Ethernet hard drive

[Dave Lehnert]

Playing with my wireless printer I have discovered the world of home networking.
I have been reading about Ethernet hard drives. Sounds like a good way to backup my files and be able to access them from my laptop or desktop.

In my limited search, the ones I have found ,do not get very good reviews.
Anyone own one and can recommend?
Seems like they are more expensive that a USB drive for some reason.

[Steve knight]

they cost more and they are far slower. but the speed is because if your network even with a giganet wired network.
it is easy to use an external drive on your pc and share it so anyone on your network can access it. this does the same thing but the computer hocked to it will get the data far faster.

[Phil Thien]

Steve is right with the possible exception of the Ximeta drives. Their drive is NDAS (I think, Network Direct Attached Storage). Basically, each machine has a virtual SCSI adapter and it "thinks" the drive is locally attached. Performance is outstanding compared to the lower-end NAS products.

So I use an Ximeta to backup multiple workstations each night. I have the older 10/100 with a parallel (500GB) drive. I'm probably going to replace it w/ one of the newer gigabit enclosures and a giant drive.

BTW, there is a disadvantage to the Ximeta: You have to load their software on each machine you wish to be able to use to access the drive.

[Tom Godley]

I have the Apple unit -- I'm all Mac -- I like mine but I do not use it for any intensive use.

It is great for storing pictures and I also use it to store common documents at my home office

[Dan Mages]

I have a Linksys network attached storage drive and it works marvels for backup and deep storage of files. It holds two hard drives, so I have it set up with redundant SCSI. You might want to also look at Windows Home Server based options which have a few interesting features.

Dan

[Dave Lehnert]

they cost more and they are far slower. but the speed is because if your network even with a giganet wired network.
it is easy to use an external drive on your pc and share it so anyone on your network can access it. this does the same thing but the computer hocked to it will get the data far faster.

That was my thinking before I found out about the Ethernet drives. This interested me because I only boot up my desktop maybe once a week. This would keep me from having the desktop on all the time.
My ISP offers on line storage. Maybe that would be a better option???

[Frank Hagan]

I would say no to the ISP "cloud" storage; I just don't trust it. There have been a couple of "cloud storage" companies go belly up.

A NAS unit might be just the thing for you ... check out Small Net Builder (http://smallnetbuilder.com/) for performance reviews of the various units. The guy there does a great job, even going so far as to tell you what operating system the NAS uses, etc.

I have a little MP3 server I built from a Linksys NSL (Network Storage Link) so I could listen to the music on my Roku Soundbridge in the family room without having my computer on ... it works great for that, but I wouldn't want to use it as a primary storage device on the network.

[Randal Stevenson]

Part of the reason they are more expensive, is they require a processor (however small), verses USB which uses your computers cpu.
As mentioned, they do run slower, unless you start spending big (commercial) dollars for things like storage area networks (sans).
A lot of the ones I have looked at over the years, have had heat issues (like some of the older (haven't checked in a while)), diy'er usb drives.

That said, let me throw out some more options. Check your routers/nat boxes. A few do have usb plugs, that you could hook a drive to and share.
Old pc lying around you could use? (look up freenas)
Worried about the energy usage? If you have an old case lying around and aren't planning on trying to use it for a commercial network (bunch more users), I would look at the Intel Atom boards (built in network/video/cpu), where you add memory, your storage (and a raid controller if desired), and use FreeNas or Linux and Samba, to handle your networkl

[Craig Coney]

Check out HP's mediasmart servers. I have added the EX485 to my network and it works well and you can expand the HDD capacity later. I also have a maxtor NAS device but it is slow when more than one computer is accessing it.

[Darius Ferlas]

The "ethernet hard drive" is a.k.a. NAS - network attached storage, or kinda SAN (storage attached network).

In essence it is a computer whose main role is to store files and to allow access to those files. Virtually all network environment will have some semblance of NAS.

I used two models and I am only somewhat happy with them:

TS-409 Pro Turbo NAS (http://www.qnap.com/pro_detail_feature.asp?p_id=85) (approx $1000)
D-Link - DNS-323 (http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2443662&CatId=207) (approx $200)

The main advantage of devices like the ones above is that they have so called redundancy, i.e. they have 2 (or more) drives to store data (look for RAID Levels 1, 5, 6 etc). If one drive fails the other(s) keep on going and the user has a chance to replace the failed drive, which is automatically rebuilt.

IMO the cheapest NAS is an old clunker with 2 or more drives. Any Pentium machine will do as long as it can accept drives of sufficient capacity.

As for the operating system, most versions of Win 9x and above are OK for a somall home network, although they are not as robust and some versions may require 3rd party software (or hardware) to achieve drive redundancy. To avoid additional expense all it takes is a download of one of versions of Linux. Linux offers various built in RAID levels, and additionally it allows for much more flexibility in accessing the data.

My favorite distribution of Linux to drive a NAS device is SME Server (http://wiki.contribs.org/Main_Page).

[Frank Hagan]

RAID should not be used as a replacement for backups; it is really only a kind of insurance against a drive failure. Even then, if something goes wrong with the RAID card, it can write garbage to all the drives. Happens a lot (Google it).

DELL had an Intel RAID embedded on their motherboards, and I thought I was safe using it. I even had a hardware failure and swapped out the defective drive. It worked. Then, some months later, the controller went bad and wrote garbage to the MBR of both drives. I eventually got my data back, but not without a lot of work (and after a complete reinstall of Windows).

The advantage of a simple NAS is that you presumably have two copies of the data, one on your computer and one on the NAS. I wouldn't trust your data to a single computer or storage device.

[Mike Henderson]

I haven't messed with computers to any great degree since I retired (so things may have changed) but one thing I'd consider is getting a cheap computer with a big disk and make the disk sharable on the network. Just attach the computer to your network and map the drive to your other computers. It would act somewhat like a server.

For backup, I like the Internet backups - I use Carbonite.

Mike

[Eric DeSilva]

I love NAS, but have a varied history with it. The first one I bought was a Dell PowerVault--4 x 250GB drives running RAID5. That one was commercial quality, rack mountable, and fast as all get out. Unfortunately, it sounded an awful lot like a 747 spooling up for take off. I tried putting it in an acoustic rack, but even then it was large and noticeable. And, it was bloody expensive.

Attempt Nos. 2 & 3 were 1TB Buffalo Terastations. These worked pretty well. Again, 4x250GB drives configured in RAID5. Mine ran 24/7 for years without any problem. But, I kind of wanted hot swap capability, was running out of space, and also wanted a box with enough brains to run something like Squeezecenter for distributed audio.

So... Last year I bought a ReadyNAS Pro with 6 x 1TB drives and it has fit the bill beautifully. Highly recommended.

[Darius Ferlas]

RAID should not be used as a replacement for backups;
Of course not. I never suggested that that RAID is a good idea as a replacement for backup. NAS is one of good backup options, and if NAS has RAID redundancy then it's better than when it does not.


DELL had an Intel RAID embedded on their motherboards, and I thought I was safe using it. I even had a hardware failure and swapped out the defective drive. It worked. Then, some months later, the controller went bad and wrote garbage to the MBR of both drives. I eventually got my data back, but not without a lot of work (and after a complete reinstall of Windows).
That is one of the reasons I am partial to software base RAID. Data does not depend on proprietary hardware and the disk can be put in another machine to retrieve the data.

I have been using a home made NAS (a linux PC of one sort or another). After 15 years I haven't lost a bite of data - about 300GB in total.

[Rob John]

Check out HP's mediasmart servers. I have added the EX485 to my network and it works well and you can expand the HDD capacity later. I also have a maxtor NAS device but it is slow when more than one computer is accessing it.


I have to second this recommendation, these small servers are goign to offer you a world more than simple NAS based storage. I do not personally own one but know several people who do. This particular setup will allow you to backup machines, Windows or Macs over the network. For windows you can do a full machine restore, for Mac I am not certain how far the time machine integration has come, I am Mac user and built my own server before these became popular and "Mac friendly".

I would really take the time to look into this unit, after you spen dthe money on a NAS and then want to ahve a server to stream movies, iTunes music, or many many other features this unit will win out in the end.

[Darius Ferlas]

I have to second this recommendation, these small servers are goign to offer you a world more than simple NAS based storage.
I looked at that one too and having tried this and that I'd still opt for a barebone PC acting as NAS and with features no "small box" NAS soultions come even close to.

Of course that would be for those who like to tinker, but for around $350 (60% of what low end HP mediasmart costs) you could get a much faster machine with 4GB Ram, 3 disks (for the total of 1TB storage), and AMD Athlon X2 4400+ 2.3GHz. Throw in some decent Linux distro (free) and in addition to NAS, media streaming you can have a web server, ftp server, business grade answering system, TV server (inclusive of TiVo kind of functionality), home automation server, remote surveillance server, BitTorrent download server... well, you get the idea.

Also, most small box NAS devices offer pretty scattered support for UPS (uninterruptable power supply) which I consider a critical part of any device which claims to help ensure data integrity. A full fledged Linux box has no such limitations.

[Frank Hagan]

For those who like the HP MediaSmart servers, there's a new one out now that is reviewed at On-Line Tech Tips (http://www.online-tech-tips.com/gadgets/hp-mediasmart-server-lx195-review/) that is $399 with a $100 instant rebate direct through HP (but its out of stock, and you have to pay shipping).

Amazon has it at $342.55 right now with free shipping:
SMC Amazon Link (http://www.amazon.com/HP-LX195-MediaSmart-Home-Server/dp/B0021L9HKK?&camp=212361&linkCode=wsw&tag=wwwnorthwinda-20&creative=380797). SMC gets a small commission from anything bought from Amazon through the SHOP link at the top of the page on the forums; you can tell the URL is one that will give SMC the commission if it says "&tag=wwwnorthwinda-20" in it.

This one is very tempting!

[Craig Coney]

I looked at that one too and having tried this and that I'd still opt for a barebone PC acting as NAS and with features no "small box" NAS soultions come even close to.

Of course that would be for those who like to tinker, but for around $350 (60% of what low end HP mediasmart costs) you could get a much faster machine with 4GB Ram, 3 disks (for the total of 1TB storage), and AMD Athlon X2 4400+ 2.3GHz. Throw in some decent Linux distro (free) and in addition to NAS, media streaming you can have a web server, ftp server, business grade answering system, TV server (inclusive of TiVo kind of functionality), home automation server, remote surveillance server, BitTorrent download server... well, you get the idea.

Also, most small box NAS devices offer pretty scattered support for UPS (uninterruptable power supply) which I consider a critical part of any device which claims to help ensure data integrity. A full fledged Linux box has no such limitations.

If you have the time to tinker. I looked at going that route, howerver with the rebate, I got a 750MB machine in a small footprint, quiet, and ready to go with support for less than $475. I can also upgrade my HDDs when I need, and plug in my USB drives to back up the EX485. Plus, I didn't have to spend the time to put it all together, configure it, and troubleshoot it either, so the extra $$ was worth it in my scenario.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

get ghost and back up your own drives and you'll be dependent on no web site's dasdi space