Comments on: Building A Home Server Part IV

By: Internet

Internet — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 13:02:25 +0000

thank you Everton , useful tutorial

By: Everton

Everton — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 17:32:34 +0000

@Doc

Would be very messy!!

By: Doc

Doc — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 04:19:57 +0000

What if instead of installing a windows server on a host, you use those cute boxes that actually let you connect 30 monitors and keyboards to one PC? I forgot what the tech is called, but I’ve seen it demo 30 concurrent users running various aps on a single main server

By: Smackall

Smackall — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:07:04 +0000

thats true… But when you can really define that the system is only going to do this or that stuff, I prefer it can use the very lite, optimized OS. Say in an office environment, where you are not going to bother about the system when it does want you want. But at home, we always think of adding up another use to the same system. For home use, I will definitely choose windows where you will like to test something new, give it a try… things like that. :)

By: Everton

Everton — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 07:29:56 +0000

@Smackall

Just for fileserving no. But, who knows what my requirements may be in the future? In just under a week I’d outgrown NASLite, so I don’t want to be stuck on a system that can’t grow as my needs grow.

By: Techpark

Techpark — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 05:10:32 +0000

Thanks for the informative update Everton, though its smaller compared to your other parts.
Will wait for the next (final?) update..

By: Smackall

Smackall — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 04:16:07 +0000

But if it is only for file serving, do you think WHS would be the best option?