WHS or Ubuntu server?

I'm running a WHS box now and love it.  It's one of those things that you set up and forget about it.  Remember the phrase, "It just works"?  That definitely applies here.  Even for a person who likes to tinker--a lot--I rarely have a need to log into the server itself or make any changes to it, unless I've made a hardware change, such as adding a tuner.  I'm still having some issues with remote access to my computers, but that's due to an issue I'm having with my IPCop firewall.

My analysis of the comparison would go like this:

If you're looking for something that's easy as cake to set up, low maintenance, with a low learning curve, go WHS.

If you want something you can do a lot of playing with and don't mind taking the time to search, read, and learn, then go with Linux.

I have a question; currently I'm using a XP Pro system setup for file sharing as my "server," I've got two 750 gig HDDs loaded with stuff that I don't want to lose but I want to move the system over to Ubuntu Server.

Can I run Ubuntu Server with my NTSF formatted HDDs and keep all my data?

Can I run Ubuntu Server with my NTSF formatted HDDs and keep all my data?

https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LinuxFilesystemsExplained

I've been playing around with a trial version of WHS and the wife really likes it.  However, I'm always open for "free" options

Here are a couple things that my wife (and myself) like about WHS, so I'm curious if Linux can do the same...

1) Remote access to files.  This has proved very handy for my wife.  We copied all our photos to it and I just have to set up users and passwords and now her parents can access them, my family can access them, the parents of my daughter's playgroup can access them (and upload photos).  Don't have to mess with Flickr, Photoworks, or other web-based photo storage areas.  I can also access all my documents from work, while traveling, etc.

2) Drive pool.  I really like being able to set up file redundancy per folder instead of having to use a full RAID setup.  I'm sure there are automated file-copy options that could be done in Linux to achieve the same results, right?

3) SageTV.  Since I'm only running a trial at the moment I haven't moved my SageTV server to WHS, but when I make a decision it has to support SageTV.  The downside for Linux is that I would have to purchase a new SageTV license, while my understanding is that my current Windows-based license can be used to install the WHS version.  With that in mind, WHS for $100 or SageTV for $70 (if I go Linux).

A few questions first.  I assume that WHS does this over a web server?  If so, Linux can do very similar functionality with it's web server.  One program that comes to mind is Coppermine.

Standard files can be accessed using a program like WinSCP.  It acts just like any FTP client, but the files are encrypted through a SSH tunnel.

There is a program called "rsync" that can be used to mirror folders or entire drives.  All you need to do is make a one line script that runs however often you want to sync things up.  I've used this to do backups of remote servers since it can be run over a SSH tunnel.

Very true.  A user migrating from a Windows to a Linux SageTV server would need an additional Linux license.  However, you would then have a "free" Windows license to use for a frontend.

Coppermine looks pretty cool!  Not sure I like the idea of messing with WinSCP (or more appropriately teaching the wife to use it).  I would need something that allows me to download files just from a simple web interface (documents, videos, software, etc.).

Any suggestions for a Distro that would have a lot of whe WHS features built in?  Automatically setup a basic webpage for viewing/downloading/uploading files?  The file duplication thing is easy enough if it is just one line per folder.  Bacula sounds like that should take care of the PC backups (as long as it will wake the clients up from suspend/sleep).

I don't mind doing a little tinkering, but sometimes is seems like it takes a lot of research/learning/tinkering to do relatively simple things in Linux compared to Windows.  Just playing around with Ubuntu in VirtualBox (a virtual machine program) took a couple hours to get the system to install the virtual system additions and get it configured to play Divx/AVI/MPEG files.  Windows you just double-click the EXE file for the additions and download and install CCCP (for example) and your done.

I'm definitely not afraid of learning, I just don't want to have to spend all my time tinkering.  That is one of the reasons I'm getting rid of my SageTV clients and moving to extenders

I'll have to research to see if there are any drop in solutions to do the remote picture/file thing as part of a distro.  Keep in mind that this is a new OS.  You would find some tasks in Windows a bit daunting if we weren't all trained on it from birth.  :)  If you are interested in trying it, take it one step at a time.  Attempting to absorb it all at once might just serve to frustrate you.

Thanks,
Mike

PS How does running Sage server on WHS work?

I don't know about WHS, but I'm using this exact setup to do Sage server duties in CentOS, so I'd think it might be possible in WHS.

Gotta add that WHS is a snap to set up and maintain.   

Kryspy

Yes, there is an equivalent to this in Linux-land.  However, there isn't a single shiny button that you click to make it happen.  You need to choose which drives you want to put in a JBOD array and configure the one line script which performs the mirroring action based on what you want to do.

There are pluses and minuses to this.  For one, the set up isn't as "user friendly".  On the other hand, you actually know which drives things are mirrored on and how often / when it occurs.

Just about any combination of RAID, LVM , JBOD, and manual mirror can be combined to meet your specific requirements.  Many people frown on software RAID methods.  I prefer it because it is not tied to specific hardware.  If my MB "toasts", I can just yank the drives and connect them to a new MB and I'm up and running in minutes.

I would think that your system specs would be just fine.  I run my WHS system on a Via C7-D (1.5GHz) processor, 1GB of RAM, and all the Hard Drives I could stuff in the case (4 PATA, and 2 SATA) drives... with just over 1TB of data storage.

For a while I was even running a Virtual machine session with a linux router distro (Smoothwall) on my WHS system.  But there were some instabilities there, and ended up taking that off and dedicating an old Pentium 3 system to running the linux router.

WHS does exactly what it claims to do, and there are some great plug-ins to fill some of the gaps.  Though, I do wish I had gone with a linux home server as I would have a lot more flexibility.  But... at the same time, sometimes it's better to have a system "just work", so you don't have to tinker with it endlessly.  I tend to do that with my Vista Media Center system... and usually end up breaking something.  But the nice thing about having WHS, is I when I do break my VMC system, I just pop in the Restore CD, and I go back to last-night's backup!

I do have a question for the Linux gurus in attendance...

Does Bacula or any other automated backup application for Linux have something similar to WHS's Single Instance Storage, where if multiple machines have the same file, it only saves one instance?  This saves me a whole lot of disc space when multiple systems have the same DLLs and application files, etc.

The cheaper one