so, zero gains with NAS you reckon ? mark.
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Matt Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bottleneck is going to be the 802.11n connection either way. > > -- > Matt Johnston - 07515352971 > > On 7 Dec 2008, at 12:07, Mark Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I need a new external storage device for the home LAN (one MacPro, one >> Macbook Air and one MacBook). The Pro is gigabit hardwired to the WLAN >> Router. The portables communicate exclusively over 802.11n. The >> external device will be used for Time Machine Backups for the laptops >> and for clones of the boot volume on the Pro. >> >> (Internal drives on the Pro carry the Pro's own Time Machine backup >> and I have discrete smaller external USB drives that I use for clones >> for the Laptops). >> >> The question is whether I would get noticeably better performance >> with: >> >> a NAS drive attached to the AirPort Extreme Router >> >> than I would with: >> >> a USB2, or Firewire800 drive attached to either the AirPort Extreme >> Router, or the Pro ? >> >> when backing-up over WLAN from the laptops ? >> >> I guess that a TimeCapsule is probably the fastest, but its a >> hellishly expensive solution for folks who already have the latest >> AirPort Extreme Base Station. (1.5 TB Seagate USB/FW/eSATA drive for >> 170 Euro, vs. c. 200 Euro for a similarly spec'd NAS box, vs. 1 TB >> Time Capsule for 470 Euro). >> >> wtia, >> mark. >> _______________________________________________ >> OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected] >> http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters >> List hosted at http://cat5.org/ > _______________________________________________ > OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected] > http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters > List hosted at http://cat5.org/ > _______________________________________________ OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected] http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters List hosted at http://cat5.org/
