Basically I want to organize all my downloads over the years, and I want to serve them to any device I have or any device I may get.
I also want storage for making backup images of computers and phones.
Do I want NAS? I can't afford what's in the pic right now, is there other stuff like it?
Anything on sale today?
What's your storage requirements roughly?
Depending on what you're storing you might be better off with external drives.
If storing several TBs then roughly how much? Assume 4TB to be the maximum individual drive size you will fit in each bay (I know larger exists but just for now say 4TB) then take whatever size you came up with and cut it in half to account for RAID (you do want redundancy right?)
So for example 2-bay NAS ($80 start) is 2x4TB drives with 4TB useable
4-bay NAS ($210 start) is 4x4TB drives with 8TB useable.
Also consider if you want to do more with the system, e.g. streaming media or other server tasks in which case you might be better off with a Mini-ITX custom build or a Microserver.
For myself I have a Microserver with 1x250GB and 2x4TB drives (1 spare bay to fill later).
I use it as an ESXi host with VMs for Fileserver, Firewall, Domain Controller, WSUS and Deployment Tools
One or two drive NAS all almost cost the same.
And from three-four drive NAS onwards they're typically rip-offs and you're better off building your own, overall.
You can reach almost the same power consumption levels and more performance than 4 drive small enterprise NAS, quite easily.
>Depending on what you're storing you might be better off with external drives.
I wouldn't recommend that for "backup images of computers and phones".
External drives won't be connected to the device very often.
For most people daily or even weekly backups are out of the question when they have to attach the drive and then run it themselves... you'll end up with like bi-monthly to half-yearly or even yearly backups.
And that's typically quite worthless and problematic in a recovery situation (did I have this already backed up and where is it - fuck I recall I backed it up, didn't I...? maybe the old drive? ugh!)...
Depends how many devices. Lets say you only have two desktops to backup.
Bung a 1TB external in the back, schedule a backup each night and forget about it.
But I agree if the external is getting used for other things then it's harder to track.
Really we need more details on the environment to provide a more solid answer
OP mentioned computers and phones, so I'd expect multiple devices.
So you should probably use networked backup storage.
You could use someone's storage service or your own storage, but networked storage will typically work best by far.
And you don't want to use them.
More than 2 platters increases risk of damage, especially if you have these in a NAS where the vibrations from the drives compound one another.
2TB is generally as large as 2 platters is going to get for now
I currently have a cheapass D-Link DNS-320L 2 bay NAS. It's connected via ethernet to my router. Serves as media storage for the house. There's two 3TB drives in there, and they're going to run out of space in about half a year, maybe.
Anyway, I'm not in the mood or position to fork out money to upgrade to 2 x 4TB. I'm also worried that because the D-Link NAS runs Linux and has the drives formatted in ext2? that should the NAS fail, it'd be a pain in the ass to get my files back easily (Linux liveCD followed by many hours of data retrieval). I'm not using the NAS for backup, it's merely central media storage.
Anyway.. I think there are three options I can go with:
1. Upgrade to a 4 bay NAS. Not keen on buying new, I saw some craigslist ads for a used 4 bay Netgear ReadyNAS V1, could be good.
2. Fiddle with alternative firmware? I saw that there's an alternate firmware called "alt-f" for D-Link NAS models. I've played around with Android ROMs and shit, but this looks like it's way out of my league and is too early in development to be reliable and stable (at least the community is there and they're actively working on fixes for my model). Still, it supports NTFS, which means if it does work, I could begin converting my NAS drives over to NTFS now. In the event that the NAS hardware dies, I can slot the drives into my desktop and start using them again right away.
3. Homemade NAS. I have a HTPC in the living room I could turn into a NAS server, it can hold up to six drives and possibly more with bay adaptors. I also have a bunch of smaller capacity drives (2x2TB, 2x3TB, and a few under 1TB) that I could use. Problem is, it's an HTPC and it's required to run Windows, so I can't have it switched over to something like FreeNAS running 24/7. Is simply running Windows and having it share drives over wifi/powerline good enough? Anyone have issues with something like that?
What does /g/ think about dedicating a computer to storage(and only storage) and running all other services on other devices?
Nothing has direct access to the storage device, everything has to to through some low-powered device first.
For example: raspberry pi for a torrent client that downloads shit
> Nothing has direct access to the storage device, everything has to to through some low-powered device first.
Weird. No, If anything, you should make your storage device itself fairly low power consumption, because it will run 24/7...
> For example: raspberry pi for a torrent client that downloads shit
That's not quite only storage. It's also torrent client/server functionality.
You might as well also add UpNp with transcoding for the media files, a web server, and what not... if you need it.
Private users with multiple computers (family's, your own, doesn't matter...) that need to deposit backups or share data (be it media or documents or something else) somewhere have just as much use for a NAS as businesses do.
>Private users with multiple computers (family's, your own, doesn't matter...) that need to deposit backups or share data (be it media or documents or something else) somewhere have just as much use for a NAS as businesses do.
They can use local FTP for the same purpose
No one, not even most small businesses need something as extreme as NAS
>They can use local FTP for the same purpose
Eh, that one is running on a NAS, too?
> as extreme as NAS
NAS are just (usually small, not so power-hungry, 24/7 powered) storage computers attached to a network that run a bunch of network protocols to make their storage accessible over the network.
Nothing is extreme about this.
NAS does not imply iSCSI in an optical high-speed network, even though some companies may do that if they need to.
What a NAS is:
>a computer attached to a network, running 1 or more services
What you're describing:
>a computer attached to a network, running 1 or more services
Do you have a special case of the retard perhaps?
Third option could probably work and would certainly be adequate for a home user.
In Windows you can use Mirrored volumes as a kind of 'software RAID' so you could duplicate the files over the 2x1TB and 2x2TB disks and either disk on it's own is readable by Windows if the HTPC or one drive in the mirror should fail
>exactly my fucking point
No one here has any idea what you think your point is.
You're saying no one needs a NAS, and then describing something that is a NAS and saying they should use that instead.
In fact now I'm certain you have no fucking idea what a NAS is, and possibly think that they're magic boxes with live pixies inside them.
Are you new here perhaps?
A NAS is different to a computer with FTP. People go out and buy these fucking things specifically because they probably think there's some niggerjew magic in there that helps their files move faster. You fucking idiot. It must be retard hour on /g/, because you fuckwits sure are coming out of the woodwork.
no that's what morons like the guy who originally mentioned his NAS box think
this is basically what I think >>45414141
in case you weren't aware, dumbfuck, people go out and buy specific NAS boxes for a task that can be done by any computer, i.e. storing files
The niggerjew magic in these devices is the ease of use.
Nobody is claiming faster speeds.
/g/entoomen probably build their own NAS systems or re-purpose old stuff
Are you fucking drunk or something?
For example the people looking for niggerjew boxes usually end up buying a piece of crap like this
Now fucking tell me it doesn't exists
>People go out and buy these fucking things specifically because they probably think there's some niggerjew magic in there that helps their files move faster.
Or, you know, because they're small form factor low power devices with a bunch of (possibly hotswap & hardware RAID) 3.5" drive bays that are specifically designed to be used as a NAS device.
But no it must be because they're morons because you say so because reasons.
Purpose-built NAS devices have a number of features meant to distinguish them from just a Desktop PC with some hard drives.
Now most of these features can be added to the Desktop but require additional expansion cards:
>RAID configurations (most desktops would only support 0, 1 and maybe 5)
>Health monitoring (requires 3rd party software to replicate on PC)
>Multiple network interfaces (server-class motherboard or PCI NIC for desktop)
>iSCSI, NFS and other file sharing protocols (available on desktop but less intuitive)
>One-click copy to USB
That's still a NAS. They really aren't that bad compared to DIY NAS devices.
The software used is really good and free as in freedom in the case of Synology(yes really you pleb)
Explain a retard how to set up and stream his movies from an FTP server.
I fucking dare you
That shitbox is pretty good at what it does.
>Explain a retard how to set up and stream his movies from an FTP server.
If a retard asked me, I would. If he didn't understand I'd tell him to fucking google it like I had to. Problem solved.
>Stream movies over FTP
Ok this is making my brain hurt
FTP is for uploading/downloading files on a remote server. If the server is on your local network then just use local file share protocols like NFS or the Windows equivalent (samba?)
For streaming of media from the storage server you need a media server component like Plex, XBMC Server or hell even the Digital Media Services in Windows Server Essentials
A Media server does the decoding work and streams the media to the client (think YouTube)
A File server would simply move the file to the client machine and leaves it up to the user to work out how to play it.
Both have different use cases.
not even him, but you're retarded, you're acting like downloading something over a local network and downloading something over the internet are 2 completely different things that need 2 different protocols, they're not, ftp is not only fine for this but actually optimal
FTP is a protocol that "streams" the data in a serial way (from start to finish, no fetching shit in the mid-section of the file)
This makes it unsuitable for what most people use a NAS for.
A media server does so much more.
ok, at this point you must be trolling, I mean do you actually think that youtube somehow "decodes" the video before sending it to you... I mean it doesn't even make sense, I guess i've fallen for the bait now