should I go xp or home server ?

knowlesy

knowlesy

knowlesy

Soldato
Joined
6 Jan 2006
Posts
4,663
Location
Newcastle
right Ive got a little server being built by myself on the nights, and Ive been using 2003 for an older one previously, but I really cant be hacked with domain set-ups etc...

so do I go xp simple file sharing and tversity or home media server ???

and if i go home media server, does it stream to the ps3 ? and can you install other programs on it or are they home server specific ?
 
bledd. said:
tbh xp pro or even windows 2000 is fine for the job
Click to expand...

sorry, should have gone into more detail tbh, but xp kept on loosing its security settings for shared folders before for some reason and It did on another server setup i did for a mate on a vista machine for shared folders etc which got annoying (i didnt realise what it was at the time)

this was the reason to switching to 2003 but then I forgot that you have to have the usernames etc to log in and it got annoying (as it was r2) and you cant just let any old sod access it without a username password.....


and I know home server did have a problem of corrupting files, but i was hoping to use raid and home server dosent use raid as such ....
 
WHS file corruption is a fixed bug, and only applied in a special set of circumstances (Editing some office files over the network). If you are using RAID anyway, then theres no point in using WHS tbh. The main feature of WHS is the file storage and folder duplication. The fact you can just add an extra disk of any size and it automatically expands your storage is the main selling point. You can easily install extra software via remote desktop (I use TightVNC personally) or by connecting a screen/mouse/keyboard.
Will you be backing up your PC's at all? WHS offers this too. Automatic backups, and remote access to your files via your own subdomain of homeserver.com.
If none of these feature are going to be used, then get XP.
 
just done a small server myself and xp was installed - less hassle and simple to use. job done.

Remote desktop (in the pro xp) works perfectly well
 
knowlesy, was that XP home? that forgets passwords..

XP Pro should behave the same way as server 2003 (or can be setup to behave the same way in gpedit), but it's only good for up to 12 users
 
bledd. said:
knowlesy, was that XP home? that forgets passwords..

XP Pro should behave the same way as server 2003 (or can be setup to behave the same way in gpedit), but it's only good for up to 12 users
Click to expand...

yeah it was xp pro, which is why i never thought of the security permissions till the last minute and then just couldn't be bothered with it and just moved to 2003 to get a more hands on for my work etc, but now im in a flat of 8 peeps and its just too much to get them to do anything such as logins etc, lazy students haha (hides the fact i am one :) )

i know most of the pros for whs but the file corruption was a big worry for me i didnt know the extent of it as engadget and its sources covered it minimally, im just trying to weigh up all the pros and cons in all honesty as they all seem pretty equal to me, but the raid option is pulling me more towards xp as id like to know that if one hdd fails i have a guaranteed backup (well near enough just using raid 1)

as for home server i knew you can remote just didnt know if the programs were specific after reading there were specific programs caterd for it, I know its just built on top of 2003 but was wondering if the os actually allowed the install of say an xp/vista program such as tversity, logmein etc ... and then if it did stream to the ps3 ....

I must admit i do like a geek around just server 2003 was abit too fidely to be doing at home rarther than work, xp and whs seem simple to me in what i want to do but they have seperate options pros and cons which Im trying to establish would be the best, to base future server builds on
 
just stick with 2003 then, and don't use a domain... just make a login that they can all use

like

media/media, with read-only access to media etc
 
You can run RAID with WHS. WHS will just see this as a single drive (though it is more difficult to set up). The advantage of WHS is that it takes single drives and manages them as a pool. Through the Connector software (or RDP) you can set up each of the shares you create to duplicate or not. Duplication makes WHS physically make a copy of anything in the share on another physical drive - i.e. it can be more efficient than RAID 1 or 5 which will duplicate all the data.

Example; I've about 4tb of DVDs copied to mine, but as I've got the original disks this folder isn't duplicated. Another folder with some DVDs I've created are duplicated as I wouldn't have the original DVDs as backup.

I've tried the W2K3 approach too, and I found it much more admin. Most of the admin/config is done through the WHS connector software on the client and is pretty easy to use.

I've not set up my PS3 - cos I don't need to - but it should work - it can certainly see the WHS, but I've not setup an account for the PS3. ATM I'm streaming everything, music, videos, DVDs, BD-DVD etc to Media Center PCs. WHS PP2 and PP3 have made it easier to share the media content across the network, especially in Media Player and Media Center.

I think MS have a 120 day trial of WHS if you go over to their connect website for WHS - but be warned it will wipe all your disks on install as it create the storage pool.

Hope that helps.
 
SiD the Turtle said:
Do what I'm doing and download WHS server from Microsoft and have a play with it in a Virtual Machine. Then make a decision on the best move :D
Click to expand...

lol tried that on my esx server at work dosent recognise scsi disks however i have a 1tb drive sitting here.... might as well load it up on my rig at home :) ty good idea!!!


ChileanLlama said:
You can run RAID with WHS. WHS will just see this as a single drive (though it is more difficult to set up). The advantage of WHS is that it takes single drives and manages them as a pool. Through the Connector software (or RDP) you can set up each of the shares you create to duplicate or not. Duplication makes WHS physically make a copy of anything in the share on another physical drive - i.e. it can be more efficient than RAID 1 or 5 which will duplicate all the data.

Example; I've about 4tb of DVDs copied to mine, but as I've got the original disks this folder isn't duplicated. Another folder with some DVDs I've created are duplicated as I wouldn't have the original DVDs as backup.

I've tried the W2K3 approach too, and I found it much more admin. Most of the admin/config is done through the WHS connector software on the client and is pretty easy to use.

I've not set up my PS3 - cos I don't need to - but it should work - it can certainly see the WHS, but I've not setup an account for the PS3. ATM I'm streaming everything, music, videos, DVDs, BD-DVD etc to Media Center PCs. WHS PP2 and PP3 have made it easier to share the media content across the network, especially in Media Player and Media Center.

I think MS have a 120 day trial of WHS if you go over to their connect website for WHS - but be warned it will wipe all your disks on install as it create the storage pool.

Hope that helps.
Click to expand...

pp2 pp3 ?? if its possible for raid im much more inclined in all honesty...
 
knowlesy said:
lol tried that on my esx server at work dosent recognise scsi disks however i have a 1tb drive sitting here.... might as well load it up on my rig at home :) ty good idea!!!
Click to expand...

I cheated, loaded Virtual PC and gave it three virtual disks of varying sizes. Saved me having to dig out real disks.
 
ive got a sata usb adapter just loading a virtual machine :) going with virtual box though although i can see virtual pc 2007 being a better idea ...
 
knowlesy said:
lol tried that on my esx server at work dosent recognise scsi disks however i have a 1tb drive sitting here.... might as well load it up on my rig at home :) ty good idea!!!




pp2 pp3 ?? if its possible for raid im much more inclined in all honesty...
Click to expand...

Yep it's possible to raid...just set it up as normal, WHS should just see the raid as one drive - there's loads of people who've done this - checkout the MS forums. Just make sure you have the correct drivers on a USB stick for setup (W2K3 drivers work)...oh and it's not officially supported by MS.

Personally I'd just set the RAID controller to JBOD or single disks and let WHS do the hard work, makes it easier to add new drives to the pool when you need more space, or remove and replace failing hard disks. You can use any size drive in the pool, unlike RAID which works best with the same size/spec drives. Plus you'll save space if you use the duplication feature.

Why are you set on using RAID? There might be a good reason, and I'd be interested to learn?

PP2 and PP3 are Power Packs...They're just the WHS name for Service Packs but so far have added new features as well as bug fixes. PP2 fixed the corruption bug you mentioned earlier - plus a load of media sharing features. PP3 is in beta at the moment and will integrate WHS shares into W7 libraries, disables the W7 backup reminders and adds a few more features in W7MC - like ability to backup TV programs to the WHS Recorded TV share automatically...adding an applet that shows the WHS status etc.
 
By the way, I wouldn't run WHS in a VirtualPC for anything other than evaluation (like SiD is doing). I'd imagine the drive extender/migrator could get pretty messed up over time using virtual HDs. I wouldn't trust my data to it anyway :)
 
ChileanLlama said:
By the way, I wouldn't run WHS in a VirtualPC for anything other than evaluation (like SiD is doing). I'd imagine the drive extender/migrator could get pretty messed up over time using virtual HDs. I wouldn't trust my data to it anyway :)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't recommend running any production machine on lowly VirtualPC, too much potential for disaster. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom