Live data from Hacker News

A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

arnorhs.com

21–30 of 77 posts

Re: A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

#22
post #2

Maybe you should check this out? http://download.iomega.com/digital-home/index_en.html or http://go.iomega.com/en/products/network-storage-desktop/hom... ?

I strongly advise everybody to stay away from Iomega. I bought a 1TB NAS a few years ago when 1 TB was a lot. The web UI, to make shares, was so stupid that it would create a tree, in memory, of all directories and files on the NAS every time you tried to make a new share (this tree was passed as javascript to the web UI). Needless to say, after a few hundred gig the amount of files was so big that it took longer to make the list than the timeout was set, effectively rendering making shares impossible. There were dozens of complaints on the support forum (that's right, support through a forum!) and after a year and a half of no updated I gave up hope. Shoddy material, and that's being generous.

Re: A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

#23
post #21

And please integrate with facebook/google/twitter so I can download/stream movies from my friend's devices.

I don't think Twitter is the best solution for streaming movies...

I think GP meant that social networking would announce new media available on their servers, not that he'd stream over Twitter.

Re: A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

#24
This sounds a lot like Opera Unite, which was sadly totally ignored 5 seconds after it came out.

http://unite.opera.com/

(As a totally tangential rant, I've been using Opera recently for no particular reason, and it's been frustrating me how left-behind it's been, even by the tech crowd. The latest version is both faster and more responsive than Chrome, which had been my browser of choice.)

Re: A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

#25
I've never been too crazy about a device that both (a) stores my media and (b) plays it. Since Hollywood and the scene cannot agree upon formats for any length of time, freezing the state of the industry into a closed box leaves me in fear of not being able to play something in the future.

Specialize. I want a device that stores my media (I already have this), and I can then replace the "display media on television" part with whatever I like. When a device tries to wear too many hats, quality of each hat tends to suffer, in my experience.

Re: A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

#26
I don't see any really compelling reason to have all that functionality shoved into one device. I like the idea of separating playback/record from storage.

I like the idea even better when the storage is in the cloud (with a possible local cache, would be nice).

Re: A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

#27
I just upgraded my Dropbox account to 50Gb, and for me, it covers a lot of needs.

I keep all my important files in there (my mp3 collection, projects, documents, etc.). I have Dropbox set up on 3 machines (main machine, family computer and my laptop), so I get automatic syncing of all these files, plus backups of all the files on 3 computers, plus access to all these files in the cloud.

As far as I'm concerned, it's a revolution in how I work. Dropbox is now my guardian angel, silently backing up everything I do.

The only problem with this arrangement is that 50gb is too small for all my files (videos, mostly), and even their 100gb offering is too small for that. I expect this to change in the near future.

Re: A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

#29

There's also Windows Home Server, which does everything you're looking for I believe. Here's a list of features from the wikipedia page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Home_Server ):

windows home server is the best microsoft product in years that they don't market too well. I don't get it.

Re: A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it.

#30
post #24

This sounds a lot like Opera Unite, which was sadly totally ignored 5 seconds after it came out. http://unite.opera.com/ (As a totally tangential rant, I've been using Opera recently for no particular reason, and it's been frustrating me how left-behind it's been, even by the tech crowd. The latest version is both faster and more responsive than Chrome, which had been my browser of choice.)

I've had similar feelings. You would think that products that are superior from a technical standpoint would be enough for them to get some traction in the technical community.

I can't quite put my finger on why, but Opera always seems to get ignored.

Post reply on HN