Overall Impressions - The good and the bad

Tuesday, February 27, 2007 8:33 PM

5
Posted this on my blog. For your reading and discussion I have posted here too. I could find no NDA about anything so I hope a public post was OK... if not just let me know and I can take it down :)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our house at times must resemble something of a wet dream for Microsoft. Of the four or five computers in use, 4 run Windows (mostly Vista) and only one multiboots between Windows and a variety of Nix distros. We used Media Centre extensively to pump content to an XBox 360 in the living room which provides the focus of content consumption on the big screen TV.

Ours is probably a typical house in terms of what we want to store on the computers. 95% of it is media such valuable family photos, videos and recorded TV (via a digital tuner using the excellent Media Centre), and of course a music collection that has developed over the years to something like 20,000 tracks. A tiny proportion of all the data in the house is ‘work related.’ Probably a few hundred documents between the users, some photoshop files and a load of web stuff. In terms of gigabytes this ‘work content’ is probably less than 1 GB of the TB or so of data we have stored. So although the work content is important, the main use of the computers is to provide content to whoever wants it, either on one of the PC’s (rare) or on the TV in the living room (most of the time).
Although media content is important, most of it is replacable. Obviously some isn’t but most could be re-downloaded, re-ripped or similar. What can’t be replaced is the 5 or 6 years of photographs from the digital cameras, that precious home movie of the dog or kids, and of course that work-content may be found in a sent email, but if not will be a huge chore to recreate.

So, in our house (and I expect many others too) one PC tends to act as ‘the server.’ It stores all the media, is in fact a Media Centre itself (Vista Ultimate) and is left switched on 24 hours a day doing the long downloads, the bittorrent client lives there, backups are stored there, and it has remote access for people to access files from wherevere they may be in the world. In fact if you have Vista Ultimate there is no function on earth it cannot provide to the average home user. What it isn’t capable of doing (without extra software) is remotely backing up machines on a schedule without all kinds of tweaking and mappings, it certainly can’t image the other machines, I could set up volume shadowing and so on too but it’s a big pain in the *** when you have so much content on the disks already. But all in all it serves the Home Server role pretty well already, but there are always more things I want to do to secure what is important to content for the household.

So when the announcement of Windows Home Server was made, it seemed like music to the ears. I lept on the beta signup and was accepted a week ago or so. In that time it has been installed, the media is moved there and what follows is a brief roundup of the great and the ugly of Beta 2 of Windows Home Server.

First the great:

Centralised Backup

The backup end of things in Windows Home Server is superb. Dumping everything onto one machine is nice, but could already be done on any other operating system. What makes it nice on WHS is a few things combining to provide a solution that just makes sense and is INCREDIBLY SIMPLE to set up.
- First there are no drive letters as far as the user is concerned. Every hard drive as it is added to the machine is simply formatted added to one large volume. Thus no more juggling space between partitions when things get tight. Once the storage is in place there are pre-shared folders for Video, Pictures, Music, Programs and so on, plus a share for each user on the network which can be made private if required. You can add additional shares should you need to but I haven’t needed any more than the pre-configured ones so far. So storage and sharing is managed very simply and I don’t think any more than 2-3 clicks of a mouse has been needed to set any of it up.
- Folder duplication is another great feature. Of the shares you can choose that any of them be duplicated backups meaning that there are two copies residing on different physical disks, so should one die on you the data is still available on another drive. Perfect for the really important stuff such as the user folders and the photos, whilst there is no need to use double the space for the TV shows and other replacable stuff.
- The next nice thing is the backup routines. Once a machine is added to the network (via installation of a very small 10mb piece of client software called the Connector) it’s backups can be managed totally within WHS. Every night a complete image is taken of the computer you can choose to exclude anything you don’t want and obvious things such as the page file, temp folder, hibernation file, are already excluded. This image can then be used to completely restore a PC like Ghost image, or be browsed to restore just a single file. It works flawlessly in both cases as I have tested and retested several times to feel secure the process will actually work! I even made a fresh installation image that included all the drivers for the various boxes around the house that could be used to rebuild any time I feel like.
Headless / Remote Management

WHS is designed to be a headless machine (i.e. no monitor, keyboard, mouse) and so after installation all that is connected to the box is a network cable and the power. Nice not to have even more cables adding to the copper jungle under the desk!
- All management of the server can be done using the WHS Console. This is a mini-remote desktop launched from any machine on the network that provides a very simple and intuitive interface to manage everything from new accounts, to adding extra hard drives. It is INCREDIBLY SIMPLE to use and even non-tecchies will come to grips with it in 5 minutes.
- You can also access the box of course over the internet using remote desktop (though this could be simpler to configure on the permissions side by launch as new users had to be added to a group outside of the console interface… I am sure its just a bug right now) so you can access the server wherever you are to grab important files, or maybe just listen to your music collection from work
Low System Requirements

The server runs on a stripped down version of SBS 2003 and thus the requirements are pretty low. The recommended (note not the mininum) requirements are a 1ghz processor and 512mb RAM. That means any old frankenstein machine can be thrown together from old parts and will run it perfectly. Some may find an old computer they consigned to the garage to gather dust may find a new lease of life running one of the most important functions of a home network!

So on the backup and setup side of things WHS is truly great. Very simple, very effective.

However, there are some things right now which would stop me buying it on release and some of them are insane.

The Ugly

First and most ridiculous is the fact that if you use the XBox 360 Media centre (I don’t just mean the video and music entries on the main blades, but the full blown media centre interface which is essential for us to use the digital TV features and program guide etc) you cannot access the Server’s shares. Crazy and one thing surely they have to fix. WHS should be the final piece of the end to end solution for the home media network and they have completely blunted the final step of it! What use is media if we can’t display it on the destination of choice which is within the fantastic Media Centre Extender interface of the 360 on the big screen?

Second (and related) is that due to the insane refusal of Microsoft to support DivX/Xvid formats through the 360, users have had to use realtime re-encoding solutions such as Runtime360 to view content in such formats through the 360. Now if you move the media to the WHS you would have to send the content across the network to the re-encoding box, and then again onto the 360. In something as bandwith intensive and dependent on throughput… this now seems impossible.
These two things alone would absolutely stop me from buying WHS and as almost everyone I know requires something similar, I would advise against it for them too. This could be easily fixed by Microsoft, implement DivX support on the 360, and make the shares extendable to media centre extenders…. voila!

Lesser issues (more like suggestions) are that roaming profile seem to be an obvious missing integration that would fit perfectly into the home network so that Dad can easily sit at his sons computer and everything he needs such as favourites and documents is just there waiting for him.
WHS is also REALLY missing a download manager. If WHS is to be sold as the replacement for that ‘always on’ machine, then users should be able to send a download link to the WHS to download and store so they can then switch their computer off. I think if they were bold and integrated a bittorrent client too, this could really be a killer sales pitch as right now there is still a need to have other machines switched on overnight guzzling electricity.

Conclusion

As it stands, WHS is a great backup product, but ultimately a crippled solution right now. I envisaged the WHS to be a solution to all those problems and to be the stand-alone resource for content and backup in the house. Right now the solution can be pulled off better by a single Windows Vista (in fact a single Windows XP machine), and similarly with open source solutions such as FreeNAS and various Linux Distros, though admittedly with more configuration required and some extra software. If they can just make media distribution to the living room a focus of future features and provide those little applications such as a download manager that would kill off the need for other PC’s to be left on overnight…. then they could have a real killer app on their hands. I understand they want to make the product simple but the problems and suggestions I have made would add little to the interface, yet add a bundle to the functionality.

I have shown three other people the box in action and they have asked the same three questions only to be dissapointed every time - DivX, Media Distribution, Download Manager…. Stop being so stubborn and get it done!
- Reply
- Quote

All Replies

Tuesday, February 27, 2007 9:47 PM

0

Thank you very much for that.

I was currently hunting down a machine to use as my server, and I also have Xbox360 (2 actually). I make much use of the Media Center too.

This is a showstopper for me, and won't use it until they fix this shortcoming.
- Reply
- Quote
Tuesday, February 27, 2007 11:05 PM

0

Yes they are showstoppers to be frank. I have had to move the video and music drives back into the Vista box... there was just too much missing in terms of functionality. I'm tired of the complaints from the family :) Now WHS beta 2 pretty much only a backup option and to be honest I wouldn't pay for such a thing when so many alternatives are available for free and I have switched it off for the daytimes and switched on again at night to backup only.
- Reply
- Quote
Tuesday, February 27, 2007 11:57 PM

0

When I use the 360 Media Centre interface it can see the shares on WHS just fine. Have you tried adding them in Library Setup? The only setting I've changed that may effect this is to enable the Guest user in WHS.

We're happily streaming 400GB of videos from WHS via the 360 MCE interface.

And as for the DivX issue. Convert them to WMV using Encode360. Then you have native support on the 360 and can fastword/rewind and skip at will without having to wait for Transcode360 to convert the files. And there should be little difference transcoding files anyway from one of the WHS shares due to the low network bandwidth required for DivX files anyway (unless you're running a 10MB or lower network?). I've had transcoding working fine from network shares in the past however I no longer use it as I convert them to WMV for a better experience.
- Reply
- Quote
Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:02 AM

0

Thank you for the geat input.

Gave me some ideas to what WHS can really do for me, and I also see the downside of the product which you mentioned.

One solution could be to set it up in a virtual PC environment.

You would need a general installation of Vindows Vista or Windows XP and install Virtual PC 2007 on it.

The main installation can handle all BitTorrent downloads, encoding to Xbox360 etc.

On the Virtual PC you install WHS, which will provide all the backup you need from the whole network (including the host operating system).

Using a setup like this, would in theory make you able to do everything you wished for, including only one server online 24x7.

Downside is that you have to manage the host operating system and buy an extra license for Windows.
- Reply
- Quote
Wednesday, February 28, 2007 10:14 AM

0

Hi Richard

I assure you that I am not trying to insult your intelligence... but it will seem like it anyway maybe. If so I apologise in advance :) Are you sure you are talking about through the full media centre interface? Of the 4 people I know in the beta in real life, and the dozens I have chatted to online .... None of them can see the WHS shares through library management in the 360 Media Centre. We would love to add the shares through library setup... but the point is they are not visible to do so :)

Several people have some workarounds using logon scripts, messing around with the mcx account and all kinds of convoluted solutions (see thegreenbutton forums for examples), but none can see the shares without some serious mucking about!

I'll post some screenshots up when I get home later to try and make it clear.

Of course reencoding is a solution but totally needless and time consuming. If the codecs (e.g. ffdshow) are installed on a media centre PC then you can play the files no problem. But then MS has enforced a false limitation on the 360 that DivX files cannot be streamed from the PC. We are perhaps going off topic here as it is a pet peeve of mine, but also every other 360 owner I know :) DivX is fast becoming the defacto standard of video distribution on the net, not just the pirates, but mainstream media companies too as it offers so much at a cost of so little (i.e. mb). On a PC DivX can also be fastforwarded etc ... there are no benefits to wmv, especially if the media arrives in DivX format originally, only enforced limitations from MS on other formats through the 360.
- Reply
- Quote
Wednesday, February 28, 2007 8:51 PM

0

Seerr, I just checked again.

- Went to "Video Library"

- pressed "Info" button

- Selected "Library Setup"

- "Add folder from another computer"

And 5 shares were visible on SERVER (Music, Videos, Photos, Users, Public).

Just to confirm this is on a 360 connected via the Media Center interface (NOTthe dashboard) to a Vista Ultimate PC.

I in fact don't use this method to add media to the Video Library. I create a shortcut to the network share under the "Public Videos" folder on the PC that's hosting the 360. It's easier to manage than the Library Setup as you can easily remove folders this way (something that seems to be bugged in Library Setup). You can also have them showing up as just "Movies" rather than \\server\videos as they will if added through Library Setup.

A user on the forums I frequent also has had the same issue as you, but no one else has reported it there:

http://www.xpmediacentre.com.au/community/windows-home-server/18079-getting-xbox360-see-shares-whs.html

As for the DivX issues. I've seen very few legal video fles on the web only in DivX format. The majority provde both WMV and H264, sometimes with MP4 and DivX as well though (eg. http://dl.tv/ that supplies all four). WMV format is actually superior to DivX in quality at a given bitrate (or at least equal) and one of the reason AVC was chosen as one of the formats for HDDVD and Bluray.

Not sure what you mean by "MS has enforced a false limitation on the 360 that DivX files cannot be streamed from the PC" ? Is there some hidden ability for the 360 to decode a 3rd party codec that they have disabled?
- Reply
- Quote

Monday, March 05, 2007 1:46 PM

Richard Gregg wrote:

Not sure what you mean by "MS has enforced a false limitation on the 360 that DivX files cannot be streamed from the PC" ? Is there some hidden ability for the 360 to decode a 3rd party codec that they have disabled?

He means the Xbox 360 is more than capable of playing back DivX content hardware wise, it just lacks the software support for it.

Also, you are adding the shares through a media centre PC, the OP was regarding using the WHS to serve the content in the same was Windows Media Centre does. Why use 2 PCs when one should be able to handle it alone!

Monday, March 05, 2007 6:04 PM

I agree with everything you say, BUT

As an "enthusiast", when I first installed WHS, I was overcome with the possibilities. Oh, if ONLY it would work as a Media Server to Xbox360, if ONLY I could make prettier web pages for remote access, if ONLY etc., etc...

But, the more I think about it, all this would do is add to the intimidation factor for home users. Keeping it simple is vital. The people I work with do not do "if only" thinking (they don't know what they don't know.) Computers are scary and less is more.

Personally, I think Microsoft "missed the boat" by not marketing the Xbox360 for the MANY things that it does other than games. No one I know realizes it. When I begin to rave on about the possibilities, their eyes glaze over and you can see panic setting in! I am sure that it the reason for the marketing strategy - the Xbox is a dream machine for those who know, and a simple game machine for those who don't. (There is no reason to scare people or make them think there is a huge learning curve.) I think that is what WHS will be, too.

WHS is WONDERFUL right now for home users because it will easily back up and restore data. (I can't tell you how many times I have listened to the sad stories of lost data.) If it did nothing else, it would be a winner. But, it also lets you access your computer (if you can figure out the router settings) from afar and you can easily (relatively) use Remote Desktop. I am really excited about finally being able to recommend something EASY that will save data and restore computers.

We are testing this product because we have an interest in technology and an enthusiasm for the possibilities. Way back in the old days, we were the only ones who used computers (and God bless us!). Now, my friends (the soon to be senior citizens) call Dell and buy expensive equipment and have NO idea about what it can do (Workgroup?? What am I talking about? You mean we can share the printer???) THESE are the people who NEED this product.

And we enthusiasts - we will do what we have always done and see the possibilities. And it WILL be done. We'll see to it (even though it may be a little harder than necessary. But isn't that the fun anyway??!!)

You have described MY "dream product". Hopefully our dreams will come true - but, right now, my friends' dreams have (and they don't even know it!)

Kathy

Monday, March 05, 2007 8:56 PM

Actually - it IS possible to modify the web pages for remote access. If you are familiar with windows server 2003 and IIS, there is no mystery in it. The web pages are stored right on your box. Feel free to modify to your heart's content :)

-greg

Monday, March 05, 2007 9:24 PM

Teknishun wrote:

He means the Xbox 360 is more than capable of playing back DivX content hardware wise, it just lacks the software support for it.

That's hardly a "false limitation". It's a licensing and software issue yes. The 360 is capable of doing many things it currently doesn't.

Teknishun wrote:

Also, you are adding the shares through a media centre PC, the OP was regarding using the WHS to serve the content in the same was Windows Media Centre does. Why use 2 PCs when one should be able to handle it alone!

If you read his original posts and later follow ups to my posts you'll find that that is not the case.

Monday, March 05, 2007 9:28 PM

Your house sounds a bit like mine. I live in a house with 4 PC's, 2 Laptops, an Xbox 360 and a dedicated SAN. Some of it is wired and some wireless. The OS' are mixture of XP and Vista and generally the only things left on 24/7 is the Vista PC and the SAN. I've spent several years refining my backup routines using a combination of mirrored drives on each PC, the SAN (and Smartsync Pro) and Driveimage to maintain images of all the PC's (well except the Vista machine) I've dabbled in a homebrew NAS running Linux but my Unix skills are lacking and the one time I had hardware failure I had no end of grief trying to unpick the mess to get my data back. So when WHS was announced, my heart skipped a beat as I figured this might offer the complete solution. It does what it does fantastically well and in a very straightforward manner that is easy to get up and running quickly. The fact that it runs on a small footprint and can maximise all those odd hard disks many of us have kicking around the house is fantastic. However, if I go with WHS as my backup and media server solution of choice then it will mean having two PC's switched on 24/7 instead of one, which I have no intention of doing. That said, I love the idea of running it in a virtual machine environment and assuming that this works, I reckon that might be the way ahead.

Monday, March 05, 2007 9:40 PM

newmotor wrote:

That said, I love the idea of running it in a virtual machine environment and assuming that this works, I reckon that might be the way ahead.

I've been running WHS in Virtual PC 2007 for about a week now, and it works like a dream :)

It eats more memory and CPU power to have two operating systems working at the same time, but it works and you only need to have one computer online 24/7.

Monday, March 05, 2007 10:02 PM

I had figured as much! Thanks for the info, Greg.

Kathy

Monday, March 05, 2007 11:44 PM

What is your hardware config that you are running Virtual PC 2007 and WHS under it? What applications are you running on the hardware?

Tuesday, March 06, 2007 6:30 PM

I've been using it on my main computer, which I use for my everyday use (surfing, e-mail, gaming etc.)

AMD 64 3200+

2GB RAM

250 GB HDD

Windows Vista 32 bit

Tuesday, March 06, 2007 9:15 PM

But it doesn't support my version of Vista (Premium)

Friday, June 15, 2007 4:58 AM

Since WHS is supposed to be the server, wouldn't it make a lot more sense if they made it easy to run and remotely access virtual PCs running on WHS rather than the other way around? It doesn't need to support multiple Virtual PCs, just one to run your normal internet applications like BT..

Friday, June 15, 2007 8:10 AM

This answer I got from the WHS Team according to Vista interface in X-Box...

______

To add to this, all you need to do is enable the guest account on your Windows Home Server and give guest account access to the shares, have your Windows Vista Media Center watch your Windows Home Server shares and connect your Xbox to your Windows Vista Media Center. Then you have the best of both worlds! :-)

Windows Home Server Team

______

I hope The WHS team will add a better interface for X-Box user connected to WHS so we don’t have to run two PC to get the Vista Interface in X-Box.

Roger

Friday, June 15, 2007 9:23 AM

Your home set up is quite similar to how mine used to be.

As for the 360 not being able to see the shares (I've not actually installed WHS yet so I probably don't really know what I am talking about) surely the 360 must be pointing at your Media Center PC that records the TV rather than the WHS. If this is the case then if you can see the music / pictures on the Media Center (where ever they are on the MCE or the server) then you should be able to see them on the 360?

I used to have a 360 as an extender in my bedroom in a simlar way that you have the 360 in the living room. I have now replaced that with another Media Center. This has a few advantages:

Quieter
It's another PC so we can se it as one for internet ect.
Can play Divx / any other media
Can play DVDs stored on the server

I also have 2 media centers in the living room, one to record digital tv and to be used as a media center. The other just records Sky to the same network location as the first media center. In this way I can see all recorded TV from both boxes on the living room MCE and the bedroom one.

The MCE I have in the bedroom is one of these:
http://www.tranquilpc-shop.co.uk/acatalog/T7.html

it is compleatly silent and is a perfect solution.

I would recommend going for another MCE in the living room instead of the 360. It is much more flexible.