this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
2 points (100.0% liked)

Homelab

371 readers
3 users here now

Rules

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 

I currently have a 10-year old off-the-shelf NAS (Synology) that needs replacing soon. I haven't done much with it other than the simple things I mention later, so I still consider myself a novice when it comes to NAS, servers, and networking in general, but I've been reading a bit lately (which lead my to this sub). For a replacement I'm wondering whether to get another Synology, use an open source NAS/server OS, or just use a Windows PC. Windows is by far the OS I'm most comfortable with so I'm drawn to the final option. However, I regularly see articles and forum posts which frown upon the use Windows for NAS/server purposes even for simple home-use needs, although I can't remember reading a good explanation of why. I'd be grateful for some explanations as to why Windows (desktop version) is a poor choice as an OS for a simple home NAS/server.

Some observations from me (please critique if any issues in my thinking):

  • I initially assumed it was because Windows likely causes a high idle power consumption as its a large OS. But I recently measured the idle power consumption of a celeron-based mini PC running Windows and found it to be only 5W, which is lower than my Synology NAS when idle. It seems to me that any further power consumption savings that might be achieved by a smaller OS, or a more modern Synology, would be pretty negligible in terms of running costs.
  • I can see a significant downside of Windows for DIY builds is the cost of Windows license. I wonder is this accounts for most of the critique of Windows? If I went the Windows route I wouldn't do a DIY build. I would start with a PC which had a Windows OEM licence.
  • My needs are very simple (although I think probably represent a majority of home user needs). I need device which is accessible 24/7 on my home network and 1) can provide SMB files shares, 2) act as a target for backing up other devices on home network, 3) run cloud backup software (to back itself up to an off-site backup location) and, 4) run a media server (such as Plex), 5) provide 1-drive redundancy via RAID or a RAID-like solution (such as Windows Storage Spaces). It seems to me Windows is fine for this and people who frown upon Windows for NAS/server usage probably have more advanced needs.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dafzor@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

Because linux is just easier and less annoying.

I too started with Windows server NAS since it was what i was more familiar with, but eventually moved to Linux server NAS and would never go back.

Systems like omv and unRaid are built to be NAS so after install which are very easy, the common/popular use cases will be covered out of the box or a plugin install away without leaving the built in WebUI.

Stuff such as:

  • Setup a bunch of random disks as a single one
  • Setup a backup server for windows/mac clients
  • Setup cloud syncing to a cloud provider
  • Run an additional service in a container
  • Save all your nas settings to you can restore them on a new server later

In windows, you'd have to install a bunch of independent programs designed for single user desktops with different configurations and UIs and trying to make them work as a server.

All while also fighting against default OS settings and licensing limitations since it was never designed to be a NAS but a desktop OS and microsoft servers to use server licenses.

Not to mention Windows just isn't popular server software outside of enterprise due to the high cost, so most tools will only support linux and wont even have a windows version.