Using Linux or 2000 for Storage?

Daave · Feb 20, 2007, 07:33 AM

I'm trying to decide what to do with my old machine once I have my new one built. (hopefully in another month or two.)
I want to us my old machine for storage, to backup images, videos and lots of junk that I download . I tried Linux once a couple years ago but I didn't spend enough time in it and my machine at the time was running like crap. Anyway, I'm wondering what OS to put on it Linux, Win 2000 maybe or maybe even 2003 server.
I'm also wondering what would be the best way to share files over the network? Would Linux be able to do this easily? Could I develop a webpage that would run on the machine in 2000 that would allow for transferring files easier. I really don't like how windows does networking and it would be neat if I could do something that would make it easy for my wife to transfer files over the network.
Which leads to another question what would be the fastest way? Is Ftping locally faster then transferring through folders?
Sorry for the long post, I'm just trying to find something that would make life easier. Plus I would like to learn some cool things that I know you guys know. I'm sure I could just get some software that would do automatic backups to my old box.

~~DudeBoyz~~ · Feb 20, 2007, 07:39 AM

I would even consider Windows 98 SE on there to make it faster.

Just slap some drives in, format them as FAT32 for max compatibility and use Windows Networking to share the drives.

You could update to Gigabit networking if you want to make the speeds better. That way, it's about the same speed as copying from one hard drive to another in the same machine.

I got a Dlink gigabit 5 port switch at CompUSA everyday price at $35 and two Dlink gigabit PCI cards. My other two machines already had gigabit built into the motherboard.

Frankly though, I think I'd consider an external USB 2.0 or Firewire hard drive. It can be unplugged and easily tucked into a firebox or what not, or taken with you and plugged into another machine if you want.

That way you don't have to mess with licensing, the extra space taken up by the other machine, etc. No need to mess with FTP, Web stuff - no need to expose anything to a potential security breach either, which can happen if you do your own web page hosting.

Works awesome.

Maxtor has some one-button solutions I think. 500 gig or so.

Best of luck.

H3X4D3C1M4L · Feb 27, 2007, 12:46 PM

I wouldn't consider 98SE mainly due to stability concerns and the fact that it was never designed to be a server type o/s.

I think ReiserFS would be faster for what you want to do, and Linux more stable.

http://linux.rockriver.net/presentat...peed/speed.pdf

There's a good PDF and using a Google search will also yield alot of information on what filesystem is fastest for pure speed for the machine locally (to make sure you're not bottlenecked by the machine's disk speed incase you go gigabit or are already using gigabit.

That PDF compares samba, NFS, and ftp

~~DudeBoyz~~ · Feb 27, 2007, 12:55 PM

Windows 98 SE is excellent at providing shared storage and printers.

98 SE still supports an IRQ for the LPT1 - XP don't.

H3X4D3C1M4L · Feb 27, 2007, 01:08 PM

Is it? Last I checked the networking was quite poor.

Besides what do you really need an IRQ for the parallel port for, most printers are USB and most networking is done over ethernet, not parallel port.

I'm not saying 98SE is totally useless for the purpose of filesharing or printer serving, it is useful. But in most cases if you've got a little Linux experience or the time to sit down and try it out with Linux there's no reason to even use Windows, Linux is just alot more stable once you've got it running and Windows (especially legacy, DOS code ridden 9.x Windows) just isn't as stable as NT is or Linux. 9.x was never designed with serving in mind, that's why MS has NT

*nix will support IRQ for LPT1 too

~~DudeBoyz~~ · Feb 27, 2007, 01:18 PM

Most serious POSTSCRIPT printers are still parallel port based.

Most home users don't have a dedicated IP for their printer - they share it from one machine on the network.

I'm sayin' 98 SE is still a good option for printer and file serving - just stuff it in a back corner and let it grind.

Of course, Linux could also do it, provided folks could figure out how to enable SAMBA and such.

I still wish we had dedicated ports for Printing in Win - but perhaps dual core systems may help minimize the impact that hardcore printing can have on a system.