• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

kehs
Banned
(07-09-2012, 06:48 PM)
Only if you plan to virtualize stuff really. Though some higher end NASes can virtualize smaller stuff.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(07-09-2012, 07:05 PM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar
NetGear? That's better than building my own? I don't mind either. I just want the best bang for buck.
kehs
Banned
(07-09-2012, 07:13 PM)

Originally Posted by Bboy AJ

NetGear? That's better than building my own? I don't mind either. I just want the best bang for buck.

Netgear bought the ReadyNAS company a couple of years ago, but as far as I can tell they are still run mostly separate and by the same people from when they were independent.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(07-09-2012, 09:44 PM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar
Alright, I think I'm going to grab a Synology DS411j. Looks cheap enough. I want 4 bays.

Are 3TB drives the way to go? I don't see many 4TB ones out there.
Marty Chinn
Member
(07-10-2012, 05:51 AM)
Marty Chinn's Avatar

Originally Posted by Bboy AJ

Alright, I think I'm going to grab a Synology DS411j. Looks cheap enough. I want 4 bays.

Are 3TB drives the way to go? I don't see many 4TB ones out there.

Normally I'd say go with as big as you can since it's much more painful to swap out later, but given that it looks like that 4TB is practically double the price of 3TB, just get 3TB drives. Make sure it supports it too. Apparently my server has an upper limit of 2TB drives.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(07-29-2012, 03:08 PM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar
DS411j: Will this be 110v or 220v? Is there a switch in the back I can just flip?
ninjapanda
Member
(07-29-2012, 03:39 PM)
ninjapanda's Avatar

Originally Posted by Bboy AJ

Doh. I guess I'll have to find a way to rig it up wired. Germany doesn't seem to be big on wired connections.

Thanks. Any hardware suggestions?

Why not try an ethernet over power solution. You plug in some adaptors and it basically pushes your data through your power lines from one adaptor to another. Data streams are stable and it saves your running ethernet cables everywhere.

e.g. http://www.tp-link.com/au/products/d...el=TL-PA411KIT

Can't help you with your power predicament. I have a QNAP and it switches automatically so the Synologies should do the same. Oh and good choice with Synology, although the QNAP team have been doing good work they seem to have fallen behind in a number of areas compared with Synology.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(07-29-2012, 05:04 PM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar

Originally Posted by ninjapanda

Why not try an ethernet over power solution. You plug in some adaptors and it basically pushes your data through your power lines from one adaptor to another. Data streams are stable and it saves your running ethernet cables everywhere.

e.g. http://www.tp-link.com/au/products/d...el=TL-PA411KIT

WTF? I've been reading about tech for forever and I've never heard of anything like this. Awesome. I need to read up on it. Any disadvantages?
alekth
Member
(07-29-2012, 05:15 PM)
alekth's Avatar

Originally Posted by Bboy AJ

DS411j: Will this be 110v or 220v? Is there a switch in the back I can just flip?

My 212j has an external universal adapter. Regular PC cable from adapter to mains.
ninjapanda
Member
(07-30-2012, 11:43 AM)
ninjapanda's Avatar

Originally Posted by Bboy AJ

WTF? I've been reading about tech for forever and I've never heard of anything like this. Awesome. I need to read up on it. Any disadvantages?

Yeah, when it works it works well. If it doesn't work it doesn't work at all. Depending on the setup of your place it can be quite hard to know whether it will work for you or not

If your power is all on the same phase you should be fine. I've also heard that the newer versions bypass this restriction by sending data through the neutral line but I am uncertain if this is true as I wouldnt think it would be compatible with previous adaptors and thus wouldn't be standard compliant.

This thread should help you a bit: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum....cfm?t=1512203

I must say this form of technology seems to stay relatively unknown for some reason. I only stumbled upon Ethernet over Power when I was looking in to Power over Ethernet for a different application. Nevertheless it is a brilliant solution to a very common problem.
KennyLinder
Member
(07-30-2012, 11:52 AM)
KennyLinder's Avatar
My friend uses Ethernet over power and it works really well. His set up is

(Large 4 bedroom house, UK)

Upstairs
- Virgin cable enters house
- Virgin wireless router
- iMac (wired with power ethernet)
- 360 (wired, virgin hub)
- PS3 (wired, virgin hub)
- Power Ethernet

Downstairs
- Power Ethernet with wireless sender (iPhone etc picks this up automatically as stronger signal downstairs, Virgin wireless superhub is shit for coverage)
- Network Blu-Ray player (wired)
- Apple TV (wireless)

He's on Virgin 30mb internet. On tests on iMac upstairs he gets 30mb down/3mb up, and when testing downstairs wireless from wireless sender he gets 30mb down/3mb up.

He doesn't get any issues, but its a relatively new house (mid 80's build), so I guess quality of wiring helps. I can only assume the house is one ring, which is unusual for a large house. Who knows? Anyway, it works!
Bboy AJ
Banned
(09-15-2012, 11:37 AM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar
I just got my NAS. Synology DS411j. Can I add more hard drives to it later? Or do I have to add all four HDDs at once? I want to avoid having to delete all the currently existing HDDs if I add a new HDD. Possible?
maeh2k
Member
(09-15-2012, 12:33 PM)
maeh2k's Avatar

Originally Posted by Bboy AJ

I just got my NAS. Synology DS411j. Can I add more hard drives to it later? Or do I have to add all four HDDs at once? I want to avoid having to delete all the currently existing HDDs if I add a new HDD. Possible?

I noticed the thread and now I'm reading up a bit on NAS devices. I looked at the amazon reviews of this model.

Looks like that should be no issue. Here's one from a guy who first only had two HDDs on Raid 1, then added a third HDD and switched to Raid 5 without issues.

Hatte erst 2*2TB Platten als RAID1 verbaut, dann die 3. 2TB-Platte eingebaut und auf RAID5 umgestellt. Hat alles ohne Probleme und auf anhieb funktioniert. Die Konvertierung lief allerdings knapp 1,5 Tage. Ist aber kein Problem einfach die DS so lange in Ruhe lassen.

accx
Member
(09-15-2012, 12:40 PM)
accx's Avatar

Originally Posted by FillerB


Greatest combo. While a HTPC with a sufficiently large HDD will suffice, a htpc with a small SSD with the bare essentials (Linux, XBMC) that streams the movies from a NAS (by wire) is far cheaper, blazing fast and all-around awesome.

Why would there be a siginifcant performance boost with adding a NAS? I mean wouldn't adding internal drives to an already up and running HTPC provide the best performance?
I mean it would just add another hardware's latency/access time on top of it all, instead of just having it centralized in one device (the HTPC).
It just seems really unnecessary adding a NAS if you already have a htpc up and running.
Sure, the HTPC will be running an OS and various software but i can't imagine that would cause that much of a performance drop.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(09-15-2012, 01:24 PM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar

Originally Posted by maeh2k

I noticed the thread and now I'm reading up a bit on NAS devices. I looked at the amazon reviews of this model.

Looks like that should be no issue. Here's one from a guy who first only had two HDDs on Raid 1, then added a third HDD and switched to Raid 5 without issues.

Cool, I'll buy 2 3TB drives now. Save the other two for later. They're expensive.
maeh2k
Member
(09-15-2012, 01:36 PM)
maeh2k's Avatar
I'm wondering how exactly those NAS things work and if I need one.

Lets say I was using a Windows 8 device with a relatively small SSD, my old PC, an old Macbook, and my parents also have a notebook running Windows 8.

Right now (not running Windows 8 yet and I don't have that Ultrabook-y Windows 8 device yet), I back up the mac from time to time with an external HDD (like every two weeks -- plug in, back up, plug out), use Live Mesh and SkyDrive to synchronize some stuff with the cloud and with my old PC, and my parent infrequently back up the notebook with another external HDD.


With a NAS, could I use it for Time Machine on the Mac, and Windows 8's History Vault?
Can you put Windows Libraries on the NAS so that multiple PCs/users can use them?
Does connecting to the NAS work automatically when I connect to the network with a mobile device or when the PCs are running and the NAS powers on? Or will every device somehow complain when it doesn't find the NAS?
Do you keep it on 24/7? I don't really need hourly time machine backups.
Any issues using NAS devices with a router running DD-WRT?
Kibs
Member
(09-15-2012, 01:45 PM)

Originally Posted by accx

Why would there be a siginifcant performance boost with adding a NAS? I mean wouldn't adding internal drives to an already up and running HTPC provide the best performance?
I mean it would just add another hardware's latency/access time on top of it all, instead of just having it centralized in one device (the HTPC).
It just seems really unnecessary adding a NAS if you already have a htpc up and running.
Sure, the HTPC will be running an OS and various software but i can't imagine that would cause that much of a performance drop.

Adding a nas will obviously not really give a performance boost - but does this really matter for a htpc? Either your media streams without choppiness or it doesn't :p
On the other hand, a nas offers so much functionality in an easy to manage package with the added benefit of consuming less power than keeping an htpc running 24/7.

My current setup is :
- Synology DS411slim with 4 1tb disks in raid5
Opened up to the outside world so i can use the DS Audio app to stream it's music to my iPhone, manage downloads and my photo library
- Boxee Box downstairs
- rest of my living room plugged in to the network using a powerline adapter (my router is behind the couch)
- iMac upstairs also plugged in using a powerline adapter
- timemachine backups done on the nas

Also use it as a local webserver to work on webprojects but that's a different discussion :p
Red
point your penis at me,
and have a good day
(09-15-2012, 02:32 PM)
Red's Avatar
Seeing this thread bumped reminds me:

I have a synology ds212j, and have been trying to set it uo for remote access. I am on OS X and keep getting errors. Not sure if it's me or the device (errors like 'incorrect domain name' in cloud station). Has anyone else set this up to act as a remote server?
accx
Member
(09-15-2012, 05:10 PM)
accx's Avatar

Originally Posted by Kibs

Adding a nas will obviously not really give a performance boost - but does this really matter for a htpc? Either your media streams without choppiness or it doesn't :p
On the other hand, a nas offers so much functionality in an easy to manage package with the added benefit of consuming less power than keeping an htpc running 24/7.

My current setup is :
- Synology DS411slim with 4 1tb disks in raid5
Opened up to the outside world so i can use the DS Audio app to stream it's music to my iPhone, manage downloads and my photo library
- Boxee Box downstairs
- rest of my living room plugged in to the network using a powerline adapter (my router is behind the couch)
- iMac upstairs also plugged in using a powerline adapter
- timemachine backups done on the nas

Also use it as a local webserver to work on webprojects but that's a different discussion :p

He said it was blazingly fast. So i assumed it was faster than going the easier, cheaper route. Trying to approach this from different sides but can't come up with how this would be better in any way. It would cost more, it would add another device taking up space, it will offer no real benefits.
Sure, if one doesn't already own a HTPC, a NAS would be considered. The small footprint (both physically and for the electrical bill) would make it attractive. Then again, building a HTPC would probably come out in similar (or maybe less) costs for a lot more features.
Also, having a HTPC with sleep mode and Wake on Lan would probably not make that much of a bigger footprint on the electrical bill. Maybe if it was running 24/7 but even then i think it's bullshit.

Getting a fully fleshed out OS and all the capabilities with it would be far superior than what a NAS would/could do. I suppose that for end users that can't operate electronics beyond plugging a cable into a power socket it might be a little bit of a hassle.

I'm not trying to shit up the thread by saying "NAS are worthless, build a HTPC", i'm just saying that there's better options.

If i think what you mean by having powerline networking i'm just gonna say ugh. I've had limited experience with this and i will never, ever touch that again. But that's going off topic ;p
404Ender
Member
(09-15-2012, 06:09 PM)
404Ender's Avatar

Originally Posted by accx

He said it was blazingly fast. So i assumed it was faster than going the easier, cheaper route. Trying to approach this from different sides but can't come up with how this would be better in any way. It would cost more, it would add another device taking up space, it will offer no real benefits.
Sure, if one doesn't already own a HTPC, a NAS would be considered. The small footprint (both physically and for the electrical bill) would make it attractive. Then again, building a HTPC would probably come out in similar (or maybe less) costs for a lot more features.
Also, having a HTPC with sleep mode and Wake on Lan would probably not make that much of a bigger footprint on the electrical bill. Maybe if it was running 24/7 but even then i think it's bullshit.

Getting a fully fleshed out OS and all the capabilities with it would be far superior than what a NAS would/could do. I suppose that for end users that can't operate electronics beyond plugging a cable into a power socket it might be a little bit of a hassle.

I'm not trying to shit up the thread by saying "NAS are worthless, build a HTPC", i'm just saying that there's better options.

If i think what you mean by having powerline networking i'm just gonna say ugh. I've had limited experience with this and i will never, ever touch that again. But that's going off topic ;p

An HTPC is worthless if you need more than 2-3 HDDs, or any kind of hot swappability.

They both serve completely different purposes, personally I'd never choose either one or the other on their own if I had a need for networked storage/backup/streaming and also media playback.
accx
Member
(09-15-2012, 06:38 PM)
accx's Avatar

Originally Posted by 404Ender

An HTPC is worthless if you need more than 2-3 HDDs, or any kind of hot swappability.

They both serve completely different purposes, personally I'd never choose either one or the other on their own if I had a need for networked storage/backup/streaming and also media playback.


What? Hotswapping have been around for ages on PC's.
I currently have 4 drives in my HTPC. Granted, the case isn't the smallest (which i agree, a NAS wins). An HTPC is just like any other PC.
Have it connected through a gigabit switch with wlan capabilites and several devices will be able to stream and use it for storage (granted that the hardware is up to snuff).
It wouldn't need to have state of the art hardware aswell. Hell, mine is running on an old ass Core 2 duo. Going with something smaller like AMD llano (or whatever is their latest iteration) would probably suffice for most tasks.

Sure, if you need to do more tasks (i.e two computers running a total backup) then having one computer backing up to a NAS and one to the HTPC would take some load off the HTPC. Other than that, i can't see the reason getting one if you already own a HTPC.
kehs
Banned
(09-15-2012, 06:59 PM)
Like 404 mentions, HTPC and NAS are pretty different beasts.

You could build a monster HTPC with NAS capabilities, but the power draw from having that thing on all the time would be ridiculous.

The idea of a NAS is for a wholly independent device with a software layer as thin as possible.

Originally Posted by maeh2k

I'm wondering how exactly those NAS things work and if I need one.

Lets say I was using a Windows 8 device with a relatively small SSD, my old PC, an old Macbook, and my parents also have a notebook running Windows 8.

Right now (not running Windows 8 yet and I don't have that Ultrabook-y Windows 8 device yet), I back up the mac from time to time with an external HDD (like every two weeks -- plug in, back up, plug out), use Live Mesh and SkyDrive to synchronize some stuff with the cloud and with my old PC, and my parent infrequently back up the notebook with another external HDD.


With a NAS, could I use it for Time Machine on the Mac, and Windows 8's History Vault?
Can you put Windows Libraries on the NAS so that multiple PCs/users can use them?
Does connecting to the NAS work automatically when I connect to the network with a mobile device or when the PCs are running and the NAS powers on? Or will every device somehow complain when it doesn't find the NAS?
Do you keep it on 24/7? I don't really need hourly time machine backups.
Any issues using NAS devices with a router running DD-WRT?

Most NASes have support for Time Machine, not sure about the W8 though.
Not sure what you mean by sharing libraries.
The NAS is typically accessed through standard network shares, everything from SMB to AFP and FTP, so if you're device can access though, it'll be able to see the NAS shares.
I keep them on all the time. When they are not in use the HDDs spin down to saving mode (make sure you buy drives that are compatible/tested with the NAS)
Shouldn't be any issues, because all the devices do is put out standard network connections. You just have to disable any DHCP or network settings that some NASes have built in.
Kibs
Member
(09-15-2012, 07:30 PM)

Originally Posted by accx

If i think what you mean by having powerline networking i'm just gonna say ugh. I've had limited experience with this and i will never, ever touch that again. But that's going off topic ;p

300mbit, absolutely stable and no need to pull cabling all over my rented apt is a pretty big win :p
Modern powerline technology is nothing like it was 3 years ago and actually pretty fantastic.

Only if you plan to virtualize stuff really. Though some higher end NASes can virtualize smaller stuff.

We actually use a synology RS3412xs to power a vSphere clustered webserver park at work. The performance on that thing is incredible since only pretty high-end SANs seem to support vSphere 5 VAAI currently.
Not to mention being able to backup the iScsi LUNs on the nas directly saves us from having to get an (expensive) veaam backup solution. Obviously it's missing some of the features, but our goal with this setup was to build a cost-efficient reliable and easily scalable solution.
Really worked out very well
accx
Member
(09-15-2012, 07:34 PM)
accx's Avatar

Originally Posted by Copernicus

Like 404 mentions, HTPC and NAS are pretty different beasts.

You could build a monster HTPC with NAS capabilities, but the power draw from having that thing on all the time would be ridiculous.

The idea of a NAS is for a wholly independent device with a software layer as thin as possible.

I get what a NAS is and why it is preferable in some cases, and i've touched on some of it. My original question still stands though when it comes to already owning a HTPC, why would one add another hardware layer on top of it when the HTPC already have the capabilities of doing exactly what a NAS would do, and more?

I actually would like some sources on power draw and what that would amount to in costs per year, because i recall reading about it a couple of years ago and it seemed negligible.
I don't remember where i read it though.
I can't seem to find any hard data on it after some searches so i would be interested if anyone could provide it.
Even if the cost would be a large sum for running 24/7, why not utilize Hibernate and run WOL?

The low profile and easy to use makes a NAS perfect, but to say that it can do anything other than a HTPC is wrong. I would also argue the whole "HTPC would cost more running 24/7", and it most likely would cost less to build.


Originally Posted by Kibs

300mbit, absolutely stable and no need to pull cabling all over my rented apt is a pretty big win :p
Modern powerline technology is nothing like it was 3 years ago and actually pretty fantastic.

Wow, cool. I didn't know that. I think it was at least 3 years ago since i last had my run in with it and it was absolutely shit.
Kibs
Member
(09-15-2012, 07:50 PM)

Originally Posted by accx

I get what a NAS is and why it is preferable in some cases, and i've touched on some of it. My original question still stands though when it comes to already owning a HTPC, why would one add another hardware layer on top of it when the HTPC already have the capabilities of doing exactly what a NAS would do, and more?

I actually would like some sources on power draw and what that would amount to in costs per year, because i recall reading about it a couple of years ago and it seemed negligible.
I don't remember where i read it though.
I can't seem to find any hard data on it after some searches so i would be interested if anyone could provide it.
Even if the cost would be a large sum for running 24/7, why not utilize Hibernate and run WOL?

The low profile and easy to use makes a NAS perfect, but to say that it can do anything other than a HTPC is wrong. I would also argue the whole "HTPC would cost more running 24/7", and it most likely would cost less to build.




Wow, cool. I didn't know that. I think it was at least 3 years ago since i last had my run in with it and it was absolutely shit.

Synology has power footprints listed on all their models (when fully loaded with disks). Their latest models are focussed on getting this down as much as humanly possible - think the 2bay models hover at around 17w when used / 6w idle. Don't think most htpcs can touch that :p

It's true that there's nothing that a nas can do that a htpc can't - it's just that these things are optimized to do their job while a htpc serves a different purpose. To each their own though, i personally don't feel like fiddling around with a linux install to get things to work after coming home from work.

So yes, a nas is easier to use - which is their main selling point for me :)
kehs
Banned
(09-15-2012, 07:56 PM)

Originally Posted by accx

I get what a NAS is and why it is preferable in some cases, and i've touched on some of it. My original question still stands though when it comes to already owning a HTPC, why would one add another hardware layer on top of it when the HTPC already have the capabilities of doing exactly what a NAS would do, and more?

I actually would like some sources on power draw and what that would amount to in costs per year, because i recall reading about it a couple of years ago and it seemed negligible.
I don't remember where i read it though.
I can't seem to find any hard data on it after some searches so i would be interested if anyone could provide it.
Even if the cost would be a large sum for running 24/7, why not utilize Hibernate and run WOL?

The low profile and easy to use makes a NAS perfect, but to say that it can do anything other than a HTPC is wrong. I would also argue the whole "HTPC would cost more running 24/7", and it most likely would cost less to build.

Looking into it, you're right, the power things have evened out. Didn't realize HTPCs are so efficient now.

I prefer prebuilt hardware for a NAS as opposed to doing a home build HTPC. One of my NASes had been running strong for about 5 years, and when it did have some issues it was replaced with few questions asked, and the new unit still has lifetime warranty. When it comes to data storage, I don't mess around anymore with hardware. Even though I still build my own computer for use, for data storage I'll still take a NAS that's been tested for HD compatibility and reliability.

If you already have an HTPC with RAID setup, then adding a NAS would be superfluous.
yn-neko hates a cat
Banned
(09-15-2012, 08:03 PM)
I roll with this:

Synology DS1812+

  • 194.48 MB/sec Writing, 202.20 MB/sec Reading
  • Scaling up to 18 Drives with Synology DX510
  • Featuring SuperSpeed USB 3.0
  • Expandable RAM Module (Up to 3GB)
  • 2 LAN with Failover and Link Aggregation Support
  • CPU Passive cooling Technology & System Fan Redundancy

Other Random PoI
  • Native UPS Support
  • Amazing Linux-based OS with a Stupid-easy UI Front-end
  • Can Team the Eternet Ports or have it behave as a router/gatway
  • Anything you can think of... it probably already does
I highly recommend it.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(09-15-2012, 09:55 PM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar
I owned an HTPC and it's great. But now I roll with a NAS. It's a lot more efficient for my set up, I think. I want to stream stuff to more than one computer at a time. I haven't tried it yet but I hope it works well.

Is there any iOS and Android app where I can pull media off the NAS and stream it?
kehs
Banned
(09-15-2012, 10:12 PM)

Originally Posted by Bboy AJ

I owned an HTPC and it's great. But now I roll with a NAS. It's a lot more efficient for my set up, I think. I want to stream stuff to more than one computer at a time. I haven't tried it yet but I hope it works well.

Is there any iOS and Android app where I can pull media off the NAS and stream it?

Synology has a couple of apps for music/videos/pictures, but you're better off just finding any media app that look into network shares (avia/dice player/etc).

I can't think of any music app that looks at network shares though, and the synology one is kinda lame.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(09-15-2012, 11:17 PM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar

Originally Posted by Copernicus

Synology has a couple of apps for music/videos/pictures, but you're better off just finding any media app that look into network shares (avia/dice player/etc).

I can't think of any music app that looks at network shares though, and the synology one is kinda lame.

Using Dice for Android. Thanks. Now to find a good one for iOS. Airplayer seems like it'd do the trick but $5, hmm. I wonder if there are cheaper alternatives.
404Ender
Member
(09-15-2012, 11:55 PM)
404Ender's Avatar

Originally Posted by accx

What? Hotswapping have been around for ages on PC's.
I currently have 4 drives in my HTPC. Granted, the case isn't the smallest (which i agree, a NAS wins). An HTPC is just like any other PC.

Oh I know, it's just that IMO if an HTPC case is large enough to support at least 4 HDDs and/or hot swapping, it sort of misses the point of an HTPC.

Originally Posted by accx

I get what a NAS is and why it is preferable in some cases, and i've touched on some of it. My original question still stands though when it comes to already owning a HTPC, why would one add another hardware layer on top of it when the HTPC already have the capabilities of doing exactly what a NAS would do, and more?

Don't think of it as "adding a layer". It's much more like modularizing

There's a principle in software design called "separation of concerns" that applies just as well to hardware. The idea is that it's much cleaner and more efficient to have N smaller things that focus on doing one task each and doing them well, than one large single device/system that handles all N things on its own. I understand that some prefer the swiss army knife approach when it comes to tech, but personally I think it's inelegant, and it certainly doesn't scale as well. If your requirements change, you can just deal with the single machine handling the task in question, and not need to worry about the effect upgrading/changing it will have on anything else, because it's an encapsulated system.

Sure you could stuff 4 HDDs into an HTPC, but then you have this giant beast of a machine that's going to get loud, hot, and draw a lot of power. Also, having 8, 12 or even 16+ HDDs in a NAS isn't too uncommon these days either (relatively speaking, of course...I'm talking about within the market of people who know what a NAS and an HTPC are). Would you really want to be sticking all of those HDDs into the same machine that is responsible for handling all of your media ripping/encoding, transcoding, internet streaming, TV recording, gaming, etc?

In my opinion, that's adding way too much complexity to one device. It has too many responsibilities.

Now, if you know your needs are relatively stable, that 4 TB of space is plenty and you're just repurposing an old computer to stream media directly to a screen, then of course it doesn't make sense to buy a separate NAS. I completely understand that and wouldn't recommend a full HTPC + NAS solution to just anyone.
accx
Member
(09-16-2012, 01:20 AM)
accx's Avatar

Originally Posted by 404Ender

Oh I know, it's just that IMO if an HTPC case is large enough to support at least 4 HDDs and/or hot swapping, it sort of misses the point of an HTPC.



Don't think of it as "adding a layer". It's much more like modularizing

There's a principle in software design called "separation of concerns" that applies just as well to hardware. The idea is that it's much cleaner and more efficient to have N smaller things that focus on doing one task each and doing them well, than one large single device/system that handles all N things on its own. I understand that some prefer the swiss army knife approach when it comes to tech, but personally I think it's inelegant, and it certainly doesn't scale as well. If your requirements change, you can just deal with the single machine handling the task in question, and not need to worry about the effect upgrading/changing it will have on anything else, because it's an encapsulated system.

Sure you could stuff 4 HDDs into an HTPC, but then you have this giant beast of a machine that's going to get loud, hot, and draw a lot of power. Also, having 8, 12 or even 16+ HDDs in a NAS isn't too uncommon these days either (relatively speaking, of course...I'm talking about within the market of people who know what a NAS and an HTPC are). Would you really want to be sticking all of those HDDs into the same machine that is responsible for handling all of your media ripping/encoding, transcoding, internet streaming, TV recording, gaming, etc?

In my opinion, that's adding way too much complexity to one device. It has too many responsibilities.

Now, if you know your needs are relatively stable, that 4 TB of space is plenty and you're just repurposing an old computer to stream media directly to a screen, then of course it doesn't make sense to buy a separate NAS. I completely understand that and wouldn't recommend a full HTPC + NAS solution to just anyone.

Absolutely and i agree with you somewhat. My point was just that of the previous post i originally quoted that stated that it would be more efficient adding another layer of hardware than just adding more drives to an already existing HTPC.

The only thing i could agree with you regarding stuffing more drives in an HTPC is that it would require a larger case, but becoming louder and hotter? Nope. I can't agree with you on that. Sure, it would be "louder" than an NAS, but it wouldn't instantly become louder than the HTPC you already have (sans harddrive trashing of course, but imo it's negligible).
I also think that an HTPC would give you more freedom of upgrading than a closed system like an NAS. A NAS would of course bring better closed integration and easier set up, but as a poweruser myself, i'd prefer more options and modular support. Granted, my knowledge about NAS isn't as up to snuff as i would want it to be, so there's probably a lot more upgrading options than i give credit for.
I really don't see the difference between sticking 8 drives into a HTPC and doing it in a NAS? The performance drop would literally be the same, if there even would be one.
The simplicity and ease of usage of a NAS is probably more wanted over an HTPC, and i get that. I just don't think that adding a NAS on top of a HTPC would provide that much of a difference. It's basically just adding more drives to a HTPC, but instead of SATA it's connected through the network.

I think maybe this has derailed the thread somewhat and i apologize. I still want to point out that i do not think it's pointless getting a NAS, even if you have a HTPC. For myself, i wouldn't do it but i can understand the reasons why. It just becomes more expensive, imo.
404Ender
Member
(09-16-2012, 03:07 AM)
404Ender's Avatar

Originally Posted by accx

The only thing i could agree with you regarding stuffing more drives in an HTPC is that it would require a larger case, but becoming louder and hotter? Nope. I can't agree with you on that. Sure, it would be "louder" than an NAS, but it wouldn't instantly become louder than the HTPC you already have (sans harddrive trashing of course, but imo it's negligible).

Adding more HDDs to a case will make it hotter and louder. Each HDD will generate additional heat and noise, no really getting around that. The nice thing about having your storage separate from your client (HTPC) is that you can stick it in a closet with cooling somewhere and not worry about either. I guess you could do that with an HTPC, but then you'd have to run video cable through to your TV, and you couldn't use a remote.

Originally Posted by accx

I also think that an HTPC would give you more freedom of upgrading than a closed system like an NAS. A NAS would of course bring better closed integration and easier set up, but as a poweruser myself, i'd prefer more options and modular support. Granted, my knowledge about NAS isn't as up to snuff as i would want it to be, so there's probably a lot more upgrading options than i give credit for.

You can build your own NAS from scratch if you're a power user. I go back and forth on which I prefer, but you have the option.

Originally Posted by accx

I really don't see the difference between sticking 8 drives into a HTPC and doing it in a NAS? The performance drop would literally be the same, if there even would be one.

First of all, that would be a massive HTPC! I realize size isn't that important to some, but many of the HTPCs sold these days are around the size of a Nintendo Wii, if not smaller. With Raspeberry Pi + XMBC, they'll be about the size of an Apple TV (heck you can even jailbreak an ATV2 and use it as an HTPC).

Performance-wise, if you only have a 1 client system, you're right, it would be equivalent. Performance becomes an issue when you have multiple clients all connecting to your main HTPC. Without a NAS, that main HTPC has to both serve media to multiple clients plus play back media itself. It's juggling multiple streams. With a NAS, each client only has a single stream (to itself). The NAS does all of the serving, so your machines that actually play the media won't have issues, and the NAS is specially built to handle simultaneous network connections without performance issues, while an HTPC probably isn't.

I think maybe this has derailed the thread somewhat and i apologize. I still want to point out that i do not think it's pointless getting a NAS, even if you have a HTPC. For myself, i wouldn't do it but i can understand the reasons why. It just becomes more expensive, imo.

Nah nothing wrong with a little healthy debate IMO. We can continue this over PM though if people are getting irritated. I think we both see each other's POV anyway, just different personal preferences.
maharg
idspispopd
(09-16-2012, 03:42 AM)
maharg's Avatar
I'm thinking of getting one of these:
http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX34516

And a small appliance machine to run FreeNAS on connected to it. Cheapest way I can find to house more than 4 drives and I like the flexibility of having it in the future. Actual computer cases with large numbers of 3.5" bays are ridiculously expensive.
kehs
Banned
(09-16-2012, 03:46 AM)

Originally Posted by maharg

I'm thinking of getting one of these:
http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX34516

And a small appliance machine to run FreeNAS on connected to it. Cheapest way I can find to house more than 4 drives and I like the flexibility of having it in the future. Actual computer cases with large numbers of 3.5" bays are ridiculously expensive.

Any reason why you want to do an enclosure/freenas setup?

Synolgy has a 4 disk diskless for about $400, and you won't need the extra box.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822108066
maharg
idspispopd
(09-16-2012, 03:49 AM)
maharg's Avatar
Because I don't want 4, I want 8. :)
kehs
Banned
(09-16-2012, 03:52 AM)
Oops, haha.

Eight drives, I'd probably go with a built in RAID on a server instead of an enclosure then.
maharg
idspispopd
(09-16-2012, 04:06 AM)
maharg's Avatar
Meh. Server chassis are a lot more expensive than what I'm planning to do.
kehs
Banned
(09-16-2012, 04:16 AM)
I just looked up prices for 8 bay nases.

EEK.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(09-16-2012, 08:14 AM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar

Originally Posted by Copernicus

I just looked up prices for 8 bay nases.

EEK.

Yep, ridiculous.
mike23
Member
(09-16-2012, 09:56 AM)
mike23's Avatar

Originally Posted by maharg

I'm thinking of getting one of these:
http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX34516

And a small appliance machine to run FreeNAS on connected to it. Cheapest way I can find to house more than 4 drives and I like the flexibility of having it in the future. Actual computer cases with large numbers of 3.5" bays are ridiculously expensive.

That actually looks pretty nice for the price.

For a case, you could always look at the Fractal Design cases (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811352017 for example) it can fit at least 10 and it's only $140
If you can find an R3 for a good deal, it'd be a good option as well.

You could also use cheap converters to make more room for 3.5 drives, like
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817993002
Baron Doggystyle von Woof
Member
(09-16-2012, 10:25 AM)
Baron Doggystyle von Woof's Avatar
I have been checking out there site. Synology seems like top of the line for NAS.

I think I will go for a cheap 2 bay version. 6 TB is enough for me. Currently have all my stuff on 3TB.
maharg
idspispopd
(09-16-2012, 10:39 AM)
maharg's Avatar

Originally Posted by mike23

That actually looks pretty nice for the price.

For a case, you could always look at the Fractal Design cases (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811352017 for example) it can fit at least 10 and it's only $140
If you can find an R3 for a good deal, it'd be a good option as well.

You could also use cheap converters to make more room for 3.5 drives, like
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817993002

That case looks pretty nice, though I worry about heat. I feel like keeping the drives as far away from the core as possible is a good idea.

I'm seriously baffled why so many computer cases have so many 5.25 bays these days though. Like, even that one has 4 of them in addition to the 10 3.5" bays. Why? 1 is fine. 2 pushing it. But 4? Who uses 4 5.25" bays? It's like case manufacturers are stuck in 1990 or something.

Yeah I know that they're sometimes used for fans and you can use those converters (most of which, unfortunately, have pretty crappy reviews if they have hot swap bays, which I'd want if I went with that). But still.
Dan27
Member
(09-16-2012, 11:01 AM)
Dan27's Avatar
Own a Synology DS410 with four 2TB Seagate Barracuda Green HDDs, in Raid 5 config.

Really like it - however am perplexed on how to upgrade in the future. Will need inventive thinking to move all the contents elsewhere when the time comes.

Also, have to say that I'm impressed with the development Synology have given the operating system from v3 to v4. Good stuff.
Bboy AJ
Banned
(09-16-2012, 11:03 AM)
Bboy AJ's Avatar

Originally Posted by Baron Doggystyle von Woof

I have been checking out there site. Synology seems like top of the line for NAS.

I think I will go for a cheap 2 bay version. 6 TB is enough for me. Currently have all my stuff on 3TB.

I did a lot of looking for a NAS. Go with Synology. Also, it's not that much more for a 4 bay. I'd go with a 4 bay, just to future proof.
maharg
idspispopd
(09-16-2012, 11:17 AM)
maharg's Avatar
I gotta say I don't understand why anyone would want a 2-drive array at all. Cost:benefit ratio-wise mirroring isn't worth it and concatenating is too failure-prone. At 3 drives you can get 2/3rds of the space you paid for, at 4 3/4.
Canis lupus
Banned
(09-16-2012, 11:22 AM)
I'm in a dilemma, I already have an htpc where I can put 3 hdds in, connected to the network it would make it basically a nas. But I don't want it to run 24/7 because of the power consumption. Are there any nas with atleast a 4 bay drive for around 300-400? Do they already come with usb3.0?
ninjapanda
Member
(09-16-2012, 11:26 AM)
ninjapanda's Avatar

Originally Posted by maeh2k

I'm wondering how exactly those NAS things work and if I need one.

Lets say I was using a Windows 8 device with a relatively small SSD, my old PC, an old Macbook, and my parents also have a notebook running Windows 8.

Right now (not running Windows 8 yet and I don't have that Ultrabook-y Windows 8 device yet), I back up the mac from time to time with an external HDD (like every two weeks -- plug in, back up, plug out), use Live Mesh and SkyDrive to synchronize some stuff with the cloud and with my old PC, and my parent infrequently back up the notebook with another external HDD.

The MAC, old PCs, and Windows 8 PCs (via third party programs like "Cobian") can backup to the same NAS, they wont care about the format of the HDDs as it is on the network. You will be able to access the NAS off site via the internet so you wont need to waste bandwidth syncing with another cloud service. The NAS will essentially become your cloud. However NAS devices can sync with third party cloud services directly as well to act as your off site backup if you so wish. I use "Symform" with my QNAP NAS which provides me with 100GB cloud storage for contributing 100GB of my local storage for other ppl to use as their cloud.

With a NAS, could I use it for Time Machine on the Mac, and Windows 8's History Vault?

A number of NAS devices will happily support time machine. History vault ... not so much at this stage since Windows 8 has not been released. I feel somewhat confident that compatibility will retrofitted if it is possible to QNAP and Synology devices. I am less confident this will be the case with Netgear ReadyNAS or Dlink devices as firmware updates are less common. I am unfamiliar with other brands of NAS devices.

Can you put Windows Libraries on the NAS so that multiple PCs/users can use them?

You can map the NAS shares as "mapped network drives". So it can show up like a local storage device and be assigned a drive letter e.g. Drive M: under "my computer". If you map the same share to multiple devices each device can see and use files simultaneously. HOWEVER, you can't integrate said shares into your Windows Libraries as you cannot index network locations.

Does connecting to the NAS work automatically when I connect to the network with a mobile device or when the PCs are running and the NAS powers on? Or will every device somehow complain when it doesn't find the NAS?

It should connect automatically with PCs. If there is a problem it will pop up a little warning about being unable to connect with the mapped drive just above your tray. I find mobile devices need to be connected manually, most likely to save power. Settings are saved but you normally have to "tap to connect". Some NAS manufacturers provide apps for iOS and android. I have a symbian phone and I could map the NAS shares as mapped network drives until recently so it was all integrated in to my file browser. I presume you can do that as well with android but I am uncertain.

Do you keep it on 24/7? I don't really need hourly time machine backups.

You can generally set a period of time of inaction for the internal HDDs to spin down to save power. If you want to save more power certain NAS devices do allow you to schedule shut down and start up times. Again these two things are really based on which brand of NAS it is you get. QNAP and Synology had no issues, the Netgear ReadyNAS I set up could schedule shut down but not start up ... so be careful.

Any issues using NAS devices with a router running DD-WRT?

Nope.
ninjapanda
Member
(09-16-2012, 11:35 AM)
ninjapanda's Avatar

Originally Posted by TurkishEmperor

I'm in a dilemma, I already have an htpc where I can put 3 hdds in, connected to the network it would make it basically a nas. But I don't want it to run 24/7 because of the power consumption. Are there any nas with atleast a 4 bay drive for around 300-400? Do they already come with usb3.0?

Yeah they exist (I think).

I'm in Australia Land but using my fuzzy math a QNAP TS-412 can be had for just under your budget (with USB 2.0) and a QNAP TS 419P II (with USB 3.0) for slightly above your budget. The synology NAS devices should be similar in price point.
catfish
I have a foreskin yet I do not have AIDS
(09-16-2012, 11:57 AM)
catfish's Avatar
I have the 2 TB raid 1 version of this

http://go.iomega.com/en/products/net...erviewItem_tab

it's cheap, does what it should and if you have a hard drive fail support via the website just sends you a new one.

Pretty happy with it.

When I say 'does what i should' I mean stream 1080p movies to any device in the house with no issues. It's my media centre(s) storage.

Thread Tools