Comments on: Snow Leopard Is Stingy With The Storage Love http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/06/09/snow-leopard-storage/ Understanding the accumulation of data Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:58:00 -0500 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: sfoskett http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/06/09/snow-leopard-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-13993 sfoskett Wed, 10 Jun 2009 06:35:57 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=2001#comment-13993 Indeed, iSCSI is becoming more important by the day. We know Apple had a working software initiator in Leopard betas a few years back. I wish they would just put some development effort into finalizing that! Indeed, iSCSI is becoming more important by the day. We know Apple had a working software initiator in Leopard betas a few years back. I wish they would just put some development effort into finalizing that!

]]> By: hmurchison http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/06/09/snow-leopard-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-13992 hmurchison Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:03:56 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=2001#comment-13992 I have no idea why Apple is so anti iSCSI. I can see ZFS being pulled because of the NetApp lawsuite and Oracle purchase but iSCSI support can be found in fairly low end QNAP NAS. I have no idea why Apple is so anti iSCSI. I can see ZFS being pulled because of the NetApp lawsuite and Oracle purchase but iSCSI support can be found in fairly low end QNAP NAS.

]]> By: sfoskett http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/06/09/snow-leopard-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-13350 sfoskett Wed, 10 Jun 2009 02:35:57 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=2001#comment-13350 Indeed, iSCSI is becoming more important by the day. We know Apple had a working software initiator in Leopard betas a few years back. I wish they would just put some development effort into finalizing that! Indeed, iSCSI is becoming more important by the day. We know Apple had a working software initiator in Leopard betas a few years back. I wish they would just put some development effort into finalizing that!

]]> By: hmurchison http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/06/09/snow-leopard-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-13349 hmurchison Wed, 10 Jun 2009 01:03:56 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=2001#comment-13349 I have no idea why Apple is so anti iSCSI. I can see ZFS being pulled because of the NetApp lawsuite and Oracle purchase but iSCSI support can be found in fairly low end QNAP NAS. I have no idea why Apple is so anti iSCSI. I can see ZFS being pulled because of the NetApp lawsuite and Oracle purchase but iSCSI support can be found in fairly low end QNAP NAS.

]]> By: S Waterhouse http://blog.fosketts.net/2009/06/09/snow-leopard-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-13348 S Waterhouse Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:15:33 +0000 http://blog.fosketts.net/?p=2001#comment-13348 I wonder if Oracle's acquisition of Sun might be responsible for the death of ZFS integration? Perhaps Apple doesn't want to "own" this is Oracle decides to no longer offer a Open Source/GPL license? I know they can't take it back, but nothing says they have to support it/enhance it in the future either, not as an open source project anyways. Or maybe the litigation with NetApp scared them off? <br><br>Personally I wish that they would do the last 10% of the work to make Disk Manager really great. Offer different RAID types. Automate event notification. Ditto the 10% comment for Time Machine, while we are at it... I wonder if Oracle's acquisition of Sun might be responsible for the death of ZFS integration? Perhaps Apple doesn't want to “own” this is Oracle decides to no longer offer a Open Source/GPL license? I know they can't take it back, but nothing says they have to support it/enhance it in the future either, not as an open source project anyways. Or maybe the litigation with NetApp scared them off?

Personally I wish that they would do the last 10% of the work to make Disk Manager really great. Offer different RAID types. Automate event notification. Ditto the 10% comment for Time Machine, while we are at it…

]]>