NAS or Cloud?

[Lobster]

I am thinking of getting a NAS.
I tried FreeNAS and managed to mess up the MBR on two computers
. . . so I looked at all in one home solutions and a few cheap two hard drive boxes.
My priority is acess from an Ipad and ease of use. So far having no experience I wonder if anyone uses them, with Puppy, using Puppy or any recommendations or links?

Thanks guys

[DC]

Hi Lobster,
I've had a ReadyNas (bit expensive) for a few years now. Did have a problem with NFS for a bit but now it all works well.

I can access it from my PC's, netbook, smart TV and my cell phone. Good for keeping data, music and video's all in one place for access from everything.

The only cloud I use is the free one you get with gmail. Which I've only really used whist traveling. Not to Happy about the big companies having my data to mine.

One advantage of the cloud is that it can't get stolen. But the company could close down etc.

any specific questions please ask

dc

[mikeb]

Hmm our NAS for some years now is one machine thats on most of the time, a 1TB usb hard drive plugged in and NFS running. Simple and flexible if your setup has something like that hooked up.
Gives transparent file access and streams nicely.

Another point is NAS boxes often use exotic variations of XFS and can be a pain to recover data if the interface dies (usually the weak point)..by using a PC you are dealing with familiar software and systems. Perhaps one of those rasberry pi's........

mike

[gcmartin]

NAS have been around for many many years. And for the most part is well understood by those who use them. They are local on one's LAN. Windows, Macs talk to them right out of the box (OOTB) because all NAS sold come standard with SMB communications built-in. This make a NAS accessible to all of those PC users without the owner giving much thought to their use. SMB will soon become 20 years old! Simple, secure, easy LAN solution. The greatest advantage of a NAS is that local PCs run at 10Mbps/100Mbps/1000Mbps for many/most in the world.

Cloud is another solution which is approaching a decade in its availability to internet users. The Cloud, though, uses a different avenue for allowing its use. It uses Internet services as whether local or outside of the home, it intends to present an internet type feature for users to retrieve and store data.

To me, the greatest advantage to one who uses Cloud services: ===> BACKUP! This need falls on the shoulders of the Cloud's services instead of the maintainer of a NAS. This is an important consideration for those of us who are data junkies (all of us are this in one form or another). For example, over a decade ago I setup a home "terminal server" and was successful in getting my family to use it. ALL user's data (and I do mean all) is saved to an accompanying LAN NAS. It didn't take long before I needed expand NAS size. Over the years, I have expanded the NAS couple of times. Doing so, requires unload and reload of data.

Today, the Terminal server is not used so much, but "thanks to @Lobster and this thread", I just took a look at my NAS because we have stored a lot of family photos and videos in the NAS over the years. The 1.5TB HDD, is approaching 90% use. This means I need to plan an upgrade where I'll need to transfer all that data from one HDD to a larger HDD. @Thanks Lobster.

The need for NAS maintenance is on the shoulders of the NAS supporter. He must plan, backup, do restorations when needed, etc.

The need for Cloud maintenance and its security is on the shoulders of the Cloud providers. It is their requirement to do all of this on each user's behalf (in some cases this comes with a recurring cost($$).

But, I must admit, that when trusting my information to be properly handled by someone else, understanding its drawbacks, this does have an appeal when you consider how effortless Cloud Providers are making their service for our use. A friend recently got a smart phone which she agonized in having to trade in her "old" phone for the smart one. Today, she is elated at how easy it is to take photos and make them instantly available for viewing. This kind of ease of use is what makes Clouds so compelling.

Whether we have personal issues or not, Clouds are with us today. They are DropBox, Apple, Microsoft, HP, Google, Samsung, Sony, etc. Each offers advantages for use to users.

FYI

[Lobster]

Thanks guys,

Finding the info useful.
Beginning to get a handle on this. Most likely to take both routes as they have distinct advantages.
Ideally we would just have a NAS with different permissions on our phone but storage size is still an economic issue. Roll on Quantum storage . . .

[raffy]

Nice to hear from you again, Lobster.

rcrsn51 has worked on samba server for Puppy, see
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=60204

Although FreeNAS is something good to use especially using old PCs - it works as push-button to start, another push-button to stop.

[gcmartin]

Any system with FULL SAMBA can be easily used as a storage location local on the LAN. When multiple PCs store stuff to a single "large" location on the LAN this is typically called a NAS. That being said, a NAS can be a Windows device, a MAC device, or a SAMBA (Linux) device which has enough storage to provide some central information repository services. In Puppyland, there are a very few distros which come complete with SAMBA built-in, OOTB.

SAMBA version 4 was released this year after a 7 year world-wide development and testing cycle. It exceeds the prior implementation in structure, functionality and the SMB protocols it supports.

In essence, one can purchase a ready-made NAS, or create one using any one of the above mentioned OSes. In the case of Windows or MACs, I would think you'd want to use either since they have had SMB3 protocol ability in their OSes since 2006, while Linux just got it this year in Version 4 of SAMBA.

Summary: make your own or purchase. Both methods will give good storage services on the LAN.

Clouds, well services differ but intent is the same.

[mikeb]

NAS uses file-based protocols such as NFS (popular on UNIX systems), SMB/CIFS (Server Message Block/Common Internet File System) (used with MS Windows systems), AFP (used with Apple Macintosh computers), or NCP (used with OES and Novell NetWare). NAS units rarely limit clients to a single protocol.

just to give you an idea of choices. Note NFS is available on windows professional versions and as an add on for free for XP and 2000. geexbox can use it too which is aimed at turning an xbox into a network media player but can run on a PC. Puppy normally has the nfs modules though some small binaries usually need adding ~200k. but that does give client and server. so everything can access everything else easily.
Pretty sure ftp is included too...worth checking the spec of what you intend to buy.

samba always makes me think of the trojan than can get in through it in 2 minutes if you run windows without a firewall direct to the net lol..I'm sure its better now. In those days I hacked it to close 135/137/139 ports as a cure....anyway I digress. There is a mini version if the bloat puts you off floating around.

My bias would be NAS based on speed, security and its in your posession.
Cloud/online storage for me is for backup and distribution.

mike

[Lobster]

Thanks guys I appreciate the further advice. Many thanks.
It was a little easier when I had a server but this cost money . . .

To be honest I prefer the ready made solutions. It would be easy to take this route but is not really essential, it is a convenience. The old computers I have would take too much fiddling with . . . my main computer is now a BSD derivative (IOS)

I am just an Apple tart now
The shame of it . . .

[gcmartin]

An Apple can be a NAS in 3 mouse-clicks to anything on your LAN withOUT changing any of your existing PCs. Apple, like Microsoft, has had the advanced SMB2/3 states since 2006. And, it has little to NO system impacts in system operation as it "serves" resources used by any other LAN PCs.

You would see what it shares in Microsoft PC (via My Network Places, etc.) or Linux PCs (via mount command or 64bit PUP's lameSMBexplorer, or 32bit PUP's Pnethood/YASSM) and. of course, any other MACs you would have present on your LAN. Thus, this is a simple, poor-man's NAS with no need to install anything, anywhere.

"Hope your kennel PUPs have lots of adventures in the Apple grove"