Storage via wifi

Nebulous2

bsod wrote: »

whatever this something is, by the time you've added the cost of it, to a nas, and the electricity to run it, it's probably the price of a laptop - much more functional items that generally come with enough capacity for whatever format of photo you intend to store. You have a disk inside the pc, that's 3 copies for redundancy, a caddy cost a few pounds, some have network ports too.

That's pretty much what my children are saying! They don't like tablets at all. I'm looking at something more expensive than a laptop, possibly a Microsoft surface pro.

I've a very good work setup with a thinkpad and a docking station, so I do like laptops. Maybe buying a modest laptop and plugging in my current external HDD would in fact be more practical. It would certainly be cheaper.

enfield_freddy

yes ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


however your original post used the words "Storage via wifi "


please decide , then ask further questions

Nebulous2

enfield_freddy wrote: »

yes ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


however your original post used the words "Storage via wifi "


please decide , then ask further questions

Threads change as they progress. Asking questions will help people make decisions, depending on the answers they receive!

I had made up my mind I wanted a hybrid and asked for advice on storage options to backup my data. My family were always sceptical. Answers I received confirmed that backing up does have significant issues, particularly where the raid controller breaks and I lose both copies of my data at once.

That has led people to ask how I got here in the first place and I'm now beginning to think they, and my children, may be right!

Maybe I should start a new thread on the relative merits of a laptop versus a hybrid.

ManAtHome

Just enable file-sharing on the PC and switch it on when you need to transfer files...

esuhl

Just a thought, but you could use a NAS for all the files you want to access (but can't fit on the laptop drive). And then use a standard external USB drive, plugged into the laptop once a week (say) to backup everything from the NAS and laptop drives.

Instead of buying a specific NAS device, you could keep the desktop and use that as a NAS.

Fightsback

esuhl wrote: »

Just a thought, but you could use a NAS for all the files you want to access (but can't fit on the laptop drive). And then use a standard external USB drive, plugged into the laptop once a week (say) to backup everything from the NAS and laptop drives.

Instead of buying a specific NAS device, you could keep the desktop and use that as a NAS.

Depends, that desktop could end up costing you as much (or more) in electricity to run as the purchase price of a low power NAS.

see here:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=69141816&postcount=45

esuhl wrote: »

A NAS would be a good solution in that situation. Personally I wouldn't bother with RAID mirroring, though. Consumer devices use a proprietary "fakeRAID" implementation. If a drive fails, you can replace it without issue. But if the RAID controller goes kaput, you'll probably have to replace it with identical components and firmware. If the company no longer produces the same NAS, you've lost the contents of both drives instantly.

Not necessarily on a Synology if the controller goes tits up you can rebuild on a Linux machine.

esuhl

Fightsback wrote: »

Not necessarily on a Synology if the controller goes tits up you can rebuild on a Linux machine.

Ooh -- how does that work? Is the Synology's fakeRAID firmware open source so you can get a Linux OS to act as the RAID controller...?