.. with a heck of a lot of added bloat (this is Microsoft we're talking about). Rather than this I'd be looking at something rather more efficient like Qnap's TS range.
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 MediaSmart Servers Gain Mac Compatibility
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
.. with a heck of a lot of added bloat (this is Microsoft we're talking about). Rather than this I'd be looking at something rather more efficient like Qnap's TS range.
Actually most of the unecessary apps and files have been removed. The only thing on it is the WHS console.
This has no bloat. It's more stripped down of unnecessary stuff than windows 95.
It definitely does not show up as a server when trying to do a system restore. I'm not sure there is a hack that works at the moment, as the HP-MSS is an SMB file system, and as far as I can tell the libraries for accessing it are not present on the OS X Boot DVD.
HP tells me that you have to do a bare-metal restore, then use TM to restore everything.
I'd call the GUI bloat. Stick with a simple webserver-based config panel, one that works out of the box with Mac OS.
H.P.'s money buys "Best of Show" at dying Con.
I've used H.P. MediaSmart server and it is certainly no "Best of Show" H.P. has been spreading around promotional money for this to Apple events and podcasts but stay away. This thing is slow, buggy and earned me nothing but criticism from my one and only implementation.
I've used H.P. MediaSmart server and it is certainly no "Best of Show" H.P. has been spreading around promotional money for this to Apple events and podcasts but stay away. This thing is slow, buggy and earned me nothing but criticism from my one and only implementation.
"The new server, which was the recipient of a Best of Show award, provides a home server solution for cross-platform environments."
How disappointing this got Best of Show. Looks like the end of MacWorld may be a good thing if this is the best Mac product out there.
1. It's a windows box with all the headaches. How can you even consider this for a Mac household when you can't even configure it without a real windows box (no virtualization PC supported)
2. It doesn't support iTunes video. Say what? My guess is that it doesn't support other Mac media formats.
I looked at this because I was interested in something that had the drive expansions and could handle the size of my media collection. My conclusion was it was another "half way there" solution for Mac folks. I'm going to stick with my MacMini (which costs less) and attached external drives. At least all Mac applications work.
How disappointing this got Best of Show. Looks like the end of MacWorld may be a good thing if this is the best Mac product out there.
1. It's a windows box with all the headaches. How can you even consider this for a Mac household when you can't even configure it without a real windows box (no virtualization PC supported)
2. It doesn't support iTunes video. Say what? My guess is that it doesn't support other Mac media formats.
I looked at this because I was interested in something that had the drive expansions and could handle the size of my media collection. My conclusion was it was another "half way there" solution for Mac folks. I'm going to stick with my MacMini (which costs less) and attached external drives. At least all Mac applications work.
Well, the new version of MediaSmart has new Intel processor and more memory, so it should be faster. Isn't the software also updated in this new version?
True, it's not an ideal media center, and I love to gripe about it even though at this point you'll pry my 10.4 based mini's Frontrow remote out of my hands when I'm dead. I hate Apple's focus on forcing people into a situation where it's insanely easier to buy crippled video from them than it is to buy your own and rip it for a good quality DRM free video... but seeing as they're "Big Media" now it's just the way things are going and not much we can do at this point. They're raking it in like mad from iTunes, that's a cash cow.
With all of that said however, you can say one thing about the Mini as a media server that I'll wager even the newest Windows based solutions can't say yet: you can leave the keyboard and mouse put away and use nothing but the remote for weeks on end. When I get busy with work it's the nicest, easiest to use media center controlled remotely with 6 buttons. Quirky and annoying at times, but pretty slick overall. My main hope is that Boxee gets somewhat usable soon because the direction Frontrow has gone under 10.5 is the real bag of hurt in this arena.
Back on topic, this server from HP has no interest at all to me... to each their own.
How would this configuration compare to a Drobo implementation. (Other than the expensive price)
I am looking for easy set up, room for an ever growing collection of media, and redundancy! Backup is the key.
Does anyone have any hands on with the Drobo? It looks easy to set up and keep up moving forward with the swappable drives.
All of the reviews seem to contradict each other. I am looking for reliable feedback in order to make a good decision on whatever storage selection is the best "value" to me.
I am looking for easy set up, room for an ever growing collection of media, and redundancy! Backup is the key.
Does anyone have any hands on with the Drobo? It looks easy to set up and keep up moving forward with the swappable drives.
All of the reviews seem to contradict each other. I am looking for reliable feedback in order to make a good decision on whatever storage selection is the best "value" to me.
I've got to admit, it's kind of humorous to see a forum full of Mac users complaining about the price of this unit. 
Just thank yourself this isn't an Apple product, or it would cost $999 and require a mandatory $99/year subscription because it would only work with Mobile Me.
It's not a perfect box, and certainly won't fit the bill of people with a homogeneous Apple network at home. For people a little more platform-agnostic, by choice or necessity, it's a very intriguing solution.
Windows Home Server is actually a promising platform, with lots of expandability and customization options. It would be great if someone was able to develop a plug-in for this thing that brought Apple support up to the next level. Personally, I think $600 is quite reasonable for what you get. It's exactly what a lot of people need in their home.
Just thank yourself this isn't an Apple product, or it would cost $999 and require a mandatory $99/year subscription because it would only work with Mobile Me.
It's not a perfect box, and certainly won't fit the bill of people with a homogeneous Apple network at home. For people a little more platform-agnostic, by choice or necessity, it's a very intriguing solution.
Windows Home Server is actually a promising platform, with lots of expandability and customization options. It would be great if someone was able to develop a plug-in for this thing that brought Apple support up to the next level. Personally, I think $600 is quite reasonable for what you get. It's exactly what a lot of people need in their home.
I stopped by the HP booth to see it, and the HP reps were clueless. The guy I talked to wasn't even familiar with the terms SMB and AFP.
I can't believe this product is one of the Best of Show products. It doesn't support AFP, and you need a PC to not only set it up but also to manage it. If a drive fails, and you have to pull it and add a new drive, you have to use the Windows console to tell the server that you're adding a new drive.
The HP rep confirmed that you should have a PC handy at all times, since you need one for setup and administration.
I can't believe this product is one of the Best of Show products. It doesn't support AFP, and you need a PC to not only set it up but also to manage it. If a drive fails, and you have to pull it and add a new drive, you have to use the Windows console to tell the server that you're adding a new drive.
The HP rep confirmed that you should have a PC handy at all times, since you need one for setup and administration.
Actually, this is great, but not ideal yet .....
First off, I have to give credit where it's due. (Amazingly, to HP in this case.) They beat Apple to the punch, offering a product many of us can use with our networked Macs. If Apple does release their own "media server" by year's end - great. Still doesn't change the fact HP (of all people!) beat them to market with the concept.
More importantly though, I think this whole market category is still immature. You have all these options out there, ranging from USB connected boxes of drives that do RAID mirroring internally to expensive systems like the Drobo, and these HP Media Servers. Promise offers one, too.
The thing is, all of them have lists of what you CAN and CAN'T interconnect or do with them - and they all assume you're using additional hardware to be the "player" end of things.
I built my own "MythTV" media center box a couple years ago, using a standard AMD Athlon 64 processor and PC motherboard in an Antec case designed to look like a piece of stereo equipment. MythTV runs under Linux (so no licensing fees paid to Microsoft or anyone else for the OS), and in one of these purpose-designed cases, it ran as quietly as most Macs.
The great thing with MythTV is, it can be your media server AND player/recorder, all in one box. I set up a uPnP server application on mine that even knew how to read the iTunes .XML data file. So you could copy an entire iTunes music library to the MythTV box, and it would then share it out properly, AND let you play the files from the Myth box itself (complete with its own set of visualizations that move to the music, if you like).
With a $150 or so TV tuner card in the machine, it could record TV shows like a Tivo, automatically find and erase all the commercials in the show, and let me burn a copy to DVD if I wanted. What else has THAT kind of flexibility?
Oh, and it can also view streaming Internet broadcasts, play classic coin-op or Sega SNES games with emulators included with it, store and view your photo collection, pull down weather reports complete with moving satellite image maps, and display RSS news-feeds from your favorite sources. It has video teleconferencing capabilities as well.
Not only can AppleTV not even begin to TOUCH that, but the combo of AppleTV and something like HP's Media Server can't either, even working together (which they currently can't).
Only problem with MythTV? Still lots of initial setup hassle.... Easily takes literally weeks of tweaking, reading documentation, and messing around to get it working 100%.
First off, I have to give credit where it's due. (Amazingly, to HP in this case.) They beat Apple to the punch, offering a product many of us can use with our networked Macs. If Apple does release their own "media server" by year's end - great. Still doesn't change the fact HP (of all people!) beat them to market with the concept.
More importantly though, I think this whole market category is still immature. You have all these options out there, ranging from USB connected boxes of drives that do RAID mirroring internally to expensive systems like the Drobo, and these HP Media Servers. Promise offers one, too.
The thing is, all of them have lists of what you CAN and CAN'T interconnect or do with them - and they all assume you're using additional hardware to be the "player" end of things.
I built my own "MythTV" media center box a couple years ago, using a standard AMD Athlon 64 processor and PC motherboard in an Antec case designed to look like a piece of stereo equipment. MythTV runs under Linux (so no licensing fees paid to Microsoft or anyone else for the OS), and in one of these purpose-designed cases, it ran as quietly as most Macs.
The great thing with MythTV is, it can be your media server AND player/recorder, all in one box. I set up a uPnP server application on mine that even knew how to read the iTunes .XML data file. So you could copy an entire iTunes music library to the MythTV box, and it would then share it out properly, AND let you play the files from the Myth box itself (complete with its own set of visualizations that move to the music, if you like).
With a $150 or so TV tuner card in the machine, it could record TV shows like a Tivo, automatically find and erase all the commercials in the show, and let me burn a copy to DVD if I wanted. What else has THAT kind of flexibility?
Oh, and it can also view streaming Internet broadcasts, play classic coin-op or Sega SNES games with emulators included with it, store and view your photo collection, pull down weather reports complete with moving satellite image maps, and display RSS news-feeds from your favorite sources. It has video teleconferencing capabilities as well.
Not only can AppleTV not even begin to TOUCH that, but the combo of AppleTV and something like HP's Media Server can't either, even working together (which they currently can't).
Only problem with MythTV? Still lots of initial setup hassle.... Easily takes literally weeks of tweaking, reading documentation, and messing around to get it working 100%.
I've got to admit, it's kind of humorous to see a forum full of Mac users complaining about the price of this unit.
Just thank yourself this isn't an Apple product, or it would cost $999 and require a mandatory $99/year subscription because it would only work with Mobile Me.
It's not a perfect box, and certainly won't fit the bill of people with a homogeneous Apple network at home. For people a little more platform-agnostic, by choice or necessity, it's a very intriguing solution.
Windows Home Server is actually a promising platform, with lots of expandability and customization options. It would be great if someone was able to develop a plug-in for this thing that brought Apple support up to the next level. Personally, I think $600 is quite reasonable for what you get. It's exactly what a lot of people need in their home.
If it was made by Apple, it wouldn't be ugly, it wouldn't have Windows, and yes, it would be $999.
I've never had MobileMe, and I have two MacBooks and an iPhone, and not once have I felt limited by not having it. MobileMe is and always has been an add-on, not a necessity.
Kudos to HP for making this cross-platform and at least TRYING to make a Mac-compatible media server.
Really? This is new!?!
How does HP win a best of show award and the praise of mac fans by adding a few open source apps to the readily available Windows Home Server OS? In addition, how has the mac community completely passed over Windows Home Server and the idea that you actually can use Windows as a file server for Macs as well. This a by no means a "new" product, it's just been rebadged for the mac market.
Windows Home Server is an alright product, especially since it allows easy setup for remote access. It also has a nice backup feature for windows machines that consolidates duplicate files across the network so you actually can backup your entire network to this thing. Beyond that it's a basic file server.
Being a dedicated mac user myself, I think it's worth saying the whole mac demographic could stand to be a lot less, for lack of a better word, ethnocentric.
How does HP win a best of show award and the praise of mac fans by adding a few open source apps to the readily available Windows Home Server OS? In addition, how has the mac community completely passed over Windows Home Server and the idea that you actually can use Windows as a file server for Macs as well. This a by no means a "new" product, it's just been rebadged for the mac market.
Windows Home Server is an alright product, especially since it allows easy setup for remote access. It also has a nice backup feature for windows machines that consolidates duplicate files across the network so you actually can backup your entire network to this thing. Beyond that it's a basic file server.
Being a dedicated mac user myself, I think it's worth saying the whole mac demographic could stand to be a lot less, for lack of a better word, ethnocentric.
Why do we need all these separate boxes though? Is it unrealistic to expect something that merges TimeCapsule andTV and all sorts of server features in one box?
THANK YOU!!!!
Someone else sees it, too.
I am getting so tired of more and more and more boxes.
I don't like AppleTV for just that reason. I can abide TimeCapsule because it also works as a WiFi point, which usually is a stand alone box anyway.
Someone commented about video output of the HP media server, and being able to connect it to a video display... and another person chastized him...
I agree, I would want my home media server to ALSO work as my HTPC. A dedicated machine to both display, AND distribute media from it's centralized library, and to host data redundancy protocols, both RAID disk redundancy of hardware, and networked backups of satellite computers, like my wife's desktop, and my laptop.
I don't want a slave box AppleTV on my main home theater (maybe a secondary display in another room). I don't want a separate piece of redundant hardware to be a media, file, and backup server, other than a main-display HTPC.
I don't want to have an AppleTV slave to some other computer, DVD player, Blu-Ray player, SAT/Cable box, CD player, Record player (wife loves old vinyl), and a receiver all doing different things, all having to be switched back and forth for audio and some video.
I want a HTPC that hooks to my digital processing receiver, and a HD monitor, maybe keeping the record player for the wife. The HTPC would take care of media playback. ALL of it. Broadcast TV and Radio including recording/time-shifting (DVR), disc-based CD ripping, DVD or Blu-Ray playback, and internet-based streaming and downloading. ALL from one device with one front-end displayed on the monitor. I would even add telepresence/video communications, with a webcam and communications software like video iChat or Skype, or whatever. One could even conceive of a VOIP or modem-based phone client, that would host the land-line phone-answering system, with possible call forwarding, or message/callerID distribution to e-mail or sms to mobile phones.
And if there is anything that requires windows (can't really think of anything important that Windows needs to do for me, though...) then BootCamp partition, co-opted by Parallels, or VM-Fusion through Mac OS would grant access to that. MacOS already offers windows-compatible share access.
It would store and backup all of the appropriate data, as well as receiving backup data from other LAN machines, and it would distribute it's available media to those other LAN machines, or even my iPhone (like slingPlayer that was just announced.)
Visible either by the main monitor, or by screen sharing, iTunes sharing, and network disk access, it should be quite a versatile system.
The MacMini comes close to being the heart of such a system. And the new one yet to come might actually be capable of doing this, with some tuner and storage facility add-ons. Otherwise I am seriously thinking that a Hackintosh HTPC is going to be in the cards. kingtj's suggestion of mythTV also comes close, but as he said, isn't as intuitive as setting up a Mac, and doesn't have some of the more computer-based functions, such as data backups, file serving, and RAID management.
But I don't want to buy or build a HTPC in addition to a headless media server. I want one box to rule them all, not another box in a stack of other boxes.
1.You can just remote into it. There is an app for OSX that allows for this. Works fine.
2.It doesn't need to. You store all your media on the server, as I do, then just point itunes on your other computers to it. It will play everything.
So in other words, "mac compatibility requires windows". lol, what a joke.
I'd like to see a server that required OS X to be compatible with Windows win a 'best of show' award at a Windows expo.
I'm off to have a swim in my waterproof swimwear that is completely waterproof*
*waterproof sustainability only applies in absence of water. Do not get wet.
couple things
So, these have been out for about 1.5 years in the pc world, and the same thing was true at first, they were TOO MUCH $$$.
I just bought a couple at the end of last year for 250$ AR and livecashback and at that amount they are worth every penny.
I hope that HP will honor their original press release and release this MAC compatible SW for the older units.
That said, for the money, they are very nice to use and configure. they are multi drive bays, so up to 6TB of storage in one place. Although, pricing on the 1.5TB drives is still crazy, but 4TB is pretty cheap.
They will allow media streaming for devices like the squeezebox and other media streamers.
They are also PRINT servers, with just a little SW updating. So, that makes it very convenient.
Add extra storage very simply with the USB port, and GIGE network access.
Also, the external drive access works quite well, I have now setup all my photos on this device for others to password access.
The $$ for retail now are just that, MSRP. They will come down quick and especially now that there are about three OTHER OEM making the WHS devices like this.
So, these have been out for about 1.5 years in the pc world, and the same thing was true at first, they were TOO MUCH $$$.
I just bought a couple at the end of last year for 250$ AR and livecashback and at that amount they are worth every penny.
I hope that HP will honor their original press release and release this MAC compatible SW for the older units.
That said, for the money, they are very nice to use and configure. they are multi drive bays, so up to 6TB of storage in one place. Although, pricing on the 1.5TB drives is still crazy, but 4TB is pretty cheap.
They will allow media streaming for devices like the squeezebox and other media streamers.
They are also PRINT servers, with just a little SW updating. So, that makes it very convenient.
Add extra storage very simply with the USB port, and GIGE network access.
Also, the external drive access works quite well, I have now setup all my photos on this device for others to password access.
The $$ for retail now are just that, MSRP. They will come down quick and especially now that there are about three OTHER OEM making the WHS devices like this.
Real servers
To chime in again, this HP box is okay (except for Windoze and CPU), but it's not a real server. If you want a real server, get an HP DL-360 (or higher) or an Apple XServe...
If you want to do it on the cheap, small form factor, and have real file server capabilities (meaning MacOS X or Linux) look no further than the Mac mini -
Mac mini: $599 (or higher if you want)
Mac mini & replace internal HD yourself w/500GB 7200RPM drive: $758
Mac mini & single external 1.5TB MiniStack FW hard drive: $858
Mac mini & external LaCie 4big RAID 2TB (up to 6TB): $1348
If you're a Linux fan and don't want to run OSX, then AOpen makes a mini PC about the same size, spec, and price as the Mac mini, or you can of course build your own as many posters have mentioned.
This HP box is clever, but it's running Windows. I'd say 'blow it away and install Linux' but it's too under-powered for even semi-real file serving.
To chime in again, this HP box is okay (except for Windoze and CPU), but it's not a real server. If you want a real server, get an HP DL-360 (or higher) or an Apple XServe...
If you want to do it on the cheap, small form factor, and have real file server capabilities (meaning MacOS X or Linux) look no further than the Mac mini -
Mac mini: $599 (or higher if you want)
Mac mini & replace internal HD yourself w/500GB 7200RPM drive: $758
Mac mini & single external 1.5TB MiniStack FW hard drive: $858
Mac mini & external LaCie 4big RAID 2TB (up to 6TB): $1348
If you're a Linux fan and don't want to run OSX, then AOpen makes a mini PC about the same size, spec, and price as the Mac mini, or you can of course build your own as many posters have mentioned.
This HP box is clever, but it's running Windows. I'd say 'blow it away and install Linux' but it's too under-powered for even semi-real file serving.
I want to ask a couple of questions to people who have a HP Media Server already. I have been looking for a 4 drive internal NAS solution for a while (was hoping Apple would release something) and my research has lead me to get one of the following:
HP Mediasmart Server
Linksys ReadyNAS NV+
Drobo or Synology Device
I initially looked at Drobo but if you look at the reviews for the v 2.0 on Amazon they are pretty bad. The other thing I don't like about Drobo is you have to connect it via USB to a router which seriously limits speed I would think... If you use a Droboshare you are still being limited by USB...
I want the device to act as a Time Machine Backup, file server, and streaming device for Audio, Video, and Pictures to my PS3 and Tivo HD. Also, I want my data backed up to at least one drive on the server. The extra stuff like web streaming for media and online backup are great bonuses but not on my "must have" list. I currently have around 750 Gb of data and want to be expandable in the future. Also, right now I only have Macs on my network but am not opposed to having PCs if Apple doesn't have anything appealing when I am ready to buy in the future.
1. For the Media Smart server how does the folder duplication work? If I add 4 1 TB drives (internal) and share all of my folders does that mean I get 2 TB of storage? The ReadyNAS for instance (I think) will give you 3TB of storage if you have 4 1 TB drives but if more than 1 drive fails you lose data.
2. Does anyone have any experience with a 1st gen Media Smart server with 2 GB of memory added? Is it faster or slower for streaming video (UPnP to PS3, Xbox etc.) than a ReadyNAS, Drobo, etc.?
3. I think if your Media Smart Server fails then you have to put the drives in another WHS machine to retrieve data as normal Windows won't read the drives. Is this correct?
4. Is the thing too loud compared to NAS devices? I live in an apartment so it would probably have to go in my bedroom but I guess I could set it to auto-shutdown after a certain time of night...
I wish Apple would just expand Time Capsule to 4 hot-swappable SATA drives and offer more features like UPnP for people with set-top boxes besides theTV. The problem I have with people suggesting to get a Mini is that I don't want to be limited by Firewire's speed for video streaming and I really want something self contained even though I know there are stackable enclosures.
HP Mediasmart Server
Linksys ReadyNAS NV+
Drobo or Synology Device
I initially looked at Drobo but if you look at the reviews for the v 2.0 on Amazon they are pretty bad. The other thing I don't like about Drobo is you have to connect it via USB to a router which seriously limits speed I would think... If you use a Droboshare you are still being limited by USB...
I want the device to act as a Time Machine Backup, file server, and streaming device for Audio, Video, and Pictures to my PS3 and Tivo HD. Also, I want my data backed up to at least one drive on the server. The extra stuff like web streaming for media and online backup are great bonuses but not on my "must have" list. I currently have around 750 Gb of data and want to be expandable in the future. Also, right now I only have Macs on my network but am not opposed to having PCs if Apple doesn't have anything appealing when I am ready to buy in the future.
1. For the Media Smart server how does the folder duplication work? If I add 4 1 TB drives (internal) and share all of my folders does that mean I get 2 TB of storage? The ReadyNAS for instance (I think) will give you 3TB of storage if you have 4 1 TB drives but if more than 1 drive fails you lose data.
2. Does anyone have any experience with a 1st gen Media Smart server with 2 GB of memory added? Is it faster or slower for streaming video (UPnP to PS3, Xbox etc.) than a ReadyNAS, Drobo, etc.?
3. I think if your Media Smart Server fails then you have to put the drives in another WHS machine to retrieve data as normal Windows won't read the drives. Is this correct?
4. Is the thing too loud compared to NAS devices? I live in an apartment so it would probably have to go in my bedroom but I guess I could set it to auto-shutdown after a certain time of night...
I wish Apple would just expand Time Capsule to 4 hot-swappable SATA drives and offer more features like UPnP for people with set-top boxes besides the
TV. The problem I have with people suggesting to get a Mini is that I don't want to be limited by Firewire's speed for video streaming and I really want something self contained even though I know there are stackable enclosures.
Windows machines don't randomly just get viruses. Virus infection is ALWAYS the direct result of idiot-user actions.
A headless box where the user will never be browsing the web or opening emails has about the slimmest chance of getting a virus, probably a slimmer chance than your mac just randomly getting a virus.
My last job we had probably close to 10 Windows 2003 Servers, that were on 24/7, the only time they saw a reboot was when updates needed to be installed. Never a single virus in the two and a half years I was there. Never a single crash. Never a single problem.
Windows Server 2003 is a very decent platform, many buisnesses around the world rely on it, I would have no qualms about using it in my home enviroment.
To the people saying that Apple should make the TV into a file server, do you really want something loud and big next to your TV? The more hard drives you add to a device, the more cooling it is going to need and the louder it will be. Also, even though I know TV is nice, I already have a PS3, Wii, and Tivo HD hooked to my TV.
IMO, Apple just needs to expand Time Capsule into something more full featured like this and I will be plenty happy. Sealed in hard drives FTL!
TV into a file server, do you really want something loud and big next to your TV? The more hard drives you add to a device, the more cooling it is going to need and the louder it will be. Also, even though I know TV is nice, I already have a PS3, Wii, and Tivo HD hooked to my TV.IMO, Apple just needs to expand Time Capsule into something more full featured like this and I will be plenty happy. Sealed in hard drives FTL!
Oh you mean like how my OS X servers have Front Row, Mail, Photo Booth, Quicktime, iCal and iTunes on it which results in numerous updates that have required reboots?
Like mentioned around here, Windows servers are pretty solid, especially when they are used as just a server - not as a workstation as well subjecting them to viruses, spyware and other garbage. I don't know if this was worthy of the award it got, but it is still a cool device and platform you can run on any PC hardware you want to.
Good point, also since you shouldn't be installing too much software on the device I wouldn't expect it to slow down from registry fragmentation either...
Server or NAS?
ddrueckhammer:
See my post right above yours... I know, I'm suggesting a Mac mini, and no, I don't have 1st hand experience with this HP media box. What I do have is IT experience (I'm a sys admin).
I can tell you with certainty that if you need real file serving capability you're not going to get it with this HP media box as configured, and you are definietly not going to get it with a NAS.
A NAS just does not have the horsepower to be a file server. NAS boxes give you a whopping 5-15MB/s data throughput. It's pathetic.
Without playing with the HP box in person, I don't know what it's real world capabilites are. The first thing I would do is kill Windows and install Linux on it. You need a real OS with a descent file system. Just from the specs, this HP box has limited CPU bandwidth. That could bite you depending on how much you tax it. Folks need to understand file serving is much more than how fast the disks are. You have to be able to maintain throughput to your networked clients and keep latency down.
A decent dual core PC with a low overhead OS is going to perform much better. A Mac mini will do. A custom built PC will do even better, and if you need real performance, a real server with disk array will be the best.
Some comparisons:
NAS: ~10MB/s
My dual core G5 w/500GB 2-disk RAID: ~90MB/s
My Mac mini w/FW HD: ~40MB/s
Company HP DL-380 w/2TB internal hardware RAID: ~250MB/s
Company XServe w/16TB external FC RAID shelf: ~920MB/s
Keep in mind this is disk performance (except for the NAS which has no other method of connection except network). Even if you have a 920MB/s capable array, the fastest possible data transfer to clients connected via Gigabit Ethernet is going to be 125MB/s. Your only advantage to super fast storage is with keeping multiple ethernet connections saturated or with direct attachment to your fiber channel (FC) switch.
Your best money spent is going to be a dual core PC with a big fast hard drive or an inexpensive disk array. NAS is crap, and full blown server is overkill.
ddrueckhammer:
See my post right above yours... I know, I'm suggesting a Mac mini, and no, I don't have 1st hand experience with this HP media box. What I do have is IT experience (I'm a sys admin).
I can tell you with certainty that if you need real file serving capability you're not going to get it with this HP media box as configured, and you are definietly not going to get it with a NAS.
A NAS just does not have the horsepower to be a file server. NAS boxes give you a whopping 5-15MB/s data throughput. It's pathetic.
Without playing with the HP box in person, I don't know what it's real world capabilites are. The first thing I would do is kill Windows and install Linux on it. You need a real OS with a descent file system. Just from the specs, this HP box has limited CPU bandwidth. That could bite you depending on how much you tax it. Folks need to understand file serving is much more than how fast the disks are. You have to be able to maintain throughput to your networked clients and keep latency down.
A decent dual core PC with a low overhead OS is going to perform much better. A Mac mini will do. A custom built PC will do even better, and if you need real performance, a real server with disk array will be the best.
Some comparisons:
NAS: ~10MB/s
My dual core G5 w/500GB 2-disk RAID: ~90MB/s
My Mac mini w/FW HD: ~40MB/s
Company HP DL-380 w/2TB internal hardware RAID: ~250MB/s
Company XServe w/16TB external FC RAID shelf: ~920MB/s
Keep in mind this is disk performance (except for the NAS which has no other method of connection except network). Even if you have a 920MB/s capable array, the fastest possible data transfer to clients connected via Gigabit Ethernet is going to be 125MB/s. Your only advantage to super fast storage is with keeping multiple ethernet connections saturated or with direct attachment to your fiber channel (FC) switch.
Your best money spent is going to be a dual core PC with a big fast hard drive or an inexpensive disk array. NAS is crap, and full blown server is overkill.