Drobo's aren't that good.  I had one and returned it.  First off they
are not NAS'es because there is no network port.  For that you have to
get another attachment.

I still think that getting a HP Mediasmart Server for his needs would be
fantastic!

They are running cheap these days, around 400 bucks or so.  And run
Windows Home Server. I've had one and couldn't be happier.

It's not a RAID box per se, but it does data duplication very nicely.
Right now I have 4 1.5TB Seagates in there and only have 1 TB free.

Plenty of pr0n! :P

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden
Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 2:43 PM
To: hwg
Cc: hwg
Subject: Re: [H] Network Storage

If you have drives of different sizes a Drobo will work nicely.

The only reason people would have to  rebuild raids frequently is if  
drives are failing.  Having a fault tolerant raid means that when this  
happens you don't lose any data.

If those same drives are in a NAS as JBOD, they still fail and now you  
have lost data as well.

-------
Brian Weeden
Technical Consultant
Secure World Foundation

Sent from my iPhone

On 4-Apr-09, at 7:05 AM, Steve Tomporowski <[email protected]> wrote:

> Admittedly the cheapest solution would be to use an old box,  
> however, I was really looking for something compact.  Maybe after  
> hearing some real life experiences on the cheaper stuff I'd go that  
> way.  I won't be going to a raid, the two drives that I'll be  
> shoving into it are not set up for raid, nor do I want to go the  
> gyrations and buy the extra drives to do that (drives are two  
> different capacities).  Plus, from what I've heard, people with  
> raids spend a lot of time rebuilding them. Frequently.  Note, if  
> it's once a year, that's too frequent.
>
> On the upside, doing an old box as a NAS let's me do all the  
> configuring and I don't have to worry about the number of drives.   
> On the down side, from what I've got, it'd be a mid size tower case  
> (I was hoping for smaller) without gigbit lan.
>
> So I'm still looking for someone with experience on the sub-$400  
> units to see if it's worthwhile.  I have a healthy skepticism on  
> site reviews, especially when they seem to be either 1's or 5's with  
> very little in between.
>
> Thanks for the info so far.  I am going to look into the free NAS  
> software.
>
> Steve
>
>
> Neil Davidson wrote:
>> If you have more than one drive you are going to want to do some  
>> kind of
>> raid, unless you are just going to have the two/three drives as  
>> individual
>> shares. personally, I'd have them all as one network share.
>>
>> I have two Thecus N5200Pro's. Complete overkill for most, and they  
>> are
>> expensive. At the time I didn't want to build my own box, I just  
>> wanted an
>> appliance type device. However now I'm looking at building my own and
>> selling the NAS boxes as my needs have changed in the past year.
>>
>> What I'm saying is there is a certain simplicity to NAS boxes that is
>> appealing. You aren't tempted to tweak and fiddle with them like  
>> you are
>> with regular PCs.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected]
>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve  
>> Tomporowski
>> Sent: 04 April 2009 02:16
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: [H] Network Storage
>>
>> Okay, I'm looking at network storage boxes.  Simple needs:  at  
>> least two open bays, 3 would have been perfect but willing to go to  
>> four.  I have two drives that hold all my video and Dr Who stuff  
>> that I want to stick in it and be able to move the computer they're  
>> from upstairs for my son.  Not planning on doing any raid, although  
>> I'll eventually upgrade the router/switch to gigabit.
>>
>> I've looked at Newegg, specifically at the Synology CS407e and the  
>> Promise NS4300N.  Both have mixed reviews there, either really bad  
>> or really good.  If either are noisy, I'll find a place to hide  
>> 'em.  Otherwise I'm looking for reliable for decent price.
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>>
>> Thanks....Steve
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to