I've talked about both. But when I said that NAS are dumbed down desktop computers, I was not talking about servers in general. Even you understood that right in your post
You lie. These are your words.
You fail to understand what the word "they" was referring to. You think it was servers. It wasn't. It was NAS devices.
Please do. Either you won't find what you are looking for, or I will have to point out yet again how you badly understood a basic sentence.
Please read up above where your own words contradict you. Liar.
Again you fail at logic/understanding. Workstations are desktops computers. Not all desktop computers are workstations. I never said the Mac Pro isn't a workstation, yet, you seem to claim otherwise.
No you called them toys because you don't seem to understand what a workstation is and now you're desperately trying to cover up for that.
When I qualified them as toys, I meant that they have some serious shortcomings for many types of work. They are made to be small and stylish, as most Apple products.
Please are you now going to lie even more about what you meant. You just dig yourself more and more into a hole because you didn't know something basic and are trying to lie your way out of it now.
Not only that, Huawei is accused of stealing tech from other companies. Unless Huawei extensively rewrites the code, someone from the Cisco, for example, is going to notice that their proprietary drivers are in Huawei’s open source code.
You specially said that you were talking about servers and not a NAS. Again we can scroll up or are you going to lie about that? By definition, Mac Pro and iMac Pro are workstations as is a Dell Precision. Again you show a stunning level of ignorance and arrogance at the same time. If you can’t basic definitions right, how bad must your conclusions be.
Because under the simulations, Boeing themselves found pilots might have under 40 seconds to override the software or the plane might go into a unrecoverable dive. And that’s in a simulator where the pilots were expecting it.
So are you now arguing that Netflix doesn’t have a monopoly on things it doesn’t own? Also where and when criticized others for trying to compete with Netflix?
They just use a cheaper CPU, no GPU, no audio or other useless peripherals, and less RAM than a regular desktop. So yeah, they are cheap desktop computers, dumbed down. The good ones might have a good hardware RAID controller but that's pretty much it.
From the very beginning I told you to research what a NAS is. It appears you didn't do so. It appears it took you almost a week to realize that a NAS is a server. If you didn't know a NAS was a server then what other knowledge are you lacking? Because many of your arguments look nonsensical if you didn't know that a NAS was a server. Like the statement above makes you look like an idiot. A NAS was never designed to be a desktop and you called them "cheap desktop computers, dumbed down."
On the topic of a Mac Pro or iMac Pro, they are workstations and specifically not toys. Learn what a workstation is.
I only coded briefly in Swift 2/3 and even I knew it wasn’t ABI stable. That was one of the complaints in why the Swift app size was much larger than ObjC versions. Sorry if this wasn’t clear to you but it is always a risk with a relatively new languages that they aren’t stable for a while. Even older languages break compatibility with new versions. Java 9 breaks a lot of things, and Java was 15 years old by then.
Did Apple hide this from you? I mean you developed apps using Swift fully knowing it wasn’t ABI stable. And now it’s Apple’s fault for making it stable. As far as I know you could have kept using ObjC.
So it seems that you spent days not knowing the a NAS by definition is a server. Not only that you’ve argued vehemently in a topic area you seem to know nothing about.
In what way does Netflix have a monopoly on content? The main reason they would have to raise prices is that the content companies charge Netflix ever increasing rates for licensing.
They just use a cheaper CPU, no GPU, no audio or other useless peripherals, and less RAM than a regular desktop. So yeah, they are cheap desktop computers, dumbed down. The good ones might have a good hardware RAID controller but that's pretty much it.
This part tells me you don’t know what a “server” is. A server doesn’t mean a high end CPU and lots of RAM. No audio, no GPU, and fewer peripherals is characteristic of every single server I’ve worked with from big iron to web servers to enterprise databases. Most of Google’s web crawling servers are low power and low performance CPUs. Many big iron mainframes don’t have the fastest CPUs either but focus on processing a high number of transactions. Low cost print servers don’t use any high end CPUs yet they are still servers.
Please learn what is a server is as your world seems entirely centered around desktops even though no NAS was designed to be a desktop. They are highly specialized to be a NAS. They are not specialized to be a database server or a enterprise web server. Most of them cannot even made to be print servers. Their hardware are not standardized and specialized specifically to that model.
On the other end of performance your words on the Mac Pro and iMac Pro:
That's why it would be a much better idea to use a real desktop instead of these toys. A real professional video editing machine have multiple drive bays.
So you called two machine with Xeon processors, ECC RAM, Pro GPUs, PCIe SSDs, and TB “toys.” It seems you don’t know what a “workstation” is. At the same you have never worked with professional video editors yet boldly and arrogantly claim that these machines are not “real” video editing machines despite they are exactly what professionals use.
At this point it seems you are now resorting to lying as to what you said even though anyone can scroll up and see your words. There is no misunderstanding. You are just wrong and desperately trying to cover it up by lying about what you said.
Early epidemiologic studies were inadequate in demonstrating an increase in cancer incidence associated with contaminated vaccine. Recently, investigators have provided persuasive evidence that SV40 is present in human ependymomas, choroid plexus tumors, bone tumors, and mesotheliomas, however, the etiologic role of the virus in tumorigenesis has not been established.
Don't you think that's a bit dishonest if you leave out the first part.
In this case the phones were unlocked because of the use of biometrics instead of password only protection. If they were locked only with passwords and Cohen didn’t cooperate, the FBI would have had to employ hackers.
You called a server a “desktop, dumbed down”. You called a Pro workstation with Pro hardware, a “toy”. You don’t know at a NAS is. Please do your research further commenting as you’re only making yourself look dumber.
MS, in my opinion, is still a terrible company. But I don’t think they’re wrong on this point. MS wants consumers to have access to better broadband for the company’s goals and not purely altruistic ones. But given what we know already about the FCC’s past inaccurate characterization of broadband, it’s reasonable to assume they can do it again. This time under Pai, I’m not going to assume it’s incompetence; I’m going to assume it’s dishonesy.
Dude, give it up. You called a server "a dumb desktop". That tells me you have no clue about what you're talking about. I can literally dismiss everything you are going to say.
No I am not. What I am saying, is that your shinny TB box may be using SATA internally to connect hard drives. Either that, or NVMe/PCIe to connect faster SSDs. There is no such thing as a TB drive.
Dude, you are missing the whole point again. Internally, the Mac Pro 2013 and the iMac Pro do not use SATA to connect to internal drives. The Mac Pro used their own PCIe standard before NVMe became the standard. The iMac Pro uses NVMe. At no point are these Macs limited to SATA at 6 Gbps internally. You do understand this right? Externally they use TB. They don’t use eSATA as an external connector for all the reasons above. You do understand the difference between internal and external right?
Nobody ever talked about sharing a single SATA cable for more than one drive except you. I wouldn't even know how to do that.
Nobody but you. When I’m talking about TB as an external connector and you champion SATA, what the hell are you talking about?
Is it obviously even slower if you connect to a gigabit Ethernet NAS. By the way, the Mac Pro doesn't have 10 Gbps Ethernet. The average NAS is gigabit at best.
I said previously that the main advantage of a NAS isn’t speed over TB or eSATA. I said specifically the term “network” was the main advantage. Availability, reliability, redundancy, backup strategy?
Your understanding is terrible. I never said the opposite.
And yet you keep championing SATA over TB.
That's why it would be a much better idea to use a real desktop instead of these toys. A real professional video editing machine have multiple drive bays.
Bahahaha. “Toys” that have Xeon processors, ECC RAM, PCIe SSDs (starting in 2013 no less), Pro video cards, TB? By the way, you later admit to not having any experience in professional video editing, but you’re absolutely sure what professional video editors use. Here’s a clue: the current trend is that video editors don’t have multiple drive bays. Why? Because as you accumulate more files, it is difficult to expand your desktop to have enough drives. If your NAS becomes full you can add more drives if there is space or add another NAS. Unless you started out with a desktop that had 4 or more drive bays, enough drive connectors, etc., this is why pros don’t use a multi-bay desktop anymore.
They are not highly specialized. Especially not the cheap ones.
Oh really? So what do they use for hardware and software then? Let me guess for hardware: just standard ATX x86 MBs running standard Windows? Oh wait they use specialized boards and specialized OS. I guess the term “specialized” applies.
They are running some sort of embedded Linux or BSD.
Wait didn’t you just admit the term “specialized” applies then?
You can use FreeNAS to make your own NAS. They just use a cheaper CPU, no GPU, no audio or other useless peripherals, and less RAM than a regular desktop. So yeah, they are cheap desktop computers, dumbed down.
So the term “specialized” doesn’t apply? Also if you have a desktop with no GPU, no audio, no peripherals, etc, how is it a “desktop”? You could call it an appliance maybe. In this case also a “server”. Please brush up on your IT.
The good ones might have a good hardware RAID controller but that's pretty much it.
Again not “specialized” according to you.
Then don't call it a NAS. Call it a network file server.
Please read the wiki on what is and is not a NAS as you just contradicted yourself by installing FreeNAS to make a NAS.
Again, the reason for not running the web server on your desktop is availability. And i
First, you can't do RAID on a single SATA cable since you need at least 2 drives, which will use at least 2 SATA cables, duh. So how exactly are you supposed to be limited by the 6 Gbps of SATA when using more than one drive?
Dude you are the one advocating using SATA instead of TB, not me. Your math is terrible. Once again, a single SATA III cable has a max of 6Gpbs. A single TB2 cable can handle 20Gbps or 3.5 x SATA. To use multiple drives in a RAID you have to have the space which neither the Mac Pro 2013 nor iMac Pro had for 2 disks much less 3 or more.
Then you can do RAID just as well within a desktop as within a NAS (which is nothing more than a dedicated networked computer with drive bays running a dumbed down operating system). So NAS is no more redundant.
Dude you seriously need to brush up on your IT. A NAS isn’t a just a desktop that shares its drive. These are highly specialized and optimized machines with hardware and software for this purpose. While you can convert a desktop to be a NAS, you shouldn’t be using it simultaneously as as desktop. This is as idiotic as using your desktop as the company’s web server at the same time while editing video..
Finally a desktop CPU is so fast, especially compared to a NAS CPU, that gigabit network transfers won't affect it that much (say, 10% of one core).
Do you work in professional video editing because the more you post, the less likely it seems as you speak in absolute generalities? Using your desktop as a single point of failure isn’t done by professionals for a multitude of reasons. If you tried to tell these pros that they should just use someone’s desktop, they’d laugh at you.
Also we have gotten far away from original point: why would you advocate for slower
storage in machines that didn’t have the space for multiple drives? Why are you arguing to single point of failure?
But that's not why I replied to your first post. I could have changed the title from there.
But you didn't. So let me see if I understand you: You changed the subject without mentioning you were changing the subject even though the OP and I were talking specifically about the Mac Pro.
I was talking about the form factor. You don't need an all-in-one to get 4 TB connectors. Also you wouldn't need any TB connectors to begin with if you had room for internal storage.
Whether we were talking about the Mac Pro 2013 or the iMac Pro, there was no internal room for additional SATA drives. Again, the workload of professional video editor is that they do not store all of their files locally. They store them on a separate drive for redundancy. Like a TB drive. Like a NAS. They copy files to their local system to do work then transferred finished work back to the
The math is simple. The TB bridge can't make the drive go faster. It can only make it slower. It's an additional middle man, which hopefully delivers close to 100% of the speed.
That was never the point. The max of SATA 6Gbps is 6Gbps. That's it. You can't get faster than that using TB; however, the bottleneck still is the SATA connector not the TB connector.
It doesn't increase the drive speed. Bandwidth isn't shared between multiple SATA ports in a desktop computer either. You could be doing RAID within your desktop computer instead. Using either SATA or PCIe/NVMe.
I suggest you brush up on your RAID levels. This is very simple. If you use any form of RAID 0, you can have 2 drives at 6Gbps pushing data through a 20Gbps TB connector. If you use a single SATA connector, your bottleneck still is the 6Gbps connector. It doesn't matter how you've set up your RAID if you have a single SATA connector.
You can share your local drive on the network and get the same effect.
Only if you suppose you are doing no work at the time that would be hindered by people transferring GB sized files from your computer. Also your computer houses multiple RAID drives for redundancy? Well if has to be at least 4 disks for RAID 10, 3 disks for RAID 5, etc.
The main advantage of a NAS over this solution is to offer continued availability even when you are rebooting your computer.
Dude, I suggest you brush up on IT infrastructure. One advantage of NAS is high availability. There is also reliability and redundancy. Multiple people can copy files all at the same time. Loss of a drive does not mean loss of all data.
The disadvantage is cost, and performance (for the local user at least, remote users get similar performance of course).
Argh. The whole point of a NAS is that your machine is not hammered when people are transferring large files from the server. The whole point is that there isn't a single drive failure that will destroy your work. The point is that backup strategy is much easier with a NAS.
Frankly why are you arguing against a NAS and for single point of failure?
If you are maxing out a iMac Pro at $16K, I doubt you'd be spending it on playing video games. Sadly this is really the only Apple that professional video editors or animators can use right now.
Yes we are. The OP said: "SATA is a good sign for the next mac pro." It is the literal title of this entire thread.
The iMac is definitely not a professional video editing machine, with no room for multiple drives, and a form factor which offer no advantage to begin with.
The specs on the iMac Pro. Besides the 5K display and 4 TB connectors, there's no advantage?
Again, you understand there is no such thing as a TB drive, right? There are SATA and NVMe/PCIe drives, connected to a TB bridge. The TB bridge can only make the drive go slower. It can't make it go any faster. Therefore you are always better with internally connected drives, saving a lot of money compared to that ugly TB enclosure.
You do understand that at 2 X 20Gbps, a TB2 bridge isn't a bottle neck to SATA drive which maxes out at 6Gbps right? So when you say the TB2 bridge makes it go slower, I have to wonder about your math. Many of the TB2 enclosures support multiple drive RAID which can increase speed.
I'd prefer a drive maxing the SATA cable over a 10 gigabit Ethernet NAS. I believe it is faster for most use cases (especially latency), despite the fact that the theoretical bandwidth of Ethernet is a little faster.
Do you and all of your multiple video editors share the same SATA cable? The primary use case of a NAS isn't speed. The term "Network Attached Storage" lays out the primary use case which the term "network" describes. The primary use case is that multiple users can access the same drives. Also for those that set up a NAS, they also tend to set up a backup strategy which is far easier to back up the NAS than to make sure every one used the SATA cable to copy to a lone SATA drive that isn't backed up.
Slashdot Mirror
I've talked about both. But when I said that NAS are dumbed down desktop computers, I was not talking about servers in general. Even you understood that right in your post
You lie. These are your words.
You fail to understand what the word "they" was referring to. You think it was servers. It wasn't. It was NAS devices.
Please do. Either you won't find what you are looking for, or I will have to point out yet again how you badly understood a basic sentence.
Please read up above where your own words contradict you. Liar.
Again you fail at logic/understanding. Workstations are desktops computers. Not all desktop computers are workstations. I never said the Mac Pro isn't a workstation, yet, you seem to claim otherwise.
No you called them toys because you don't seem to understand what a workstation is and now you're desperately trying to cover up for that.
When I qualified them as toys, I meant that they have some serious shortcomings for many types of work. They are made to be small and stylish, as most Apple products.
Please are you now going to lie even more about what you meant. You just dig yourself more and more into a hole because you didn't know something basic and are trying to lie your way out of it now.
Not only that, Huawei is accused of stealing tech from other companies. Unless Huawei extensively rewrites the code, someone from the Cisco, for example, is going to notice that their proprietary drivers are in Huawei’s open source code.
You specially said that you were talking about servers and not a NAS. Again we can scroll up or are you going to lie about that? By definition, Mac Pro and iMac Pro are workstations as is a Dell Precision. Again you show a stunning level of ignorance and arrogance at the same time. If you can’t basic definitions right, how bad must your conclusions be.
Because under the simulations, Boeing themselves found pilots might have under 40 seconds to override the software or the plane might go into a unrecoverable dive. And that’s in a simulator where the pilots were expecting it.
So are you now arguing that Netflix doesn’t have a monopoly on things it doesn’t own? Also where and when criticized others for trying to compete with Netflix?
Personally I’m highly suspicious of Huawei and I don’t think this was a flaw. “Intended design” is what I suspect is a better description.
They just use a cheaper CPU, no GPU, no audio or other useless peripherals, and less RAM than a regular desktop. So yeah, they are cheap desktop computers, dumbed down. The good ones might have a good hardware RAID controller but that's pretty much it.
From the very beginning I told you to research what a NAS is. It appears you didn't do so. It appears it took you almost a week to realize that a NAS is a server. If you didn't know a NAS was a server then what other knowledge are you lacking? Because many of your arguments look nonsensical if you didn't know that a NAS was a server. Like the statement above makes you look like an idiot. A NAS was never designed to be a desktop and you called them "cheap desktop computers, dumbed down."
On the topic of a Mac Pro or iMac Pro, they are workstations and specifically not toys. Learn what a workstation is.
I only coded briefly in Swift 2/3 and even I knew it wasn’t ABI stable. That was one of the complaints in why the Swift app size was much larger than ObjC versions. Sorry if this wasn’t clear to you but it is always a risk with a relatively new languages that they aren’t stable for a while. Even older languages break compatibility with new versions. Java 9 breaks a lot of things, and Java was 15 years old by then.
Did Apple hide this from you? I mean you developed apps using Swift fully knowing it wasn’t ABI stable. And now it’s Apple’s fault for making it stable. As far as I know you could have kept using ObjC.
I don’t know anyone who owns a VR set. Granted I don’t know anyone who owns a Ferrari either
So it seems that you spent days not knowing the a NAS by definition is a server. Not only that you’ve argued vehemently in a topic area you seem to know nothing about.
In what way does Netflix have a monopoly on content? The main reason they would have to raise prices is that the content companies charge Netflix ever increasing rates for licensing.
Your exact words:
They just use a cheaper CPU, no GPU, no audio or other useless peripherals, and less RAM than a regular desktop. So yeah, they are cheap desktop computers, dumbed down. The good ones might have a good hardware RAID controller but that's pretty much it.
This part tells me you don’t know what a “server” is. A server doesn’t mean a high end CPU and lots of RAM. No audio, no GPU, and fewer peripherals is characteristic of every single server I’ve worked with from big iron to web servers to enterprise databases. Most of Google’s web crawling servers are low power and low performance CPUs. Many big iron mainframes don’t have the fastest CPUs either but focus on processing a high number of transactions. Low cost print servers don’t use any high end CPUs yet they are still servers.
Please learn what is a server is as your world seems entirely centered around desktops even though no NAS was designed to be a desktop. They are highly specialized to be a NAS. They are not specialized to be a database server or a enterprise web server. Most of them cannot even made to be print servers. Their hardware are not standardized and specialized specifically to that model.
On the other end of performance your words on the Mac Pro and iMac Pro:
That's why it would be a much better idea to use a real desktop instead of these toys. A real professional video editing machine have multiple drive bays.
So you called two machine with Xeon processors, ECC RAM, Pro GPUs, PCIe SSDs, and TB “toys.” It seems you don’t know what a “workstation” is. At the same you have never worked with professional video editors yet boldly and arrogantly claim that these machines are not “real” video editing machines despite they are exactly what professionals use.
At this point it seems you are now resorting to lying as to what you said even though anyone can scroll up and see your words. There is no misunderstanding. You are just wrong and desperately trying to cover it up by lying about what you said.
Early epidemiologic studies were inadequate in demonstrating an increase in cancer incidence associated with contaminated vaccine. Recently, investigators have provided persuasive evidence that SV40 is present in human ependymomas, choroid plexus tumors, bone tumors, and mesotheliomas, however, the etiologic role of the virus in tumorigenesis has not been established.
Don't you think that's a bit dishonest if you leave out the first part.
In this case the phones were unlocked because of the use of biometrics instead of password only protection. If they were locked only with passwords and Cohen didn’t cooperate, the FBI would have had to employ hackers.
You called a server a “desktop, dumbed down”. You called a Pro workstation with Pro hardware, a “toy”. You don’t know at a NAS is. Please do your research further commenting as you’re only making yourself look dumber.
MS, in my opinion, is still a terrible company. But I don’t think they’re wrong on this point. MS wants consumers to have access to better broadband for the company’s goals and not purely altruistic ones. But given what we know already about the FCC’s past inaccurate characterization of broadband, it’s reasonable to assume they can do it again. This time under Pai, I’m not going to assume it’s incompetence; I’m going to assume it’s dishonesy.
Dude, give it up. You called a server "a dumb desktop". That tells me you have no clue about what you're talking about. I can literally dismiss everything you are going to say.
That’s the way I read it too.
If would be ironic if someone found a way to use Defendwr to put viruses on a Mac.
No I am not. What I am saying, is that your shinny TB box may be using SATA internally to connect hard drives. Either that, or NVMe/PCIe to connect faster SSDs. There is no such thing as a TB drive.
Dude, you are missing the whole point again. Internally, the Mac Pro 2013 and the iMac Pro do not use SATA to connect to internal drives. The Mac Pro used their own PCIe standard before NVMe became the standard. The iMac Pro uses NVMe. At no point are these Macs limited to SATA at 6 Gbps internally. You do understand this right? Externally they use TB. They don’t use eSATA as an external connector for all the reasons above. You do understand the difference between internal and external right?
Nobody ever talked about sharing a single SATA cable for more than one drive except you. I wouldn't even know how to do that.
Nobody but you. When I’m talking about TB as an external connector and you champion SATA, what the hell are you talking about?
Is it obviously even slower if you connect to a gigabit Ethernet NAS. By the way, the Mac Pro doesn't have 10 Gbps Ethernet. The average NAS is gigabit at best.
I said previously that the main advantage of a NAS isn’t speed over TB or eSATA. I said specifically the term “network” was the main advantage. Availability, reliability, redundancy, backup strategy?
Your understanding is terrible. I never said the opposite.
And yet you keep championing SATA over TB.
That's why it would be a much better idea to use a real desktop instead of these toys. A real professional video editing machine have multiple drive bays.
Bahahaha. “Toys” that have Xeon processors, ECC RAM, PCIe SSDs (starting in 2013 no less), Pro video cards, TB? By the way, you later admit to not having any experience in professional video editing, but you’re absolutely sure what professional video editors use. Here’s a clue: the current trend is that video editors don’t have multiple drive bays. Why? Because as you accumulate more files, it is difficult to expand your desktop to have enough drives. If your NAS becomes full you can add more drives if there is space or add another NAS. Unless you started out with a desktop that had 4 or more drive bays, enough drive connectors, etc., this is why pros don’t use a multi-bay desktop anymore.
They are not highly specialized. Especially not the cheap ones.
Oh really? So what do they use for hardware and software then? Let me guess for hardware: just standard ATX x86 MBs running standard Windows? Oh wait they use specialized boards and specialized OS. I guess the term “specialized” applies.
They are running some sort of embedded Linux or BSD.
Wait didn’t you just admit the term “specialized” applies then?
You can use FreeNAS to make your own NAS. They just use a cheaper CPU, no GPU, no audio or other useless peripherals, and less RAM than a regular desktop. So yeah, they are cheap desktop computers, dumbed down.
So the term “specialized” doesn’t apply? Also if you have a desktop with no GPU, no audio, no peripherals, etc, how is it a “desktop”? You could call it an appliance maybe. In this case also a “server”. Please brush up on your IT.
The good ones might have a good hardware RAID controller but that's pretty much it.
Again not “specialized” according to you.
Then don't call it a NAS. Call it a network file server.
Please read the wiki on what is and is not a NAS as you just contradicted yourself by installing FreeNAS to make a NAS.
Again, the reason for not running the web server on your desktop is availability. And i
First, you can't do RAID on a single SATA cable since you need at least 2 drives, which will use at least 2 SATA cables, duh. So how exactly are you supposed to be limited by the 6 Gbps of SATA when using more than one drive?
Dude you are the one advocating using SATA instead of TB, not me. Your math is terrible. Once again, a single SATA III cable has a max of 6Gpbs. A single TB2 cable can handle 20Gbps or 3.5 x SATA. To use multiple drives in a RAID you have to have the space which neither the Mac Pro 2013 nor iMac Pro had for 2 disks much less 3 or more.
Then you can do RAID just as well within a desktop as within a NAS (which is nothing more than a dedicated networked computer with drive bays running a dumbed down operating system). So NAS is no more redundant.
Dude you seriously need to brush up on your IT. A NAS isn’t a just a desktop that shares its drive. These are highly specialized and optimized machines with hardware and software for this purpose. While you can convert a desktop to be a NAS, you shouldn’t be using it simultaneously as as desktop. This is as idiotic as using your desktop as the company’s web server at the same time while editing video..
Finally a desktop CPU is so fast, especially compared to a NAS CPU, that gigabit network transfers won't affect it that much (say, 10% of one core).
Do you work in professional video editing because the more you post, the less likely it seems as you speak in absolute generalities? Using your desktop as a single point of failure isn’t done by professionals for a multitude of reasons. If you tried to tell these pros that they should just use someone’s desktop, they’d laugh at you.
Also we have gotten far away from original point: why would you advocate for slower storage in machines that didn’t have the space for multiple drives? Why are you arguing to single point of failure?
But that's not why I replied to your first post. I could have changed the title from there.
But you didn't. So let me see if I understand you: You changed the subject without mentioning you were changing the subject even though the OP and I were talking specifically about the Mac Pro.
I was talking about the form factor. You don't need an all-in-one to get 4 TB connectors. Also you wouldn't need any TB connectors to begin with if you had room for internal storage.
Whether we were talking about the Mac Pro 2013 or the iMac Pro, there was no internal room for additional SATA drives. Again, the workload of professional video editor is that they do not store all of their files locally. They store them on a separate drive for redundancy. Like a TB drive. Like a NAS. They copy files to their local system to do work then transferred finished work back to the
The math is simple. The TB bridge can't make the drive go faster. It can only make it slower. It's an additional middle man, which hopefully delivers close to 100% of the speed.
That was never the point. The max of SATA 6Gbps is 6Gbps. That's it. You can't get faster than that using TB; however, the bottleneck still is the SATA connector not the TB connector.
It doesn't increase the drive speed. Bandwidth isn't shared between multiple SATA ports in a desktop computer either. You could be doing RAID within your desktop computer instead. Using either SATA or PCIe/NVMe.
I suggest you brush up on your RAID levels. This is very simple. If you use any form of RAID 0, you can have 2 drives at 6Gbps pushing data through a 20Gbps TB connector. If you use a single SATA connector, your bottleneck still is the 6Gbps connector. It doesn't matter how you've set up your RAID if you have a single SATA connector.
You can share your local drive on the network and get the same effect.
Only if you suppose you are doing no work at the time that would be hindered by people transferring GB sized files from your computer. Also your computer houses multiple RAID drives for redundancy? Well if has to be at least 4 disks for RAID 10, 3 disks for RAID 5, etc.
The main advantage of a NAS over this solution is to offer continued availability even when you are rebooting your computer.
Dude, I suggest you brush up on IT infrastructure. One advantage of NAS is high availability. There is also reliability and redundancy. Multiple people can copy files all at the same time. Loss of a drive does not mean loss of all data.
The disadvantage is cost, and performance (for the local user at least, remote users get similar performance of course).
Argh. The whole point of a NAS is that your machine is not hammered when people are transferring large files from the server. The whole point is that there isn't a single drive failure that will destroy your work. The point is that backup strategy is much easier with a NAS.
Frankly why are you arguing against a NAS and for single point of failure?
If you are maxing out a iMac Pro at $16K, I doubt you'd be spending it on playing video games. Sadly this is really the only Apple that professional video editors or animators can use right now.
By the way. we are not talking about the Mac Pro.
Yes we are. The OP said: "SATA is a good sign for the next mac pro." It is the literal title of this entire thread.
The iMac is definitely not a professional video editing machine, with no room for multiple drives, and a form factor which offer no advantage to begin with.
The specs on the iMac Pro. Besides the 5K display and 4 TB connectors, there's no advantage?
Again, you understand there is no such thing as a TB drive, right? There are SATA and NVMe/PCIe drives, connected to a TB bridge. The TB bridge can only make the drive go slower. It can't make it go any faster. Therefore you are always better with internally connected drives, saving a lot of money compared to that ugly TB enclosure.
You do understand that at 2 X 20Gbps, a TB2 bridge isn't a bottle neck to SATA drive which maxes out at 6Gbps right? So when you say the TB2 bridge makes it go slower, I have to wonder about your math. Many of the TB2 enclosures support multiple drive RAID which can increase speed.
I'd prefer a drive maxing the SATA cable over a 10 gigabit Ethernet NAS. I believe it is faster for most use cases (especially latency), despite the fact that the theoretical bandwidth of Ethernet is a little faster.
Do you and all of your multiple video editors share the same SATA cable? The primary use case of a NAS isn't speed. The term "Network Attached Storage" lays out the primary use case which the term "network" describes. The primary use case is that multiple users can access the same drives. Also for those that set up a NAS, they also tend to set up a backup strategy which is far easier to back up the NAS than to make sure every one used the SATA cable to copy to a lone SATA drive that isn't backed up.