P.L. <Not@Valid.invalid> wrote in
news:b37gs2to6c1d9a4rmdhvh647ihdvdd76nq@4ax.com:
> Denne her skulle vist være rigtig god, overvejer den selv da den's
> software er opensource.
Synologys source er licenseret under GPL og kan downloades - umiddelbart
synes jeg ikke QNAPs betingelser virker meget anderledes.
> QNAP 9-in-1 NAS Server TS-101:
>
http://www.krome.co.nz/default.aspx?MenuId=86
Der er et udmærket review af den her
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/28019/75/
Men jeg tror dog jeg ville vælge en Synology, men døm selv.
Fra konklusionen:
"Since their basic features sets and prices are almost identical, I thought
it would be interesting to compare the Qnap TS-101 to the previously
reviewed Synology DS-106e.
The DS-106e had a number of advantages over the TS-101, the first being
performance. Our performance tests aren't 100% comparable since the disk
drives used were not identical, but the fact that the DS-106e bested the
TS-101 in most tests is a pretty good indicator that the DS-106e is a
better performer. The only tests where the TS-101 beat the DS-106e were in
the gigabit read measurements, which could be due to the TS-101 having
twice the RAM of the DS-106e.
Multimedia-wise, the DS-106e also bested the TS-101. Both had a nice photo-
album feature, but the DS-106e supported the UPnP protocol as well. As far
as database support, the DS-106e used the full-featured MySql while the TS-
101 used a less powerful Sqlite - however, depending on your needs, the
reduced memory requirements of Sqlite may be a benefit. As mentioned just
above, the TS-101 had 64 MB while the DS-106e only had 32, which should
benefit performance in certain areas.
As far as the TS-101's advantages, its RAID 1 support was not matched by
the DS-106e, and its fanless design is definitely a plus."
/flemming