ARGOSY - HD363N - Network Storage

[mdp1969]

hI, I am trying to use a program called Allways Sync to kee
directories in Sync, its free and it works great! However, I bough
this thing and with the tritton 607 firmware it could never sync
with the beta firmware, I now get these errors when trying to cop
files..... any ideas...

thank

matt


8/31/2005 11:38 PM, API call error, Network access is denied
(80070041), Error when copying 'E:\libby\My Music\Sample Music.lnk
to '\\Homenas\libsbackup\My Music\Sample Music.lnk' usin
intermediat
'\\Homenas\libsbackup\_sync.app\temp\4016993C70D38F3D73941A6F89C74A8D.tmp

 

[winux]

dilettante:

I believe comparing the NAS to a Windows 95 machine (or any computer)
can give a false comparison. I investigated the SOHO NAS units on the
market, and all have between 4 - 16MB memory with a 100Mhz to 175Mhz
MIPS processor. Plus, the Tritton/Argosy unit is the only one I found
that is not running a Linux kernal; everyone else (Linksys, Maxtor,
Buffalo, etc) are.

I looked at Tom's Hardware Guide, and they have a comparison chart of
the NAS units they tested. The Tritton/Argosy unit actually
outperformed their competition; the only NAS to be above them was for
a mid-size NAS for about $500+.

I think if speed is important here, then a SOHO NAS device is not the
best idea. I also think the SOHO NAS is a great choice for those who
either don't have the technical experience or money to spend on more
reliable backup solutions.

[b:5544d14702]mdp1969[/b:5544d14702]

I think it has something to do with the temp filename it is creating.
It looks like it is a long filename that FAT32 doesn't seem to like.

 

[winux]

I did a search for more Argosy products and I came up with a compan
called Inoi (www.inoi.com). I called them and the same person fro
Argosy lifts up the phone. They are the same! However, their websit
offers no help for most of their products; maybe because they ar
new. I wonder why an OEM such as Argosy would want to compete wit
its own business....

I like the Tritton people better, though, because they seem to hel
out more. I hope this doesn't affect them in a big way. I called the
and talked to one of their product managers, asking them if they ar
releasing any other NAS units in the future. They said yes, that the
have a couple more to fill the SOHO to midrange to server applianc
gaps. They weren't able to give specs on it, but he made it soun
like they want it to be faster and more feature rich than thei
current NAS solution

I wonder if the above Argosy -- Ioni thing is causing Tritton (an
maybe others?) to quickly find other solutions....

Just more of what I found in my hunt for the perfect NAS...

I think the latest beta from Tritton (same as Argosy) makes the NA
work pretty well. I love it for my needs, and until I find somethin
else, I'm staying with it

 

[dilettante]

winux, I go along with pretty much al
you have said. The one thing I'd disagree with slightly is th
characterization of NAS in general as a backup solution. However yo
may well be onto something, since that seems to be the applicatio
most people have in mind when purchasing one. It may also be th
main use the vendors are targeting

It is true that one can only expect so much from a small, inexpensiv
device of this type. I was pleasantly surprised though to find tha
the latest beta firmware I was able to try significantly improves th
performance of this device in non-backup applications

As a matter of fact I'd like to see Tom's repeat their compariso
benchmarks with this latest firmware, perhaps once a regular releas
version becomes available. I think even their reviewer will b
favorably impressed

 

[Sifter]

I really wish they would fix the problem with the xbox browsing.
cant browse subfolders within xbmc. Has anyone else experience
this? I have 90 gig's of mp3's on this NAS, that cant be playe
through XBMC. :

Otherwise, the device has gotten better and better. Im runnin
Argosy's latest firmware

 

[microchip]

Sifterwrote
I really wish they would fix the problem with the xbox browsing.
cant browse subfolders within xbmc. Has anyone else experience
this? I have 90 gig's of mp3's on this NAS, that cant be playe
through XBMC. :

Otherwise, the device has gotten better and better. Im runnin

Argosy's latest firmware

I have the same problem

M

 

[foxtail]

HELP FTP

How do I create an UPLOAD folder without giving a user genera
ReadWrite permission on all the other folders that they can see. I
looks like RW/RO permission is set per user and not per user pe
folder, but I may be missing something

Thank

 

[Kane81]

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=29701
Personal folder files are unsupported over a LAN or ove
a WAN lin

This is why the pst files keep getting corrupted

if you create a pst file on your local drive, then copy it to th
network drive. you will be able to open the remote pst file usin
outlook. However the file keeps getting corrupted every now and the

 

[foxtail]

Kane81 your post's not directed at me, is it I have a differen
problem with managing user access to FTP folders for WAN client

 

[winux]

Foxtail

When you create the users you have to assign them the folder you wan
access to. You can create a folder called UPLOAD and then assign
user to it with R/W

Any other folder you give to him will also have R/W, so yes it doe
not do a per folder permission

 

[foxtail]

thanks winux, my fears confirmed

is next best giving each user two different logins, one RW and one R
then assigning folders accordingly

thank

 

[jonas.astrom]

Hi guys!

I'm using the newest (?) firmware, but it doesn't seem to make any
difference.

1) The drive is EXTREMLY slow. Copy 3 Mbyte takes 30- 40 seconds,
sometimes more.

2) Every now and then it looses connection and I get the error "The
specified network name is no longer available"

When I went to the store where I bought the device, they did test run
it without problems. I can't understand this.

I'm running firmware NetHDD006-0804.

Do you guys have any clue?

Cheers,

Jonas

 

[hoogie69]

mintcakewrote
I'm using the HD363N with a Mac (with two Macs to be precise)

I just purchased this NAS for my home network (4 Macs running 10.3.
and 10.4.2) and have been unable to even address the drive t
configure it. I have a LAN using a Belkin wired/wireless router w
static IPs but when I tried w/ that setup, I couldn't see the drive.
I then did a direct connect but have also been unable to see i
either. Any suggestions? TI

 

[winux]

hoogie69:

What kind of error are you getting when you try to configure the
unit?

When you connect it directly, don't forget to change your IP address
to 169.254.0.x because the unit defaults to 169.254.0.1.

[b:f1fd7e26e6]Jonas[/b:f1fd7e26e6]:

Are you running any anti-virus software? There is a known issue with
older Norton products. And is this on a wireless connection?

 

[lrmat]

i'm sorry for hijacking this thread but i have the bytecc nas and
just can't seem to get my pc to see the drive, yet i can access th
web interface. if i use the run command " \\landisk" it will not se
the drive if i type "\\landisk\public" i task me for an id an
password but i can't log in (i've already used the admin as id an
admin as password and it doesn't work)

what am i doing wrong? obviously the drive is ther since i can acces
the nas with the web browser. what am i doing wrong? any and all hel
would be greatly appreciated

 

[winux]

lrmat:

I think it best to start a new thread since the NAS units are
definitely different. I do bet, however, your NAS is not asking for
the admin interface password. Probably guest with no password would
work, but that's a question for bytecc.

 

[dilettante]

I'm not sure KB297019 answers the question with .pst files though

Sure, it suggests this can be inefficient. Yes, it says they ca
suffer corruption if the network fails or degrades. I'd go furthe
and suggest another problem is having the application or clien
machine fail while the .pst is being updated - but that's a proble
even with a local .pst file

This is an issue with any file over a LAN that is thrashed on a lo
though. The problems are very similar to those suffered by Je
database users, perhaps without the extra source of problem
resulting from concurrent updates by multiple clients

I'm having good luck with the late beta firmware and Jet databases bu
I haven't had the time to try extensive operations on large ones yet
or anything with a lot of concurrency. Right now mine are in th
500KB to 4MB range with 2 to 3 very low activity clients

I may get around to trying some large .pst files too though that isn'
something I need myself. For local email I'm using a "shimserver
concept. The mailstore is a Jet MDB, and users "connect" to it via
local instance of a compact SMTP/POP3 server they fire up on thei
workstation and then run their email client. The server accept
client requests and hits the shared mailstore on the NAS device t
satisfy them. Mailstore backups are easy because even if users leav
the server running it only opens the MDB when performing a requeste
action. Latency isn't bad except when the drive has timed out an
been put to sleep - and so far even this is acceptable. Heavie
testing will determine the ultimate viability of the concept though

Since Microsoft explicitly states that .pst files over a network ar
Bad Thing though, there may be little effort within Outlook to do it
updating with much recoverability. Jet on the other hand, despite it
limitations, was sold to customers to be used in this manner. Mayb
that's one reason I'm not seeing trouble yet

 

[Maximus1234]

If someone come up with a solution to the "xbox media center"-problem
please let me know!

I get into the folders, but can't see the files.

/M

 

[eds]

Maximus1234wrote
If someone come up with a solution to the "xbox media center"-proble
please let me know

I get into the folders, but can't see the files

/

This is a problem for a lot of us here. Not sure if it will ever b
solved and Tritton does not seem to care (according to GAPotter'
post) the NAS does not support XBMC

 

[dilettante]

Another bug, NetHDD006-0804 beta version.

Reproduce the error:

Copy a good sized text file to the NAS device (19 K bytes in my
test).

Open with NotePad, etc.

Add a few lines in the middle of the file. Save, exit the editor.

Reopen the file, all is ok.

Delete those news lines, save, exit.

Reopen the file. Text at the end of the file appears "duplicated."

[b:02a8f4bac0]What's going on?[/b:02a8f4bac0]

I don't know for sure. It seems likely that NotePad saves over a file
by simply rewriting into the original file. If there is more to
write, the file gets extended. If there is less to write on "save"
then the new text is written and the file's EOF pointer is set.

This EOF pointer doesn't seem to be getting set right on the NAS
device.

[b:02a8f4bac0]Workaround[/b:02a8f4bac0]

Edit the file, "save as" some new name, close the editor. Then delete
the old file, rename the new open as the old one.

[b:02a8f4bac0]Theory[/b:02a8f4bac0]

This might be one source of the Outlook .pst file woes (among others)
people have been running into.

[b:02a8f4bac0]Status[/b:02a8f4bac0]

Reported to Argosy via email 10-Sep-2005.