Is their a defective drive in my time capsule?

To do the math it would take at least 6.038 hours to back up a 500gb drive on my mac pro that is before any loss preformance from over working the drive so figure 10hrs for any backup. it may even take a couple of days to get the computer/ device to works again. basically if i am now with littlw tp no data on the drive getting 27mbs write/ 23mbs read in real world i could expext 20mbs write and 17mbs read if not slower.

My conection speed to the Airport is 450mbs so the speed should be no problem, their should not be any bottle necks when the conection is that fast. What is the SATA contoler, I cannot find the specs???????

If it is atleast SATA 300 mbs than even the newer rotaional drives will not have a bottle neck, with older designed drives with less than 150mbs write/ transfer a SATA 150mbs would be good enough, not to mention the fact that SATA 600mbs have been around for years.

As far as the statement about Ethernet, ethernet is still the best way, there is very little interferency that can lead to packet's of data being lossed. I only use wireless because it takes so much time to wire/rewire an entire house plus all the ipods, iphone, laptops ect and alot of wires look oggly.

YES the drive should run at a proper speed, and no its not just a router, it has a cpu, it has ram it has a controler for a drive. The statement the "TC is a router with a hard disk inside.. it is not a NAS" only proves that you do not know what is inside the device. The TC is a router and a NAS cobined with a micro computer, similar in how the apple tv has an I5 processor, ram and an 8gb storage drive. I purchased a device that is a router+NAS i would expect it to be manufactured properly. I am using black magic speed test to check the drive,,

Oh PS, a basic 802.11AC router will cost around 99$ maybe as low as 75 and as high as 170... A basic 1 bay ethernet conected NAS device with 2TB of storage will cost less than 150$ combined the cost.. At the highest cost, it would be no more than 320$ which because of the fact they are combining the 2 it lowers to the cost to 300$ You could Do an 802.11AC with ethernet HDD which will give you the max speed of the drive through the wireless network, for under 200$ if you shop around.... So please, realize that the time capsule is a router+NAS

Can someone answer the question I asked, or can someone just tell me it was poorly designed? Because it the speed is this slow, its certainly not ment for speed,, not to mention the fact that I constently have to renew the DHCP client on the other new MAC mini., because the Time capsule/ new airport extreme AC has some glitch, that my airport extreme 5th gen never had...

You said the speed of the processor is slow, Will apple be releasing firmware update for the CPU/ controler for the time capsule? so the drive should run properly? Or is the hardware that bad that it never will run correctly???

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA1J20UC1446

See you could even put this on to an airport extreme with a limitation onlyon the fact that the extreme has old USB 2.0 technalogy and still get fast speeds than this and save 11$ w/tax...

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=14702 93&CatId=9698

here is an ethernet attached drive with 2tb of data for under 100$ which would give most likely between 135-165mbs transfer speeds.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833122555

here is a very trusted name braned 802.11Ac Netgear for 110$ you could assemble your own 802.11AC+ NAS for easily less than 200$ You could even make the airport extreme a true 802.11AC +2tb NAS for under the price that they charge for the 2tb time capsule and get better workmenship.

I paid a premium price to get the device combined into a semless design, I only expect that it works.

I have download items from the itunes/ other sites at over 50mbs using my old airport extreme with just about 300mbs link speeds(sometimes it was 440mbs sometimes 300mbs.but either way, if i can achieve that speed through the internet with all the limitations/ packet loss that occurs over the internet than surely a network device should not be less than half that.

Please try again...

some people have even gotten over 150mbs of internet speeds(if there provider supports this) and all transmitted through wifi... Google fiber, which is one of the only companies that gives there consumers 4g internet let alone 4g home internet typically transmite the signal over wifi, they are using 802.11N which i can't imagine gets less than 300mbs per device.

Desclaimer 4g internet is 100mbs peak through telecomunication towers, and it is 1,000 mbs peak through physical conection (As in google fiber) so no your cell phone has never gotten 4g, thats why the old iphones said 3g when an android said 4g because AT&T verizon ect lied to consumers, but iphone did not, until they realied it would be a conflict of interest to tell the consumers they where still on 3g.. The term 4g was developed by a company to figure out the next generation of internet speed requirements. It is minimum speed to watch 1-2 4k videos at home, and the speed required to watch short 4k video(like you-tube) with a few minute buffer time around 4-5 secounds of buffer for ever secound of video. The companies have sense used the term without giving the consumers what they have paid for. Even on LTE most companies limit the speed to under 50mbs, so its not 4g or as we should call it 4k ready. Having to wait 15 minutes to watch a 3 minute clip is long enough on a tablet, (video for next generation on tablets would really most likely be the resolution that the current retena uses for the macbook pro/ ipad retina (about 2k-3k video) which would be a significantly less speed than 4k video requires. But the first time that the screens are properly used. So unless you have google fiber, you do not have 4g internet.

To make a simple enalogy, it would be like gooing to a honda delership to buy a car, they say the car is a v-6 with 280horsepoer 220-lbs of torque can get from 0-60 in 5 secounds and you buy it, and come to find out there is a honda 2 stroke engine inside... I am not using honda to say that honda does this, i am just using this enalogy to explain the severety of false advertisement.

oh yeah, 1 last thing... shortly after that they began coming out with more unlocked models, and supported more cariers... Just speculation but maybe they relized they where partnered with an untrustworthy company,,, just throughing that out there...

Here the real information read this from the site a 2 atenaa system is full duplex, or it can send and recieve information at the same time. The 802,11Ac further expands apon this technalogy as well as adding greater connections. SO NO, THIER SHOULD ONCE AGAIN NOT BE A DIFFERENCE, your technacal knowledge is out dated, and i;m sorry but once again you should know whats inside the device.

https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/thread/5818

When you purchase a N uint you will either purchase a single b/g/n (2.4Ghz) or dual band a/b/g/n (2.4Ghz & 5Ghz)

To answer your second question

Remember that MIMO uses spatial multiplexing for greater throughtput and therefore uses multiple antennas for better diversity which increases range. Now to explain 3x3 and 2x3 MIMO.

MIMO consist of multiple radio chains and each radio chain having its own antenna. So with MIMO you have a transmitter and receiver in multiple radio chains. So for example you 2x3 (as per your question in a AP1250) system that would consist of three radio chains with Two transmitters and Three receivers and therefore your 2x3 MIMO system.

In a 3x3 it would be 3 transmitters and 3 receivers.

Believe me i know,, as i said before direct connection is always the best. Their is less interference than with wifi. However like i said before my link speed through wifi is more than fast enough for the task. Which is why I have said there is no bottle neck. If i was transfering files from 2 computers on my network with both computers having 2gb etherenet and both having high end PCI-express SSD, i might consider ethernet because the bottle neck would be with the wifi. However I do not have any computers with a SSD that can move data anywhere near the 1,000-2,000 mbs speed. My samsung SSD typically will get 520mbs read and 540mbs write, its connected by SATA 600 for some reason some times i get even fast than the rated speeds for SATA and i achieve over 800mbs read speeds, but in no way is that sustainable. In sistuation fo my needs there is no bottle neck with my mac, or anyother computer/ device on my network. There is no bottle neck with the wifi. In fact the only reason to switch to ethernet is for high end video editing in real time, with massive NAS ssd solution at its core for (for example) multiple mac pro's to conecting to the same storage media for the 17 plus hours of recorded 4k video and the audio. Which makes a reasonable format for edditing when in real world high end video editing companies will most likely use multiple edditors/ computers for the video. I am not one of those people, so once again wifi has no bottle neck for my needs, and google has yet to bring there version of internet to my area, i am stuck with 56mbs download and 5.6 mbs upload intenet speeds..

Here's a crash course in full duplex for wifi,,, There are 2 versions of wireless N,, there is a single antenna which is of course half duplex it, essentially its like a walky talky it can only send or recieve at a giving point in time. There is also a version that has a 2.4ghz channel and a 5ghz channel, this version is full duplex. They are of course two different channels so not to interfer with the other one... The 2.4 ghz frequency is used also by some phones, and can have interference if using the microwave. My house does not have any "home phones" we use only cell phones, and the microwave hardly gets used. Any how as i said at any point in time, one sends as the other recieves, this is why they took the feature away to "set network type IE a,b,g,n,ac" the most demanding of the 2 either upload or download will of course be the 5ghz channel. While if you are downloading information the 5hz channel witll transmite the data in the packets, while the 2.4ghz channel should send back the signal (essentially saying yeah, i got packets 1, 2 3,6 i am missing packets 4 and 5. Because the actual data is being transmited over 5ghz there should be less packet loss and those faster speeds. That is one of the reason why they are coming out with IGMP which helps to give real world information on how to send/recieve data at any point in time which of course are decisions made in fractions of secounds.

Total Simultaneous Throughput			Print
Product	Class:Rank $$		Throughput (Mbps)

	Apple AirPort Extreme (802.11ac) (A1521)	AC1750:#6	$185	578.8
	Apple AirPort Express [2012] (MC414LL/A)	N600:#8	$93	146.5

You cannot just use a single channel as I said they are full duplex if you test only usinga 5ghz channel than you are making the router half duplex.