ARGOSY - HD363N - Network Storage

  • Thread starter Thread starter BobVal
  • Start date Start date
I suppose I keep hoping that the next firmware release will fix al
the problems

^^

if you get

" Cannot find the specified path. Make sure you specify the correc
path."

try loggin onto the drive via ftp and deleting there

That is how I managed to delete folders that couldnt be deleted

just put in Internet Explorer address bar "ftp://theNameOfYourDrive
 
Odie Ferrouswrote:
Get something decent.
OD
Click to expand...

What is the next level up from this $70 NAS enclosure?

I just purchased this for my home network for sharing small files over
the internet, laptop backup, etc... you know, small crap. I just got
it in and have not fired it up yet. If there is a bulletproof NAS
out there for a little more $, I would seriously consider it. So
what is the next better thing out there for the small home user?
 
Thomas said:
What is the next level up from this $70 NAS enclosure?

I just purchased this for my home network for sharing small files over
the internet, laptop backup, etc... you know, small crap. I just got
it in and have not fired it up yet. If there is a bulletproof NAS
out there for a little more $, I would seriously consider it. So
what is the next better thing out there for the small home user?
Click to expand...

I honestly think you'd be better off getting something generic.

In my experience, they tend to have fewer flaws.

In the UK, a company called span.com does external drives that connect
via ethernet.

Have a look on their website.

If it's available here, it will be more so in the US.

Probably also about $70 minus the drive itself.


OD
 
In the UK, a company called span.com does external drives that connect
via ethernet.

Have a look on their website.

If it's available here, it will be more so in the US.

Probably also about $70 minus the drive itself.
Click to expand...

Probably a piece of crap too...Anyone tried it?
 
Odie Ferrouswrote
I simply cannot believe you are actually spending so much time on
product that clearly is a pile of sh!t

Get rid of it

Get something decent

Stop clogging up the newsgroup with drivel concerning what i nothin
more than a toy. And a bad one, at that

Good grief

If you're serious about your data, then do something serious abou it
don't get a pile of cr@p and expect it to perform

Absolutely mindless. Give it up

And take your posts to "alt.mindless.drivel" in future


O
Click to expand...

I don't know what your problem is with this product, Ferrous. An
since when it is "clogging up a newsgroup" to post problems an
troubleshooting tips? That's what this newsgroup is for. Befor
giving your two cents, I'd like to know -- do you own the product yo
are so much against? Are you in this forum to offer help or do yo
work for Span.com pushing their NAS?

I have the Tritton/Argosy NAS and with the newest firmware update i
has been a great buy. The speed has been on par with most other NAS.
My biggest complaint is its poor Samba support, but it's a trade of
I'm willing to make for an NAS that cost less than a hundred bucks.

If you're not going to help with troubleshooting, how about takin
your comments somewhere else
 
eds said:
I don't know what your problem is with this product, Ferrous. And
since when it is "clogging up a newsgroup" to post problems and
troubleshooting tips? That's what this newsgroup is for. Before
giving your two cents, I'd like to know -- do you own the product you
are so much against? Are you in this forum to offer help or do you
work for Span.com pushing their NAS?

I have the Tritton/Argosy NAS and with the newest firmware update it
has been a great buy. The speed has been on par with most other NAS.
My biggest complaint is its poor Samba support, but it's a trade off
I'm willing to make for an NAS that cost less than a hundred bucks.

If you're not going to help with troubleshooting, how about taking
your comments somewhere else.
Click to expand...
There are good NAS built upon Linux embedded, perhaps XP embedded too.

I doubt the Argosy is, as there are far too many bugs. I does appear to be junk.
 
So far, I have found Argosy Support to be very responsive to my inpu
concerning the problem I described. I have traded several email
with them in as many days and they are clearly working on the issue

The HD363N is not quite ready to fulfill all the roles that peopl
have come up with, but if Argosy and Tritton continue to suppor
firmware development for it, the final product is very close at hand
I'm sure. I suspect that writing firmware to emulate a portion of
Windows operating system along with other things like Samba, etc., i
not a trivial task and it should only be expected that a number o
hidden or subtle bugs would emerge over time

For those of you simply trolling this thread, keep in mind that mos
of the issues described here were resolved months ago. The lates
NetHDD006-1013 firmware rev has addressed pretty much everything tha
remained. The bug I described a day ago is actually a little toughe
to reproduce than I initially outlined, but Argosy is on top of it
it appears. I will post updates as appropriate

Junk? I see no basis for such an opinion. This device has evolve
quickly over the last few months and should prove quite capable fo
most users
 
eds said:
I simply cannot believe you are actually spending so much time on a

I don't know what your problem is with this product, Ferrous. And
since when it is "clogging up a newsgroup" to post problems and
troubleshooting tips? That's what this newsgroup is for. Before
giving your two cents, I'd like to know -- do you own the product you
are so much against? Are you in this forum to offer help or do you
work for Span.com pushing their NAS?

I have the Tritton/Argosy NAS and with the newest firmware update it
has been a great buy. The speed has been on par with most other NAS.
My biggest complaint is its poor Samba support, but it's a trade off
I'm willing to make for an NAS that cost less than a hundred bucks.

If you're not going to help with troubleshooting, how about taking
your comments somewhere else.
Click to expand...

My frustration is more with the vendors / manufacturers of these
products and how they manage to persuade prospective buyers that they
are fit for purpose.

I can understand the user's equal frustration at not being able to get
it to work properly, but surely time should have been called on this
issue?

Sure, if the device were a "proper" NAS device costing $000s then I
could side fully with him.

But beating your head about over something that costs so little and is
clearly mickey mouse-ish - no thanks.

There doesn't appear to be a viable solution for the user other than to
return it to its place of purchase. To drag it through the group on a
nearly daily basis is pretty mind-numbing.

Odie
 
What is the next level up from this $70 NAS enclosure?
Click to expand...

Note: I may not see replies to this, as my usenet feed on this
account is not very reliable.

I recently purchased a couple of network HDs from Iomega, mostly
because they were fairly inexpensive. I was looking for a simple,
low-maintenance, networked redundant backup archive and MP3 server.
After a ton of research and nothing that was perfect (and not much
hard data at all), I decided to go with inexpensive, figuring I'd test
the functionality while keeping my stuff backed up.

I first got an Iomega Network HD - 160 G for $130 after rebate -
because it was on the shelf locally (easy to return if needed) and
feedback on the net has been reasonably good. It's worked well - very
simple to hook up and configure, but is not very flexible or
expandable, and is slow (roughly 3 MB/sec transfer).

It turned out I filled it up quicker than I thought, and the slow
speed was a problem for moving full backups over, so I bumped up to
the next level.

Since the Iomega worked well enough, I looked at their 100D, which is
bigger and can add expansion drives via USB (which I haven't tested
yet). I got a 250 G on ebay for $250 shipped from Iomega's outlet
store. It's only FAT32, but that's typical in these low-end net
disks. It's also got 802.11G wireless built in, but I don't need
another AP, and it only has WEP encryption, so I've disabled it.

It was more trouble to initially configure, but after futzing around a
bit, it's been working fine. Raw copy speeds are closer to 5.4 MB/sec
(I haven't done any solid benchmarking yet), but curiously, Second
Copy speeds are similar to the slower Network HD. I haven't dug into
any of that yet.

The Network HD has been running for several months now with no
problems, and the 100D has been running for a week or so, also with no
problems.

I'll be writing up a more comprehensive report on these when I get the
time, but so far, they've been good for my basic needs (simple
directories nested only a few deep, no huge files, not a lot of
traffic, no strong security needs, backups located away from my main
PCs).
 
I agree. I have been using this product since its initial debut an
though buggy at first, the latest firmware seems to work quite well
I have had no problems with it thus far

You have to think that just because Person A has problems, Person
may not. Factors include software running on the computer, routers
switches, and all. The same is true for any piece of hardware. Lik
printers--I know plenty of people who love HP printers and have ha
no problems with them. But I also know people who experience on
problem with them and they then think all HP products are crap

If the problems someone experiences are not reproduceable by others
or by a select few, then perhaps you should all look at the commo
factors involved, down to the smallest detail
 
Here's a list of the NAS devices I was checking out before settling o
the Tritton/Argosy unit. Mac support was a big deal to me but wha
really cinched it was this thread and the fact that there seems to b
some real support and refinement from the manufacturer. Yes, i
seemed to have been released a little early, but the unit seems to b
a lot more robust now

Inexpensive NAS list

Tritton Simple NAS TRI-NSS001 – Mai
Company
[b:e0908a6da7]Argosy HD363
IONi HD363
Inno-Tid
MediaSonic HD363
Cintre NAS100
V-gear LANDIS
Bytecc ME-850[/b:e0908a6da7
Same unit
No USB for add on drive
Mac suppor
$59 cheapest

[b:e0908a6da7]Hawking Net-Sto
Hawking HNAS
ADS NAS-806-EF[/b:e0908a6da7
[list:e0908a6da7]Same unit?
Drive size limited to 250M
No USB for add on drive
No Mac suppor
$94[/list:u:e0908a6da7

[b:e0908a6da7]LaCie Ethernet Disk Mini[/b:e0908a6da7

[b:e0908a6da7]Western Digital Net Center[/b:e0908a6da7
[b:e0908a6da7
NetGear SC101[/b:e0908a6da7
[list:e0908a6da7]DHCP only, cannot set to stati
No SAMBA implementation-- Linux and Mac users cannot us
it.[/list:u:e0908a6da7

[b:e0908a6da7]Maxtor NA
Simple Tech[/b:e0908a6da7
[list:e0908a6da7]Includes HD?[/list:u:e0908a6da7

[b:e0908a6da7]Buffalo Technology Linkstation[/b:e0908a6da7

[b:e0908a6da7]Iomega NAS 100D[/b:e0908a6da7
[list:e0908a6da7]Includes H
USB
$363[/list:u:e0908a6da7

This is just info I have pieced together from variou
websites/forums... does this look right
 
I'm looking into getting one of these drives for multiple purposes...
well ok.... like 2

1) to have my mp3/FLAC collection accessible to all my computers (
desktops + 1laptop0 as well as my modded xbox running XBOX Medi
Center.

2) to have my videos accessible via XBOX Media Cente

3) Possibly use as a download space, instead of my PC


i have a couple of questions
I've been looking over this thread, i read that almost all major bug
have been fixed, what if any still exist

Has anyone tried one of these with xbox media center. I know XBMC ca
access Samba and SMB shares. If I share a folder on my pC, xBmc ca
access it using the workgroup samba.

Can I pre-format a drive? The drive I'm planning on using (Maxto
200G) is already in my PC. I was wondering if I can format it t
FAT32 32k clusters, and then load up my mp3/flac/video collection
and then just put that drive into the NAS unit. or do i have t
format it using the NAS's software

thank you
 
getting pretty good results with XBMC compared to prior firmwar
updates.
Still can't access folders, but I am able to stream video if placed i
the root folder without crashing my xbox. Nice
 
do you think thats a xbmc problem? or drive problem

I'd very much prefer accessing folders, otherwise my music collectio
will be extremely unorganized and i'm anal about that...

thank
 
oh well going thru the xbmc forums, this drive isn't compatible. an
aside from some update from the company, it probably won't be

oh well.. .*sigh

thank
 
Using the Tritton 6-1013 firmware I still see the problem with SetEO
not working properly

This only seems to be an issue for files that get updated in place t
a size less than the original size. An example would be a text fil
opened with NotePad, some text deleted, and then closed. Reopenin
the file shows text beyond where EOF should be
 
Hi guys
I just got an genuine Tritton unit (NSS001 enclosure without drive
because Fry's Electronics had them for $50, after rebate. Out of th
box it had 5-0607 firmware in it. I promptly upgraded it to 6-1013

With 6-1013 and Windows 2000 sp4, with no other updates yet, I ca
easily replicate the SetEOF bug reported above.

With 6-1013 and Windows 98SE, I CANNOT replicate it

I made a file that consisted of 200 lines of 84 asterisks per line
with the line number prepended at the begining of the line. It wa
18k. I added 10 lines of 84 characters after line 50, using notepad
saved and exited. I re-opened the file and deleted the 10 lines
saved, and exited. In W98, on re-opening, there was lines 1-200, a
in the original, with no duplicated or extra lines at the end.

dilettante, am I replicating your issue properly

One other observation
5-0607 you could telnet in using the admin ID and passwor
6-1013 refuses telnet connectio
 
That sounds right

I suppose the difference seen with NT 5+ vs. 9X could be the action
NotePad takes in each case. I suspect the newer versions write ove
the existing file while older NotePads write a new file (replacin
the original)

This could be an issue for any application that updates a file i
place and then relies upon the EOF setting in any important way.
Some have theorized that the problems (or at least some of them) wit
PST file handling could be due to this behavior of the NAS device

Perhaps SysInternals' FileMon or a similar utility might shed mor
light on this
 
Back
Top