[geeks] HP Home Server for $299 ($250 off list)

[nate at portents.com]

> I don't think the power savings are *that* significant.

There's not much of a contest between an embedded PowerPC CPU/chipset vs.
a fairly standard PC chipset/CPU combination.  One of the known downsides
to the HP EX470 is "Relatively high power consumption" for a NAS:

<http://www.computeractive.co.uk/computeractive/hardware/2208804/review-hp-mediasmart-server>

Compare that to the DS-207+:

52.2W(Spin); 32.76W(Access); 28.32W(Idle); 11.04W(Hibernation)

> While the box you listed is nice, it is pricey (no disks included),

Yes, the up-front cost is higher.  Which is why someone should do some
math and figure out what their needs and desires are long-term.

> and is even more minimal spec'd that the HP box I referenced.

And I'd argue the typical WHS box is overspecced for what it's doing
(though maybe not because it's running Windows).  Despite the typical WHS
having more CPU power and RAM than most of the Synology lineup, they're
less capable from a NAS functionality perspective, being so
Microsoft-centric.  The only advantage is really that it's up-front costs
for a four bay NAS are low right now.

> The HP box can do almost anything a Win2003 server can (as long as
> Active Directory isn't needed), and has some very nice Windows backup
> tools (including bare-metal restore).

I wouldn't compare it to a Win2003 server, especially considering WHS
greatly reduced functionality compared to that and 10-user limit.  And it
doesn't hold a candle to the extensibility of a NAS built on open-source
tools like a Synology.

Regarding backup and restore, the DS-207+ supports both USB and eSATA
external storage, configured however you like, including for backup.  It
also supports encrypted network backup to remote sites through

> It was a Microsoft 1.0 release, and as a "consumer" appliance they
> didn't treat it the same as, say, a new Windows Server release.

I thought their 1.0 release was pathetic.  Data loss for things like
Outlook and Quicken files stored on a server?  Doesn't matter if it's in
someone's home/small business or a big company, that's terrible for a
company the size of Microsoft.  And the lack of 64-bit client support is
just lazy.

> The Synology boxes are about cost-equal to WHS boxes of similar
> capacity (4 bay server box about $500 with 500 Gig storage). The WHS
> box I pointed out has on-board video (but it is a minor hack to access
> it), and it could likely run a *nix or *BSD, that wastes a $100
> software investment... Similar boxes can be built without a commercial
> OS for about $400-450, I figure.

Depends on how much you value things like small size and hot-swap bays. 
True you could throw together a bigger box with no hot-swap (or cheaper
made hot-swap) bays for less, but that's a pretty lousy compromise.

A fair comparison for a DIY PC-based NAS vs. the HP WHS would be something
like the Chenbro ES34069 Mini-ITX Home Server/NAS Chassis ($225) and a J&W
Minix 780G-SP128M AMD 780G Socket AM2+ Mini-ITX motherboard ($160), but
that doesn't even include RAM or CPU, and one of the downsides of that
case is that it comes with a 120W external power supply (though you could
replace it with a 180W) and 120W would be pushing it with four drives even
with a 45W AMD CPU like the AMD Athlon X2 4850e.  But you do have the
advantage of some serious CPU power and GPU power, a standard motherboard
form-factor, higher RAM ceiling, and the ability to make a combination
NAS/media computer that you could hook up to an HD TV...

> My point was that this solution is low-priced for what it is, but it
> is by no means the be-all, end-all of low-powered servers.

And my point was that some people might still be better served by putting
a bit more money in to a Synology up front because the economics might pay
out in the long run due to the lower power consumption, and they might
find that the features that Synology offers are things they could grow
into down the road.

> This is for Windows households, and for them it fills a need.

Looks like you can install Linux on it:

http://samuel.thollander.net/projects/linux-on-hp-ex470/

Ugh, it's a SiS chipset... no wonder it's so cheap.

- Nate