coolbreeze
macrumors 68000
So you have a server rack in your home, do you? 🙄
I have the EX487. I surely hope HP provides expanded Mac functionality via a software update. Even a paid update would be fine with me.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
HP Introduces Updated Cross-Platform MediaSmart Home Servers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So you have a server rack in your home, do you? 🙄
I have the EX487. I surely hope HP provides expanded Mac functionality via a software update. Even a paid update would be fine with me.
While I agree it would be nice if Apple would jump into this market, I own one of the EX485's and I have to say I'm quite happy with it. No, it's not perfect, but it's actually quite a bit more snappy than I thought it would be and the features/usability are pretty good. I will likely upgrade to this series when they become available and just sell my 485 box. The 485 does about 90% of what the new one will do but it just automates most of it. And adds "full" time machine restore capability (or so it sounds). These things are really built for people with both Windows and Mac based systems in their house (like me). If you're running strictly Mac then I can see the incentive to hold out for a better solution, though I think someone already mentioned that the mac mini would make a pretty nice solution.
arkmannj
macrumors 68000
Besides the hot swappable SATA drives a Mac mini with OS X Server installed can do all of this. But it's still not Media oriented. (For example: iTunes Home Sharing server)
Don't forget Firewire, if we're making a wish list I want atleast 2 Firewire 800 ports.
But my preference would be that Apple would make Media Server centered capabilities incorporated with OS X Client or OS X Server. Then yiou could buy a copy of that and then buy Apple hardware that would best suit your needs. (I'm guessing most of us would be just fine with a Mac Mini)
all mac solution aside, the mac mini doesn't really allow for the expandability of these boxes in an all in one solution. my preference would be to have a stand alone box instead of a headless computer.
hitekalex
macrumors 68000
RAID-5 has its own share of weaknesses. The main one being that it doesn't protect you from file system level data corruption, or controller failure/corruption that can result in a loss of the whole array.
In terms of performance, you actually get a performance hit with RAID-5. Only with RAID-0 (mirroring) you get the improved dual-read performance, but you're obviously not taking advantage of N+1 redundancy in that setup.
I personally prefer Win Home Server approach, where the drives are universally readable outside of the system.. and there are no complexities / performance penalties of RAID-5.
hitekalex
macrumors 68000
Like what? I am not sure what could possibly be done on a dedicated media server, that could not be done on full-blown MacOS system like Mini.
The only thing Mini lacks in media server department is expandable internal storage. But that can be easily overcome with cheap FW800-attached external storage.
GoodWatch
macrumors 6502a
Synology is making big steps towards this. I have a 207+ that does most of the non-specific Apple program items. It is my web server as well.
lord patton
macrumors 65816
Just as it received Genius support after said feature was introduced in iTunes, I fully expect AppleTV to receive Home Sharing, and soon.
That won't satisfy everyone's needs for a home server (obviously) but it would help a lot of folks who are primarily looking for household-wide synced media distribution device. With AirTunes and the Remote app, it would be pretty robust, imo.
It would also make me wish I had the 160 GB version!
That won't satisfy everyone's needs for a home server (obviously) but it would help a lot of folks who are primarily looking for household-wide synced media distribution device. With AirTunes and the Remote app, it would be pretty robust, imo.
It would also make me wish I had the 160 GB version!
I just bought the EX485 about 4-5 months ago, along with three 1 TB drives. I primarily use it as a NAS, but I installed iTunes on it with the intention of attaching my 
TV to that library for syncing. I never was too impressed with the backup and streaming features.
The most attractive part of the new models is the 2.5 GHz Dual-Core processor in the EX497. It could also function as my video converter, running my Handbrake queue round the clock!
TV to that library for syncing. I never was too impressed with the backup and streaming features.The most attractive part of the new models is the 2.5 GHz Dual-Core processor in the EX497. It could also function as my video converter, running my Handbrake queue round the clock!
Sound's great. I'd really like to see dual gigabit ethernet, in it though. And I'd like to see a home server OS from Apple, too. Something that combines the media streaming abilities and adds remote access (standards based SSH, VPN, RDP), FTP/SFTP (I know you said AirDisk, but I want it based on standards).
Really, the Mini would make a great solution except for the lack of storage expandability and the dual gig-e thing.
jmpage2
macrumors 68040
I have an EX485 and like it very much. It is used to back up two Macs and several PCs in the household and does this job excellently.
The addition of the media scavenger feature, bare metal restores over the network (even the TM does not do this) and control direct from a Mac make upgrading to this a no brainer for my household.
As to the idea of a Mac Mini serving the same purpose, I would point out that the Mac Mini can't do over the air TM backup and restore and to add additional drive space that is redundant on the Mini is very expensive and requires additional boxes being plugged into it.
Someone also commented that the duplication features on the Mediasmart were a joke. I strongly disagree as the drive pooling technologies used most closely mimic what is seen in Solaris ZFS setups. Simply put in additional drives and mark folders for duplication and the system does the rest. If the box ever fails or crashes you can pull the disks out, hook them up to a Mac or PC and recover the contents.
About the only thing missing right now is the option to mirror the operating system partition itself, something I anticipate to show up in the next version of the Windows Home Server software, code named Vail which should ship early next year.
The addition of the media scavenger feature, bare metal restores over the network (even the TM does not do this) and control direct from a Mac make upgrading to this a no brainer for my household.
As to the idea of a Mac Mini serving the same purpose, I would point out that the Mac Mini can't do over the air TM backup and restore and to add additional drive space that is redundant on the Mini is very expensive and requires additional boxes being plugged into it.
Someone also commented that the duplication features on the Mediasmart were a joke. I strongly disagree as the drive pooling technologies used most closely mimic what is seen in Solaris ZFS setups. Simply put in additional drives and mark folders for duplication and the system does the rest. If the box ever fails or crashes you can pull the disks out, hook them up to a Mac or PC and recover the contents.
About the only thing missing right now is the option to mirror the operating system partition itself, something I anticipate to show up in the next version of the Windows Home Server software, code named Vail which should ship early next year.
Yes, HP's WHS boxes are built for normal people. Not like people like you. Not to say you aren't normal, but if you're posting to MR about how it doesn't have RAID-5 support, then WHS in general isn't for you.
I don't care that it doesn't have RAID or whatever. I've pulled HDs out, read the data off the drive, and put it back in, no biggie. It works, and I'm sick of having to spend all my time fixing stuff and keeping stuff running. WHS is as good as it gets in that category. Backups for windows and Mac (when it works, hopefully 3.0 fixes the current TM backup issue), centralized file storage, access to those files over the internet over HTTPS and built-in dynamic DNS, streaming over Firefly dappd or whatever its called.
http://www.wegotserved.com/2009/09/14/new-hp-mediaserver-ex490-ex495-home-servers-announced/
Software will be available for Ex 485/487. It is a great server.
MorphingDragon
macrumors 603
They've been promising the first gen (Ex47x) users that the 2.x software would be backwards compatible since January and they haven't released it as far as I know, so until they actually release the 3.0 software I wouldn't take them at their word. Its vaporware as far as I'm concerned.
NAS/RAID anyone?
Yep, controller failure/corruption risk is a big draw-back (although you can still recover from such error by just buying a new chassis, but it then becomes a bit more expensive). Fortunately, RAID controller failure/corruption is nowadays almost non-existent (just try to look at the thecus/synology forums, not much people are complaining about these kinds of problems).
For the performance part, you are partly wrong (or partly right, as you wish 🙂). With RAID-5, and for reading scenarios, you get almost the same level of performance than RAID-0. But for writing scenarios, you get a slight performance hit, as the controller has to calculate the parity bits for the error recovery algorithm.
Link (sorry, I have more reference in french, this is the first one I found in english through Google): http://www.raid-data-recovery.net/raid-5.html
Of course, as we are talking about network storage, the main limiting factor for the throughput will always be the transfer through ehternet, so performance considerations of the underlying storage system shouldn't really play a role in the decision process.
Mmm, the reason I switched to Macs is that for a given amount of money, it was the most polished and professional system I could get. PC or Macs alike. Most people still using Windows just say they don't care that MacOSX is running on top of Darwin, that it's Unix-based, ... Even if those assets that non-technical people are likely not to understand are what makes MacOSX "just works". Most people just use Vista, MSN Messenger, IE8. It works, and they are sick of having to spend all their time considering switching to Macs. Sorry, that was a bit a of a joke there 🙂
But my point is that most good NAS (like the Thecus N5200 Pro, but there are other systems made by Synology that are of the same quality level or even better) have the same feature set, while being more professional/polished.
The funny thing is that you are saying "hopefully 3.0 fixes the current TM backup issue". TM backups already work with the Thecus, no need to wait for a future 3.0 that might or might not restore full compatibility. All other features you quote are also supported by the Thecus and other good NAS (centralized file storage, access to those files over the internet over HTTPS and built-in dynamic DNS, streaming over Firefly).
To quote most people experience with the Thecus 5200: you buy it, you plug it in, you insert the hard drives, and it just works...
To sum it up: for me, a forum is a place where opinions can be gathered. In my opinion (still waiting for more opinions though), HP MediaServer solution is a good choice when compared with a single USB2/Firewire external harddrive. But when you compare it with the other solutions available on the market, it just doesn't cut it. Kind of like when you compare Windows to MacOSX, it just doesn't cut it.
I'm posting this not because I think it's "hype" to have a NAS setup, but because I believe that I can help some people and teach them something they don't know (maybe not you, as you seem to know what NAS and RAID stands for). And at least these people will make an informed decision, even if they decide to buy the HP MediaServer (after all, some people are also buying Windows OS 😉).
Yep, controller failure/corruption risk is a big draw-back (although you can still recover from such error by just buying a new chassis, but it then becomes a bit more expensive). Fortunately, RAID controller failure/corruption is nowadays almost non-existent (just try to look at the thecus/synology forums, not much people are complaining about these kinds of problems).
For the performance part, you are partly wrong (or partly right, as you wish 🙂). With RAID-5, and for reading scenarios, you get almost the same level of performance than RAID-0. But for writing scenarios, you get a slight performance hit, as the controller has to calculate the parity bits for the error recovery algorithm.
Link (sorry, I have more reference in french, this is the first one I found in english through Google): http://www.raid-data-recovery.net/raid-5.html
Of course, as we are talking about network storage, the main limiting factor for the throughput will always be the transfer through ehternet, so performance considerations of the underlying storage system shouldn't really play a role in the decision process.
Mmm, the reason I switched to Macs is that for a given amount of money, it was the most polished and professional system I could get. PC or Macs alike. Most people still using Windows just say they don't care that MacOSX is running on top of Darwin, that it's Unix-based, ... Even if those assets that non-technical people are likely not to understand are what makes MacOSX "just works". Most people just use Vista, MSN Messenger, IE8. It works, and they are sick of having to spend all their time considering switching to Macs. Sorry, that was a bit a of a joke there 🙂
But my point is that most good NAS (like the Thecus N5200 Pro, but there are other systems made by Synology that are of the same quality level or even better) have the same feature set, while being more professional/polished.
The funny thing is that you are saying "hopefully 3.0 fixes the current TM backup issue". TM backups already work with the Thecus, no need to wait for a future 3.0 that might or might not restore full compatibility. All other features you quote are also supported by the Thecus and other good NAS (centralized file storage, access to those files over the internet over HTTPS and built-in dynamic DNS, streaming over Firefly).
To quote most people experience with the Thecus 5200: you buy it, you plug it in, you insert the hard drives, and it just works...
To sum it up: for me, a forum is a place where opinions can be gathered. In my opinion (still waiting for more opinions though), HP MediaServer solution is a good choice when compared with a single USB2/Firewire external harddrive. But when you compare it with the other solutions available on the market, it just doesn't cut it. Kind of like when you compare Windows to MacOSX, it just doesn't cut it.
I'm posting this not because I think it's "hype" to have a NAS setup, but because I believe that I can help some people and teach them something they don't know (maybe not you, as you seem to know what NAS and RAID stands for). And at least these people will make an informed decision, even if they decide to buy the HP MediaServer (after all, some people are also buying Windows OS 😉).
I agree. That's why it wouldn't take a giant leap to take the idea to the next level and offer a ready to go media server.
Come on Apple...this would only needs a couple of programmers and marketing people.
Make the TV/Mini the machine that can not the machine that didn't.
I see your point, but the HP 47x series is really old hardware. Sure it is easy to upgrade the software side but the server is going to run like a pig. The hp 48x series has a faster processor (celeron 2 Ghz) and 2 gb of memory. It can handle the new software and functions much better. The hp 47x series was a first attempt at backing up people's computers with relative ease. It worked very well for that function. Software update 2.5 brought video encoding and streaming into the server. The old 512K of ram and 1.8 Ghz sempron processor just can't cut it. HP should have come out and stated they will not be upgrading the software due to hardware limitations. I mean the new 490 only has the celeron 2.2Ghz 64bit processor and everything else is the same. There is no reason to not allow the 48x customers to update.
Well I have had both in the house and the Thecus N5200 Pro just was not a good fit at all.
Price wise vs hardware I have to argue with you a bit.
The hardware is much better in the HP media 490 series even the 48x series is much better.
For functions like encoding when not backing up that 1.5 Ghz celeron M is just too slow. Take that and pair it to 512K ram and you have a really slow machine. Now I know you don't need power in your server rig but it is nice to have a little more power when you need it. I would even forgive this horrible setup if it was a silent machine but it was about twice as loud as my HP mediasmart 485.
The internet interface was horrible in my opinion and nothing close to the ease of the hp interface.
Price: well I will just use newegg as a standard
Thecus pro= $649.99 no hard drive
HP Mediasmart 490=$549.99 with 1 TB
In addition for any redundancy in the NAS you need at least 2 Hard drives.
I like to come to the forum and help people make an informed decision as well.
You can set it up to automatically encode videos to mp4. I just bought the last gen last week lol. Dual core would help big time.
hitekalex
macrumors 68000
A purpose build home storage server is still a very much of a niche product. Between the Time Capsule and Mini, Apple has the bases covered.
A combined TC/Mini type product is unlikely to sell in large numbers, and I just don't see Apple making anything like that in the foreseeable future.