Alienware Launches Enormous 4TB Home Server

[zekrahminator]

Alienware, known for selling very high-end pre-built computers and computer parts, recently put it out there that they've made a 4TB server for personal use. The server is targeted at users who actually have 4TB of high-definition content to share across a network. The device boasts remote access via internet, so that owners can enjoy their stuff from any PC with an internet connection. The device also has your standard array of wireless access options, and can connect to multimedia sources you already own.

Anyone hoping to own or sell one had better check out this site.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[kwchang007]

That's awesome. I mean of course if someone had that much info, and I'm sure it's amazingly expensive compared to building your own...but it's cool for people that don't know how to do it themself.

 

[Swansen]

um??? what, this is confusing, as you can just make your own media server, and its really really easy, i'm confused.

 

[ktr]

Usually the software and how it is implemented is the selling point.

 

[kwchang007]

um??? what, this is confusing, as you can just make your own media server, and its really really easy, i'm confused.

As in if you know how to set up the software and what you need its easy. Otherwise you defiantly need help to understand what software is necessary. That's how Alienware makes it easier. And yeah I don't understand half of what I wrote there...must've been too into the game.

 

[Mussels]

the software is useless. the average HD media file is 1.1GB for a 45 minute show - you'd need one hell of a net connection on each end (up and down) to watch that remotely.

[scrweed up math was here]

1100MB / 45 (minutes) / 60 seconds

3.25Mb/s upload on the server end, and same on the download end - at a minimum. I suppose USA cable can do that, but i thought the average around there was 2Mb, with less upload.

 

[kwchang007]

the software is useless. the average HD media file is 1.1GB for a 45 minute show - you'd need one hell of a net connection on each end (up and down) to watch that remotely.

[scrweed up math was here]

1100MB / 45 (minutes) / 60 seconds

3.25Mb/s upload on the server end, and same on the download end - at a minimum. I suppose USA cable can do that, but i thought the average around there was 2Mb, with less upload.

I think it's more of for files stored locally (on the server). So wireless G should be able to handle this kind of transfer granted that there's a good connection.

 

[Mussels]

I think it's more of for files stored locally (on the server). So wireless G should be able to handle this kind of transfer granted that there's a good connection.

wireless G cant hack it, at least not at 55Mb. Tried it here with the system 2 metres away from the router with 'excellent' signal (full 5 bars)

Wireless is really about 22Mb both ways - they just add them together because it can communicate full duplex (its about as useless as people saying 100Mb switches are 200Mb. i have seen that on boxes before)

So basically, for internet its useless (no real time/slow transfer) for 55Mb wifi its good enough to copy the files and watch them (not real time) but you need 100Mb or gigabit ethernet to watch HD media. - not just assumptions, i have a fully kitted network and a ton of HD media here to test it on.

 

[kwchang007]

wireless G cant hack it, at least not at 55Mb. Tried it here with the system 2 metres away from the router with 'excellent' signal (full 5 bars)

Wireless is really about 22Mb both ways - they just add them together because it can communicate full duplex (its about as useless as people saying 100Mb switches are 200Mb. i have seen that on boxes before)

So basically, for internet its useless (no real time/slow transfer) for 55Mb wifi its good enough to copy the files and watch them (not real time) but you need 100Mb or gigabit ethernet to watch HD media. - not just assumptions, i have a fully kitted network and a ton of HD media here to test it on.

Really? Huh...never would've thought it's not good enough. Were you trying to use a compressed or uncompressed format (as in was it compressed before or after the transmission?). I'd try, but uhh unfortunately a relatively slow dsl line and lack of hd sources/not alot of hdd keeps me from downloading hd.

 

[ktr]

the software is useless. the average HD media file is 1.1GB for a 45 minute show - you'd need one hell of a net connection on each end (up and down) to watch that remotely.

[scrweed up math was here]

1100MB / 45 (minutes) / 60 seconds

3.25Mb/s upload on the server end, and same on the download end - at a minimum. I suppose USA cable can do that, but i thought the average around there was 2Mb, with less upload.

you forgot to talk about data buffer...

Technology such as Data Buffer is created for this issue of where internet connection speeds are not par with streaming.

 

[Mussels]

Really? Huh...never would've thought it's not good enough. Were you trying to use a compressed or uncompressed format (as in was it compressed before or after the transmission?). I'd try, but uhh unfortunately a relatively slow dsl line and lack of hd sources/not alot of hdd keeps me from downloading hd.

most of my anime and a few TV shows are in HD, average of 1.1GB for the TV shows and 350MB for the anime.

The reason for the size difference is mostly length of the show, over wireless with a perfect signal it WILL play - but it stutters every 30s or so (briefly) and skipping back/forwards is very slow, taking upto 5s to skip and another 5-10 after that to play at the correct speed (video loves going into 2x speed til it resynchs with the audio)

Over 100Mb, its as smooth as watching it directly.