Discussion in 'Networking & NAS' started by Steve Withers, Feb 8, 2014.
Greg Hook takes a look at Netgear's entry level 2 bay network attached storage device.
You didn't test/review the iscsi features which its direct competitors don't have.
Most NAS will easily handle at least one fullhd stream as long as there is no transcoding going on.
I'd like to see some direct side by side comparison with the linkstation 421 and the Zyxel NSA325 v2, as apart from iscsi, which most people are not going to use I think both of these are better value than the netgear.
This is the first NAS that Greg has reviewed, so it would be pretty hard for him to do a comparison yet.
A few points, in the Introduction section it says
That sounds more like a description of RAID5 than RAID1.
In the Performance section, the testing methodology is tied to the (unspecified) PC - and will be affected by it's source/sink data performance. That also makes it difficult to compare results from other/future reviews of other NAS units. Testing the performance of other disk configurations than RAID1 would also be a good idea.
Might I suggest he reviews the HP microserver N54L next then. Just so he can establish the upper benchmark
Thanks for the suggestions guys, computer hardware is still a relatively new area for our review team but we always try to make the reviews as informative and objective as possible. As for other products to review, we're somewhat dependent on getting samples from the manufacturers and PR companies but we'll try.
Computing "expertise" is rather is lacking in the AVF review team. Can I suggest they avoid opining on any kind of "performance" until they have acquired some knowledge of computing science.
It is impossible to be "objective" when one (literally) doesn't know what one is talking about. By all means tell us how much they liked the UI, how pretty the box is, how easy they found it to use, etc. etc. but it is a nonsense to conduct "performance tests" and the like when one is incapable of interpreting the results.
Think about it this way: Top Gear frequently tell us how "fast" some super-car or other is amid beautiful images and operatic music. That's all they can do from the drivers seat; vehicle A might "feel" faster than vehicle B, but we can't know for sure. The only way we can "objectively" measure the power output is to put the vehicles on a calibrated rolling road and run some standard, repeatable tests and get some real numbers. (Of course that makes for boring TV so it doesn't happen often.)
But even then, it's not the whole story. Vehicle A has 600 horsepowers (whatever they are) and vehicle B has 150. So Vehicle A is of course faster. But vehicle A is a 40 ton truck and vehicle B is a 2 seater sports car. Look how easy is is to sucker oneself with only a little knowledge.
If that is the case, you really ought to be saying so (sorry if you have, I haven't read it that thoroughly). It's easy to be influenced when getting freebies
They aren't 'freebies', they're review samples that are returned to the manufacturer or PR company once the review has been completed. AVForums review staff are completely independent and I can assure you that no one is being influenced. Out of curiosity, how exactly do you think we obtain all the different products that are reviewed on AVForums?
Thanks for the explanation Steve. Don't honestly know how you get them, as this is the first time I have looked - I prefer to hear from people who have purchased with their own money and have no other consideration.
I used to get What HiFI and they were always happy to point out how much better then next model up was - and we are talking about cables here. Totally non-objective in my eyes, just towing the line.
I'm not saying that receiving 'samples' is inherently going to make you more biased, but perhaps less objective. Especially if you want to the manufacturer or PR agency to keep sending you stuff to review.
But if there is full disclosure, anyone can make their own mind up with full knowledge of the facts.
Not making any accusations or even suggestions, just a thought. I've seen it done elsewhere and it does show a certain transparency.
With the exception of Which, every professional review publication predominantly uses review samples provided by manufacturers or PR companies, anything else is impractical. We reviewed 220 different pieces of hardware on AVForums last year and we'll cover at least 250 this year; to expect us to buy all those samples is simply unrealistic. However we will be adding a User Review feature to allow AVForums readers to post their own experiences of a product because, as you point out, that is valuable information.
Great. Makes sense and would be a good feature.
Care to elaborate on the errors in my review? You clearly know your stuff, so any wisdom is appreciated.
I carried out various simple tests which any home user would be able to replicate. I reported the read and write speeds as seen with file transfers and the basic performance figures. I don't have a degree in computer science and get sent all manner of products to review so it's impossible to be fully knowledgeable on the technical aspects of everything.
Regarding this review, after seeing your comments I had a look at the reviews of this same product on other review sites and can see that they have done no different than me. But as I say, any wisdom from yourself is appreciated.
I have to say I am quite disappointed with some comments in this thread just because people have some differing opinions about the product tested here. Instead of stating why the other products might be worth a look by discussing their strong points in relation to the tested product (and I am assuming you have fully tested the product reviewed here as well as the competing models and not just read the spec sheets) some of you have seen fit to try and attack Greg's integrity by suggesting the item got a fairly positive review, because he doesn't know what he is talking about and it was a freebie.
Let me set the record straight that Greg would not be reviewing a product that I didn't feel he was more than capable of reviewing in a knowledgeable, fair, unbiased and balanced manner. This site attracts millions of unique visitors every month and as such the editorial content has to cater to a wide range of people with a wide range of knowledge levels. As you can see from all the hardware reviews we produce, there is a mix of benchmarking, testing, real world assessment and overall a down to earth conclusion based on all those points. There are no freebies as everything is sent back. We are not scared about upsetting any manufacturer as we feel that our testing and reviews are balanced and fair. If there is an issue we will report that within the reviews and to the manufacturers involved. We have very rarely had products withheld in the past by manufacturers due to reviews that were critical, but in those cases we have sourced further product from retailers to review before sending them back. The entire review team is made up of knowledgeable enthusiasts, display experts, film fans and gamers who are forum members and write for the forum members, not manufacturers or advertising companies. We have spent many years making sure that our editorial is independent of any outside influence and is as fair and balanced as it can be. It also has to be relevant to as wide a readership as possible, as well as catering for the more technical amongst us. It is a tough task to achieve the right balance, but I think we have the right mix to achieve that goal.
I'm sure that a small number of forum members would love reviews filled to the brim with graph after graph of data. But, there are just as many who prefer to have the option to get the information they want quickly without trailing through graphs that only a few really understand. We found that with the TV and Projector reviews the majority of people just wanted the conclusion and didn't understand the graphs. But we developed those reviews so they now have all the relevant and important tests along with the real world assessments and conclusions. Readers have a choice. We also don't tell people what they should buy, our reviews should be part of their overall research and we urge them to test themselves (where possible) before buying. User experience is also very important and welcomed as we cannot live with the review samples for any length of time. So, owners threads and the new user reviews are also an important part of the jigsaw for members when researching a product. There are disadvantages to this approach for obvious reasons, but most users are aware of those and can decide what they think is important to them.
We are all for constructive feedback and ideas to help us improve our content because at the end of the day we produce it for the forum members. Everything we do with the editorial is transparent and disclosed openly. You are more than welcome to disagree with the reviews and sometimes our experiences with products will vary from the needs and wishes of others. There is no way we can produce page after page of technical detail and also cater for the casual reader, there needs to be a balance of the two. We are not a niche content producer, that is what the forums and user/owner threads are for. Given the details of how the editorial actually works and the work the reviewers do I see no valid reason for some of the comments in this thread from certain posters.
Separate names with a comma.