Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Consumer Hardware & Components > Best NAS for Mac?

Best NAS for Mac?
Thread Tools
Le Flaneur
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 10, 2008, 01:27 PM
 
I'm wondering whether it would be possible to update the list of Mac-friendly network attached storage devices. The necessary features are (IMO):

1) true afp 3.1 support for file sizes > 2 GB and file names > 32 characters
2) bonjour/mdnsresponder support
3) good performance (10 MB/second read/write)
4) no Linux hacking required
5) affordable
6) quiet

Optional:
1) Raid 1 for reliability (2 drives)
2) iTunes server

Right now, I can only think of the LaCie 2big Network (2-disk RAID) that may fulfill all these criteria. But I'm not sure that its has good performance. The Infrant/Netgear NAS is too expensive. Buffalo's Linkstation Pro meets many of these criteria, but I don't believe that it has Bonjour support. Buffalo just released a Linkstation Pro Duo that offers Raid 1, but doesn't appear to have as good performance as the basic Linkstation Pro (the duo uses 5400rpm drives instead of 7200rpm in the Pro basic). There's also the diskless Synology DS207, but I'm not sure that it has Bonjour support. I also initially thought of the Apple Extreme Base Station plus external AirDisk, but I've read that the AirDisk support is unreliable.

Can anyone weigh in here? By the way, I'm NOT thinking of using another Mac as NAS -- too much complexity and maintenance.
( Last edited by Le Flaneur; Jan 10, 2008 at 01:50 PM. Reason: additional criteria)
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 10, 2008, 07:36 PM
 
I don't think you're going to find all that in one reasonably priced box. The closest I can think of is the stuff Netgear just announced at CES.
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 10, 2008, 07:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I don't think you're going to find all that in one reasonably priced box. The closest I can think of is the stuff Netgear just announced at CES.
What specifically did Netgear (not a Mac-friendly company) announce at CES?

FWIW, I think that cost is really the least limiting factor; most NAS units are VERY Mac-unfriendly. The Buffalo Linkstation Pro has everything except Bonjour networking, which could probably be adding by a little Linux hacking. I have an old Buffalo PPC Linkstation to which I added full afp 3.1 support and Bonjour networking, but boy was it a pain!
( Last edited by Le Flaneur; Jan 10, 2008 at 08:03 PM. )
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2008, 05:43 PM
 
The Netgear (what makes them Mac unfriendly??) ReadyNAS Duo meets every one of your necessary and optional features:
Netgear is beefing up its NAS options with the new ReadyNAS Duo Gigabit lineup, featuring dual SATA drives and shipping in 500GB (RND2150), 750GB (RND2175) and 1TB (RND2110) capacities. In addition to traditional NAS duties and gigabit Ethernet connections, the drives can automatically pull images off of your camera when you plug it in via USB, and the drives include built-in support for BitTorrent as well. Netgear has adopted some of Apple's networking technology, Bonjour and AFP, to make it easier to monitor and access the drives, but the Duos still operate just as well with Windows machines. Netgear is also launching the ReadyNAS Duo 2-Bay Gigabit, which packs in more traditional server features like HTTP/S remote access, FTP, SSL and ACL security, an iTunes server, UPnP AV and Logitech Squeezecenter. The dual SATA drive bays are hot-swappable and can be managed with hardware accelerated X-RAID. No word on price, but most of these drives should be out in Q1 2008. (emphasis mine)

I'd expect pricing to be about $200 for an empty box.
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 14, 2008, 02:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
The Netgear (what makes them Mac unfriendly??)
I guess you haven't tried updating the firmware on one of their Powerline network adapters, then. They don't support Macs. Their tech support is clueless about Macs. Of course, most manufacturers of networking gear are this way.

Originally Posted by mduell View Post
ReadyNAS Duo meets every one of your necessary and optional features
I'd expect pricing to be about $200 for an empty box.
Sounds great. Hopefully less expensive and better-performing than Drobos. There's now the DroboShare, just announced, which unfortunately doesn't support AFP. Do you have any experience with Drobos?
( Last edited by Le Flaneur; Jan 14, 2008 at 03:03 PM. )
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 14, 2008, 06:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
Sounds great. Hopefully less expensive and better-performing than Drobos. There's now the DroboShare, just announced, which unfortunately doesn't support AFP. Do you have any experience with Drobos?
I wanted a Drobo, then I read the reviews and experiences, and ran far far away. Instead I'm going to pick up a pair of 5-drive eSATA enclosures and run them in RAID10 (kinda... I'll do RAID0 on each enclosure, but then sync them with rsync or similar).
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2008, 11:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I wanted a Drobo, then I read the reviews and experiences, and ran far far away.
Yeah, the Drobo looks really unreliable.

What about this NAS, the LaCie 2bigNetwork? It has all the protocols (AFP, Bonjour) and offers RAID 0 and 1. Costs about $350.
     
GORDYmac
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Decatur, GA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2008, 03:14 PM
 
Netgear is not very Mac friendly, ironically enough. Their Mac inspired Storage Central line of network storage boxes still don't support Macs. I know because I have been waiting for Mac support since they were announced...they look sweet.

SC101T - NETGEAR.com
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2008, 03:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by GORDYmac View Post
Netgear is not very Mac friendly, ironically enough. Their Mac inspired Storage Central line of network storage boxes still don't support Macs.
Right, but their ReadyNAS line was acquired with the purchase of Infrant Technologies, and appears to be quite Mac-friendly. As far as I can tell, currently the Netgear ReadyNAS Duo and the aforementioned LaCie Big2Network are the only NAS units that support AFP 3.1 and Bonjour out of the box, in addition to offering the added reliability of Raid 1.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2008, 07:03 PM
 
GORDYmac didn't read the thread.

I think I'm going to buy a ReadyNAS Duo, because I don't think Apple TV can play from a Time Capsule.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2008, 07:23 PM
 
Is this all about whether or not AFP is supported? Isn't AFP depricated by Apple? Bonjour works better and more effectively with almost everything, so why sweat about AFP?

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2008, 07:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Is this all about whether or not AFP is supported? Isn't AFP depricated by Apple? Bonjour works better and more effectively with almost everything, so why sweat about AFP?
I think you're confusing things. AFP (Apple File Protocol) is a file service, and I'm talking about AFP over TCP, not AppleTalk!

"In Mac OS X, AFP is one of several file services supported including Server Message Block (SMB), Network File System (NFS), File Transfer Protocol (FTP), and WebDAV" (Wikipedia).

Bonjour isn't a file service, but rather it's a general method of discovering services on a local area network. Thus, a device will broadcast AFP (or FTP, HTTP, etc.) via Bonjour.

I don't think AFP is deprecated; does anyone want to weigh in here?
( Last edited by Le Flaneur; Jan 31, 2008 at 08:11 PM. )
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2008, 10:05 PM
 
Bonjour facilitates the most appropriate connection method for a discovered network device or service. It does not by default use AFP with a given device, though it doesn't discount that AFP is available. But together, Bonjour and the selected connection protocol are not limited to Apple-centric choices. "Not supporting native AFP over TCP/IP" is not a damning statement. It simply recognizes that only a relatively few manufacturers other than Apple ever fully implemented AFP. In fact IIRC, AFP over TCP/IP is more widely supported by third party devices than AFP over AppleTalk (or AppleTalk itself) ever was.

AFP is deprecated by a number of vendors who used to support it, such as Oracle. I can't find any substantial information about whether or not Apple intends to maintain this protocol indefinitely, though they are well known for supporting broad standards and (eventually) deprecating in-house standards when something better or at least equivalent is available as a full-fledged standard.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2008, 11:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Bonjour facilitates the most appropriate connection method for a discovered network device or service. It does not by default use AFP with a given device
I never wrote that. As far as I know, Bonjour doesn't use any connection protocol by default, except for tcp/ip; a device broadcasts and/or selects via Bonjour the different connection protocols that are available. Again, Bonjour doesn't replace afp/ip, smb, ftp, webdav, or anything else.

In any case, the real question is: for file transfer over a Mac-centric LAN, is there anything better than AFP over TCP? That's why I "sweat" over AFP. SMB is terrible in terms of preserving Mac file attributes.
     
ginoledesma
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2008, 12:00 AM
 
The Netgear SC101T is horrible, even on Windows. They chose to do an iSCSI-like approach for implementing it, hence the Windows-only drivers. A better alternative is the D-Link DNS-323, which is similar: 2-bay SATA NAS with Gig-E port and USB for printer sharing. It supports RAID-1/JBOD. It's what I use at home for my NAS, though it's far from perfect.

I hacked it to enable AFP (it runs Linux), but after moving to an AEBS(n), I've been able to take advantage of much faster speeds with CIFS/SMB (802.11n for my MacBook Pro, Gigabit for the NAS). If Apple only officially supported using this as a Time Machine backup, I'd be golden.

The chassis is getting cheaper ($180 down from $220+). Slap in two 500GB or 750GB drives and you'll have a decent NAS setup.

I'm waiting for the ReadyNAS Duo to come out so I can compare, though I'm really looking for an enclosure with more bays.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2008, 10:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
I never wrote that. As far as I know, Bonjour doesn't use any connection protocol by default, except for tcp/ip; a device broadcasts and/or selects via Bonjour the different connection protocols that are available. Again, Bonjour doesn't replace afp/ip, smb, ftp, webdav, or anything else.

In any case, the real question is: for file transfer over a Mac-centric LAN, is there anything better than AFP over TCP? That's why I "sweat" over AFP. SMB is terrible in terms of preserving Mac file attributes.
I didn't say you wrote anything specifically. I said that Bonjour doesn't default to an Apple-centric choice for connecting to any particular device.

I feel that a network should be agnostic, depending on IEEE standards and using the most efficient protocol to connect between devices. For most files, there's not really anything that needs Mac file attributes that I've run into, so losing the resource fork isn't a biggie in my book. If you're connecting between two Macs directly, that's different, and I'd assume you were doing that because you had a file on one that needed processing using software on the other. But for simply saving your music files or documents on a networked device, there's nothing wrong with NFS or SMB for doing that.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2008, 11:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by ginoledesma View Post
I'm waiting for the ReadyNAS Duo to come out so I can compare, though I'm really looking for an enclosure with more bays.
The original ReadyNAS enclosures have 4 bays, so if you have the bucks, go for it!
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 1, 2008, 11:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
If you're connecting between two Macs directly, that's different, and I'd assume you were doing that because you had a file on one that needed processing using software on the other. But for simply saving your music files or documents on a networked device, there's nothing wrong with NFS or SMB for doing that.
You've established that for you, AFP isn't a necessity. But for other people on this forum, it is

To my knowledge, the Finder still handles AFP better than SMB. Copies of bundle-type files (i.e. folders that look like single files) using AFP are faster, but not only that, there are programs such as Retrospect that can't automount SMB volumes.
     
Mastrap
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 14, 2008, 11:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I wanted a Drobo, then I read the reviews and experiences, and ran far far away. Instead I'm going to pick up a pair of 5-drive eSATA enclosures and run them in RAID10 (kinda... I'll do RAID0 on each enclosure, but then sync them with rsync or similar).
Could you point me to some negative reviews? Not trying to be an ass, but everything I've read so far has been positive to super positive. I own a drobo with two 1TB drives and am very happy with the setup.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2008, 12:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Mastrap View Post
Could you point me to some negative reviews? Not trying to be an ass, but everything I've read so far has been positive to super positive. I own a drobo with two 1TB drives and am very happy with the setup.
drobospace.com is a good place to start. The days long relayouts, the crummy performance that doesn't even approach the capability of USB2, the noise, the price, the oops-your-data-is-toast burps, the enclosure failures, etc. After doing a bit more research I found that RAID10 offers better performance at a lower price for my needs.

A two drive setup avoids some of the problems since it's just a simple mirror, but now you've paid $500 for an enclosure for what could be accomplished with better performance with a $100 enclosure.
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 15, 2008, 10:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Mastrap View Post
Could you point me to some negative reviews? Not trying to be an ass, but everything I've read so far has been positive to super positive. I own a drobo with two 1TB drives and am very happy with the setup.
Well, there's Gizmodo.

There are the user reviews on this Cnet review.

Or this one.

See amazon, too.

Just don't upgrade the firmware and hope that your data will remain intact

In addition, the fact that it's a USB device just seems like a bad decison to me -- FireWire is much better. In addition, the use of USB means that DroboShare, the networking addition, must be really slow.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2008, 12:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
In addition, the fact that it's a USB device just seems like a bad decison to me -- FireWire is much better. In addition, the use of USB means that DroboShare, the networking addition, must be really slow.
This is just ignorance, but widespread ignorance. USB2 is good for 20-25MBps (in practice... of course no one gets the 60MBps paper figure) with cheap single drive enclosures, yet the Drobo manages just 5-15MBps. What's holding the Drobo performance down is the internal processor, and FW would do nothing to help there.
DroboShare is held back by the Drobos performance, as well as the generally miserable performance of all of the consumer-grade DAS-to-NAS out there (Airport AirDisk included).
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2008, 02:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
This is just ignorance, but widespread ignorance. USB2 is good for 20-25MBps (in practice... of course no one gets the 60MBps paper figure) with cheap single drive enclosures, yet the Drobo manages just 5-15MBps.
I beg to differ. Personally I have had many more problems with USB 2 than with FireWire 400/800. MacOS X in any case is less stable using it (I've had the word of an Apple engineer on this), and it's more CPU-intensive.

Originally Posted by mduell
What's holding the Drobo performance down is the internal processor, and FW would do nothing to help there.
DroboShare is held back by the Drobos performance, as well as the generally miserable performance of all of the consumer-grade DAS-to-NAS out there (Airport AirDisk included).
Bullocks. The Drobo obviously isn't designed from the ground up to be a NAS. It was designed to be a single-user device, and then Data Robotics tacked on a DroboShare device that connects the USB device to a network. So in essence there's a layer SATA to USB with that OS in between, and then another layer that goes from USB to Ethernet. That's a lot of overhead. And you've spent $700 for a machine that has no hard disks included.

I think that the ReadyNAS Duo machine that you initially recommended offers much better performance and definitely more versatility. And you get a 500 GB hard disk for $500.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2008, 09:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
I beg to differ. Personally I have had many more problems with USB 2 than with FireWire 400/800. MacOS X in any case is less stable using it (I've had the word of an Apple engineer on this), and it's more CPU-intensive.
I thought those days were behind us and with Intel's USB chipsets and drivers the performance and stability in OS X is on par with Windows and Linux. I've had far more problems with FW (three Apple products together => freezing, fried ports, etc) than USB on Macs.

Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
Bullocks. The Drobo obviously isn't designed from the ground up to be a NAS. It was designed to be a single-user device, and then Data Robotics tacked on a DroboShare device that connects the USB device to a network. So in essence there's a layer SATA to USB with that OS in between, and then another layer that goes from USB to Ethernet. That's a lot of overhead. And you've spent $700 for a machine that has no hard disks included.
Isn't that what I said? Drobo is slow as DAS (due to the internal processor, not because it's USB) and even slower at NAS (all consumer grade DAS-to-NAS is slow because there's too many layers and not enough processing power).

I'm a bit disappointed at the ReadyNAS Duo pricing (I'd like an empty one anyway), but I think it's a much better offering than Drobo as NAS.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 16, 2008, 10:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Is this all about whether or not AFP is supported? Isn't AFP depricated by Apple? Bonjour works better and more effectively with almost everything, so why sweat about AFP?
So what *IS* the future file sharing protocol for Apple OS X ?

I have never heard of AFP being replaced...

-t
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2008, 08:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
So what *IS* the future file sharing protocol for Apple OS X ?

I have never heard of AFP being replaced...

-t
I don't have a crystal ball, but Apple does have a history of migrating to standard-based protocols once they emerge and stabilize. I think AFP is on its way out and something like a selection of NFS and SMB will replace it-especially since Boujour handles both of these protocols nicely.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Mastrap
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 17, 2008, 09:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
Well, there's Gizmodo.

There are the user reviews on this Cnet review.

Or this one.

See amazon, too.

Just don't upgrade the firmware and hope that your data will remain intact

In addition, the fact that it's a USB device just seems like a bad decison to me -- FireWire is much better. In addition, the use of USB means that DroboShare, the networking addition, must be really slow.
The Gizmodo review is far from negative, to quote: "Drobo is the first backup solution that I've seen that might actually work". A fair number of the Cnet reviews rate the product as being excellent. ZDnet amended their review, with he author actually apologizing to Data Robotics, and the new version is far more positive. Amazon gives it four out of five stars. So I am at a bit of a loss how these links should point me into the direction of negative reviews.

The drobo is a consumer product, not a pro product. If you know your way around RAID (and I could post just the same amount of horror stories about data loss in RAID configurations btw) then drobo is probably not for you. If all you want is a backup system that just works, and work it does, then drobo is a perfectly valid choice.

Ours is configured as an AirPort disk, with both myself and my wife using it as our main storage disk. The files we work with are typically <20MB, so little in the way of performance hits there. Should I ever have to edit a considerably larger file I'd pull it over to the local drive first. Our system works as such:

All work files -> drobo -> backed up monthly to another drive that's kept safe-> backed up daily to Mozy Online Backup: Simple, Automatic, Secure.
All applications -> local -> backed up to external drive via Time Machine ->backed up daily to mozy.com

Works well for us.
( Last edited by Mastrap; Mar 17, 2008 at 02:35 PM. )
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2008, 01:57 PM
 
Well, the ReadyNAS Duo is out, and it may be a bit noisy (registration required):

There's the D-Link DNS-323, and also the LaCie 2BigDisk:

LaCie - 2big Network (2-disk RAID) - Gigabit Ethernet 10/100/1000 Mbits

But there are some performance concerns with the LaCie.
     
Nergol
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 05:05 AM
 
I'm real glad to see this topic. Real glad indeed. I have a similar question. I want a NAS, too, but have very light requirements. Basically, I want something to attach to my router that will allow the three anime/sci-fi fans in the house (and occasional guests) to dump the latest episodes of our favorite things onto one shared space so we're not all wasting bandwidth downloading exactly the same thing three times from BitTorrent/whatever. The home network looks like three PCs and one Mac, both PCs running Win2K, the Mac running 10.5, with one PC wired to the router (a Linky WRT54G with DD-WRT) and one PC and the Mac wirelessly connected to it.

Basically I really don't need more than 150-300GB storage, nor anything world-beating performance wise, nor do I need any kind of automatic backup features, nor RAID, nor an iTunes server - but I do need something reliable and easy to use, that can be set up/administered from the Mac, compatible and hassle-free with all the computers in the household, quiet, and affordable (dare I say cheap?). Something that can be set up for FTP access from the outside world would be nice, but is not a requirement. Small would also be nice - something about the size of a 3.5" external USB drive or so.

My first thought was a Linky NSLU2 - I'm a big Linksys fan, and the NSLU2 means total and painless upgradability and expansion - plus if a drive fails, it's trivial to replace the drive with a new unit. They're also cheap, powerful, and easy to set up. But it might also be overkill for what I need, and having two devices instead of one is kind of a pain.

Another thought was the ADS NAS Drive Kit, or something similar like the Vantec offering. With Fry's accessible to me, hard drives of the size I'm looking for are very cheap, and building my own NAS may be a very cost-effective way to do things. I've used ADS enclosures in the past and liked them. But how Mac-friendly (not to mention Win2K friendly) would the ADS be? Or would any of them be?

So - any suggestions? Other products you'd recommend? Anything info you can help with would be greatly appreciated.
( Last edited by Nergol; May 9, 2008 at 05:49 AM. )
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 09:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by Nergol View Post
Basically I really don't need more than 150-300GB storage, nor anything world-beating performance wise, nor do I need any kind of automatic backup features, nor RAID, nor an iTunes server - but I do need something reliable and easy to use, that can be set up/administered from the Mac, compatible and hassle-free with all the computers in the household, quiet, and affordable (dare I say cheap?). Something that can be set up for FTP access from the outside world would be nice, but is not a requirement. Small would also be nice - something about the size of a 3.5" external USB drive or so.
Actually, it sounds like you'd be a good candidate for a Time Capsule (used in bridge mode if you want to keep your router). If you want to tinker, get the Linksys, which almost certainly won't handle AFP out of the box. I wouldn't touch Linksys with a ten foot pole, however, as I haven't heard anything good about the reliability of their products in the past few years, and just about everyone I know (including myself) has a failed Linksys router. In addition, they have the worst Mac support of any manufacturer.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 10:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
I don't have a crystal ball, but Apple does have a history of migrating to standard-based protocols once they emerge and stabilize. I think AFP is on its way out and something like a selection of NFS and SMB will replace it-especially since Boujour handles both of these protocols nicely.
SMB: restricted to a LAN, NFS: insecure, may not work with Windows.

I think the strongest option is SSHfs.
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 10:30 AM
 
Bonjour handles any protocol nicely. I don't know why AFP would be on the way out -- SMB and AFP are the only two protocols supported by Time Capsule!
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 04:49 PM
 
Well, AFP does really suck, it is due to be replaced...
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 05:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Well, AFP does really suck, it is due to be replaced...
A well-articulated opinion, to be sure
     
Nergol
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 08:41 PM
 
The thing I've read about Time Capsule is that it's a great NAS for what it's designed for - as a place on a network to do Time Machine backups - but not for much else.

At the moment I'm leaning towards a NexStar LX, though I was hoping for something just slightly less expensive. Still, it's not extravagantly or unreasonably priced by any means.
     
ginoledesma
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 08:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
SMB: restricted to a LAN, NFS: insecure, may not work with Windows.

I think the strongest option is SSHfs.
For a home NAS, SMB/CIFS being restricted to a LAN isn't an issue. And while it's still far away, NFSv4 introduces support for security.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 08:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
A well-articulated opinion, to be sure
I thought everybody has heard my opinions about AFP, but since you asked:

- Does not allow mounts of multiple home directories on a single machine

- Chatty, slow

- Not widely supported on non-OS X machines

- Knowing Apple, they probably drag their heals on releasing the AFP spec so that it can be fully supported by Netatalk

- This is not really AFP's nor Apple's fault, but the whole Apple metadata approach is goofy. Expect .AppleDouble directories on servers running Netatalk in an attempt to accommodate Apple's approach. I wish something like xattr would gain momentum enough for Windows to support it, putting this issue to rest
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 08:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by ginoledesma View Post
For a home NAS, SMB/CIFS being restricted to a LAN isn't an issue. And while it's still far away, NFSv4 introduces support for security.
What do you mean by support for security? Encryption?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2008, 09:49 PM
 
Is BSD/Unix hacking acceptable?

(in reference to original post)
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2008, 09:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by Nergol View Post
At the moment I'm leaning towards a NexStar LX, though I was hoping for something just slightly less expensive. Still, it's not extravagantly or unreasonably priced by any means.
You get what you pay for. No gigabit ethernet? IDE drives only? SMB protocol only?
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2008, 09:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Is BSD/Unix hacking acceptable?

(in reference to original post)
Not for me. That's what I did with the original Linkstation, and it took a very long time. Sure, there is even opensource NAS software that you could install on a bare-bones PC, right?
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2008, 03:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Nergol View Post
I'm real glad to see this topic. Real glad indeed. I have a similar question. I want a NAS, too, but have very light requirements. Basically, I want something to attach to my router that will allow the three anime/sci-fi fans in the house (and occasional guests) to dump the latest episodes of our favorite things onto one shared space so we're not all wasting bandwidth downloading exactly the same thing three times from BitTorrent/whatever. The home network looks like three PCs and one Mac, both PCs running Win2K, the Mac running 10.5, with one PC wired to the router (a Linky WRT54G with DD-WRT) and one PC and the Mac wirelessly connected to it.

Basically I really don't need more than 150-300GB storage, nor anything world-beating performance wise, nor do I need any kind of automatic backup features, nor RAID, nor an iTunes server - but I do need something reliable and easy to use, that can be set up/administered from the Mac, compatible and hassle-free with all the computers in the household, quiet, and affordable (dare I say cheap?). Something that can be set up for FTP access from the outside world would be nice, but is not a requirement. Small would also be nice - something about the size of a 3.5" external USB drive or so.
Why not buy just that?

$46 Ethernet+USB 3.5" enclosure
$80 320GB Seagate ATA/100 hard drive
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2008, 04:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Why not buy just that?

$46 Ethernet+USB 3.5" enclosure
Ethernet port is limited to 10mb/sec! (see comments on newegg). You get what you pay for.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2008, 05:30 PM
 
How common is SSH support in NAS devices?
     
Le Flaneur  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Austin, TX 78751
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2008, 10:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
How common is SSH support in NAS devices?
I guess it depends on whether you mean "out of the box" or "configurable." My sense is that ssh support isn't included with most NAS devices (however, it is with the Netgear ReadyNAS Duo), but can be added to most since most run Linux.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2008, 11:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
I guess it depends on whether you mean "out of the box" or "configurable." My sense is that ssh support isn't included with most NAS devices (however, it is with the Netgear ReadyNAS Duo), but can be added to most since most run Linux.
When you say Linux, are you including the BSDs? I would imagine that several, if not most run a flavor of BSD.
     
ginoledesma
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2008, 04:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
What do you mean by support for security? Encryption?
The security model in NFSv4 is RPCSEC_GSS, following the GSS-API framework. It offers secure authentication and encyrption, with 3 mechanisms supported: Kerberos, LIPKEY, and SPKM-3. And needless to say, ACL support is also present. Here're some summary pages (1, 2) you might find interesting.

I've been looking into NFSv4 with NetApp's ONTAP and Linux/Solaris, but haven't really gone into it yet, but it does look promising and should at least be a step up in terms of feature parity with CIFS.

Oh, and there's a 3rd party beta client for Mac OS 10.5.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2008, 09:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Le Flaneur View Post
Ethernet port is limited to 10mb/sec! (see comments on newegg). You get what you pay for.
10MBps (80Mbps) is pretty good for consumer NAS... even on gigabit I don't think others (like Airport Express/AirDisk) do much better.
     
Nergol
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 12, 2008, 08:12 PM
 
Le Flan;

Well, yes, you get what you pay for. But I've also learned that there's no point paying for more than I need. If I needed an airplane to fly back and forth between Seattle and San Francisco, I might get a Learjet, but I wouldn't go buy a Concorde - there's nothing that the added performance would bring to my experience. Similarly, if I need a consumer-level NAS for slinging files around an otaku house, I'm not going to go buy something that's overkill.

Anyhow, I just won an eBay auction for a NexStar LX that even includes a 250GB hard drive with it. So looks like that's my NAS. I'll let you all know if I have trouble with it (believe me - if I can't figure out how to set it up, I'll be asking questions here).
     
nonhuman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 18, 2008, 01:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
SMB: restricted to a LAN, NFS: insecure, may not work with Windows.

I think the strongest option is SSHfs.
Now that's interesting. I love the idea of native SSHfs support in OS X. I currently use it all the time with MacFuse for doing remote development (SSHfs + TextMate = kick-ass!), and I've been toying with the idea of using it as my main filesharing method on my home network (I'm about to set up a FreeBSD box to use as a fileserver and EyeTV recording repository). I'm guessing that there's currently no easy way to set up Bonjour (read: avahi) so that my Mac will automatically connect to my FreeBSD server using SSHfs, though that would be really cool. But since all my client machines will be Macs (and maybe a Linux box or two), I'll probably just stick with netatalk for now.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:20 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,