[MW Forums]

OWC is offering a triple-interface external RAID drive, in capacities from 250GB to 750GB. more

[Nobody]

This is a software RAID; not a hardware RAID. It is not the same!
Software RAID requires two FireWire cables and Mac CPU.
Hardware RAID requires a single FireWire cable and no Mac CPU.

[bastion]

Do you know this particular model relies on software to drive the mirror or are you inferring? I couldn't find a statement one way or the other on OWC's site.

[rdolivaw]

It is important to note that the announcement is not just for a new triple-interface RAID drive. They have sold these for at least a year. I have two of the old ones which were purchased as empty enclosures. What OWC has announced is two new versions of this enclosure with or without drives. Both of the new enclosures support SATA drives as opposed to the PATA drive support in the old model. You can purchase the enclosures with drives in several configurations. A different view than the link in the article shows the variety of options. Also note they don't point out on this page that there are empty enclosure-kits available. Check out their Firewire enclosures if you are interested in those.
http://eshop.macsale...94/USB/EliteAL/
http://eshop.macsale.../enclosure-kits

[Nobody]

Quote:

---

This is a software RAID; not a hardware RAID. It is not the same!
Software RAID requires two FireWire cables and Mac CPU.
Hardware RAID requires a single FireWire cable and no Mac CPU.

---

Besides, the Software RAID uses twice the FireWire bandwith (via two FireWire cables), whereas the Hardware RAID uses only half of such bandwith (via a single FireWire cable). That is because all FireWire ports in all Macs are not true different FireWire channel/buses, but in fact a SINGLE FireWire channel/bus working as a FireWire HUB. So, you share the FireWire bandwith between all FireWire cables connected at a particular moment to the Mac. Imgine that now you connect another FireWire disk to the Mac. If you had the Software RAID working, you will notice that such third disk is really slow! In such a case the FireWire bus is shared amongst three FireWire drives in the Soft RAID but only amongst two drives in the Hard RAID.
In summary, Hardware RAID seems much better than Software RAID. You will get TWICE the speed with a Hardware RAID than with a Software RAID when configured as RAID 1 (real time mirroring for the ultimate backup).

[Philbert]

Quote:

---

This is a software RAID; not a hardware RAID. It is not the same!
Software RAID requires two FireWire cables and Mac CPU.
Hardware RAID requires a single FireWire cable and no Mac CPU.

---

If that's the sole criteria for what determines software vs hardware RAID, that statement doesn't make sense. These enclosures are connected to the computer with a single FW/USB cable. It's a software RAID, but the drives are connected internally in the enclosure.
Side note -
I wouldn't categorize RAID 1 mirroring as the "ultimate" backup. The only benefit it gives you is protection from drive failure. Accidentally erase a file and it's gone from both drives. If a file becomes corrupt, it's corrupt on both drives. RAID 1 is useful as a first step in a backup strategy, but it shouldn't be the only step.
I too have been using the mirrored PATA version of these for about a year. It just dawned on me that I have no clue how recover data should one drive in the RAID pair fail. Anyone know? How would you know which drive had the problem? Could you simply just run the good drive as a single?

[Wizzard]

Screwed by OWC. Just received the "old" 912 Raid 1 drive on Thursday, then saw this "new" 924 Raid 1 drive on Friday for $50 less. But OWC won't credit me the difference. Strange way to keep customers.

[slather]

I purchased a similar 1TB RAID from OWC a couple of months ago (hardware RAID 0 instead of software RAID 1, but otherwise identical) and I'm quite disappointed with the speed. When connected to my Dual 2GHz G5 in the optimum fashion (FW800, only this one device connected) it was actually slower than my 3+ year old stock internal non-RAID SATA drive.
It seems to me that OWC doesn't really have RAID figured out. The drive is 25-30% slower than advertised. OWC tech was bewildered as to why my drive might be slower than in their tests and (after weeks of hounding them for a response) suggested that I courier it back to them (at my expense) so they could check it out. Makes me think that I'm one of the few people who actually tests a new RAID for the actual performance.
If you're looking for performance, I'd suggest you look elsewhere.