POST A COMMENT

30 Comments

Back to Article

  • xi0s - Sunday, October 10, 2010 - link

    Try getting one of LG's NAS samples for review. Seen them on Fry's shelves but have yet to make a decision. Reply
  • Conficio - Sunday, October 10, 2010 - link

    First thanks for all teh ahrd work you are doing here. Your tests are in depth and very informative.

    I'd love to see Mac OS X covered in the tests, at least some basic setup and performance.

    May I also suggest a build it yourself option the Coolmax CN-390 enclosure with a printer server included for ~$70. Add a 1 TB (or 2 TB) drive and you got yourself a rather cost efficient solution.
    Reply
  • name99 - Sunday, October 10, 2010 - link

    Perhaps MacOSX isn't covered because, seriously, if you're using OSX why do you need to pay $70 extra for this sort of thing? Buy an FW800 version (maybe a $30 premium over USB), plug the drive directly into an OSX box and share it, and you have the exact same functionality. With Snow Leopard, you can even allow the server to go to sleep and it will wake when a request comes in, so it's not like there's power savings. And you have a device that's running 100% HFS+ rather than god knows what file system Seagate provide, and which, if god forbid, it becomes necessary, you can subject to fsck. Reply
  • Strunf - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    If you have windows you can also share your drive so "why do you need to pay $70 extra for this sort of thing"... maybe cause the whole point of a NAS is to not be dependent on a single computer. Reply
  • name99 - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    The dynamic is somewhat different for Windows.

    (a) Most Windows boxes don't offer FW800, and USB3 is still rare. So using this box would get you perhaps double the speed of a USB2 connection to a Windows box.

    (b) I can't remember the story with WIndows support of allowing a server to to to sleep. Recall that on Snow Leopard (with an Airport Base Station) the server can go to sleep, and the base station listens for requests directed at the server and will wake it when appropriate. (All automatically, no setup necessary.)
    I recall that MS has talked about this, but I can't remember if they've released it yet, or how wide a range of base stations/routers it works with. I'd guess that right now it's probably not something you can rely on.

    So, like I said. On the Mac side the possible reasons to use this box (speed and power) are pretty non-existent. On the Windows side, the equation is not so strong.
    Reply
  • Strunf - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    I don't know what your speaking about this NAS sure isn't 2x faster than a USB drive, on the contrary is much slower, in writes is 4x slower than my USB drive, only the read is on pair with my USB drive.

    I have windows 7 and all drives go into sleep mode even the external ones, if there was a problem at some point it's not the case anymore at least not for me.

    Like I said the whole point of a NAS is to be completely independent on the status of a single computer, be it with a Mac or a Windows the reasons to buy a NAS are exactly the same.
    Reply
  • Duftopia - Sunday, September 14, 2014 - link

    Be assured the drive is slower primarily due to Ethernet speed on your router, Please check that.

    Under normal conditions this drive runs at around 54 mb/s on a gigbit router 10/100/1000 or 2000.

    The drive inside the box is slower at writing than reading which can drop the speed down to 1/2 the above mentioned speed but still remain marginally faster than a typical usb 2.0 connected external.

    Duf
    Reply
  • brucek2 - Sunday, October 10, 2010 - link

    If I'm going to trust all my files to a centralized storage solution, I want that solution to have protection from a failed hard drive (and it seems most/all individual drives will eventually fail.) Perhaps cost effectiveness ruled out a RAID 5 array or similar approach at this price, but even if so that strikes me as penny wise, pound foolish. Reply
  • Duftopia - Sunday, September 14, 2014 - link

    Your backups should be of working online files and systems. As long as you are not counting on an "Image" or any other encoding this cheap alternative serves a very useful purpose for low budget people, PLUS it comes with perks like online access, easy upgradability (as long as Seagate keeps the goflex line alive), and can remain up and running when you turn your computer off making it available to DLNA and other devices (aka Tivo) w/o a running computer. Reply
  • ZeframJCochran - Sunday, October 10, 2010 - link

    "The GoFlex Home connects to a [bold]wireless router[/bold], and allows all manner of media streaming, file sharing and backups across a home network or the internet with the key emphasis of Seagate's software bundle being on ease of use."

    This implies that it is a wireless device, which lead me to be quite disappointed :(
    Reply
  • brucek2 - Sunday, October 10, 2010 - link

    They mention later on that there's a GigEthernet port as well. Reply
  • Voldenuit - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    WTF. Seriously?

    A NAS that uses a proprietary drive mounting system, charges a subscription fee to give you unlimited account access and is crippled by writes?

    You could/should have completed the review with just two words: 'IT's CRAP' and tossed the damn thing into a trashcan.

    I imagine something like a Synology NAS would have this thing licked in terms of features, performance and upgradability (hont: would love to see a proper review of a Synology NAS to compare). Recommending the GoFlex for *any* user (especially what amounts to uninformed general users) with little or no comparison to the rest of the market seems irresponsible to me.
    Reply
  • Voldenuit - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    *hint, not hont. Reply
  • dia - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    If it were as bad as you imply, Small Network Builder would have arrived at a different conclusion, too. I think given the type of user this drive is aimed at it's not bad overall.

    http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/nas/nas-reviews/312...
    Reply
  • HMTK - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    You can't compare this to a Synology on features nor price. Reply
  • Voldenuit - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    A Synology DS210 is $200 (bare unit) and has 2 drive bays, DLNA, RAID and bittorent functionality. The type of user who needs a NAS will probably have spare hard drives lying around and/or would appreciate not being locked into a vendor-specific configuration. Anyone who puts a 2 TB drive in a NAS probably won't appreciate slow write speeds, either.

    If the Synology performs to expectations (hint: review pls), it would represent much better value and be a better technical solution than the Seagate.

    PS Did AT test performance under multi-client access? After all, the point of a NAS is to serve multiple users on a single network.
    Reply
  • Duftopia - Sunday, September 14, 2014 - link

    I would have agreed with you when I bought the unit. Seagate on the other hand does make A++ Hard drives which is what they are good at, they DO NOT write A++ software, nor have exceptional support (as of 2013).

    the $9.99 subscription was in my opinion a travesty, NO professional company like Seagate should resort to such a money grab, but after several years of use I must say the drive is an exceptional and cheap backup and streaming device (although almost always behaves as-if its on its last leg).

    Duf
    Reply
  • baba264 - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    I'd be quite interested by reading reviews of other NAS units as I might be interested in buying one in the not so distant future (6 month or so).
    I would be interested to see what higher priced solutions have to offer and would particularly like to read about solutions that would allow RAID 5. As was said before, with these kind of solutions, it is nice to have some kind of insurance against drive failure.
    Reply
  • Rajinder Gill - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    Hi,

    We'll try and get some more stuff in to review - specifically enclosures offering redundancy. This is our first NAS review so there's room for improvement and we're taking all suggestions into consideration for future articles.

    -Raja
    Reply
  • Voldenuit - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    Thanks Raja!

    Looking forward to more reviews from AT on NASes as they become more relevant to home users. Maybe even find some way to put them on Bench? ^_~ Things that I can think of offhand that would be good to know before spending $200+ on a NAS:

    1. Performance under different connection protocols (100/1000/801.11n)
    2. Read and write (and concurrent r+w) speeds
    3. Performance scaling with multiple queues/users
    4. Setup and installation
    5. Compatibility with various client OSes and HDDs (Advanced format, 2 TB+ etc)
    6. Administrative access
    7. Features and utilities (usb printer server, http/ftp host, BT, RAID, QoS)
    8. Streaming features and compatibility (xbmc, DLNA, Boxee etc etc)
    9. Power, heat and noise (some NASes have tiny whirring fans, others resonate HDD noise)

    You covered quite a few of these in your review, obviously the GoFlex is a very basic device compared to its peers in terms of features.

    It might be interesting to set up a baseline system to compare NAS performance with a cheap DIY server like a miniITX Atom server running Linux/Windows. Especially when Bobcat trickles in.

    I'm sure more suggestions will trickle in, so let me say thank you again for taking on this monumental task ;).
    Reply
  • Rajinder Gill - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    Thanks, plenty to take on and consider there - it's all appreciated!!

    -Raja
    Reply
  • kmmatney - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    Thanks - I think this unit isn't bad for purposes of backing up data - since you are getting redundnacy by the fact that you are using it for backups of other hard drives. It really needs redundnacy to be used as a central location for data. Reply
  • Dobs - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    Just wondering how DLNA works on this thing....

    After much trial and error using DLNA software (including Sony recommended) I found Mezzmo to be the only software that really works with my Sony KDL40HX700 TV (running from my PC) and it works great...
    ... But how does DLNA work on this thing? Is it Pictures and Music only? What file types? What resolutions can be played? Can I fast forward/rewind with TV remote? etc... Will it work on my Sony TV?

    I'd really appreciate reviews of products that supposedly have DLNA functionality to actually be tested to see how extensive that functionality is.
    Reply
  • Duftopia - Sunday, September 14, 2014 - link

    Be prepared to download most of your movies, the software streaming features is definitely sub-standard if functional at all. Reply
  • Dug - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    I would really like to see more of these reviews.
    I think storage is becoming a huge problem for people with multiple laptops, pc's, mac's, etc.
    Yes, you can always add external hd's or replace what you have in your computer, but for a lot of us, that is not an effective strategy.

    I would really love to see a cheap cheap diy Windows home server too as a comparison. Mainly because of all the features it has compared to some of these expensive NAS solutions.
    Reply
  • bluetiki - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    would you also compare against a similar software solutions that offer this functionality (such as Openfiler or FreeNAS? it would be interesting to see how they would stack up, but I guess establishing some kind of baseline for performance would be hard because it would vary so much based on what kind of hardware it was running on. Reply
  • awaken688 - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    Solid article. For many of us readers, we have multiple computers and having centralized storage is something of interest. Some future items I'd love to see reviewed. It would be perfect for a multi-part article with each part being a review on each item, then the last part being a large overall comparison.

    Super cheap DIY NAS/HomeServer
    HP MediaServer
    Higher level NAS systems with RAID 1/5
    Drobo
    All in 1 Solutions like this

    Things to definitely cover:
    1) Price
    2) Noise and Power (definitely looking for a quiet and power sipping device if possible.
    3) Read/Write Speed in a variety of systems
    4) Setup Ease
    5) Ease of use overall with various OSes.

    Good stuff and can't wait to read more.
    Reply
  • CrapONez - Wednesday, October 13, 2010 - link

    I have an internal 500GB OS drive backed up to an external 1TB drive (only a couple week's worth of backups), an internal 500GB drive filled with a tiny subset of video from my camcorder tapes, backed up to a 750GB external drive, a brand new external 1TB drive that's 80% full connected to my Viewsonic VMP75, and that's not even getting into backing up my kids' computers and my wife's laptop. The article seems to imply 2TB is a WHOPPING amount of storage that no one could exceed. Wrong.

    I've tried RAID5 on my desktop and lost everything when a disk failed and the array just bit the dust. I've had the same experiences at work - maybe pulling a drive in a test environment proves out RAID5 but oftentimes the array goes with the drive. I feel hesitant to pay extra for features that work only on paper. And as has been said, it's just a matter of time before a drive fails. I've lost 4 in the past 5 years.

    But I would love to have central redundant storage for all my needs. The only caveat is it would need to connect to my Gigabit network and simultaneously via eSata or USB to my VMP75. DLNA works for pictures and music, but any kind of MKV or HD streaming needs direct connection to the storage source because , DLNA does not yet deliver (in my mind).
    Reply
  • Watwatwat - Thursday, October 14, 2010 - link

    meh, considering the constantly failing drives of their other lines like free agent that are cooked to death i wouldn't take the high temps so lightly. being that a nas is always on this is a serious issue. i've had freeagent drives fail several times already, the cases bake the drives without much if any ventilation, it doesn't seem that seagate have changed their ways at all. Reply
  • Duftopia - Sunday, September 14, 2014 - link

    Never Externalize a Seagate barracuda, the 7200 rpm on a hot day is not a good idea. THIS drive however runs in the arena of 5200-5400 rpm, its run for 4+ years w/o issues and VERTICALLY as well. You want to keep your drives forever as I have Seagate running 10+ years with no issues but all have the same common factors:

    1) Make sure the spin horizontally in an upright (not upside down position)
    2) Make your "WORK" partition lie at the center of the drive, 3 partitions can do this.
    3) The newer 3+ TB drives have construct issues, bruise them up early as work drives,
    if they survive the 6 month - 1.5 year mark - then they will make good long term drives.
    4) Gauge when they have errors reading / writing when the heat is up, and insure to avoid
    running them long under the same conditions in the future, or if the drive is only 2 years old
    use the warranty to return them based on this (they typically turn off when they can't take
    the heat)
    5) Buy non-Chinese and Thailand made units for the 10 year duration, those seagates last 5
    year min when the Japanese and tiawan build units go for at least 10, you can tell when 3
    year warranty drops to 1 year that's Seagate saying this drive is made cheaper.
    6) My old drives going over 10 years were dues to Seagates excellent Customer service, that's
    history now, so warranty is the best you are guaranteed.

    * Many of these rules did not apply to Seagate for a long time but rather other companies but now the rules have changed and the peasants need to become sharper as the products are deteriorating rapidly, Seagate as of mid 2014 still hold the best grades but I see the writing on the wall.

    Duf
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now