Its a nice idea but too little since the NSLU2 has been around for a long time has a large community and comes in at a similar spec and price. Of course its much uglier.
One thing i've missed in this review is the net speeds you got over LAN. The deal with a lot of cheaper devices is that they lack the processing power to reach the full link speed (100mbit for this device). Bought a Netgear SC101 once and it writes with 1MB/s and reads with 3MB/s. That was really bad for a device which was around E150 at introduction. Taking into account you still needed to buy the disks to fill her up.
Since then i switched to a debian server and funny enough it was all set up a few days before the Bit-Tech article about building your own server. It might not be as power efficient (80W) but the speeds i get from the thing are usually between 60~70MB/s from the sata disks (IDE tends to top at 40) which is good for moving a lot of data quickly. Downloading/uploading torrents are full speed, extra services like mp3 streaming are also easy to configure and remote connection is a brease over ssh.
My workstation tends to use far more then 80W so in the end i pay less for power since i only use my main rig when i am sitting behind it working on it.
Another advantage of such a server is that all dowloading activities in my home (students) are done with one pc. So it's easy to limit bandwidth usage and you don't get several users trying to use BT from their own computer completely clogging up the network, you only need to download things once and all files can be accessed by everybody easily. Also great for backups.
So even though i like the idea of such a small home server (wouldn't mind having a Synology 207+) it still doesn't offer me what i want/need. Oh and btw stability is great if you configure a linux server the right way, my scrap hardware is currently at 184 days of trouble free operation (uptime).
More OT: nice and balanced review, you guys always focus on the way it will be used by Joe Average and it works.
One problem I see with it is that the network is not Gigabit. Granted that you can connect the USB HD via USB to your main PC/laptop when the download completed but that limit's the devices potential.
Gigabit on the otherhand would ensure that your access/transfer times are acceptable when you want to use the files, without disconnecting or interupting other services.
More OT: nice and balanced review, you guys always focus on the way it will be used by Joe Average and it works.
:) thanks.
I figured - we've done our "build your own server" style article which doesn't appeal to everyone so this is a more general overview for those of us who are far lazier and just want something to "work" i.e. me :D
zr_ox - I can't say I've ever had a problem with 100M - it's served as a NAS for multiple people streaming stuff before when I made my own custom NAS box. Gigabit obviously gives far more overhead to dive into, but I wouldn't necessarily say it's essential.
I figured - we've done our "build your own server" style article which doesn't appeal to everyone so this is a more general overview for those of us who are far lazier and just want something to "work" i.e. me :D
zr_ox - I can't say I've ever had a problem with 100M - it's served as a NAS for multiple people streaming stuff before when I made my own custom NAS box. Gigabit obviously gives far more overhead to dive into, but I wouldn't necessarily say it's essential.
I'm saying it's a good thing not a bad one ;)
You might wanna look into the Synology 207+ if you want to review a more complete higher end device. Worked with it (had to help set it up properly) and i was surprised by the versatility of the thing. Having usb connections (3) and eSata combined with Gigabit Ethernet is just a winning combination. It supports two (sata) disks and can be accessed through one of the most easy to use UI's i have seen so far.
Support on the manufacterer's forums and on the wiki's is supurb, they even encourage people to mod it and post them there. Since it runs Linux you can access it through ssh if you want.
It is also able to run a CMS based website due to the LAMP server options. Downloading torrents is also fairly quick (maxed out my connection). But it has one downside atm: it doesn't seed when a torrent is finished which is a shame imo. Speeds are also great over network: 50~60 MB/s shouldn't be a problem for this thing. It also got an option so share your photo's over the interwebs through an easy wizard setting up a page for you.
But i guess there's a lot of devices out there these days that offer pretty much the same functionality. (bypassing the mian USP of the Emprex: they are significantly more expensive)
Any chance you could test plugging a USB hub into the NSD-100?
(oh, and I picked up an 8 port Gb switch for £15 on ebay the other week, so it's becoming more affordable)
I figured - we've done our "build your own server" style article which doesn't appeal to everyone so this is a more general overview for those of us who are far lazier and just want something to "work" i.e. me :D
zr_ox - I can't say I've ever had a problem with 100M - it's served as a NAS for multiple people streaming stuff before when I made my own custom NAS box. Gigabit obviously gives far more overhead to dive into, but I wouldn't necessarily say it's essential.
I'm saying it's a good thing not a bad one ;)
You might wanna look into the Synology 207+ if you want to review a more complete higher end device. Worked with it (had to help set it up properly) and i was surprised by the versatility of the thing. Having usb connections (3) and eSata combined with Gigabit Ethernet is just a winning combination. It supports two (sata) disks and can be accessed through one of the most easy to use UI's i have seen so far.
Support on the manufacterer's forums and on the wiki's is supurb, they even encourage people to mod it and post them there. Since it runs Linux you can access it through ssh if you want.
It is also able to run a CMS based website due to the LAMP server options. Downloading torrents is also fairly quick (maxed out my connection). But it has one downside atm: it doesn't seed when a torrent is finished which is a shame imo. Speeds are also great over network: 50~60 MB/s shouldn't be a problem for this thing. It also got an option so share your photo's over the interwebs through an easy wizard setting up a page for you.
But i guess there's a lot of devices out there these days that offer pretty much the same functionality. (bypassing the mian USP of the Emprex: they are significantly more expensive)
I like the sounds of that, for quite a number of reasons. The problem with most of the dedicated NAS devices is that while they may work a lot better than what I currently have (support for multiple sharing protocols, etc), they're often really slow due to a gimped processor. As I'm often installing direct from DVD ISOs that I've ripped to my NAS, that's a problem.
Anyways, great review Richard. I'd love to know more about the actual network thoroughput... while I'd like the 30+MB/s I get with my current mess, I could probably deal with near-max 100Mbit.
Few questions:
Can you attach more than two USB devices if you use a hub (ie printer and several drives, etc)?
Does it support Samba shares only, or is there also AFP support?
Does it require Windows to set up, or can it be done entirely through a web interface or are there setup clients for other OSs?
Mmm, intersting device, it seem the perfect add-on for my lan, with 6 pc and 2 user :-)
I'm really in love with the basic idea : nas+torrent+printer server in a small footprint, and at low power !
I must admit thet it have some limitation, but, hey, check the price and try to find something similar at the same price...
If I can find one here in Italy I'll buy, sure!
Good review, BT staff, tnx a lot!
very neat! Thanks for the review! ..certainly don't see a lot of reviews of this type of hardware.. too bad the stability isn't top notch, otherwise I'd be VERY interested... though, it doesn't look like they sell `em in the states, eh?
Well I did only use it a "short time" and it could simply be someone spamming the tracker with data or something inspecific to the devise - it did only happen the once.
With regards to network throughput testing - I'll put my hands up and admit it's not exactly my forte. We've previously considered it and tried it for motherboard ethernet sockets but unless you've got something else connecting to it with VASTLY superior bandwidth, making the item you're looking at the limiting factor, it's not easy to be accurate.
I did do it for the SP1 testing in Vista, but that wasn't really at a level of technicality we aspire to. I spose that's a poor excuse considering this is just a four page review :P
I see that it doesn't run NTFS, only FAT32 and "linux" format. That kind of sucks. I really like the concept of an all-in-one device for those "little tasks" that keep your PC on all day, but the limitations just make me want to turn off my fans and underclock.
Comments 1 to 25 of 35
you would be better forwarding a specific range of ports surely.
You can do either.
I think I'll stick with the nearly unlimited flexibility of a Linux system.
Since then i switched to a debian server and funny enough it was all set up a few days before the Bit-Tech article about building your own server. It might not be as power efficient (80W) but the speeds i get from the thing are usually between 60~70MB/s from the sata disks (IDE tends to top at 40) which is good for moving a lot of data quickly. Downloading/uploading torrents are full speed, extra services like mp3 streaming are also easy to configure and remote connection is a brease over ssh.
My workstation tends to use far more then 80W so in the end i pay less for power since i only use my main rig when i am sitting behind it working on it.
Another advantage of such a server is that all dowloading activities in my home (students) are done with one pc. So it's easy to limit bandwidth usage and you don't get several users trying to use BT from their own computer completely clogging up the network, you only need to download things once and all files can be accessed by everybody easily. Also great for backups.
So even though i like the idea of such a small home server (wouldn't mind having a Synology 207+) it still doesn't offer me what i want/need. Oh and btw stability is great if you configure a linux server the right way, my scrap hardware is currently at 184 days of trouble free operation (uptime).
More OT: nice and balanced review, you guys always focus on the way it will be used by Joe Average and it works.
One problem I see with it is that the network is not Gigabit. Granted that you can connect the USB HD via USB to your main PC/laptop when the download completed but that limit's the devices potential.
Gigabit on the otherhand would ensure that your access/transfer times are acceptable when you want to use the files, without disconnecting or interupting other services.
:) thanks.
I figured - we've done our "build your own server" style article which doesn't appeal to everyone so this is a more general overview for those of us who are far lazier and just want something to "work" i.e. me :D
zr_ox - I can't say I've ever had a problem with 100M - it's served as a NAS for multiple people streaming stuff before when I made my own custom NAS box. Gigabit obviously gives far more overhead to dive into, but I wouldn't necessarily say it's essential.
I'm saying it's a good thing not a bad one ;)
You might wanna look into the Synology 207+ if you want to review a more complete higher end device. Worked with it (had to help set it up properly) and i was surprised by the versatility of the thing. Having usb connections (3) and eSata combined with Gigabit Ethernet is just a winning combination. It supports two (sata) disks and can be accessed through one of the most easy to use UI's i have seen so far.
Support on the manufacterer's forums and on the wiki's is supurb, they even encourage people to mod it and post them there. Since it runs Linux you can access it through ssh if you want.
It is also able to run a CMS based website due to the LAMP server options. Downloading torrents is also fairly quick (maxed out my connection). But it has one downside atm: it doesn't seed when a torrent is finished which is a shame imo. Speeds are also great over network: 50~60 MB/s shouldn't be a problem for this thing. It also got an option so share your photo's over the interwebs through an easy wizard setting up a page for you.
But i guess there's a lot of devices out there these days that offer pretty much the same functionality. (bypassing the mian USP of the Emprex: they are significantly more expensive)
(oh, and I picked up an 8 port Gb switch for £15 on ebay the other week, so it's becoming more affordable)
I like the sounds of that, for quite a number of reasons. The problem with most of the dedicated NAS devices is that while they may work a lot better than what I currently have (support for multiple sharing protocols, etc), they're often really slow due to a gimped processor. As I'm often installing direct from DVD ISOs that I've ripped to my NAS, that's a problem.
Anyways, great review Richard. I'd love to know more about the actual network thoroughput... while I'd like the 30+MB/s I get with my current mess, I could probably deal with near-max 100Mbit.
Few questions:
Can you attach more than two USB devices if you use a hub (ie printer and several drives, etc)?
Does it support Samba shares only, or is there also AFP support?
Does it require Windows to set up, or can it be done entirely through a web interface or are there setup clients for other OSs?
I'm really in love with the basic idea : nas+torrent+printer server in a small footprint, and at low power !
I must admit thet it have some limitation, but, hey, check the price and try to find something similar at the same price...
If I can find one here in Italy I'll buy, sure!
Good review, BT staff, tnx a lot!
With regards to network throughput testing - I'll put my hands up and admit it's not exactly my forte. We've previously considered it and tried it for motherboard ethernet sockets but unless you've got something else connecting to it with VASTLY superior bandwidth, making the item you're looking at the limiting factor, it's not easy to be accurate.
I did do it for the SP1 testing in Vista, but that wasn't really at a level of technicality we aspire to. I spose that's a poor excuse considering this is just a four page review :P
Cool little device, may have to grab one eventually.
:)
It wouldn't surprise me if this is one of those things that takes off on the modding side depending on what people can get to run on it.
EDIT: WARNING:
The storage device you connect to this product must be atleast 10GB in size !