There is one thing I'd like to add to that article. USE RAID. Just RAID the HDDs before you install. WHS file duplication is slow as hell, it's duct tape grade solution for redundancy. After setting WHS on a RAID I've been rather pleased to it, before it was plain ridiculous.
@runemail: Using RAID is certainly not the way Microsoft envisioned WHS to be used, but they dropped the ball with the file duplicator so it's the way to get performance out of WHS macine. And yes, you loose the ability to easily swap drives, if all you want is "tape-like" slow backup storage, native WHS might work for you, but if you want to actively use it, like I do, it just won't cut it. Using Windows Server 2008 looses easy backup, media sharing, user managing, web access and multiplies the price, not really what I'm looking for... But most of all it drowns you into the bizarre world of user and device CAL licences, and other madness only enterprise sysadmins should have to deal with.
@Mozoltov, motherfucker: Whatever gives you the redundancy you are looking for, I personally had pile of 1TB drives to waste so I went for 1+0 with hot spare. In the article they used two 2TB drives so RAID 1 would match what WHS gives you, with better performance or course.
@OMG! Ponies!: Maybe there is a snap-in to allow compatibility with Time Machine...oh, wait, the universe would implode if that happened, starting with Steve Ballmer's head...
@USB_Humping_Dog: What's not to like? You don't have to worry about pressure to stay the night, because the orderlies will get pissed if they catch you.
@PhyrePhox: The HP home server interfaces with Time Machine using some software that HP builds into it. Hopefully it's just a matter of time before there's a plugin that replicates that.
@fastm3driver: Mac's don't need backups since...(choose your answer)
iFanboy: Mac's are so reliable that you don't ever loose data.
iHater: No one ever does anything useful or important on a Mac so there is no reason to back them up.
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
@Mozoltov, motherfucker: Whatever gives you the redundancy you are looking for, I personally had pile of 1TB drives to waste so I went for 1+0 with hot spare. In the article they used two 2TB drives so RAID 1 would match what WHS gives you, with better performance or course.
10/08/09
Windows sucks because it's Windows.
10/08/09
@OMG! Ponies!:
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
iFanboy: Mac's are so reliable that you don't ever loose data.
iHater: No one ever does anything useful or important on a Mac so there is no reason to back them up.
03/31/09
But on a more serious note, do we even know how many drive bays it has?
03/31/09
03/31/09
03/31/09
I gathered the other was, since it said OS X Time Machine compatible, or is it just limited to that function alone?