Ximeta NetDisk
Sep 21, 2004 | 12:02 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: DSM
Programs: "I COME FROM Des Moines. Somebody had to." -- Bill Bryson
Posts: 1,135
Ximeta NetDisk
Just purchased a Ximeta NetDisk 160gb and thought I'd share my thoughts.
I was in need of extra gigabytes to store digitial media. While I'm skilled at turning the computer wrench, I didn't really want to open the case on my wifes desktop. So I thought about USB external drives and then networked drives.
Being in the mood for instant gratification after my research, I slogged off to Best Buy and picked up the Ximeta NetDisk 160 (BB doesn't carry 250gb model or I would have purchased that). A $50 rebate helped soften the pain of not purchaseing from J&R.
The NetDisk does USB 2.0 or Ethernet. Multiple netdisks can be connected and appear as a single drive or can be mirrored. I'll probably try that soon.
Installation was a snap. I plugged the drive into my 10/100 switch, powered it up and then 10 minutes later, after painlessly installing its driver on two Windows XP machines I had 149gb (formated NTFS) available as if it were a local drive on both machines. It allows simultaneous read/write from multiple machines. It can also be used by Mac's and Linux machines (but not with simultaneous r/w).
Performance is good, even better than I expected. I'd recommend this hardware to my grandmother it's so easy to use.
I was in need of extra gigabytes to store digitial media. While I'm skilled at turning the computer wrench, I didn't really want to open the case on my wifes desktop. So I thought about USB external drives and then networked drives.
Being in the mood for instant gratification after my research, I slogged off to Best Buy and picked up the Ximeta NetDisk 160 (BB doesn't carry 250gb model or I would have purchased that). A $50 rebate helped soften the pain of not purchaseing from J&R.
The NetDisk does USB 2.0 or Ethernet. Multiple netdisks can be connected and appear as a single drive or can be mirrored. I'll probably try that soon.
Installation was a snap. I plugged the drive into my 10/100 switch, powered it up and then 10 minutes later, after painlessly installing its driver on two Windows XP machines I had 149gb (formated NTFS) available as if it were a local drive on both machines. It allows simultaneous read/write from multiple machines. It can also be used by Mac's and Linux machines (but not with simultaneous r/w).
Performance is good, even better than I expected. I'd recommend this hardware to my grandmother it's so easy to use.
Sep 21, 2004 | 6:21 am
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2001
Programs: DL GM, AA Gold, Hilton Diamond, Bonvoy Plat
Posts: 12,171
Have had the the 160gb model for about a month, attached via ethernet.
If you aren't running Windows, aren't running on a network, or don't want to install the network driver, you can natively add it to a machine via USB 2.0 and share it through the attached machine.
It's a great lightweight product. Perfect for USB 2.0 enabled laptops that need extra storage on the road.
^^^
http://www.ximeta.com/
If you aren't running Windows, aren't running on a network, or don't want to install the network driver, you can natively add it to a machine via USB 2.0 and share it through the attached machine.
It's a great lightweight product. Perfect for USB 2.0 enabled laptops that need extra storage on the road.
^^^
http://www.ximeta.com/
Sep 21, 2004 | 7:57 am
#3
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: www.percussionking.com
Programs: UA Alluminum =-D
Posts: 173
Just a thought:
Most Ethernet Today: 100 Mbps transfer minus some overhead
USB 2.0: 480 Mbps transfer
ATA100 Hard Drives: 800 Mbps transfer
Gigabit Ethernet: 1000 Mbps transfer minus some overhead
ATA133 Hard Drives: 1064 Mbps transfer
My emphasis here is on the Gigabit Ethernet.
Most home computers from Dell and even up to a $1,700 from Sony come with ATA100.
Pretty soon, Ethernet-shared devices will be faster than the most common hard drives and will have comparable speeds to the next level up.
Most Ethernet Today: 100 Mbps transfer minus some overhead
USB 2.0: 480 Mbps transfer
ATA100 Hard Drives: 800 Mbps transfer
Gigabit Ethernet: 1000 Mbps transfer minus some overhead
ATA133 Hard Drives: 1064 Mbps transfer
My emphasis here is on the Gigabit Ethernet.
Most home computers from Dell and even up to a $1,700 from Sony come with ATA100.
Pretty soon, Ethernet-shared devices will be faster than the most common hard drives and will have comparable speeds to the next level up.
Sep 21, 2004 | 9:26 am
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2001
Programs: DL GM, AA Gold, Hilton Diamond, Bonvoy Plat
Posts: 12,171
I use mine for documents, mp3's and other files that are small or only need occasional access. I also like the ability to have these files shared across the 3 machines in the house (two of which are wirelessly connected).
So, the 100mbps "limit" is fine for me now.
It will be neat in a few years as gigabit gets traction in the home to have all of your disk outside the chassis...
So, the 100mbps "limit" is fine for me now.
It will be neat in a few years as gigabit gets traction in the home to have all of your disk outside the chassis...
Sep 21, 2004 | 9:40 am
#5
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: ATL
Posts: 3,219
I wish they would add gigabit to these things. How much cost would that add really?
All of our computers for the last three years has had gigabit ethernet out of the box.
I would also like to see a simple HTTP and FTP servers.
All of our computers for the last three years has had gigabit ethernet out of the box.
I would also like to see a simple HTTP and FTP servers.
Sep 21, 2004 | 10:05 am
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: DSM
Programs: "I COME FROM Des Moines. Somebody had to." -- Bill Bryson
Posts: 1,135
Originally Posted by Tummy
I wish they would add gigabit to these things. How much cost would that add really?
All of our computers for the last three years has had gigabit ethernet out of the box.
I would also like to see a simple HTTP and FTP servers.
All of our computers for the last three years has had gigabit ethernet out of the box.
I would also like to see a simple HTTP and FTP servers.
Sep 21, 2004 | 12:50 pm
#8
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SFO/SJC -> UME/ARN -> IAD/DCA
Programs: AAPLT, SK/G, A3/G
Posts: 721
correct me if i'm wrong:
from what i understand, doens't 100megabit ethernet means a 100 megabit per second throughput, which also equals 12.5 megabyte per second? if that is true, then gigabit ethernet would means a 1000 megabit per second throughput, which also equals 125 megabyte per second? wouldn't that be on par with the throughout of most HDs out there?
from what i understand, doens't 100megabit ethernet means a 100 megabit per second throughput, which also equals 12.5 megabyte per second? if that is true, then gigabit ethernet would means a 1000 megabit per second throughput, which also equals 125 megabyte per second? wouldn't that be on par with the throughout of most HDs out there?
Sep 21, 2004 | 1:07 pm
#9
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: ATL
Posts: 3,219
Originally Posted by ben1979
correct me if i'm wrong:
from what i understand, doens't 100megabit ethernet means a 100 megabit per second throughput, which also equals 12.5 megabyte per second? if that is true, then gigabit ethernet would means a 1000 megabit per second throughput, which also equals 125 megabyte per second? wouldn't that be on par with the throughout of most HDs out there?
from what i understand, doens't 100megabit ethernet means a 100 megabit per second throughput, which also equals 12.5 megabyte per second? if that is true, then gigabit ethernet would means a 1000 megabit per second throughput, which also equals 125 megabyte per second? wouldn't that be on par with the throughout of most HDs out there?
When attached to a shared drive on another one of our computers over gigabit, it is much like using files from our local computer. It is noticeably slower over 100 mb ethernet.