The FreeNAS project has released version 8.0 of its popular FreeBSD-based network storage server, and in doing so has managed to alienate some of its user base. The projects directors have decided to focus on the enterprise user as their first priority, and have released FreeNAS 8.0 without the home user functionality present in …
And version 9.0...
...will be sponsored by the RAFIAA and won't allow storage of mp3's and avi's.
Until Western Digital sues them for patent infringement that is...
RE:And version 9.0...
C'mon! Give the guys a break. If the features are really that important to your setup, you could easily extend it and give it back to the project. FreeNAS source and the documentation is freely available and besides FreeBSD has one of the best (if not the best) documented, un-encumbered OS's out there.
So what's Linux then?
I realise that a BSD would probably suit a commercial entity intent on selling a branded version of the NAS software, but FreeNAS is well, free so that concern should not apply.
"So what's Linux then?"
Linux, my friend is a Kernel not an OS.
What's Linux: encumbered with it's toxic license
Linux is so toxic with it's choice of license that it still cannot yet* use the awesomeness that is ZFS, a completely open source and free to use file system that is the future of all FS. ZFS kicks sand in the face of LVM + software raid.
Isilon/EMC use FreeBSD's NFSv4 server (and contribute back testing/fixes), I don't think they use ZFS as well.
Maybe more than you know...
Given that there are two storage vendors sponsoring BSDCan conference this month (http://www.bsdcan.org/2011/), perhaps more than they know. NetApp and Isilon might not be happy about the competition in the enterprise space, especially if someone starts bundling FreeNAS with hardware.
Use of FreeBSD in the embedded storage space has been popular for a while. Supposedly, OnTAP has some FreeBSD code in, because BSD licensed code is viral like the GPL. And the new new GX stuff is supposedly 100% FreeBSD.
And given that OpenSolaris is basically dead, I bet Nexenta is looking into moving to FreeBSD too. If FreeBSD had Containers, it'd be the new Solaris.
Think you meant is BSD code is NOT viral
OpenSolaris was forked
Nexenta and Joyent forked OpenSolaris to illumos.
If oracle is smart, they'll realize it's a good thing help keep code changes going between illumos and solaris as it will help gather support for Solaris. I feel Sun bringing back an x86 version of Solaris, and OpenSolaris was a smart move. Yes, they did not get much code out of it, but the interest and side projects for Solaris was they payout.
And no Squeezebox sever either ..
apparently - see http://www.herger.net/slim/detail.php?nr=1026
wow... that makes me a bit happy
When I set up my NAS, I was considering a DIY one with freenas on it. But I decided to save time and went for a QNAP. Boy am I glad I did...
At least now I *gain* functionality on every upgrade :)
Sticking with FreeNAS 7 for a while, then
I was hugely impressed with FreeNAS - I found it very easy to configure, and it "just works".
Since FreeNAS 7 is working fine for me at the moment, and uPnP support is important to me, I'll just keep an eye out for features - but I'm not going to risk messing up a perfectly good system for the sake of a later release number!
Re: Sticking with FreeNAS 7 for a while, then
Stepping out from editorial neutrality for a moment. After really bad experiences with proprietary NAS at a company I worked for back in 2009 - multi-thousand-dollar bad experience - I put together a FreeNAS as its next server.
I cannot class myself as a FOSS guru, but it really did work out-of-the-box. It ran for the next two years completely lights-out.
FreeNAS not FreeMediaServer
Need I say more?
If it had the functionality and then suddenly it doesn't, hows that any cop>?
Yes,, you sort of do need to say more to explain why version 7 of FreeNAS included these features and version 8 doesn't. Unless you're the kind of person who thinks buying a machine with windows on it means you can actually see through it.
What's to explain
Why should anyone need to explain why a previous version had extra bells and whistles? If it does what it says on the tin then that should be enough.
Personally I'd rather have a hardened NAS without the frills that does the job than one that compromised it's integrity by un-necessary add-ons.
OK, I'll bite.
Most likely that given the limited resources the FreeNAS project might have, they might have decided to have a top notch NAS and necessary hooks for other amateurs to bolt the media server functionality instead of middle of the pack NAS with lots of other flavour of the month media servers.
I myself use FreeBSD server to run the services I deem necessary at home.
It's hard to please everyone.
Personally I hate the fact that my storage units are running a boatload of other services that may interfere with the basic storage service, so in my book the new version is a good thing. Each to their own, I guess.
I would be happier if they just disabled the services by default rather than removing perfectly good functionality.
Isn't that a matter of focussing?
I mean, in a business setting I rather have good ZFS support than iTunes support. A NAS and a media server are not the same things at all, even if they share some functionality.
Welcome to reality
Users of free software are shocked! shocked! to discover that when you neither contribute code nor money to a development effort, you have very little influence over its direction.
Charity organizations have understood this phenomenon for decades. It's called "the tyranny of the volunteer".
What a bunch of numpties...
... and that is the author and comentards here.
Anyone with a passing interest in FreeNAS over the last while will be completely cogniscant of the fact there was a split in intent. FreeNAS being focused on business with http://blog.openmediavault.org/ being the home users solution.
Open Media Vault?
If and when it ever appears it's a brave man who chooses it over FreeNas.
It's been nearly 18 months and nothing has appeared
Have they fixed the stupid bug introduced in the last release, which meant you could only add NFS exports on an entire disk, instead of individual directories?
Thankfully when I upgraded, existing exports worked, just couldn't add any more without creating a serious security problem!
Oh and ZFS works in the current version ...
I was most annoyed that you could no longer install on a hard drive that you wanted to share. My old PC doesn't support USB boot.
But then again, version 7 works fine. I'll just stick with that.
- Geek's Guide to Britain INSIDE GCHQ: Welcome to Cheltenham's cottage industry
- 'Catastrophic failure' of 3D-printed gun in Oz Police test
- Game Theory Is the next-gen console war already One?
- Analysis Spam and the Byzantine Empire: How Bitcoin tech REALLY works
- VIDEO Herschel Space Observatory spots galaxies merging