Windows Server Vs. Network Attached Storage

In the blue corner, Windows Server; in the red, an opensource NAS. The only way to see which is best: a fight!

- Neil Mohr

We’re riding your easily manipulated machismo as an excuse to look at the pros and cons of using Windows as a home server. The demise of the real Windows Home Server line in 2011 left a hole in Microsoft’s range, one that Windows Server Essentials could never quite fill with its small business remit, at a time when, annoyingly, a home server is of more use than ever.

We all have so much digital “stuff” that we want to keep, access, stream, share, and keep safe, that it’s hard to know where to put it. Sure, there are cloud solutions, but who knows where your data is going to end up being stored? Plus, access speed is always limited by your upstream/downstream speeds. So, while throwing stuff up to the cloud is useful, there are limitations and concerns with third-party services.

There’s nothing better than having real bare-metal in your locality, running services for high-speed access and backup, from where it can be pushed over slower connections to the cloud if you want. The question is, is it better to run Windows on your home server box, or is an open-source solution preferable? We’re here to find out, and explain how to set up your own box.

You know we already know the answer, but we’re going to do a fair and balanced test. By comparing what an open-source network attached server OS can accomplish against Microsoft’s Windows 10, we can at least play with something interesting and free.

WHAT IS A NAS? 

Network attached storage is, in some ways, an outdated term, because a “NAS” these days does a whole lot more than just store files. That’s the motivation behind this article: Can a modern NAS, even a free open-source implementation, take on the might and flexibility of a full-fat Windows box? A huge chunk of that answer relies on what you want from that box.