Earlier this year, Microsoft announced its upcoming Windows Home Server product; a sort of beefed up NAS based on Windows Server 2003 SP2. A few days ago, Microsoft released the first release candidate for Windows Home Server, and since I was admitted into the beta program, I downloaded this release and transformed my trusty desktop x86 into a Home Server.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-03-12
@PlatformAgnostic "I realize that I'm being emotional, and personal, but people like you really tick me off because they repeat false information and negative interpretations when they are not justified by any facts. You're obviously not a moron, so I think your tone could be improved if you ask Socratic questions rather than making incorrect statements. That way, if you're wrong, you can gracefully accept new facts rather than looking like a recalcitrant ass."
Come on we love your insults. I listening tell me about this low level technology(sic). You batter with no content the opposition yet don't even know what a server in the home *is*, or why one would be used?
I'm seeing this basic functionality thats been around since 1998 on Linux...and thats it, and every Linux Distribution can *act* as a server. What does Windows Home Server offer out of the box. I'm sure it must act more than file server.
It doesn't seem to include the functionality of apache, thin client; MythTV; FTP; email.
I actually noticed you cut and pasted from the wikipedia entry. Why do you show such ignorance.
Member since:2005-07-10
I'm seeing this basic functionality thats been around since 1998 on Linux...and thats it, and every Linux Distribution can *act* as a server.
Cyclops - you have been a long time linux shill and this just proves it.
Windows Home Server is a solution for home users who want an integrated data backup solution. I have 5 computers in my home and synching through rsync etc is a pain. I want to really try Home Server if i can put 2 500 GB drives in it and it automatically synch all my required folders and duplicate them.
I think it is worth the price for me. If you want to hack Linux scripts to do it, go do that. But tell me one single integrated solution at this cost and then we will talk.
Otherwise don't always come off as negative against products from Microsoft. Learn to keep hate away because it clouds a person's judgement.
Member since:2005-07-06
If you have a hard drive failure, you should only lose the data on that drive. You don't lose the whole filesystem.
That's extremely reassuring ;-).
If you lost the whole FS every time one drive gets corrupted, what would be the point of the "duplicate this data" feature?
I realise that the way Microsoft has done this is through some selected mirroring, but really, that's only going to happen on designated default folders or folders users nominate for mirroring themselves. That's a manual process that users in the home just aren't going to have time for.
Storage for this sort of thing needs to be pretty damn reliable if Microsoft expects people who are just out to buy a TV to buy a Home Server in addition.
Member since:2005-07-06
All shares created via the WHS Console are duplicated by default. The user has to explicitly disable duplication to risk data loss.
Edited 2007-06-16 18:42
Member since:
2006-01-02
If you have a hard drive failure, you should only lose the data on that drive. You don't lose the whole filesystem. If you lost the whole FS every time one drive gets corrupted, what would be the point of the "duplicate this data" feature?
I realize that I'm being emotional, and personal, but people like you really tick me off because they repeat false information and negative interpretations when they are not justified by any facts. You're obviously not a moron, so I think your tone could be improved if you ask Socratic questions rather than making incorrect statements. That way, if you're wrong, you can gracefully accept new facts rather than looking like a recalcitrant ass.