NAS v WHS

[Synchro]

I am using NAS for a central file repository for 3 PC's in my house.

Why should I consider WHS as a replacement?

Thanks for all suggestions.

P.S. About time we got the PC operating section sorted, been asking about this layout for ages.

[Tas1]

I suppose it comes down to what you need. NAS is clearly fine for central file storage. WHS can offer this, but in addition it provides automatic and regular backup of all the PCs in the house ( this has been invaluable to me after doing something I should not and needing to restore my system drive).

In addition my family has found the remote access facility great : eg my son had forgotten his homework and was able to log on from school to the Home server and collect the "word" file from his folder; my wife has used the server to receive access database files which were too large to be accepted as an attachment to an email; my daughter who lives away logs in to send us photos of her latest horse event.

All in all, I am very pleased with it and once the data bug has been cured, will use the shared folders to make music and photos and videos available to other rooms/pcs in the house.

Hope this is of some help.:)

[neonplanet40]

I faced the same decision as you at the start of the year. In the end i opted for the WHS as it provides alot more functionality than a NAS and also will offer alot more in the future.

There will be new updates and features added over time once they iron out the problems they have at the min which is due out in june.

[sapper]

It has its teethign issues but has a great future...

You can also use WHS for both.....

I have a JBOD within WHS for data back ups, mucis photos etc.

But I have kept some drives free of the JBOD, using these for ripping or rahter backingup some films onto hard drive. The only down side to this is that I ran out of SATA connections rapidly.

One day a motherboard manufacturer will produce a mobo with 10 internal SATA connectors and two E-SATA connections and optimised for a server....


Adrian

[wywywywy]

Hi,

I chose WHS over my old NAS because:
1. Centralised backup management
2. Print server
3. Download server (works well with uTorrent WebUI)
4. Ability to add more disks easily and with redundancy
5. Simple remote file access via web
6. WebGuide
7. Actually lower power consumption than many NAS! If you pick your setup right
8. Ability to run other programs (I use mine as a home automation server)
9. Media streaming server (will use SlimServer as well too in the future)
10. (In the near future) DHCP server

[sapper]

Hi,

I chose WHS over my old NAS because:
1. Centralised backup management
2. Print server
3. Download server (works well with uTorrent WebUI)
4. Ability to add more disks easily and with redundancy
5. Simple remote file access via web
6. WebGuide
7. Actually lower power consumption than many NAS! If you pick your setup right
8. Ability to run other programs (I use mine as a home automation server)
9. Media streaming server (will use SlimServer as well too in the future)
10. (In the near future) DHCP server

I must admit, I need to look into configuring mine in greater detail, esp regarding power settings and other applications.

But recently during a Pc build, having the ability to create a back up at every major stage was very handy.

Adrian

[DarkKnight]

9. Media streaming server (will use SlimServer as well too in the future)


I wanted to ask specifically about Media streaming capabilities.

I have a NAS which supports a multitude of protocols. But what I've struggled to find out is what Multimedia streaming capabilities WHS supports.

I have 2 Video Media Players and an Audio one (Squeezebox) and they all support different protocols. So i need to be sure that WHS can support them before I make the move towards WHS.

Unforunatly, I've not been able to find much documentation about these protocols :

- FTP file sharing
- Samba file access
- NFS
- uPnP
- Windows ADS

Would anyone know if these are supported ?

[Uridium]

If it's a protocol supported by Windows 2003 Server then it is supported by WHS

[wywywywy]

I wanted to ask specifically about Media streaming capabilities.

I have a NAS which supports a multitude of protocols. But what I've struggled to find out is what Multimedia streaming capabilities WHS supports.

I have 2 Video Media Players and an Audio one (Squeezebox) and they all support different protocols. So i need to be sure that WHS can support them before I make the move towards WHS.

The thing is, a WHS machine is essentially just another Windows machine, so you can install whatever serving software you want on it. I actually plan to run MCE05 on it in a virtual machine within the WHS machine, so that I can use American MCE Extenders.


Unforunatly, I've not been able to find much documentation about these protocols :

- FTP file sharing

Yes

- Samba file access

Yes

- NFS

Not sure

- uPnP

Yes (thats the media streaming bit I mentioned)

- Windows ADS

Don't think so, but please double check

Would anyone know if these are supported ?

[Barbarosa]

The downside is that the method of protecting you from a HDD failure is very inefficient. WHS tries to make sure that each file is on 2 different HDDs. This could get expensive if you have large ammounts of data that you want to 'protect'. For example, I have my video collection on HDD, currently it is about 4.5Tb, so fits on a RAID 5 array using 6 x 1Tb discs. With WHS, I would need 10 x 1Tb discs.

I am intending to set up a hybrid solution with WHS as the OS, to take care of machine back-ups etc. But to install a HW raid array for the library, but not to add it to the disc pool.

[wywywywy]

You don't "have to" duplicate the files.
If you are protecting the videos with a RAID5 already, there is no point to duplicate them.

[nick8571]

The downside is that the method of protecting you from a HDD failure is very inefficient. WHS tries to make sure that each file is on 2 different HDDs. This could get expensive if you have large ammounts of data that you want to 'protect'. For example, I have my video collection on HDD, currently it is about 4.5Tb, so fits on a RAID 5 array using 6 x 1Tb discs. With WHS, I would need 10 x 1Tb discs.

I am intending to set up a hybrid solution with WHS as the OS, to take care of machine back-ups etc. But to install a HW raid array for the library, but not to add it to the disc pool.
The flipside is that a RAID5 array of the type you describe requires a fairly large initial outlay for large HDDs all of the same size, whereas with WHS you can just add disks of any size to the storage pool as and when they're required, not necessarily with duplication if you don't want it for non-critical data.

There's also the point that HDDs are growing in size and falling in price all the time, so if you invest heavily now in enough disk space to cater for future needs (as you'd have to with a suitably large RAID5 array), you'll inevitably get less storage for your money than if you buy extra drives as and when you need them, at whatever capacity point represents the sweet spot in GB/£ at the time.

Neither system is ideal for truly protecting data anyway, but I'm sure you're already aware of that. :)

[Barbarosa]

The flipside is that a RAID5 array of the type you describe requires a fairly large initial outlay for large HDDs all of the same size...

Not if you have a card with OLE

[DJACID]

Well i have been using freenas for some time now,
and at one point went through this phase where i tested out alll other nas software which were around,

So i also bought WHS when it was release but after using it for afew days it wasnt for me to many crashes and system bugs,
So i went back to freenas as its much better, the only other nas software close to this is naslite+,
Let me know if you want naslite+ as i dont need my copy anymore so can email it to you...

Also before anyone says anything we have 4 laptops and 3 PC and all have vista or xp in my house and theres only the one pc with linux,
so am more of a windows fan but was disapointed with WHS,
anyway it totally up to you but if you want a bloated nas system that you'll have to pay for then go buy WHS,
but if you dont want a bloated nas system then stick with freenas its FREE...
:thumbsup:

[scoob101]

Well i have been using freenas for some time now,
and at one point went through this phase where i tested out alll other nas software which were around,

So i also bought WHS when it was release but after using it for afew days it wasnt for me to many crashes and system bugs,
So i went back to freenas as its much better, the only other nas software close to this is naslite+,
Let me know if you want naslite+ as i dont need my copy anymore so can email it to you...

Also before anyone says anything we have 4 laptops and 3 PC and all have vista or xp in my house and theres only the one pc with linux,
so am more of a windows fan but was disapointed with WHS,
anyway it totally up to you but if you want a bloated nas system that you'll have to pay for then go buy WHS,
but if you dont want a bloated nas system then stick with freenas its FREE...
:thumbsup:

Shame you`ve been put off WHS. I really think youre missing out, especially with that many pc`s in the house!! My install has been running rock solid since day 1, with PP1 public beta now released, the`ve finished the product off nicely, and fixed the nasty data corruption bug.