Recommendation for Server OS similar to WHS that is freeware. Nothing too complex.

[ajtyeh]

I'm looking for something pretty simple. I'm not much of a coder so any recommendations for using a LINUX OS that is freeware and simple to use. I am setting up a 24/7 personal server. Access to files/music/movies anywhere i go/travel.

I've never set up a server before. so any tips or advise will be appreciated. I've read that WHS is nice for noobies, but 100 bucks from newegg is a bit more then id like to spend for now.

fyi if it matters server specs:

AMD II Athlon x2 245 2.9 GHz 45nm SOI 2MB AM3 65W
Generic 4gb PC2-8500
2 - 1.5 TB WD Green
2 - 640 GB WD Black
Antec 500W Earthwatts
BIOSTAR A760G MATX
EVGA 8600gt

 

[Rifter]

If you have not used linux before it is not going to be simple.

I just started using linux a year ago for the desktop and it took a while to get used to and i went with mint which is more geared towared windows users. I have just recently started playing with it on the server and it takes some getting used to. That said for a simple file server pretty much any linux distro will work, i would reccomend ubuntu server, if you can wait a few months the next LTS release will be out which will give you 5 years of updates. Im currently running Mint 8 for my server which is less than ideal because i wanted something command line only so i will be switching to ubuntu server 10.04 LTS when its released.

FreeNAS might be another option to consider i had it reccomended alot when i was looking for a server OS but i dont know how well it would work for sharing files outside your network i think its more based on file sharing to your internal network and you mentioned wanting external access.

 

[ViRGE]

I'd second the recommendation to look at FreeNAS. It seems to be the leading *nix NAS distribution.

 

[JackMDS]

You can save the money for buying Windows Home Server by buying more humble Hardware.

our specs are mote suitable for an humble gaming computer rather then functional server.

As an example HP sells WHS with the OS for $250. Buying WHS OEM is $99.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...se&Order=PRICE

I.e. HP sells functional server for $150 which is a small fraction of your hardware.

.

 

[taltamir]

if you are willing to take the time and learn it, there are open source programs that are vastly superior to windows server...
Doesn't MS still use linux for some of their servers? their policy was "eat your own dogfood" for decades but until about 2007 ALL their servers were linux only. Only then did they start transitioning to SOME windows based servers (not WHS btw), and still they need to use some linux.

Personally I prefer openSolaris for that vastly superior ZFS file system, the best by far filesystem in the world right now, and the most secure way to store your data.
check it out at genunix.org

 

[Nothinman]

if you are willing to take the time and learn it, there are open source programs that are vastly superior to windows server...
Doesn't MS still use linux for some of their servers? their policy was "eat your own dogfood" for decades but until about 2007 ALL their servers were linux only. Only then did they start transitioning to SOME windows based servers (not WHS btw), and still they need to use some linux.

Personally I prefer openSolaris for that vastly superior ZFS file system, the best by far filesystem in the world right now, and the most secure way to store your data.
check it out at genunix.org

I find it extremely hard to believe that ALL their servers would have been Linux at any point in the past. I remember seeing a story about them having some form of unix for making/burning ISOs and I'm sure they have some dev servers and workstations but that's about it.

As for ZFS, IMO it's not worth putting up with Solaris just for ZFS. I'll hold out for Debian FreeBSD or BTRFS.

 

[Binky]

Windows home server has a trial version. You may want to give it a shot.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/windowshomeserver/eval.mspx

Simple and free is a tough combo to find. You can have simple for $100, or free but not simple. I don't know of a solution that is both simple and free.

 

[Nothinman]

Windows home server has a trial version. You may want to give it a shot.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/windowshomeserver/eval.mspx

Simple and free is a tough combo to find. You can have simple for $100, or free but not simple. I don't know of a solution that is both simple and free.

Simple is a matter of perspective. I find Linux to be much, much simpler than Windows for just about everything.

 

[taltamir]

I find it extremely hard to believe that ALL their servers would have been Linux at any point in the past. I remember seeing a story about them having some form of unix for making/burning ISOs and I'm sure they have some dev servers and workstations but that's about it.

As for ZFS, IMO it's not worth putting up with Solaris just for ZFS. I'll hold out for Debian FreeBSD or BTRFS.

end to end checksumming and ECC for every single bit of data; on the fly, especially on the media itself; catches any form of data corruptions and errors... I and many others have personally had it detect and repair data errors... it prevents silent data corruption which is a major issue. (I have even observed bit flips). Not to mention that the average SERVER class SCSI drives have a published error rate of 1 wrong bit of data written per 1TB of data, and home use drives don't have such figures published at all. (ZFS and ONLY ZFS catches and corrects that). and that assumes clean power from a quality PSU.

What is it exactly that is so superior to you about linux or so inferior about solaris? open solaris is actually GNU/Solaris, a GNU environment on a solaris kernel. While most linux distrubtion are GNU environment over a linux kernel.

Frankly I am not missing anything terribly valuable... You start with the most important thing (your data safety), then you select the best and easiest to use OS that provides it.
With the exception of ZFS (at least until BTRFS is ready) all current filesystems are obsolete crap based on assumptions from the 1980s. And conventions literally written by "some guy" as a temporary hack for his personal use which were never intended to be used as a basis for anything.
not a single filesystem aside from ZFS is even remotely close to acecptable. ZFS is not perfect. It desperately lacks the option to remove a volume from a pool (which has been on the TODO list since 2006), but it is solid, it is stable, and it is several classes above and beyond anything else on the market right now.

 

[Nothinman]

end to end checksumming and ECC for every single bit of data... I and many others have personally had it detect and repair data errors... it prevents silent data corruption which is a major issue. (I have even observed bit flips).

I have no doubt, but I personally have yet to run into data corruption on my drives. Of course that'll be more of a worry once I get a 1TB or larger drive.

What is it exactly that is so superior to you about linux or so inferior about solaris? open solaris is actually GNU/Solaris, a GNU environment on a solaris kernel. While most linux distrubtion are GNU environment over a linux kernel.

Mostly package management and my familiarity with the system. I already know Debian like the back of my hand so using anything else is annoying now. And ports isn't even close to cutting it.

With the exception of ZFS (at least until BTRFS is ready) all current filesystems are obsolete crap based on assumptions from the 1980s. And conventions literally written by "some guy" as a temporary hack for his personal use which were never intended to be used as a basis for anything.

I'm pretty sure SGI put more thought into XFS than that, but even with the layers of assumptions applied it works just fine and hasn't lost me any data. Well, I lost some FF bookmark files once or twice by doing a hard reboot but that was at years ago.

not a single filesystem aside from ZFS is even remotely close to acecptable. ZFS is not perfect.

My history with XFS and ext3 would beg to differ. Sure, ZFS is more capable and has extra safeguards and features, but XFS+software RAID+LVM does everything I need well enough to be acceptable. And I can do things like online capacity expansion, something ZFS can't do yet.

If we were talking about a spare machine that just did file serving at my apt then it might be an option, but I don't have a machine to dedicate to that right now.

 

[taltamir]

I have no doubt, but I personally have yet to run into data corruption on my drives. Of course that'll be more of a worry once I get a 1TB or larger drive.

Or you didn't notice. A single wrong bit in a movie is meaningless (typically). For me it was when I noticed just how many of my video files have changed their checksums over the years... while still working perfectly... of course, on occasion you run into damage that matters. Like ISO images that now don't work, videos that do get damaged, pictures that will not open, text files that don't work, etc...

Mostly package management and my familiarity with the system. I already know Debian like the back of my hand so using anything else is annoying now. And ports isn't even close to cutting it.

OpenSolaris has excellent package management.
Your familiarity is not relevant to someone who has never used linux OR solaris before.

I'm pretty sure SGI put more thought into XFS than that, but even with the layers of assumptions applied it works just fine and hasn't lost me any data. Well, I lost some FF bookmark files once or twice by doing a hard reboot but that was at years ago.

Or you just haven't noticed... there is also the issue of drives today having the same error rates as 10 years ago (reliability increased, but so did total size and miniturization, which counteracts reliability increases) while size vastly increased... 1/1TB on a 50GB drive is not nearly as significant than 1/1TB on a 2TB drive.

My history with XFS and ext3 would beg to differ. Sure, ZFS is more capable and has extra safeguards and features, but XFS+software RAID+LVM does everything I need well enough to be acceptable. And I can do things like online capacity expansion, something ZFS can't do yet.

I mentioned specifically that ZFS cannot do everything... but if the choice is between "data safety" and "online expansion/shrinking" (which note that I pointed out shrinking is a big lack in ZFS) then data safety should be your first choice.

I wouldn't tell someone "smoking is perfectly fine! I have been smoking for years and never got cancer, so you should smoke too!"

 

[Nothinman]

Or you didn't notice. A single wrong bit in a movie is meaningless (typically). For me it was when I noticed just how many of my video files have changed their checksums over the years... while still working perfectly... of course, on occasion you run into damage that matters. Like ISO images that now don't work, videos that do get damaged, pictures that will not open, text files that don't work, etc...

Possibly, I don't normally run checksum verifications across everything. But I can't say I'm very worried since I've never had an ISO, tar ball, etc ever just randomly fail.

OpenSolaris has excellent package management.
Your familiarity is not relevant to someone who has never used linux OR solaris before.

Excellent? Anything would be better than what was there the last time I looked.

And yes, my familiarity is relevant when I'm giving my opinion. And on top of that someone just starting with OpenSolaris is going to have a much more difficult time getting help compared to someone starting off with a Linux distro like Ubuntu.

Or you just haven't noticed... there is also the issue of drives today having the same error rates as 10 years ago (reliability increased, but so did total size and miniturization, which counteracts reliability increases) while size vastly increased... 1/1TB on a 50GB drive is not nearly as significant than 1/1TB on a 2TB drive.

Since you mentioned it, I tested a few random bzip2 files I have here and all of them tested fine. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen, but I have yet to run into it.

I mentioned specifically that ZFS cannot do everything... but if the choice is between "data safety" and "online expansion/shrinking" (which note that I pointed out shrinking is a big lack in ZFS) then data safety should be your first choice.

Except that my data is safe where it is now. Sure, I could do more with regular off-site backups, ZFS, etc but frankly the hassle isn't worth it to me. IMO being able to use Debian instead of Solaris is worth the risk and at the end of the day that's all it is, risk management.

I wouldn't tell someone "smoking is perfectly fine! I have been smoking for years and never got cancer, so you should smoke too!"

But if you know the risks, it's still your choice and I know plenty of people that choose to smoke because they enjoy it despite the risks. And with all of the health nuts dying <70 from heart attacks and such I can't blame them. Life is too short not to enjoy it.

 

[RebateMonger]

Doesn't MS still use linux for some of their servers? their policy was "eat your own dogfood" for decades but until about 2007 ALL their servers were linux only. Only then did they start transitioning to SOME windows based servers (not WHS btw), and still they need to use some linux.

Here's a 2003 article about questions about why Microsoft web sites were showing up as Linux servers:

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2003/08/17/wwwmicrosoftcom_runs_linux_up_to_a_point_.html

Microsoft uses many, many caching web servers and isn't in the business of managing that kind of infrastructure.

WWW MICROSOFT COM reports it's running on Windows Server 2008, IIS 7.5:
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.microsoft.com

 

[BTA]

I think it is pretty telling that instead of giving the guy some simple suggestions like he asked for, the two Linux lovers got into a big long winded argument over stuff the guy probably has no interest in.

With that said, there is a similar Linux project called Amahi that has a number of the same features as WHS. I'm not sure if it has the file duplification feature or not though.

If you follow the installation on their website, it is pretty straight forward. I had it installed in a VM in about 20min.

I personally have a WHS box that works great. I also run other services on the box beyond just what WHS does.

 

[Modelworks]

Amahi is what I would use. It is easy to set up and designed for home users.
http://www.amahi.org/

 

[ajtyeh]

I think it is pretty telling that instead of giving the guy some simple suggestions like he asked for, the two Linux lovers got into a big long winded argument over stuff the guy probably has no interest in.

With that said, there is a similar Linux project called Amahi that has a number of the same features as WHS. I'm not sure if it has the file duplification feature or not though.

If you follow the installation on their website, it is pretty straight forward. I had it installed in a VM in about 20min.

I personally have a WHS box that works great. I also run other services on the box beyond just what WHS does.

BTA so true. hahahaha

i was like wtf, trying to read their posts, and i got lost in their argument. i looked at that amahi website and i will give it a try. Thanks

 

[nerp]

Aside from having to pay for WHS, what is your compelling reason NOT to use it? I ended up setting up a WHS system and I thank myself daily for it.

 

[ajtyeh]

well ill give amahi a try. if its too hard or complex, i will give the WHS 1 month trial a run, and if its flawless , i'll buy it i suppose.

 

[JackMDS]

well ill give amahi a try. if its too hard or complex, i will give the WHS 1 month trial a run, and if its flawless , i'll buy it i suppose.

It might sound Funny but if there is something close to flawless in OS' WHS is the One.

.

 

[taltamir]

I think it is pretty telling that instead of giving the guy some simple suggestions like he asked for, the two Linux lovers got into a big long winded argument over stuff the guy probably has no interest in.

With that said, there is a similar Linux project called Amahi that has a number of the same features as WHS. I'm not sure if it has the file duplification feature or not though.

If you follow the installation on their website, it is pretty straight forward. I had it installed in a VM in about 20min.

I personally have a WHS box that works great. I also run other services on the box beyond just what WHS does.

I actually happen to use a variety of operating system on my various computers, amusingly at the moment none of them is linux.

btw, I use and enjoy windows 7 a lot. Although, that is not to say I dislike linux.

 

[Linflas]

I have set up a couple of my old machines using SUSE Linux to access some old drives and their contents and it really didn't require a whole lot of effort. I just mount the NTFS vols as read only SAMBA shares and can access the contents like any other share.

 

[RebateMonger]

It might sound Funny but if there is something close to flawless in OS' WHS is the One.

Yup. I hate it. I'm an IT consultant and WHS makes near-zero money for me. The pre-built WHS servers are cheap, it takes almost no time to install them, they are zero-maintenance, and the clients can recover their own PCs with little help from me. I hate it.

But I put it into every client's home or office if I can.

 

[stash]

their policy was "eat your own dogfood" for decades but until about 2007 ALL their servers were linux only.

You're thinking of Hotmail. A large amount of servers, yes, but not even close to all of Microsoft's servers. Hotmail also never ran Linux. It ran FreeBSD and Solaris, and was moved over to all Windows a few years ago. The only reason why it was not all Windows to begin with was because Microsoft bought it from someone else.

I believe all of Microsoft's public sites run on at least 2008 if not 2008 R2 and a good percentage of it is running virtual on Hyper-V.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I believe all of Microsoft's public sites run on at least 2008 if not 2008 R2 and a good percentage of it is running virtual on Hyper-V.

msn.com gave me a "Server too busy" error today.

 

[pcgeek11]

msn.com gave me a "Server too busy" error today.

OK then. ????

My wife gave me the Cold Icy Stare yesterday!


pcgeek11