Macworld Forums: OWC unveils 960 GB solid-state drive - Macworld Forums

Post your comments for OWC unveils 960 GB solid-state drive here

Yeah, it's a lot of money, but I remember when OWC first started offering SSDs, their most-expensive model held 480 GB and cost around $1600.

This post has been edited by Logan3_1639: 26 June 2012 - 09:20 AM

I think this is another indication that Apple has missed the boat. They think they know that everyone wants to use "the cloud". Just like the (dumb) changes they made with Lion, they've missed the idea that consumers want to be in control of the product they purchase.

For one, I will upgrade the RAM and go to a SSD and stick with Leopard rather than buy a new laptop.

I am not wishing for something bad to happen, but I think it's just a matter of time before someone hacks one of the "cloud" services and people start pulling their files back to their desktop and laptop drives.

rmossman, on 26 June 2012 - 09:05 AM, said:

An increasingly tiny portion of customers. Most customers want a computer that just works without them having to fiddle with it.

rmossman, on 26 June 2012 - 09:05 AM, said:

Because personal computers never get hacked and hard drives never fail…

I just thought of another perspective on the cost of OWC's 960 GB SSD: my first Apple computer was the Mac SE, which came with two floppy drives and no HDD. I paid about $1100 for an 80 MB external hard drive. That was somewhere in the 1980s.

This post has been edited by Logan3_1639: 26 June 2012 - 09:21 AM

Logan3_1639, on 26 June 2012 - 09:13 AM, said:

If you use the forum thread you can edit your post (for a little while after it is posted).

rmossman, on 26 June 2012 - 09:05 AM, said:

It's definitely hard to understand Apple sometimes. Like the Retina MacBook Pro. I purchased one, but one of the downsides is 2 USB 3.0 ports. I will not rely on just the flash memory to be my everything on that Mac. I will need to back that SSD to another drive. With my current MacBook pro, I had the option of at least swapping out the Superdrive for another hard drive to backup the SSD. Okay, so I'll end up buying another Apple Cinema display as well, but it only has... USB 2.0 ports. They are definitely lagging on updating their products, and it causes a lot of confusion.

Stewsburntmonkey, on 26 June 2012 - 09:13 AM, said:

I don't know about anyone else, but I've never purchased a computer that didn't "just work without having to fiddle with it". The difference is that Apple is taking away the ability to "fiddle with it" from those who want to. Plus, I'd prefer to think that I'm improving my computer and not just fiddling with it.

Also, yes, computers do get hacked and drives do fail, but even those things are under the control of the consumer. Does the consumer have any chance of stopping someone from hacking "the cloud"?

Does storing things in "the cloud" mean people no longer need to have personal backups, backup software, and a good backup regimen? If they still need all those things, why does Apple (and others) think cloud services are the end-all-be-all of computing? So far, the only thing I use the cloud for is sharing files between computers when I'm not on my local home or office network. In those locations, I still use shared drives/folders and not only have the benefit of accessing files but have security also.

reden, on 26 June 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

The USB ports are designed to be used for basic peripherals (wired mice and the like). For external storage the Thunderbolt ports are really the preferred connection (you can also use the adaptors to connect a Firewire drive to the Thunderbolt port). The USB ports will of course work for external storage, but clearly Apple is designing these new systems to favor Thunderbolt for those functions.

I'm not really sure what the confusion you are referencing comes in. If anything Apple is working to simplify things by combining as much functionality into the Thunderbolt port as possible (the idea behind Thunderbolt is that it can be a universal port, so would be no confusion at all).

Stewsburntmonkey, on 26 June 2012 - 09:13 AM, said:

I don't know about anyone else, but I've never purchased a computer that didn't "just work without having to fiddle with it". The difference is that Apple is taking away the ability to "fiddle with it" from those who want to. Plus, I'd prefer to think that I'm improving my computer and not just fiddling with it.

Also, yes, computers do get hacked and drives do fail, but even those things are under the control of the consumer. Does the consumer have any chance of stopping someone from hacking "the cloud"?

Does storing things in "the cloud" mean people no longer need to have personal backups, backup software, and a good backup regimen? If they still need all those things, why does Apple (and others) think cloud services are the end-all-be-all of computing?

rmossman, on 26 June 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

It depends on the service, but with some services you can encrypt your information before sending it to the cloud. Someone could hack the cloud, but they will be faced with encrypted data which is likely not worth bothering to decrypt (if decryption is even a realistic possibility). That said, most customers aren't really capable of preventing their local box being hacked, so for most people having a remote system which has professional engineers employed to maintain and secure it is likely an improvement in data security.

rmossman, on 26 June 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

I've never heard Apple say the Cloud is the end-all and be-all. They simply think it is a highly useful technology, especially given that many people now live on multiple devices which need to be synced somehow. I think you absolutely need backups and Apple clearly does as well given that it sells Time Capsule for just that purpose.

rmossman, on 26 June 2012 - 09:05 AM, said:

Speaking from the perspective of someone who just recovered files from a crashed hard drive, thanks to a cloud system (Backblaze), I would completely disagree. I will not dispute that it is just a matter of time before someone hacks a cloud system, but hard drives are no safer if you are not attached to the machine. It does not take long for someone to grab the computer and run while you are ordering that Venti Iced Caramel Latte. I have plenty of experience with this because I am a student conduct board officer at our university. You would be amazed how many students leave their laptops out and unattended, and then wonder why someone steals their papers!

I really think the days of being a packrat are over because if mobile computing is to move forward, the devices need to be light and efficient and have access to data, even if we forgot to bring it. If the dying crashed hard drive has told me anything, other than do not drop textbooks on a booting computer, it is that the replacement flash drive I put in added more performance than I could possibly imagine. My 4 year old Blackbook now boots in 30 seconds and loads powerpoint in 1 second! That machine has a 250GB in it and is less than half full, even with two OS's and Parallels installed.....

"that big storage capacity comes with a hefty price tag: $1270."

Ouch! That's what I used to say the the over 1 Gh drives first came out. Can't weight 'til the new ouch is and old memory.

rmossman, on 26 June 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

You've made remarkably poor purchasing decisions, then. I often upgrade computers, but spec them as I need them. That includes my MacBook Pro as well as the Dell desktop in my lab. Both of these computers are operating, largely, with the original hardware. I have picked up some external peripherals (display, mouse, keyboard) for the laptop, but the internals are all the same. Note: I don't consider installing software to be fiddling with a computer. Then again, Apple hasn't taken away my ability to install software on my Mac.

rmossman, on 26 June 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

A hard drive failing is hardly under my control. I recently lost the better part of a weekend, because one of our computers wouldn't boot from the internal drive. Reinstalling the OS worked fine, but was preceded by installing the OS onto an external drive so that it would boot. Twice actually, as we had Tiger and a Leopard upgrade disk. Migration assistant won't let you migrate from 10.6 to a drive running 10.5. [I ran into a separate problem with the NAS drive, so the Time Machine backup was inaccessible.] Sure, I was being uber cautious, but wanted multiple copies before trying to reinstall the OS.

Computers also get stolen, by the way. An external drive is your only security there. Well, an off site external drive. Or, of course, Cloud storage.

BB