2010-05-05, 02:30
I'm trying to determine if I should go WHS or NAS route. My requirements mainly are:
1. 4-bay or more
2. medium data security (RAID 5 or similar) versus performance
3. low power requirements (on 24/7)
4. Easy to use (minimum setup and maintenance)
5. accessible from both Mac and PCs
6. Cost (~$400 - $500 not including drives)
nice to have but not required:
1. Automated backup of computers on network
2. DLNA server
3. Remote access capability
I started my research around the WHS platform and liked what I saw in the HP line and even from Acer. I liked the low power benefit of using an Atom processor in some of them. But I wasn't sure if I needed all the benefits of the WHS OS and started to wonder if it was a lot of overhead (the OS) then going with a NAS box. I also thought that a NAS box would be cheaper in general to a full WHS solution, but was quite surprised when that wasn't the case (I'm referring to retail solutions like ReadyNas and the like - not DIY solutions).
So this got me thinking, what are the real benefits of WHS over a traditional NAS? If my primary use is to serve media to my XBMC clients, wouldn't a NAS be fine? Then again, cost wise, a NAS isn't always much cheaper (and sometimes more) than a WHS solution. From a technical standpoint my understanding is the WHS doesn't use a true hardware RAID solution but is software. For what I'm looking to do, is this a big deal? Would a ReadyNas NV+ be better, performance and data security wise? And why are the ReadyNas boxes almost as expensive, if not more, than a WHS solution from say HP (I'm thinking that the WHS license itself adds almost $100 to the hardware cost)?
So any insight into this would be helpful!
1. 4-bay or more
2. medium data security (RAID 5 or similar) versus performance
3. low power requirements (on 24/7)
4. Easy to use (minimum setup and maintenance)
5. accessible from both Mac and PCs
6. Cost (~$400 - $500 not including drives)
nice to have but not required:
1. Automated backup of computers on network
2. DLNA server
3. Remote access capability
I started my research around the WHS platform and liked what I saw in the HP line and even from Acer. I liked the low power benefit of using an Atom processor in some of them. But I wasn't sure if I needed all the benefits of the WHS OS and started to wonder if it was a lot of overhead (the OS) then going with a NAS box. I also thought that a NAS box would be cheaper in general to a full WHS solution, but was quite surprised when that wasn't the case (I'm referring to retail solutions like ReadyNas and the like - not DIY solutions).
So this got me thinking, what are the real benefits of WHS over a traditional NAS? If my primary use is to serve media to my XBMC clients, wouldn't a NAS be fine? Then again, cost wise, a NAS isn't always much cheaper (and sometimes more) than a WHS solution. From a technical standpoint my understanding is the WHS doesn't use a true hardware RAID solution but is software. For what I'm looking to do, is this a big deal? Would a ReadyNas NV+ be better, performance and data security wise? And why are the ReadyNas boxes almost as expensive, if not more, than a WHS solution from say HP (I'm thinking that the WHS license itself adds almost $100 to the hardware cost)?
So any insight into this would be helpful!