I feel some nuance is in order. The TO starts his post by asking what NAS would suite his needs.
Simply implying a NAS is unsuitable to run SBS is just not true. In my opinion it's ok to post alternatives that could better suite his situation. But at the same time, we must realize not everybody who owns a Squeezebox is a computer-enthousiast that knows how to build his own server and install, configure and maintain a linux-distro on it himself. Or like myself, have the time at hand and feel like Googling for a few hours in order to solve a problem that might arise over time. I'm perfectly happy with the Synology DS210+ I have now. It's probably slower than most dual-atom systems out there, not as flexible either. But it suits my needs perfectly; it's fast enough to run SBS in a way that it lives up to my expectations, it's power-consumption is low, it's reliable so that my girlfriend doesn't encounter problems during everyday use and that I don't have to go through embarracing moments when a demonstration to friends goes up in smoke when showing off my fancy music-system and the server is posing problems, Synology takes care of preparing updates that offer new features and for me as a linux-nono I can install them without worrying about having to fiddle with the configuration the entire afternoon. So yes, there are alternatives that are faster, there are alternatives that use even less power, there are alternatives that are more flexible in the future. But at the same time, for most people, a NAS that offers the ability to install SBS on it is probably a very nice solution that will life up to their expectations just perfectly. -- hvb83 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ hvb83's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=39615 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=80747 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/discuss
