POST A COMMENT

16 Comments

Back to Article

  • coburn_c - Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - link

    650 dollars for a metal box and a power supply? Yuck. Why are these external drive bays so incredibly overpriced? Reply
  • jeffkibuule - Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - link

    Someone has to pay for that Thundebolt controller R&D. Reply
  • Gigaplex - Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - link

    Because nobody has "won" the race to the bottom in this particular market yet. Reply
  • Zinc64 - Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - link

    Poignant..? Reply
  • boozed - Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - link

    Now that's a use of poignant I never expected to see Reply
  • vdidenko - Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - link

    Still wondering, why no one yet made a cheaper SSD in a 3'5" form-factor with internal resilience. I understand it will need a protocol extension, which can be handled as proprietary encryption commands progressed. Reply
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, August 07, 2014 - link

    You can't make an SSD any cheaper by going to 3.5" (but this obviously gives you more space for internal resilience). I guess the point why noone is doing this is that you already have hardware and software RAIDs, which can take care of this. Feeding this with regular single drives keeps the supply chain simpler and thus more efficient. Reply
  • vnangia - Wednesday, August 06, 2014 - link

    Uh what "poignant" ?

    Ian, that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
    Reply
  • usernametaken76 - Thursday, August 07, 2014 - link

    It's an appropriate use, "poignant", as in "I deeply regret having bought a Thunderbolt-enabled computer, but having done so, I may as well shove some storage in there." Reply
  • wintermute000 - Thursday, August 07, 2014 - link

    why is this the same price as a full blown 'real' synology/qnap 4 bay? Reply
  • Bob Todd - Thursday, August 07, 2014 - link

    I think the aim is to fill the small niche for people who need uber fast DAS storage but don't have a desktop chassis to stuff the drives in (which would obviously be cheaper). Like someone who wanted to do HD video work on a Macbook Pro. Reply
  • nevertell - Thursday, August 07, 2014 - link

    Or an iMac. Or a Mac Pro. Reply
  • milleron - Thursday, August 07, 2014 - link

    I notice that their prices WITH drives are both for FOUR drives. If RAID is achieved via an industry-standard RAID controller, is there any reason to believe that one couldn't set up a 3-disk RAID 5 with this device? Reply
  • wicktron - Thursday, August 07, 2014 - link

    You can buy the enclosure by itself and fill it up with whatever drives you prefer. I have a few FCPX editors with a 4-drive SSD (4x 512GB Crucial MX100) RAID-0 on these things and it's really fast. Reply
  • vdidenko - Saturday, August 09, 2014 - link

    Sorry I was not clear enough.

    There are more and less expensive existing SSD media used among other things in 2.5" drives. What I meant is use that cheaper media to populate 3.5" shell. I think it will make a good near-line store for NASes, for photos and whatnot. May report errors through existing SMART. Will simplify product catalogs and IT inventory by having less of storage form-factor diversity. I have seen storage shelves populated with 2.5" SSDs in 3.5" adapters - lots of waste.

    And although I did not think about it from the angle you brought up, I still think there may be some (albeit small) savings in a bigger capacity shell's management.
    Reply
  • mikbe - Tuesday, August 12, 2014 - link

    Thunderbolt prices are, ironically, keeping thunderbolt prices high and will eventually end in the sidelining of it as a viable technology:

    The price is too high so no one buys them. Because of the low demand, but high license and hardware costs, the prices have to be high.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now