[citation][nom]lauxenburg[/nom]Meh, I still don't see why Enterprise drives have to be SAS. There isn't much difference between SAS and SATA....honestly. And the cheapest SAS drives cost more than my Motherboard and CPU combined...[/citation]
"Honestly"? As if you actually know the difference? If you did, you'd know there's some important differences between SAS and SATA. SAS uses the SCSI protocol, which means it inherited all the advantages of SCSI, including the RAS (Reliability, Availability, Serviceability) functionality which SATA mostly lacks. This is why you will always find SCSI-based devices (Fiber Channel uses SCSI as well) in use when people really value their data. SAS also gets the high-end features before SATA does. SAS was doing 6G, expanders, multi-lane, etc., long before SATA did. SAS drives typically also have dual ports for redundant controller configurations (there's that "RAS" thing again) which SATA will probably never have.