External Storage solutions

[benjamindbloom]

Currently, I have 5 external drives that I connect to my laptop. One backs up

the laptop's internal drive, the other 4 are photos (2 pairs, manually

mirrored.) Everything is connected via USB2. While this works OK, I would like

to simplify and hopefully speed up access. My ideal setup would also enable me

to access my images at my desk and while roaming around my "studio."

 

I would love an external drive that worked as a NAS while I was roaming so that

I could wirelessly connect to my images. However, I recognize that it's quite

slow compared to a local USB connected drive. Is there something that would

allow me to use it as a NAS while I was roaming, but plug in a FireWire 800

cable while I was local? How about eSATA?

 

I suppose that's another question. In practice, eSATA and FW800 should be

considerably faster than USB2.0. I'm using Lightroom and occasionally have to

wait as it loads the image from its external drive. When working in large

composites in Photoshop, it's more noticeable. Will I notice an improvement in

practice by switching to either FW800 or eSATA?

 

Thanks.

 

-Ben

[._._z]

Swappable multi-drive enclosures that run on Firewire or eSATA -- something like this:

 

http://www.macgurus.com/productpages/firewire/BurlyMultiDriveFWHS.php

 

http://www.wiebetech.com/products/RTX200.php

[benjamindbloom]

Right. There are a ton of enclosures that will do FW or eSATA and hold multiple drives. Since I don't want RAID, multiple drives per enclosure is not a real requirement. If I get two 500gb or 750gb drives and put them in 2 enclosures, I'd be happy because I will have reduced the number of devices I'm using.

 

What I'm most interested in is something that will work as a NAS while I'm not at my desk. When I'm at my desk, I'd like the speed advantages of FW or eSATA. I haven't been able to find an enclosure that will do this.

 

Thanks.

[Matt Laur]

I think you're looking for <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FBuffalo-HS-DH1-0TGL-R5-Terastation-Multimedia%2Fdp%2FB000MTSYUM%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Delectronics%26qid%3D1205246598%26sr%3D8-2&tag=uplandlife-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325" target="_blank"><b>something like this</b></a>.

[Ed_Ingold]

A lot of questions...

<p>

FW800 is poorly implemented at present. You will be lucky to get USB2 speed from it in many cases. USB2 drives are more consistent, but slow down the more drives you have connected. You can get as much as 55 MB/s, but 12-25 MB/s is more common. FW400 is sometimes faster and generally more robust than USB2, particularly for streaming operations (video capture and transfer). Shop around for a benchmarking application, such as Plextools Pro LE (plextor.com), which is a free download.

<p>

I use 500GB SATA300 drives in USB2 enclosures, but only one or two are connected at a time. I get 22-25 MB/s, which is fast enough for photos or video.

<p>

If you have an old desktop, you can use it as an <i>ad hoc</i> file server, and simply share the drives connected to it, using a local area network. I share files locally from my workstation, which I can use from other computers in the house including laptops. I use a wireless network, but an hard-wired ethernet system (with a wireless router for laptops) is much faster and more robust if you don't mind pulling wires.

 

You can hard-connect an NAS to a router, wireless or not, and use it from any other computer on that network. I do NOT recommend setting up a LAN with remote (dialup) access unless you are an expert in net security. A quick and dirty solution is to set up a VPN, and use that for remote connections.

[mike dixon]

<i>In practice, eSATA and FW800 should be considerably faster than USB2.0. . . . Will I notice an improvement in practice by switching to either FW800 or eSATA? </i><P>

Probably. I've found that files load and save noticeably faster with my eSATA external drive enclosure than with my USB2 enclosure.

[Brad_]

>>> FW800 is poorly implemented at present. You will be lucky to get USB2 speed from it in many cases.

 

 

Not true. Have been using FW800 for around 5 years - it's robust. Significantly faster than USB 2, and totally

reliable. The fact that FW can operate isochronously puts FW400 over USB 2 in streaming apps.

[steven_clark]

I'm going to be the heretic here: just use gigabit ethernet. It's faster than firewire or USB and in most cases is going to be faster than the sustained throughput of the drive.

[znabal]

So far I've been happy with the LaCie 1TB Gigabit Ethernet Big Disk with USB 2.0. I just leave it on my router though so it is accessible by any computer on the network. -jeffl

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/477528-REG/LaCie_301156U_1TB_Gigabit_Ethernet_Big.html

[Ed_Ingold]

"Have been using FW800 for around 5 years - it's robust. Significantly faster than USB 2"

 

Perhaps you've missed the numerous service bulletins, patches and register edits issued by Microsoft regarding FW800. It has been tried and thoroughly dissed by the professional audio/video community for its unexplained skips and glitches. I have FW800, including all the patches, yet it remains unreliable in streaming applications such as 24/96 sound (or even 16/48). Maybe it works OK for copying image files or as a scratch drive for Photoshop. My needs are well beyond that, and I'll stick to something reliable.

 

BTW, I have no problems at all streaming 8 channels of 24/96 sound via USB2 - which amounts to about 50% utilization. Gigabit ethernet may be another approach, for file transfer at least. Ethernet is not very effective for data streaming, and tends to shudder a bit above 15% utilization.

[Brad_]

>>> Perhaps you've missed the numerous service bulletins, patches and register edits

issued by Microsoft regarding FW800.

 

No, as a Mac user there's no need for me to. No doubt the problem is with Microsoft -

perhaps after Vista gets straightened out they can address FW issues.

 

In the Mac world, there are no FW800 issues- it's robust, rock-solid, and exceptionally

speedy. Not too surprising as Apple developed/invented FW more than 10 years ago.

[fredrik_steffen]

Take a look at Ximetas' products.

 

http://www.ximeta.com/web/products/index.php

[._._z]

"Perhaps you've missed the numerous service bulletins, patches and register edits issued by Microsoft regarding FW800. It has been tried and thoroughly dissed by the professional audio/video community for its unexplained skips and glitches."

 

On Windows. It works like a charm on Macs.

[steven_clark]

Better operation on a proprietary platform can also be evidence of a bad standard. Thus this can be taken as "Apple sucks" as easily as "Apple Rocks".

[Ed_Ingold]

It is true that Apple doesn't issue patches and register edits. They call them "upgrades" and charge for them :-)

[Brad_]

>>> Better operation on a proprietary platform can also be evidence of a bad standard.

Thus this can be taken as "Apple sucks" as easily as "Apple Rocks".

 

It's an IEEE standard, 1394a and 1394b. Sony, Canon, and others seem to got it right with

respect to their video cam products interfacing to edit platforms. Plenty of hard disk drive

product manufacturers as well got it right. It's not rocket science.

 

Perhaps you can elaborate on your "Apple sucks" take with specifics. Including how it is a

"bad standard," again, with technical specifics.

[Brad_]

>>> It is true that Apple doesn't issue patches and register edits. They call them

"upgrades" and charge for them :-)

 

Charge for them? More false information...

[Brad_]

>>> It is true that Apple doesn't issue patches and register edits. They call them

"upgrades" and charge for them :-)

 

 

Specifically, what FireWire patches and resister edits issued by Apple are you referring to?

[benjamindbloom]

I'm kinda interested in the gigabit ethernet idea - I hadn't considered that before.

 

So I get a gigabit ethernet compatible NAS + a gigabit switch. Plug that into my wireless router. While I'm roaming, I connect to it via wireless (hmm.. maybe I should get an 802.11n router at some point) and while I'm at my desk I plug in my gigabit ethernet cable direct to the switch. Since it's just my computer and the NAS on the gigabit, throughput should be pretty darn good, right? It's been a while since I've really used my networking skills. That would sound like an affordable solution that would do what I need.

 

I had set up an ad hoc file server with my old PC a while back and throughputs just weren't anything close to reasonable. Not sure why, didn't spend much time because when I thought about it, a smaller enclosure will take up less power anyway.

 

I hadn't seen ximeta's stuff before. I've used some LaCie stuff in the past - didn't know about their NAS drive somehow. Thanks for both of those pointers.

[Brad_]

>>> I'm kinda interested in the gigabit ethernet idea - I hadn't considered that before.

 

You might want to carefully research what sort of sustained transfer rates you might encounter. OTOH, if it's for unattended backup purposes, etc, it may not be a critical issue or

make any difference.