3 ms·

Barbarians at the gate, Google and Amazon slurp it all up eventually. How's those big ones feel inside your budget, Apple.

• bushbaba 5y ago
  Flip side. You have no idea if google is actually making a profit on this workload. It might literally be cheaper for apple to use GCP for storage here than doing it themselves.
  • suifbwish 5y ago
    Either A) it’s cheaper economically or B) apple makes enough on its products where the loss is negligible compared to the work and complexity involved.
  • daseiner1 5y ago
    both are likely true
• KaiserPro 5y ago
  Managing 8 exabytes reliably is a massive pain in the arse. with no redundancy, and nothing but hardrives, 8 exabytes burns around a megawatt. Its a million drives. given the failure rate that I had when I was looking after 5 pb,(about 8k hdds) you'd be looking at at least 100-400 failed drives a week But how do you detect that, how do you schedule replacements? whats your hamming factor for redundancy, how do you optimise your storage? for speed, power, geospatial, or redundancy? what about capacity management, the lead time on growth would be large. I was a sys admin for a large VFX place, so did a lot of storage admin, but unless it was a core business function, I'd buy over build that shit, for that scale.