Home server

[TexasComputerDude]

A point about NAS's.

I bought a buffalo NAS a few months ago and immediately returned it. I had to install special software on all of the computers accessing it and it really just wasn't what I expected.

Maybe there was a way around using that software but it was enough of a pain that I just got my money back and bought another hard drive.

[brianko]

Even easier, you can get cheap nas (network attached storage) devices.

Exactly!

I'm also a Linux/Mac guy and I like to tinker, but a network drive is the easiest, most transparent way to back up and share files on your home network.

But not the fastest...a USB-2.0 compliant external drive will do about 480 Mbps, about 4x as fast as a network drive running on a 100Mbit network. For a home network, a USB-based storage device probably makes more sense. Also, despite the previous poster's discontent with their Buffalo NAS, most USB drives don't require additional software (I have a Buffalo 500GB external USB drive I use for all my Macs).

[KD5NRH]

Thanks for all of the great input folks! With the Texas Legislative Session right around the corner, I guess I'd better not take on another project that requires me to learn something new.

If you're just looking for a fileserver, it's pretty easy. Grab a machine that's too slow to do anything else, fill all IDE channels with cheap drives, and install one of the easy distros like Ubuntu or PCLinuxOS. Set up Samba, and never have to mess with it again...until curiosity gets the better of you and you start wondering what else you could be using it for.

[pbwalker]

Thanks for all of the great input folks! With the Texas Legislative Session right around the corner, I guess I'd better not take on another project that requires me to learn something new.

If you're just looking for a fileserver, it's pretty easy. Grab a machine that's too slow to do anything else, fill all IDE channels with cheap drives, and install one of the easy distros like Ubuntu or PCLinuxOS. Set up Samba, and never have to mess with it again...until curiosity gets the better of you and you start wondering what else you could be using it for.

I'll throw in another vote for PCLinuxOS. A true Ubuntu rival. I've been tinkering with in in a VM and love it. I'm real tempted to slick one of my Ubuntu boxes and go with PCLinuxOS.

Also, WarHawk-AVG recommended FreeNAS. I've got one running under my desk hosting music for my coworkers and it is a great distro. Grab as many old HDD's you have sitting around and share the drive space in any fashion you wish. iSCSI, NFS, CIFS, etc.

[KBCraig]

But not the fastest...a USB-2.0 compliant external drive will do about 480 Mbps, about 4x as fast as a network drive running on a 100Mbit network. For a home network, a USB-based storage device probably makes more sense.

It makes a lot of sense for backing up a home system, but less so for backing up all computers on a home network.

A USB drive attaches to computer, not a network. That computer must always be up and running, and must have all the permissions properly set, for other computers on the network to access the drive.

[brianko]

But not the fastest...a USB-2.0 compliant external drive will do about 480 Mbps, about 4x as fast as a network drive running on a 100Mbit network. For a home network, a USB-based storage device probably makes more sense.

It makes a lot of sense for backing up a home system, but less so for backing up all computers on a home network.

A USB drive attaches to computer, not a network. That computer must always be up and running, and must have all the permissions properly set, for other computers on the network to access the drive.

Yeah, I'm well aware of that. Assuming that this is a server that will be serving up something (database queries, HTTP requests, etc.), it will be on all the time anyway, so your point is moot. Just throwing another option out there. NAS is overkill for backing up a small home network with no more than a few servers, none of which are dedicated servers. It's like suggesting to someone wanting to back up a Windows server that they should set up a Linux box, install some hard drives, fire up Samba and go to town. Oh, wait...that suggestion's already been made

[CHLSteve]

Lots of bad advice being tossed around here. I suspect most of you haven't even LOOKED at Home Server, much less used it. Since this question was directly about WHS, I suggest you be familiar with the product before recommending something else such as a Linux box, NAS, USB, or whatever. NONE of those things even comes close to what WHS offers. These products are not even in the same league, really.

That's like saying I'm looking for a minivan to drive my large family around, and you guys get online and start recommending bicycles and scooters because they are "cheaper", "easier", or "faster". Bad tech guys, bad!

PS--Network backups are incremental, and don't require that much bandwidth. Also, GbE is pretty much the norm now, which makes the speed virtually on par with USB 2.0

[dwhitley]

I said my two cents... If Charles wants a home server I will set it up for free. A real domain server for his home with security and profiles setup to his liking. That is a real server folks... not a backup NAS a real server enviroment.... Thanks D

[Andiceman]

Charles, I have an older Buffalo TeraStation NAS device on my network, with 1TB of storage, and have been happy with it for a few years now. It has 10/100/1000 Ethernet and is configured through a browser as you would a router.

I'm not sure what the previous poster meant by "you have to install special software on each computer"... there is a utility to help you "find" the device in order to map a driver letter to it, but it is by no means required.

[brianko]

Lots of bad advice being tossed around here. I suspect most of you haven't even LOOKED at Home Server, much less used it.

I believe the topic was open-ended: Either WHS or Linux. That covers a lot of in-between ground. Looks like Charles has plenty of interesting options to consider. I've seen no bad advice here, just a divergence of opinion. Choice is good.

[pbwalker]

Lots of bad advice being tossed around here. I suspect most of you haven't even LOOKED at Home Server, much less used it.

I believe the topic was open-ended: Either WHS or Linux. That covers a lot of in-between ground. Looks like Charles has plenty of interesting options to consider. I've seen no bad advice here, just a divergence of opinion. Choice is good.

And I've looked at Windows Home Server. Then I looked away...

[TexasComputerDude]

Charles, I have an older Buffalo TeraStation NAS device on my network, with 1TB of storage, and have been happy with it for a few years now. It has 10/100/1000 Ethernet and is configured through a browser as you would a router.

I'm not sure what the previous poster meant by "you have to install special software on each computer"... there is a utility to help you "find" the device in order to map a driver letter to it, but it is by no means required.

Well I just had problems with mine and got fed up. I thought it would be like mapping a network drive.

So I just took it back and made one of my older computers into one that suited me better.

[russ]

And I've looked at Windows Home Server. Then I looked away...

Me too. It dont matter its still Windows. If you have a box to put Home Server on you should at least give
Linux a try before you go buy from Bill Gates and are disappointed. I have a Fedora-2 box that i don't think
has been rebooted in at least 5 years just no need to, Linux is just that stable its like a good ole watch it just keeps on ticking. Sure, if you are not all that computer savy you may struggle a little at first I know I did, but when it all starts to
click hold on because you really start to understand that Linux can do as little as you want, or as much as you want. I have used my Fedroa box for a domain, mail, www, network, print, game and every other server you can think of. I had a UT game server running 24 hours a day for years on it and get this it ran better as a server on Linux than it did on Windows in which it was designed for. I even had it setup as a dial up server for my poor mother in law because she couldn't even afforded internet at one time. Now I have a HP laser hooked up to it so we use it for a print server for the other 5 computers we have. My kids, wife and me all have accounts on my Linux box when they log on to there windows computers they also are mapped to there home directory on the server to use for backups and storage. I have been out of the Linux loop for a while now but i would be willing to bet anything Windows Home Server can do a good Linux distro can do better. Unlike most of the time in life you dont have to spend a lot of money to get the good stuff, because this time it truly is free.

[CHLSteve]

I have been out of the Linux loop for a while now but i would be willing to bet anything Windows Home Server can do a good Linux distro can do better.

Challenge accepted. You Linux zealots drive me crazy.

I'll take WHS, you get your choice of Linux distro. I will take the hard drive out of your PC, and smash it with a hammer to simulate it crashing. You can replace the drive, and we'll time how long it takes you to get back online and restore all your files, settings, programs, etc... including configuration of your email, network, and driver installations for your hardware and printers. Oh yeah, for all the user accounts that are on that PC--maybe your wife and kids each have their own settings and email too.

With WHS, I'll be done in less than an hour, how about you? I guarantee you won't finish in less than 4, maybe 6 or more.

...you may struggle a little at first I know I did.... Unlike most of the time in life you dont have to spend a lot of money to get the good stuff, because this time it truly is free.

My time is not free. "Struggling" to learn a Linux distro when there is a product that will do what I want right out of the box sounds like a good trade to me. Truly free means I don't have to jack with it!