On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:35 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> I'm not talking about big companies. I'm not talking about hundreds of > terabytes. You are basically proposing a SAN for a single photographer or a > single video workstation. And you're right, they would need a SAN on Mac OS > because Mac OS lacks good storage management that exists for FREE to any Tom, > Dick and Harry who downloads most any linux distribution because lvm is used > by default in most of them. But Apple doesn't have that functionality. But instead of going with a SAN, because this is complicated and expensive for a single photographer or videographer to accept, they most often will go with a cobbled together series of disks and arrays without any organization, with troublesome migration to new or larger disks, with a semi-fragile file system directly connected to the workstation. And it gets them into trouble - routinely. The most basic source of confusion is what drive their stuff is on. It's messy because Apple isn't just dropping enterprise. The distractions are adversely affecting professionals and prosumers. They're kinda ignoring their basic infrastructure, and have been, for marginal other improvements. Chris _______________________________________________ MacOSX-admin mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin
