Windows Home Server: It Just Works!

[Timothy Huber]

I have to say I'm impressed. Remarkably impressed.

I set up my HP MediaSmart Windows Home Server a couple nights ago. It works like a home product should work -- it did what it was supposed to do without having to read the manual.

I plugged it in, installed the software, went to bed, got up the next morning to find my computers all backed up.

I moved my media files to the server, pulled the now empty 500GB drive from my desktop, put it in the drive basket and plugged it in the server -- while it was running mind you. A message popped up on my Vista desktop noting the new drive, I followed the instructions and a few minutes later I had a 1TB server rather than a 500GB. It took longer to take the drive out of my desktop than it did to install, mount, and start using the drive in the server!

I was skeptical about a Windows Home Server (and frankly, did wait until the first "service pack" or as Microsoft calls it, the "Power pack") but I'm only sorry I waited this long to get one. This is how technology should work ... it just does!

Timothy

[Jason Dunn]

Yeah, Home Server rocks! :D

I'm responding to your other message about "going digital"...look for my response later today. :)

[Pony99CA]

It sounds nice, but there's one thing missing based upon what I've read -- something like Exchange. If there were some sort of Exchange Lite so we could share Contacts and Calendars and have push E-mail, I'd seriously consider this.

Maybe I haven't learned enough about it, but I can't see buying a whole new machine (or installing it on old machine) just to get backups and media sharing. I can probably do backups of our 2-3 machines faster on local drives (or a networked drive) and we don't really do media sharing at all, but I can probably do that with either Shared/Public folders or using a networked hard disk.

What am I missing?

Steve

[Jason Dunn]

It sounds nice, but there's one thing missing based upon what I've read -- something like Exchange. If there were some sort of Exchange Lite so we could share Contacts and Calendars and have push E-mail, I'd seriously consider this.

Yeah, that's not an uncommon request - but only from the uber-geeks. ;) Windows Home Server was designed to be an extremely simple tool to use, and there would be nothing simple about integrating an Exchange Lite tool - try to explain MX records to an average user and their eyes would gloss over in a second. I doubt the WHS team will ever go this route, and I think that's a good thing - with everything increasingly moving to the cloud, there are a lot of good email+contacts+calender sync solutions out there.

However, third party add-ons are supported, so maybe there's some ambitious software developer who will try to pull this off? You never know...

Maybe I haven't learned enough about it, but I can't see buying a whole new machine (or installing it on old machine) just to get backups and media sharing. I can probably do backups of our 2-3 machines faster on local drives (or a networked drive) and we don't really do media sharing at all, but I can probably do that with either Shared/Public folders or using a networked hard disk.

The nice thing about the WHS backups is that they're bare-metal restores, so if you have a critical failure you can roll back to the last backup fairly easily. Also, the system is smart enough to recognize duplicate data - so if you have the same 20,000 photos on four computers like I do, it doesn't back up the same data twice. It will "assemble" the data you need for a restore from all the data it knows goes back on that computer. And when your WHS runs out of storage, you can connect a new hard drive via USB (or directly to the machine in the case of the HP WHS) and it will add it. It has all the benefits of RAID but none of the complexities - you can add any size hard drive you want.

There's also the centralized remote desktop functionality - meaning you get a custom domain, and can use that to remotely log in to any of your PCs, and also pull any files you want off the WHS.

What am I missing?

Nothing - as a power user, you're willing to manually create a system using a collection of different tool to replicate some of the same tasks that the Windows Home Server does. Most people are not willing to do that, and thus WHS is appealing to them. :)

[Pony99CA]

Yeah, that's not an uncommon request - but only from the uber-geeks. ;) Windows Home Server was designed to be an extremely simple tool to use, and there would be nothing simple about integrating an Exchange Lite tool - try to explain MX records to an average user and their eyes would gloss over in a second.
Mine gloss over in a second, too. :) I know MX is Mail Exchange, but never bothered to learn what they're for (along with CNAME or whatever and other such netgeek stuff). I just muddle through.

Maybe Small Business Server would be better if you want Exchange, but I'm not sure how hard that is to configure -- or how much more it costs. :)

The nice thing about the WHS backups is that they're bare-metal restores, so if you have a critical failure you can roll back to the last backup fairly easily.
Won't any image backup system (Norton Ghost, Acronis, etc.) do that?

How fast does it back up a system compared to those programs?

Also, the system is smart enough to recognize duplicate data - so if you have the same 20,000 photos on four computers like I do, it doesn't back up the same data twice. It will "assemble" the data you need for a restore from all the data it knows goes back on that computer. And when your WHS runs out of storage, you can connect a new hard drive via USB (or directly to the machine in the case of the HP WHS) and it will add it. It has all the benefits of RAID but none of the complexities - you can add any size hard drive you want.
Those backup features do sound useful.

There's also the centralized remote desktop functionality - meaning you get a custom domain, and can use that to remotely log in to any of your PCs, and also pull any files you want off the WHS.
Do the PCs have to be running a specific level of Windows? Would I be able to connect to an XP Home machine, for example? (I assume anything older than XP and maybe Windows 2000 wouldn't work.)

Nothing - as a power user, you're willing to manually create a system using a collection of different tool to replicate some of the same tasks that the Windows Home Server does. Most people are not willing to do that, and thus WHS is appealing to them. :)
I do have to wonder about that market, though. If you're sophisticated enough to set up a network (not that it takes a lot of sophistication), I think most people would be sophisticated enough to roll their own.

Or, put another way, how many people have a network that requires a server like this but couldn't do it themselves?

Of course, I bought Replay TVs instead of setting up my own Myth TV boxes, so maybe I'm one of those people.

Thanks for the response, though. It gave me a better idea about the system.

Steve

[Jason Dunn]

Won't any image backup system (Norton Ghost, Acronis, etc.) do that?

Sure, but at what cost? Acronis TrueImage 2009 is $50. If I were to purchase enough copies to cover the same number of computers that I'm protecting with my WHS, it would cost me $300. That's not very appealing.

How fast does it back up a system compared to those programs?

No clue, I've never benchmarked it.

Do the PCs have to be running a specific level of Windows? Would I be able to connect to an XP Home machine, for example? (I assume anything older than XP and maybe Windows 2000 wouldn't work.)

I believe it only supports Windows XP and Windows Vista. So if you're running an OS older than eight years, I guess you're out of luck. ;)

I do have to wonder about that market, though. If you're sophisticated enough to set up a network (not that it takes a lot of sophistication), I think most people would be sophisticated enough to roll their own.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this point - maybe if you ever get a WHS you'll understand just how simple it is to use. My Mac-using friend called Windows Home Server the best operating system Microsoft has ever released.

[Pony99CA]

Sure, but at what cost? Acronis TrueImage 2009 is $50. If I were to purchase enough copies to cover the same number of computers that I'm protecting with my WHS, it would cost me $300. That's not very appealing.
I got Acronis TrueImage Home free (after rebate) when I purchased tax software. Our local Fry's often has bundles including Norton Ghost for free, too. (To be fair, those usually include an upgrade rebate, so if you're not upgrading, you'd have to pay something.)

And, if you're backing up 6 PCs, I think you're likely beyond most home users. ;) I only have two or three PCs on my network (if I ever get my daughter's laptop fixed :)) (If I count older PCs that I almost never use, that number would go up.)

But let's assume you pay $300 for backup. How much did Windows Home Server cost (including the PC if you got it bundled on one)?

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this point - maybe if you ever get a WHS you'll understand just how simple it is to use. My Mac-using friend called Windows Home Server the best operating system Microsoft has ever released.
I recall seeing that comment from some reviewer shortly after it was released.

And I'm not really disagreeing about the function; I believe you that it's easier to use. I'm just not sure of the the value proposition.

Let me ask a few more questions, though.

Does it include virus/malware scanning on the server to protect all of your PCs without slowing their processing down. (Of course, you can get virus scanning for free, too, with AVG and others, but they run locally.)
Does the server sit between you and the Internet (where it can serve as a firewall, too), or is it just a peer on the network? I'm guessing it's a peer now that Windows includes its own firewall and most networks probably have a router with a firewall anyway.
Does it handle Windows Update for each PC, downloading the updates once and distributing them to each PC as necessary?

The more cool features it has, the better the value proposition. :)

Steve

[Jason Dunn]

How much did Windows Home Server cost (including the PC if you got it bundled on one)?

You can get a copy of the software from NewEgg for $99. It will run on almost any old PC - the requirements are pretty low.

I'm just not sure of the the value proposition

I'll re-state this again: I don't think this product is a good fit for you, and that's 100% OK.




Does it include virus/malware scanning on the server to protect all of your PCs without slowing their processing down. (Of course, you can get virus scanning for free, too, with AVG and others, but they run locally.)
Does the server sit between you and the Internet (where it can serve as a firewall, too), or is it just a peer on the network? I'm guessing it's a peer now that Windows includes its own firewall and most networks probably have a router with a firewall anyway.
Does it handle Windows Update for each PC, downloading the updates once and distributing them to each PC as necessary?



No, no and no.

[Pony99CA]

You can get a copy of the software from NewEgg for $99. It will run on almost any old PC - the requirements are pretty low.
PriceGrabber said it was over $150, but they were wrong. Here's the NewEgg link for $100 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116550&Tpk=32-116-550). If you have an old machine lying around, that seems like a fair price. However, it is an OEM price, so you supposedly won't get any support from Microsoft.

Too bad that it probably won't run on my old Pentium 166 MHz box or my Compaq Pentium II 333 MHz PC. :D Do you think it would work OK on a 2.0 GHz Pentium IV laptop?

Also, I have a Western Digital NAS drive. Do you know if I can have WHS use that? If it can back up to my NAS storage while I'm still using my PCs, that might make it worthwhile. (Norton Ghost would slow my PC to a crawl. I haven't tried Acronis yet.)

Steve

[Jason Dunn]

Too bad that it probably won't run on my old Pentium 166 MHz box or my Compaq Pentium II 333 MHz PC.

Well, you can always try - it probably would run, but the performance would be pretty brutal.

Do you think it would work OK on a 2.0 GHz Pentium IV laptop?

Sure, as long as there's 512 MB of RAM (more is better obviously). You'd need to have Windows Server 2003-compatible drivers though if the NIC wasn't auto-detected though.

Also, I have a Western Digital NAS drive. Do you know if I can have WHS use that? If it can back up to my NAS storage while I'm still using my PCs, that might make it worthwhile.

WHS can only use hard drives that are directly connected to it via USB, SATA, etc. If you connect your NAS drive, WHS will wipe it out to use it as part of it's storage pool. You can't really combine technologies here - you'd have to pick one or the other. WHS will back up your PCs while you're using them, and the performance impact isn't too bad (though I back up at midnight, so I don't use my PCs at that time of night very often).

[Pony99CA]

WHS can only use hard drives that are directly connected to it via USB, SATA, etc. If you connect your NAS drive, WHS will wipe it out to use it as part of it's storage pool. You can't really combine technologies here - you'd have to pick one or the other.
So any USB drives I connected would be wiped out? That's good to know. If I decide to try WHS, I might not have thought of that, which could have gotten rather messy. :eek:

So is the PC's internal hard disk only used to run the server itself (not as part of the storage pool)? If so, there's probably no sense upgrading to a huge internal drive (unless WHS can pool logical drives partitioned from the C: drive). (Plus, if you can only choose SATA or USB, it's moot for my laptop, which is vintage 2003 and doesn't have SATA anyway.)

Thanks for answering all of my questions....

Steve

[Timothy Huber]

I do have to wonder about that market, though. If you're sophisticated enough to set up a network (not that it takes a lot of sophistication), I think most people would be sophisticated enough to roll their own.

Or, put another way, how many people have a network that requires a server like this but couldn't do it themselves?

Actually, most of the people I work with have a home network and wouldn't consider themselves sophisticated enough to roll their own. There are several people very interested in a WHS after some water-cooler conversations.

Sometimes, too, it's easier to buy an appliance than build your own. I guess that's what impressed me about the WHS. Straight out of the box it integrated into my network with a minimal amount of effort.

Timothy

[Jason Dunn]

So any USB drives I connected would be wiped out? That's good to know. If I decide to try WHS, I might not have thought of that, which could have gotten rather messy.

It doesn't wipe them out without a very explicit warning, so you wouldn't have been surprised, trust me.

So is the PC's internal hard disk only used to run the server itself (not as part of the storage pool)? If so, there's probably no sense upgrading to a huge internal drive (unless WHS can pool logical drives partitioned from the C: drive).

WHS will take the C: drive and partition off a 20 GB chunk for the OS itself, then the rest is a D: drive and available for storage. Any drives you add via USB is added to this storage pool.

[Jason Dunn]

I guess that's what impressed me about the WHS. Straight out of the box it integrated into my network with a minimal amount of effort.

I know the WHS team would be happy to see you saying that. :D