How To

How to travel with the Drobo

You might think this is a banal topic, but I don’t. I’ve had to take three of my Drobos with me on a recent overseas trip, and I had to make some clear decisions about how I was going to transport each of them.

The first thing I wondered about is whether there’s a carrying case or bag for the Drobo. I’ll talk about this first, then I’ll give you some practical travel advice.

Right, the carrying case — there isn’t any. There’s a grainy pic on TwitPic of some sort of a large plastic case with foam where you could place the Drobo and its hard drives, but that’s too big to take with you most places, particularly when you have lots of other luggage. It won’t work. We need something slim, something that fits right around the Drobo’s rectangular shape, has handles, sort of like a bowling bag, and yet is well-padded to protect the Drobo. Alas, there isn’t any such thing…

Let me show you a potential design that could work. It’s not something I invented — it’s my travel toiletry bag. Notice its handle is on the front, but I think there ought to be two handles at the top, one on each side, since the Drobo can be fairly heavy with the hard drives inside. The zipper ought to be down the middle of the case, at the top, and the bag ought to have two compartments on each side, or one below, where you can stick the power brick and the USB and Firewire cables.

Potential design for a Drobo carrying case

If Data Robotics or some other company made this sort of a carrying case, we would simply take the Drobo, with its hard drives inside, put it in the bag, and stick the bag in our carry-on luggage. I wouldn’t trust airport personnel enough to check the bag containing the Drobo. Given the way they throw baggage around like it’s bales of hay, they’d likely damage the Drobo and our data.

Now let’s get back to reality. There isn’t any carrying case yet. What do we do? What did I do? I was able to send two of my Drobos separately, by ship, and I placed them in their original boxes, which I packed into larger cardboard boxes with other items. They arrived safely, thank goodness. I love those Drobo boxes, they hold up so well! I kept all of them and used them often for storage or transport.

Original Drobo box

As for my third Drobo, the Firewire Drobo, my current primary storage unit, that had to come with me on the plane. I kept the hard drives inside it, packed it in woolen sweaters and other soft clothes, and put it in one of the carry-on bags. Yes, in case you’re wondering, I had to pull it out of the bag for airport security and show it to them. They kept wondering what it was and what it does, and couldn’t believe it was basically an external hard drive. Expect the same treatment from them, at least until they see more Drobos. As for the Drobo’s original box, I didn’t want to lose that, so I flattened it and placed it in one of the checked pieces of luggage along with the foam holders and the box that contains the wires, power brick and software CD. I’m glad to tell you that it arrived safely with me, and it’s connected to my MacBook Pro as I write this.

One last bit of advice. If you travel by car, and there isn’t yet any Drobo carrying case/bag, make room in your trunk for the Drobo’s original box. Pack it inside, and you’ll know that short of an accident, your Drobo will be well protected.

Standard
Reviews

Hardware review: Second-Generation Drobo

Updated 1/14/19: I have revised my opinion of Drobo devices. After experiencing multiple, serious data loss events on multiple Drobo models, even recent ones, I no longer consider them safe for my data.

Updated 11/23/09: The new Drobo S is now available. It has five drive slots, single or dual-drive redundancy, and triple interfaces (eSATA, FW800 and USB 2.0).

My review of the new Firewire Drobo is somewhat overdue, but I wanted to spend a few good months with it before I wrote it. I have now spent that time, and am happy to say this new Drobo can be an avid computer user’s single storage device. Whatever reservations I had about the first-generation Drobo were eliminated by this new version, and I can now wholeheartedly recommend it to anyone who needs to store a large amount of data and safeguard against a hard drive failure.

Background

You may or may not know that I also reviewed the original Drobo. I published that review in December of 2007, after spending about a month with a USB Drobo, and updated it frequently since then, outlining the various good or bad points I found during my heavy-duty use of the device. Since that time, I became the owner of four Drobos (three USB Drobos and one Firewire Drobo) and found a couple of firmware bugs — I’m not claiming to be the first one to have found them, just saying I also found them — which were later addressed by firmware upgrades. The bugs were an overestimation of used space, and a significant drop in transfer speeds after the Drobo’s used space reached 80% or greater of the total available space. I had a number of different issues with my Drobos, all of which were detailed in my original review, and are now resolved.

I also wrote about the Drobo from the perspective of product design for the consumer and corporate markets. Tom Loverro, one of the execs from Data Robotics, responded at length to my article with some very interesting insights about the inception and introduction of the product to those markets.

What’s new

What is it that differentiates the new Firewire Drobo from its predecessor? I’ll summarize it:

  • Faster read/write performance thanks to an upgraded core processor and faster transfer method (Firewire vs. USB); slower read/write performance was a big point of contention with the first-generation Drobo
  • Two Firewire 800 connectors in addition to the USB 2.0 connector, so you can daisy-chain other Firewire devices to the Drobo
  • Different design for the cooling grille and a bigger cooling fan (the fan, without the cooling grille, was a silent upgrade that was also applied to some late builds of the first-generation Drobo)

Comparison of the backs of Drobo USB and Drobo Firewire

Faster read/write performance

The official specs from Data Robotics quote the transfer speeds as follows:

  • FireWire 800: Up to 52MB/s reads and 34MB/s writes
  • USB 2.0: Up to 30MB/s reads and 24MB/s writes

I can vouch for the faster read/write performance myself. As a matter of fact, I can safely say that the performance approaches that of my WD My Book Studio Edition II, which is also a Firewire 800 device, that I have used in both RAID 0 and RAID 1 configurations. In layman’s terms, I can copy about 800 MB – 1 GB per minute to my Drobo, while I can copy about 1 GB – 1.2 GB per minute to my WD My Book Studio Edition II drive in RAID 1 config. These are large files I’m copying, ranging in size from 1-4 GB.

If we do some quick math with the official figures, we can see that you could get up 2040 MB or about 2 GB per minute written to the Drobo over a Firewire 800 connection per the specs. In my real world experience, I was able to get about half that, as you can see above. I don’t think that’s a bad thing. Again, you have to compare the Drobo with another Firewire 800 device, and I did. If I can get about the same performance from my Drobo, which has to write the data across four drives, as I can get from my WD Studio Edition II, which only has two drives to worry about, then I’m pretty happy.

Two Firewire 800 connectors and different cooling grille

Have a look at this photo to get a better look at the different back design for the new Drobo. You can see the two Firewire 800 connectors, the USB 2.0 and DC connectors and the different grille design below.

Miscellaneous notes

In the other-things-that-are-different department, I noticed that Drobo now allows people to format its volumes in the EXT3 file system (Linux), in addition to NTFS, FAT32 and HFS+, although they do say that Linux support is in beta on their website. It has nothing to do with the new Drobo 2.0 hardware, as this involved a firmware upgrade and a Drobo Dashboard upgrade, not a parts upgrade, but it’s a pretty cool move on Data Robotics’ part.

Another thing that looks a bit different is the power supply. The original one was a simple plastic brick, but the new one has a line motif going across it, parallel to its long axis. This newer power supply was also shipped with some of the late builds of the previous-generation USB Drobo.

New Drobo power supply brick

If you look at one of the photos I posted above, the one of the new Drobo’s back, you’ll see a Reset slot. Can you see it, to the left of the FW800 connectors? It was present on the back of the original USB Drobo as well, to the left of its main (and only) USB connector. Sure enough, there’s even a tech note about it, which explains how to wipe the Drobo clean. This means it’s a dangerous little slot, so don’t use it unless you really mean it.

I never got around to posting the Drobo’s dimensions in my original review, so here they are. They haven’t changed with the new Drobo. I like the form factor, I hope it keeps staying the same. In all likelihood, it will stay the same for this four-drive version of the Drobo. I know, thanks to a product survey sent out to selected Drobo customers, that Data Robotics is thinking about or working on an 8-drive and possibly a 16-drive version of the Drobo, one of which (or both) is rack-mountable. Those should be some very interesting products for the enterprise or for those with larger storage needs than what the four-drive Drobo can provide. I understand that Data Robotics is also working on the capability to safeguard against two drive failures in those larger Drobo models, which should be a very cool feature indeed.

In terms of storage flexibility and the safety of one’s data, I believe the Drobo is unmatched. There is no other product like it on the market. The only thing that’s holding it back at the moment, storage-wise, is the capability of the hard drives themselves. Only recently have the problems present in the 1.5TB drives from Seagate been worked out, and only in recent weeks have I seen 1.5TB and 2TB drives from other manufacturers like Samsung and WD. This means, according to the Drobolator, that you can get up to 5.5TB of disk space on a single Drobo unit, which is pretty amazing, but still far from the 16TB limit. I think 16TB is a lot of space to get from a single device, and it should suffice for the needs of most people for the next few years.

Drobo with four 2TB drives

Cheers to the new and improved Firewire Drobo!

The Drobo is available for purchase from Amazon or B&H Photo.

Images used courtesy of Data Robotics.

Standard
Thoughts

Is it easier to design for the enterprise or for the consumer?

I was thinking about the difference between hardware and software products designed for the consumer and those designed for the enterprise. In particular, I thought about how vocal consumers can be nowadays vs. companies, and how that affects the process of making and selling products to them vs. the business market. I think it makes it more difficult.

You’d have to be braver, as a company, to put your product out there for the consumers in this day and age when anyone can chime in and voice their opinion on the Internet — even when they’re not well-informed, or worse, they intend to do harm to your brand, for whatever reason. Whatever the pitfalls of this brave new age of feedback, it is a good thing, as you’ll see by the end of this article.

On top of that, consumer needs are a lot more varied than business needs. It’s notoriously hard to figure out what people want. Let me ask you something: when was the last time you spent your own time filling out an online survey? If you’re like me, that’d be years ago. How about filling out a survey at work, on the company’s time, because you got an invitation from one of the vendors? I bet that happens quite often. So you see, businesses making stuff for the enterprise have a much easier time figuring out what customers want, while those making stuff for the consumers are stuck paying people to take surveys and doing focus groups and who knows what else in order to get an idea of what they want.

Individual taste is also something that enters into the equation. Individuals will have different tastes, and while your product may appeal to someone, it might appear downright ugly to the next person. Generally speaking, taste and design have little do with enterprise products, which are utilitarian and function-oriented. They are meant to perform certain duties, and as such, not much thought is given to how they look.

How about the difference in ease of use between enterprise products and consumer products? I don’t think I can think of a single instance when an enterprise product was easier to use than a consumer product. Not one. Sure, they perform more complicated tasks, but still, little thought (if at all) is given to making the user interface easier or more intuitive. Mostly, enterprise products are difficult to use, difficult to navigate (if they’re software), difficult to learn, and overall, frustrating. You simply can’t get away with that when you make stuff for consumers, because no one will buy your products. They’ll laugh you right out of the marketplace.

Finally, how about price? Isn’t it true that enterprise products are insanely expensive when compared to consumer products? And yet, the rationale for that huge price difference is always hard for me to find. Every time I ask why they’re more expensive, the answer I get is because they’re enterprise products. That’s never been a good enough explanation for me. Sure, the market for enterprise products is smaller, and you have to price them higher in order to sustain your business — the economy of scale just isn’t there to make up for a lower price. Plus, the stuff you make for the enterprise has to perform more complicated tasks and be more reliable under heavy levels of use. But I’ve always believed that enterprise products were overpriced simply because they’re marketed for the enterprise and for little else — and I haven’t yet been offered any conclusive proof to the contrary.

A few examples came to my mind as I thought about all this. Let’s call them mini case studies. I want to look at each one in particular. First, we have two consumer products, the Drobo and the WD My Book Pro Edition II:

Drobo

The folks at Data Robotics had a tall order on their hands. They wanted to come up with a consumer-oriented product that would give people the benefits of RAID, the ability to increase storage space on the fly, the flexibility of using drives of any size, and a dead-simple way to replace hard drives. Did they succeed? Yes, I think so. On top of delivering on all of those functional criteria, they managed to design a beautiful enclosure, too.

Were the odds stacked against them? I think they were, and while people are enthralled with the product once they begin to use it, there are a lot of questions they need to answer for themselves before and after the purchase. One of them is the file system, called BeyondRAID. Is it compatible with other file systems? Can you get the data off the drives without a Drobo? Another issue is the price. People find the entry price expensive, and they’re quite vocal about that, wherever you look. (For a representative sample of what people think, just look at the comments section of my Drobo review — the 110 comments posted there should give you a pretty good idea.)

Besides all of this, the Drobo is a new product, literally. There is nothing quite like it on the market. Sure, it works in comparable ways to other external storage products out there, but still, the inner workings are new, and the way in which data is stored is new. That means resistance, automatically. When you go against the grain, you get friction. It’s the way things work. So that’s why I say creating the Drobo, marketing it, and actually selling it and getting people to use it properly was a tall order.

Data Robotics had to work extra hard at this. And it was crucial that they provide good product support, or they would have failed. When I say they provide good support, I mean it. You might say I’ve been a frequent user of their support plan — and the Drobo folks might say they could have done with a little less complaining from me.

If you should read through my Drobo review, you will see what problems I had. My situation was a bit different than most. I have three Drobos, two with me in the DC area, and one with my parents in FL. I got a chance to see how the Drobo would work through the changing seasons of a temperate climate in the DC area, on a PC and on a Mac, and also how it would work in a pure Mac environment, in the sub-tropical climate of South Florida.

Now my primary Drobo is a new, second generation, Firewire unit, which I’ve been using happily for the past couple of months. But over the past year since I bought the Drobos, I had noise issues and various other bugs that surfaced through my intense use of the other units, and I went through a few unit exchanges and many email conversations with the folks at Data Robotics. I can say, without a doubt, that they’ve been responsive, courteous, helpful, and even went out of their way to help me sort through the issues and replace units that I didn’t think functioned correctly.

What was their motivation? Perhaps they’re just good people. That’s quite possible. But that’s not what this article is about, is it? It’s about the difference between making consumer and enterprise products. So I think in the end it boils down to needing to work extra hard as a company, because they’re not only making a product for the consumer, but they’re making a new product and they need to carve out a slice of the storage market. Sure, they’ve got good name recognition now, but they’ve had to work extra hard at it, and I think that played greatly into the level of customer support they provided. For me, it’ll be interesting to see how their customer support evolves over time, as they become a more established company.

Western Digital My Book Pro Edition II

This external storage device was an example of how not to design for the consumer market. The drive was meant for the Mac user, although it could be used just fine on PCs. It was a triple interface (USB2.0, FW400 and FW800) device, but it only worked on USB or FW400, depending on who you talked to. It also overheated frequently, and it sometimes crashed the computers to which it was tethered. As if that stuff wasn’t bad enough, some people experienced data loss, or the inability to get at their data because the drive would either crash their systems or it wouldn’t stay on long enough for people to copy their data off it. For a good summary, see the Wikipedia entry for the WD My Book drives, or have a look at my two articles about the drive, one of them the original review, and the other detailing the problems I’d had with it. (I’m one of the cited references on Wikipedia.)

WD Support were responsive, but, at the first lines of phone support, also clueless. The were willing to help, but all they could was to keep sending me refurbished replacement units, each one in worse cosmetic shape than the other, and all exhibiting the same issues. The problems unfortunately ran deeper than a replacement with this line of drives, and WD never really came clean and confessed, which would have helped their image quite a bit. Instead, they were content to sweep the complaints under the proverbial rug and hope they would somehow go away. That didn’t happen. People were getting even more vocal, and there was quite a bit of talk about a class action lawsuit at one time.

I think the problems with the My Book Pro line were hardware-deep. I know WD tried to fix them via firmware upgrades, but they were only partially successful. While the enclosure design was nice, it didn’t lead to easy cooling of the drives, and they overheated. The circuit board was also not successful, and the USB and FW connections tended not to work properly. The on-board thermometer likely didn’t measure temperature correctly, and shut off the units prematurely because it thought they were overheating. It also caused the fan to run into overdrive, which made an awful racket.

Thankfully, a few people among the WDC executives saw the greater picture and stepped in to help in individual cases. I was one of those lucky cases. I got another replacement unit, this time a My Book Studio Edition II drive, which has worked wonderfully for me since day one. Stepping back from my case, I believe that if Western Digital hadn’t mended its image with the My Book Studio Edition, things could have gone badly for them. Just look at the comments left on my two articles (23 on the review and 104 on the one detailing the problems), and you’ll see that people were getting progressively angrier with the company.

I think the problem with the My Book Pro line of drives is that it was put out by a large company. WD just doesn’t look at the market the same way as Data Robotics does. First, they’re one of the big players in the storage market. They not only make enclosures, but they make the hard drives that go in them as well. That’s actually the biggest chunk of their business. When they launched the Pro line, it was just another model line in their large product lineup. Did they do proper product testing and QA? The tally of the real-world results comes in at a resounding no. Did they listen to the customers as the first problem reports came in? No. Did they address customer issues appropriately? No. I bet there still are plenty of My Book Pro users out there who can’t use their drives properly, if at all. I think things went differently in my case because I was vocal about it. My article gained traction and as it started to come up on the first page of Google search results (it was up among the first results for a while), and it posed a real threat to the company’s public image, which they needed to address.

As a side note, I’m glad they chose to address my case correctly. They were polite and helpful in their interactions with me, and while I had to wait a long time to get the final replacement, I didn’t get bullied in the meantime. That was nice.

To get back to the root of the problem, WD just didn’t look at things properly. They put out a faulty product because they thought they could afford to do so (they probably didn’t think that as they were making it, but when a product is one of many, that’s the unspoken thought). They had a dismissive attitude toward the consumers because they were big and thought they could ignore them, and in the end, it cost them.

Now let’s have a look at two enterprise-level products and see how the rules change in this market. I’ll be talking about a DNF SAN and VMware. First though, I want to look at customer feedback in the enterprise arena.

How feedback works (or doesn’t) in the enterprise market

What you’ll find here is the customers (the companies, rather) will tend to be much quieter than consumers when things don’t work as expected. This happens for multiple reasons.

For one thing, companies as a whole don’t have an outlet where they can complain about things like this. The larger the company, the tighter the rein on public relations, as they call it. You won’t find employees going on the company blog and writing about their bad experience with a product. It just won’t happen, because at traditional companies, every post tends to get vetted by multiple pairs of eyes, each concerned with legal and marketing and general image issues.

If the employees won’t do it, the company executives won’t do it, unless it’s off the record, among themselves, at certain gatherings. It won’t be in the public arena, unless a particular products stinks very badly and the company needs to blame it in order to account for poor results during a quarter or year, etc.

You also have resistance from within to let others know that a product is a real stinker. After all, when you’ve just spent a few tens of thousands or more on some fancy piece of hardware that’s supposed to solve your problems, and you find out it stinks, you can’t very well go to the executives and tell them you need to spend another five or six figures on another piece of hardware, because they’ll think you’re incompetent and you didn’t do your homework before recommending the purchase.

Another reason is that you don’t want to spoil a partnership. If your biz dev guys have just worked for months to get a partnership started and the company has put out marketing materials advertising said partnership, and there is promise of work in the future involving said partnership, you can bet your bottom dollar your company’s not going to go public with allegations that a certain product made by their gold/platinum/diamond partner stinks. And if you raise too much of a stink, internally, about said product, you’ll be told you’re not a team player, and you can’t be trusted to work with the valued company partners. What’s more, if the tone of your emails toward said partner gets angry, you may even be counseled.

There’s another ingredient to throw in this mess: the fact that most (if not all) support forums for enterprise products are behind login screens. Even if you should log on as an enterprise customer and voice your complaints on the company forums, those complaints will not show up on search engines, and other potential customers won’t be able to see that you’re having problems with the product until they, too, spend ridiculous amounts of money for the right to use said product and log onto the product forums, after which they find out they should have stayed away from it.

What you’ve essentially got is a muzzle on the customers in the enterprise market, for the reasons stated above. Is it any wonder then, that the companies making such products have very little incentive to be responsible, and to make good products? They can afford to charge ridiculous amounts of money for buggysoftware, ugly hardware, and despicable user interfaces, because the enterprise customers will pay for them and like it, or else.

Now, I’m not saying this is what happens most of the time, but let’s face it, when you’ve got a muzzle on your customers’ real-world experiences with your products, there’s little to keep you from going in the wrong direction and staying that way.

DNF Storage SAN

At one of the companies where I worked, we used to call it the “Does Not Function” SAN, which was a (sadly) true play on the acronym for its maker (Dynamic Network Factory). This SAN was purchased for the sole purpose of working with a VMware server cluster to act as storage for the company’s virtual servers. It never worked correctly. It was supposed to connect through iSCSI to the servers that controlled the cluster, and the iSCSI kept failing, time after time after time. Sometimes the RAID would fail, too. Throughput could never be maintained, the virtual machines sometimes didn’t want to boot up or took forever to do so, writing to the disks and reading from them was horribly slow, etc.

When the company called DNF, they got some support, but mostly, they were told the issue was with VMware. When they called VMware, they were told the the DNF SAN was no longer approved to use with VMware’s enterprise solutions, although it had been on the list to begin with, and that’s why it had been purchased.

Bottom line is the company got stuck with this thing which didn’t do its job and cost a pretty penny to boot. The staff bandaged it together and kept it going somehow, with frequent outages, until money could be gotten together so they could buy some SAN devices from EMC (VMware’s parent company). Those were on the aproved list of SANs to use with VMWare — funny how that works, isn’t it?

But wait, the fun doesn’t end here. Once the virtual servers were transitioned over to the new EMC SANs, the company wanted to repurpose the DNF SAN and use it as storage for various backups from their other servers — basically, use it as a network hard drive. It failed miserably at that task as well. First, one or more of the hard drives went, corrupting the RAID array. That meant starting from scratch. Once the setup was completed and another server stood up, people started copying data to it, and it got corrupted again. This time, it went down and stayed down for good.

At that point, after 2 years of struggling with this thing, and the support contract expired (not that the support was worth much anyway), the company was stuck with an expensive piece of hardware that took up space in the server racks and served no purpose whatsoever.

VMware

I’ve been working with VMware technology, daily, for the past two years and a half. I worked at a company which I think was at the forefront of using virtualization technology. We had production virtual servers when most companies were still only testing the waters. That was cool. Getting support from VMware with various issues that came up as we transitioned our physical servers to virtual ones and started to use them heavily, was not so cool.

While I wasn’t the main point of contact between our company and VMware, I had to take charge in a couple of situations when the POC was out. I remember quite well this one occasion when one of my production servers went down while live, and I couldn’t get it back up. It simply refused to boot at first, and when it did boot up, the networking went out. I called VMware and filed a support request. I asked them to mark it as urgent. I was promised while on the phone that someone would get back to me within 2 hours. No one did. I called again and was assured someone was researching the issue. I waited several hours. No one got back to me. I then called again, but couldn’t reach anyone. It was already the weekend. I kept monitoring my email account on Saturday and Sunday to see if anyone would get back to me, and no one did. On Monday, the main VMware person at our company was in, and he was able to get the server going again. On Tuesday, a VMware rep finally got back to me and, as if nothing happened, asked how the server was doing. I recounted the story, told him a 5-day delay in his response is not adequate for an issue marked as urgent, and expected an apology. I never got one, nor did I hear from him again. So I had a production server that was basically out of commission for a whole weekend, and VMware didn’t give a damn.

That’s not all. You remember from the DNF SAN story above that VMware kept blaming them for the iSCSI bandwidth/throughput issues. For about a year and half, we had to put up with slower than normal servers that could take as much as a half hour to boot up, not to mention that they’d often lose their networking connection on reboots, causing us to toggle between the internal and external virtual network cards multiple times in order to get it going again. When they did boot up, they just weren’t as fast as they should be. VMware and DNF SAN kept passing the buck on these issues.

When the company finally purchased EMC SANs, the problems didn’t go away, but at least VMware couldn’t play the blame game any more, since it was now their own hardware and software. Even then, it took countless hours on the phone with the VMware and EMC reps to get the issues resolved. After that, it could safely be said that the servers were adequately fast, and they booted up without issues, but bandwidth was still a major issue. Even though the company had a Gigabit network, writing data to and copying data from the virtual servers was still not at Gigabit levels (not by far), and I think that’s an issue with the iSCSI connections between the SAN and the VMware production cluster. This is why I said at the beginning of this diatribe of mine that iSCSI connections are problematic.

Another gripe of mine with enterprise software is that it’s needlessly complicated and badly designed. Sure, their virtual infrastructure client is pretty good, but we tested a piece of EMC (VMware’s parent company) software designed to keep virtual servers in sync (I forget its name), and boy, did it stink… First, it was hard to figure out what do do with it and how to do it. Second, the GUI looked as if it’d been designed in the early 90s by some dude with no taste whatsoever. Third, it cost plenty, too. The company ended up not using it.

Summary

If you’ve read this far, I’d love to hear what you think, although I’ll understand if corporate folks reading this would rather not say anything.

I’d also like to make it clear that I’m not singling out the companies and products I’ve named above because I have something against them. I don’t. I do have something against badly designed and overpriced products, no matter who makes them. I think as Western Digital proved, a company can turn things around if they want to, and in that case, I’d be glad to praise the things they’re doing right (see the WD My Book Studio review).

I hope I’ve made it clear that customer feedback is important. It’s very important as a matter of fact. Furthermore, I believe that public customer feedback, as in the case of people voicing their concerns on the Internet about a certain product, makes a company more responsible and more responsive to the needs of the marketplace. It also makes it harder for a company to create products for consumers, because the pressure to deliver a success is greater. But that’s a good thing, because if you’ve got a hit, word quickly gets out and the potential for profit is greater. That should make the bean counters and the execs happy.

When you muzzle your customers though, as is currently the case in the enterprise market, there is real potential for abuse. Companies have little incentive to price products correctly and to address issues that come up once those products get used. There is also no real incentive to design things well, so they look good and are easy to use, and I’m talking about both software and hardware here.

I think that we need to have a more transparent customer-vendor feedback loop in the enterprise markets. I think business customers ought to feel it’s their right as consumers to voice concerns about vendor products publicly if the vendor fails to address them privately. After all, when you’re paying five and six figures (or even more) for enterprise-level solutions, then you ought to get your money’s worth in every sense of the word.

Standard
Reviews

Drobo overestimates used space

Here’s what happens. When the Drobo is connected to a computer and the Drobo Dashboard software isn’t running, the Drobo’s capacity meter will overestimate the used space, potentially triggering a low space alert. When the Drobo Dashboard software is started, it does its own used space calculations and corrects the capacity meter, literally turning off one to two or even three of the blue LEDs that indicate how much space is used.

There are 10 blue LEDs, one for each 10% of space used on the Drobo. When I connect one of my Drobos to my computer, the capacity meter lights up 9 of the LEDs, indicating 90% disk space used. When I start up the Drobo Dashboard software, two of the lights are turned off, leaving 7 on, or 70% disk space used. Also, although low space warnings are triggered when the Drobo Dashboard is started, after it calculates the space used, the warning go away, and the Dashboard screen goes from yellow to green.

I made a video which shows this quite clearly. I apologize for its poor quality, but I made it without any prior setup, just to show you that I’m not making this up. This also happens for my other Drobo, where the capacity meter shows 50% disk space used when I connect it, but drops to 30% disk space used when I start up the Drobo Dashboard. If you have a Drobo yourself, try it out and see.

Download Drobo overestimates used space (640×480, MP4, 35MB)

I notified Drobo Support of this issue a couple of days ago, but I have not yet received a reply from them. I will be glad to include any feedback/clarification from them right here, and will update this post with further information as I receive it.

I should also point out that there’s still no fix for the other two issues I outlined in my original Drobo review recently, where I pointed out that:

  • The transfer speed slows down significantly (and somewhat inversely proportional) to the amount of disk space remaining on the Drobo after the 70% mark is reached. In other words, the less space there is (in terms of the percentage, not GB remaining), the slower it’s going to be to access and transfer data to the Drobo.
  • The Drobo becomes excessively noisy when the fourth hard drive is inserted, and the fan will go into high gear when the Drobo isn’t even used. It seems this is loosely tied to the ambient room temperature, and once it goes over 75 degrees Fahrenheit, the fan kicks on and stays on for a long time. But again, you’ll only see this issue when the 4th hard drive is inserted. Given that the Drobo is a consumer device which is meant to operate at room temperatures, not in a climate-controlled server room, this is not appropriate behavior and should be corrected.
Standard