that Time Machine can back up to a server? Assume that .Mac will allow this, and it's already been listed for Leopard Server. So... anywhere you have a net connection, you have your backup available.

[Brad]

Bu..bu...but Ki-iiick! .Mac is sooo slooow!

[Kickaha]

whine whine whine...

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by Kickaha And, did you miss the part that Time Machine can back up to a server? Assume that .Mac will allow this, and it's already been listed for Leopard Server. So... anywhere you have a net connection, you have your backup available.

No, that's exactly the point I have been making