Windows Home Server

[tjhart85]

I guess it's crazy some people will pay for ease of use and interoperability with their pre-existing components j/k

LOL

Well, like I said, WHS is great if you'll use the extra features it gives you. But, if all your looking for is something to backup your files to and possibly stream media to another COMPUTER in your house, or your looking to set up a way for you to access your files from work or something, WHS is not needed.

Any version of Linux can do all of that, easily.

Now, if you want to stream to an XBOX(360), then its probably a must have for you.

If you have no use for the M$ specific functionality, then at least try the free alternative. If it don't work or you don't like it, you have justification for spending $(UNKNOWN) dollars on your server.

Just my $.02

[rendrag]

I guess it's crazy some people will pay for ease of use and interoperability with their pre-existing components j/k

LOL

Well, like I said, WHS is great if you'll use the extra features it gives you. But, if all your looking for is something to backup your files to and possibly stream media to another COMPUTER in your house, or your looking to set up a way for you to access your files from work or something, WHS is not needed.

Any version of Linux can do all of that, easily.

Now, if you want to stream to an XBOX(360), then its probably a must have for you.

If you have no use for the M$ specific functionality, then at least try the free alternative. If it don't work or you don't like it, you have justification for spending $(UNKNOWN) dollars on your server.

Just my $.02

I was looking at WHS for the fact that you didn't need to know anything about RAID to set up file redundancy. The selective redundancy is really slick. I can make backups of my photos, but if I don't want to backup DVDs I've ripped to it, I don't need to. It increases the available storage because I don't really care if a HD goes down and I lose some DVD rips, but I do care if I lose a bunch of family photos.

I haven't seen selective RAID in any other product.

[valter]

Anyone has any comparison Windows Server 2003 vs WHS? More, how many web sites can be hosted on a WHS?

[bluescreens]

Anyone has any comparison Windows Server 2003 vs WHS? More, how many web sites can be hosted on a WHS?

Since it's the same engine, on the same hardware I'd expect the numbers to be the same or essentially similar.

[valter]

Anyone has any comparison Windows Server 2003 vs WHS? More, how many web sites can be hosted on a WHS?

Since it's the same engine, on the same hardware I'd expect the numbers to be the same or essentially similar.

I would think the same, but then, you know MS, suddenly, when least expected, you find out that they have change the rules of engagement