On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Bob Friesenhahn
<bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, David Magda wrote:
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2009-October/033125.html
>> Perhaps Apple can come to an agreement with Oracle when they couldn't with
>> Sun.
> This seems very unlikely since the future needs of Apple show little
> requirement for zfs.  Apple only offers one computer model which provides
> ECC and a disk drive configuration which is marginally useful for zfs.  This
> computer model has a very limited user-base which is primarily people in the
> video and desktop imaging/publishing world. Apple already exited the server
> market, for which they only ever offered single limited-use model (Xserve).

As an FS for their TimeMachine NAS boxes (Time Capsule, I think),
though, ZFS would be a good fit.  Similar to how the Time Slider works
in Sun/Oracle's version of Nautilus/GNOME2.  Especially if they expand
the boxes to use 4 drives (2x mirror), and had the pool

As a desktop/laptop FS, though, ZFS (in its current incarnation) is
overkill and unwieldy.  Especially since most of these machines only
have room for a single HD.

> There would likely be a market if someone was to sell pre-packaged zfs for
> Apple OS-X at a much higher price than the operating system itself.
> Bob
> --
> Bob Friesenhahn
> bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
> GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Freddie Cash
zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to