HP Releases Two New MediaSmart Windows Home Servers

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.dailytech.com/HP+Releases+New+Home+Servers+for+Mac+PC+Users/article13798.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.dailytech.com/HP+Release...rticle13798.htm</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"To meet the backup needs for consumers who feast on a glut of digital content, HP has introduced a pair of new home media servers called the HP MediaSmart ex485 and ex487. The two devices share many of the same features and both use an Intel Celeron 2GHz CPU and 2GB of DDR2 RAM. Other features include HP specific applications that make managing and sharing digital content easier. Bundles software includes HP Media collector to copy and centralize digital files from across the network, media streaming to stream photos and music to network computers, iTunes server to share music libraries, and HP photo view and Photo Publisher services among others."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1230662875.usr1.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p>I've always liked the HP MediaSmart product, but I'm still rocking the (comparatively) power-guzzling home-built frankenbox that I put together for this purpose in 2007. If/when that computer dies, or I outgrow it somehow, I'll definitely switch to the HP MediaSmart - or possibly sooner, who knows. The new models are noticeably different in that they have four times the RAM, and a slightly faster CPU. Celeron is still a dirty word in tech circles, but the newer Celeron CPUs have a surprising amount of kick. So why the hardware upgrade? New software services that are coming to the Windows Home Server in the form of another software update (remember Power Pack 1?). HP's <a href="http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/mediasmart-server/?jumpid=ex_r602_go/mediasmartserver#/HomeServerComparison/" target="_blank">product spec page</a> lists Mac backup support (without an asterix), "media collector", and "remote streaming". I know some of what's coming but due to NDA can't say much more than I'll be happy when these mentioned features arrive, because they'll fix my #1 source of irritation with the current WHS software.</p>

[whydidnt]

I'll be happy if they fix the broken Media Center interface that prohibits streaming MP4's from 1 MS product (WHS) to another (Xbox). I can do it from my Vista PC with Media Center on it, but not from the device built to be my media server.

That and fix the backup application. I am unable to open about 80% of the computers backups on my WHS. They fail when I'm trying to open them, yet I can recover an entire system image with no problem. Something in the WHS software wont allow me to just open the backup and recover individual files most the time though.

[Jason Dunn]

I'll be happy if they fix the broken Media Center interface that prohibits streaming MP4's from 1 MS product (WHS) to another (Xbox).

Wouldn't you know it, that's my number one complaint too. So if you read between the lines...;)

[Jason Dunn]

Some further details here:

http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/29/hp-debuts-mac-compatible-mediasmart-ex485-ex487-home-servers

and here:

http://www.wegotserved.co.uk/2008/12/29/hands-on-hp-mediasmart-server-ex487-part-1/

[ptyork]

I'll be happy if they fix the broken Media Center interface that prohibits streaming MP4's from 1 MS product (WHS) to another (Xbox). I can do it from my Vista PC with Media Center on it, but not from the device built to be my media server.
Do you have a MediaSmart box? If so, are you using the PVConnect (PacketVideo) server? Best I can tell with my setup, the built in media server doesn't work at all for video.

[whydidnt]

Do you have a MediaSmart box? If so, are you using the PVConnect (PacketVideo) server? Best I can tell with my setup, the built in media server doesn't work at all for video.

No, I have a home built system. All new components when I built it, including an Athlon x2-3800 and 2 GB of RAM. I can serve a limited set of Videos, but am using TVersity on another machine to push most videos to my PS3 and XBox 360. If WHS could serve MP4's I could do away with TVersity and just push right from the server to the rest of the house. Sounds like I might get my wish with the next version of WHS. I use MP4s so I an watch on my iPhone and only have to rip and encode DVDs once.

[ptyork]

If WHS could serve MP4's I could do away with TVersity and just push right from the server to the rest of the house.
Dude, you're not NEARLY nerdy enough. :) WHS can actually run TVersity (or Orb or lots of other software). You just have to use remote desktop (RDP) to connect to the box, log in as administrator, and you're looking at Windows Server 2003 (basically XP). There are only some slight limitations, most notably running services requiring a user account. Anyway, see this post (scroll down for instructions).

http://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/whssoftware/thread/ddef317d-5fc3-4d49-b921-9cbf582b77d1/

[Stinger]

What I'd really like to see is someone make a barebones system geared towards the media server segment.

A basic box, with enough space for 4 HDDs, that contains a motherboard with at least 4 x SATA II and built-in graphics/sounds/gigabit LAN.

Add in a few components and it would make for a very cheap option for those looking for serious RAID 5 disk capacity.

Or is there already a product on the market that I've overlooked?

[midnight821]

Actually, I'd love to see some better integration between WHS and Zune. You can't wirelessly sync the Zune to the Music residing on the WHS box. Well, you can install the Zune software on the WHS and do a wireless sync, but you have to go through a bunch of workarounds (that only work out perfectly sometimes). It's probably more of an issue with the Zune software than WHS, but it's a Microsoft issue.

[Jason Dunn]

Dude, you're not NEARLY nerdy enough. :) WHS can actually run TVersity (or Orb or lots of other software).

I'm quite gun-shy about installing anything extra onto my WHS because earlier this year I had to wipe everything out and re-install it from scratch because it was so unstable and wonky. Personally, I'm going to wait for the next upgrade to add the things I want...but that's just me. :)

[whydidnt]

I'm quite gun-shy about installing anything extra onto my WHS because earlier this year I had to wipe everything out and re-install it from scratch because it was so unstable and wonky. Personally, I'm going to wait for the next upgrade to add the things I want...but that's just me. :)

I had a similar experience, losing several photos and videos in the process. :(

After that I decided to stick with only officially supported apps and add-ons that use the built in WHS architecture.

[Jason Dunn]

What I'd really like to see is someone make a barebones system geared towards the media server segment. A basic box, with enough space for 4 HDDs, that contains a motherboard with at least 4 x SATA II and built-in graphics/sounds/gigabit LAN. Add in a few components and it would make for a very cheap option for those looking for serious RAID 5 disk capacity.

What you've described is pretty much the HP MediSmart server, isn't it? It's a small box with space for four hard drives, with everything built-in out of the box. No RAID5, but with the WHS software, you don't need RAID5. So what about the HP box don't you like? Or is it just that you don't like WHS?

[Stinger]

What you've described is pretty much the HP MediSmart server, isn't it? It's a small box with space for four hard drives, with everything built-in out of the box. No RAID5, but with the WHS software, you don't need RAID5. So what about the HP box don't you like? Or is it just that you don't like WHS?

I'd prefer something without the CPU/RAM/existing HDD simply because it would be more flexible. Something along the lines of the barebone Shuttle PCs but obviously larger. Looking at the prices online, it seems like the existing Sempron HP units are actually a pretty good deal though - especially when you factor in the cost of the Windows Home Server license.

I've never used WHS but the concept appeals to me. I'm a sucker for technology and I know I'll end up building a media server box eventually. Does it handle redundancy in a similar way to RAID?

[ptyork]

I'd prefer something without the CPU/RAM/existing HDD simply because it would be more flexible. Something along the lines of the barebone Shuttle PCs but obviously larger. Looking at the prices online, it seems like the existing Sempron HP units are actually a pretty good deal though - especially when you factor in the cost of the Windows Home Server license.

I've never used WHS but the concept appeals to me. I'm a sucker for technology and I know I'll end up building a media server box eventually. Does it handle redundancy in a similar way to RAID?

I got lucky and got mine at $299, which was an excellent deal. That was actually below the cost of any of the close to comparable barebone units (size-wise--obviously a mid-tower unit matching your specs is < $200 easily), and placed it in parity with any decent NAS. I'm not sure whether they have coupon codes or the like to reduce the cost of the old boxes or not, but a couple weeks ago you could still find them for < $400. Doubtless, e-bay will find homes for some of the existing old units, as well, now that the new ones are out. They're really very nice little boxes. To me, the best thing is the 4-slot, hot-swap backplane. WHS is okay by itself, but honestly I am nerdy enough to really appreciate its Windows Server 2003 roots. I just installed Tversity the other day and am loving watching my TV/movies streamed to my iPod Touch or my work computer. Very cool stuff.

WRT RAID, WHS allows you to mirror your data on a folder-by-folder basis. I'm was a big RAID fan, but honestly, this is a better solution. Why backup you backups? Just mirror the stuff you care about and save space. Plus, the ability to add unmatched drives is a major bonus. Note that the other nice thing about the HP box is that it comes with plenty of eSATA ports, so if you outgrow your 4 drives, it is easy to add more. The only think I'm unclear about is what happens if the main, system drive fails. I'm sure I could Google it, but I'm just not sure how they handle that.

[Jason Dunn]

Looking at the prices online, it seems like the existing Sempron HP units are actually a pretty good deal though - especially when you factor in the cost of the Windows Home Server license.

Indeed - and HP, with this latest generation of hardware, has picked a good choice for the CPU and RAM.

I've never used WHS but the concept appeals to me. I'm a sucker for technology and I know I'll end up building a media server box eventually. Does it handle redundancy in a similar way to RAID?

Storage on WHS works like this: when you have one hard drive, it's like any other NAS (no redundancy). When you add in another hard drive, or any size, you can then turn on folder duplication. WHS storage is based around folders. You have a Pictures folder, a Videos folder, etc. You can chose whether or not to have folder duplication active. If it's active, then the contents of that folder are automatically mirrored across the drives. So it's more like RAID1 than RAID5, because with RAID5 you can lose up to two drives from the array, right? With WHS, I think you can only lose one drive before your data is at risk - BUT - if one drive fails WHS should immediately start to replicate your duplicated folders onto another drive (this would presume you have three or more drives total).

Hope that helps a bit. :)

[Jason Dunn]

The only think I'm unclear about is what happens if the main, system drive fails. I'm sure I could Google it, but I'm just not sure how they handle that.

Yeah, that's always been one thing the WHS team has been a bit dodgey on - it's the biggest weakness in the WHS product. When you purchase the HP WHS, you get a restore CD that you can use to re-plaster the WHS software over the master drive. Presumably, once you restore the OS, it would recognize all your data on the other drives. But what if you have data on the master drive? It's dead unless you have folder duplication turned on - which makes sense. If you want to protect your files from loss, folder duplication has to be turned on.

I keep thinking that WHS boxes should have either a small flash drive in them that you could use to restore the OS from, or in a two drive system, completely mirror the OS, so if you had the master drive fail, it would all keep working. This is one way in which RAID1 is superior to WHS...

[Jason Dunn]

Oh yeah, it's also worth noting that with PowerPack 1, WHS boxes can now back up files to an external hard drive - but it's considered a backup of the server itself, not part of the pooled storage (this is an option, not a must-do). So that means that in addition to the folder duplication you get with multiple hard drives, you also get an option now to have a complete backup of all your files - so a third-tier backup option.

What I wish though was that the external USB drive could be used for a true server backup, meaning the master OS drive...

[Stinger]

Thanks for the info. It all sounds very interesting. I wonder if there's any rival to the SmartMedia due to arrive in the next couple of months?

On the subject of RAID 5, I believe it basically has the benefits of both RAID 0 and RAID 1 - redundancy and bandwidth efficiency. I know it requires at least 3 HDDs and you see the capacity of all the drives bar one - i.e., (3-1)*1TB = 2TB of usable space. So every file is written to two of the drives. I believe it can only handle one HDD dying though.

[Jason Dunn]

I wonder if there's any rival to the SmartMedia due to arrive in the next couple of months?

Do you mean another Windows Home Server to rival the MediaSmart, or another system to rival WHS? Doubtful to both. There are some different WHS options in Europe, and some smaller companies here making them, but I can't see Dell getting into this market for a few more years.

On the subject of RAID 5, I believe it basically has the benefits of both RAID 0 and RAID 1 - redundancy and bandwidth efficiency.

Right, I read up on it and that's correct. The boost from RAID 0 doesn't really make sense on a WHS...you're not writing a bunch of files to it on a regular basis. And since the folder duplication functions like RAID 1, it's got that covered.