33 replies to this topic

[Soul Taker]

I have a spare PC and am thinking of using it for back ups and streaming media to the PS3, I have a spare Windows 7 licence and an OEM licence for Windows Home Server 2011, which would people use? As stated PC will mainly be used for storing backups of the other PC's, torrents, some movie conversions and streaming to PS3.

Have read that the backup feature in WHS2011 is slow as hell so I would use another program I have to back up things

[+remixedcat]

Windows Server 2012

[+Brando212]

I agree with remixed, either windows server 2008 r2 or windows server 2012

the home server iterations were always lacking and didn't run well in certain situations (like backups which you mentioned)

you could get what you need out of Windows 7 but some of the things wouldn't be as easy to set up as on windows server

[Deranged]

Soul Taker, on 21 December 2012 - 22:05, said:

I have a spare PC and am thinking of using it for back ups and streaming media to the PS3, I have a spare Windows 7 licence and an OEM licence for Windows Home Server 2011, which would people use? As stated PC will mainly be used for storing backups of the other PC's, torrents, some movie conversions and streaming to PS3.

Have read that the backup feature in WHS2011 is slow as hell so I would use another program I have to back up things

It is? WHS2011 has been fantastic for me. Perhaps whoever told you that needs to stop pretending Atoms are worthwhile processors.

[+remixedcat]

They got rid of DRIVE EXTENDER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[AnotherITguy]

omg there are aftermarket versions of DRIVE EXTENDER

[PGHammer]

Brando212, on 22 December 2012 - 03:02, said:

I agree with remixed, either windows server 2008 r2 or windows server 2012

the home server iterations were always lacking and didn't run well in certain situations (like backups which you mentioned)

you could get what you need out of Windows 7 but some of the things wouldn't be as easy to set up as on windows server

Agreed - Windows Server 2012 (which actually replaces WHS) makes WAY too much sense, even (if not especially) for a home server.

I dual-boot Windows 8 and Server 2012 today, with a mind to actually build a separate server once I upgrade my desktop - the advantage that Server 2012 has it that it can run on the same hardware that supports 7 (or 8, of course) with no changes whatever - how many *server* OSes can say that?

[Soul Taker]

Server 2012 is a little out my price range atm, not to mention I would have to get AV for it as well......will need to think on this

[+Brando212]

Soul Taker, on 22 December 2012 - 05:41, said:

Server 2012 is a little out my price range atm, not to mention I would have to get AV for it as well......will need to think on this

no you don't, both Windows 8 and Server 2012 have an anti-virus built in

[xendrome]

He can just use Windows 7 or Windows 8 for what he wants to do, there is NO reason for anyone to recommend Windows Server 2012...

[+BudMan]

$500 for a copy of 2012 "essentials" is a bit over the top for a home budget.

The lic he has for whs 2011 would work just fine for his needs - and yes there are a few replacements for drive extender, I use drive pool from stablebits, and its rock solid and only $20

And never had any issues with backups - are you trying to do them over wireless B or G while your running torrents over the same wireless network or something and running folding on your PC your trying to backup?

[Soul Taker]

Brando212, on 22 December 2012 - 13:25, said:

no you don't, both Windows 8 and Server 2012 have an anti-virus built in

Should have said effective AV

BudMan, on 22 December 2012 - 13:40, said:

$500 for a copy of 2012 "essentials" is a bit over the top for a home budget.

The lic he has for whs 2011 would work just fine for his needs - and yes there are a few replacements for drive extender, I use drive pool from stablebits, and its rock solid and only $20

And never had any issues with backups - are you trying to do them over wireless B or G while your running torrents over the same wireless network or something and running folding on your PC your trying to backup?

So with that I wouldnt need to use raid10 or is it better to use raid if I can?

$500 is a bit steep to say the least for a whole OS just for home, only thing I don't like about WHS2011 is that is wants to take 60GB just for itself

[Pygmy_Hippo]

I upgraded from WHS v1 to Windows 8 - If all you are using it for is basic stuff then you should be alright, so far Storage Spaces seems to be a good replacement for Drive Extender. Not sure about backing up all of your other pc's, however with the money you would save buying something like Windows Server 2012 Essentials you could buy a third-party program that should cover your needs.

At the moment you can upgrade your Windows 7 license to Windows 8 for £25, runs out at the end of January though.

[+BudMan]

"wants to take 60GB just for itself"

And where did you come up with that? That is min install size if I recall, not what it uses.

With what you wouldn't need to use raid 10? why would you need to use raid 10 in a home setup for ever?? That is OVERKILL for storing anything in your home.. You do understand that RAID is not a backup!

What could you possible have in home network that could not survive an outage for restore from backup? If you are running raid 10 in the home - your wasting money IMHO! I just don't see how to justify it.

Drive pooling/extender is not a raid. Its a way to access all the space of the disks under a share. So I access //storage/media and I have access to all 3 drives in the pool. I don't really care which one a specific file gets written too, is stored on. I can add to this storage by just buying the best sized disk, be it 1TB, 2, or 3 or even 4TB and just add it to the pool. Does not have to be the same speed either, etc.

If I have files that I want to survive a disk loss so that I don't have to restore from my backup, then you can set directories to have copies on more than 1 disk, etc. There are plenty of advantages to this method, and yes windows 8 spaces is along the same lines.

I can use different size disks, I don't waste space on parity when what I am storing does not require it. Sorry but my media files don't need parity - I can just rerip them if drive fails. I have them on digital storage because its easier to access that way.

Now my critical files like home video/pictures are BACKED UP!! In multiple locations on multiple disks and media. So copy on my computer, copy on the storage box (2 different disks in the pool) in the cloud on my webhost space, on dvd on my shelf in my home - and another dvd copy at my sons house in case my house its taken to OZ in the next big storm, etc.

[Soul Taker]

BudMan, on 22 December 2012 - 14:15, said:

"wants to take 60GB just for itself"

And where did you come up with that? That is min install size if I recall, not what it uses.

With what you wouldn't need to use raid 10? why would you need to use raid 10 in a home setup for ever?? That is OVERKILL for storing anything in your home.. You do understand that RAID is not a backup!

What could you possible have in home network that could not survive an outage for restore from backup? If you are running raid 10 in the home - your wasting money IMHO! I just don't see how to justify it.

The fact that when I used WHS2011 that is how it set up the drive 60GB for C:\ the rest of the drive was left for me to do what I liked, ahve looked at that drive pool app, looks good, so I may change from raid to that, seeing as it will do much the same thing

I am aware raid is not a back up that is why I have backups of backups and seeing as this pc came with 4 500gb hard drives it wasnt a waste, as it was in with the price, that is why I am posting here, to ask for advice on what people think based on the needs I have put up, if raid is overkill then I can change it, but unless I ask the questions how am I to get the answers

What about encryption, do people think that is overkill for a home environment?