Customer Reviews
Great NAS, Okay Media Server...BUT...
I originally wanted this product as a RAID NAS to backup my music and photos. Then I got a PS3 and thought it'd be a great bonus to use the media server component. Here's where it fares:
NAS:
This is great as a RAID NAS. I didn't want a whole computer running to act as a file sharing device. Obviously, you can do that, too. I didn't want a network attached device or external USB drive without RAID because I'm looking for the reliability of RAID (two drives that mirror each other so that if one fails the other still has your data). Many of the RAID NAS devices in this price range have one built in drive or some other mechanism where if a drive fails, you have to send it back to the manufacturer to replace the drive(s) and rebuild it. What's the point?!? I popped in two 500 gig deskstars in there and away it went.
MEDIASERVER:
I wanted to share the photos and music I put on the network with my PS3. Using the latest (1.04) firmware, I was able to set it up and have it running with 10 minutes. I could play files just fine. HOWEVER the media server built into the NAS would unreliably provide MP3 Tags. For instance, it would allow for a "Rock" folder, but not "Soul". On the PS3, they were just listed under "Other". If I copied those same "Soul" files via the NAS to the PS3 HD, or put them on a USB Drive, the PS3 read the tags fine, so it was obviously a problem with the mediaserver. To verify even futher, I used a mediaserver on my desktop with those same files, again, and the PS3 saw them and categorized them just fine.
So... If you want to share a few songs, play one album at a time, view one folder of photos at a time- this will be awesome out-of-box. If you want to rip 300 CDs to the NAS and play by genre, rating, year, etc... You're screwed! ...Or are you? The DNS-323 allows you access to it's guts (Linux) so you can actually install a GOOD mediaserver on your NAS. I installed Twonky (Aprox ) in about half an hour at most. You can find the info on the DNS-323 wiki. It's a lot easier and safer than it sounds.
So... all in all, this is a great device. Perfect RAID NAS. Okay Media Server (minus one star for that). But with the flexibility to install a good media server and other linux components like a web server.
Installation:
Piece of cake. Out of the box it had the 1.03 firmware. I updated that first- easy. Then I added the 2 drives- very easy. Then I logged in via the browser (I never installed the dlink software!)- easy. It asked me how I wanted to use the drives and then formatted them- easy. The PS3 automagically found the mediaserver- Super Easy! Figuring out why it didn't tag my music properly- Frustrating! Installing Telnet and a new MediaServer... Not bad if you have a clue about computers (FTP, and basic Linux).
Performance: Unsure. I'm using wireless right now and there seems to be a delay inbetween songs. It might be better wired, or maybe that's just a limitation of streaming from a separate device. Also, I've noticed multiple disconnects from my DSL. This almost never happened before (maybe once in 6 months). Right now my DSL modem is also the wired/wireless router- not the best option in performance.
Handy network storage and printing
I am a new user of the DNS-323, and I would say my tech experience is moderate. The unit was very easy to setup. I installed 2 x WD 500GB SATA hard drives (WD5000AAKS), which you add to the unit without using any tools or screws. They just slide in from the front and click. Removal is just as easy. The included setup CD made finding the DNS-323 on my home network painless and fast on all of my networked computers.
I did not (have not yet) set up any user groups or permissions, which means that all the computers attached to my network can access both drives and all the folders on the DNS-323. I can see why you would want to set groups and users to protect information, but for the moment, the no group/users way works for me.
Setting up the print server was the only thing that gave me a bit of an issue with my HP Photosmart D5160 printer. To resolve my slow printing/no printing problem, I did this:
1) Configured my DNS-323 with a static IP address and made note of it.
2) Connected my printer to my computer, install drivers etc and make sure it was working correctly. (ie: printing!)
3) Next I opened the printer properties, selected the PORTS tab, and ADD PORT for a new local port named: \\lp Click OK and exit. Make sure this is still your default printer.
4) Finally, I disconnected my printer from my computer and connected it to my DNS-323. Without any further adjustments, I was able to print as normal from my computer.
Overall, I like the DNS-323 very much for a shared storage/backup device that all the computers on my network can access. The network print server was also a selling point for me (so I was pleased to get it working properly!), as was the idea of being able to replace hard drives quickly and easily as they become full, thus extending the the life of the product. I have not tried the iTunes server or the media server, since I wanted the DNS-323 primarily as a BACKUP device and would rather not play with the data I store on it. But it does have that included function for those who wish to fully explore its capabilities.
just what I needed
I've been looking for a RAID-1 NAS box for home for a while. Then after reading lots of reviews I decided to buy this one. I've had it for about 3 weeks, and so far it's been great. Easy to set up, fast and it powers down the drives when inactive (I love this feature). Good job D-Link! I got burned with you a long time ago (with a webcam that I could never get to work) but it looks like you learned from your mistakes :)
Unreliable/unable to recover from hard drive failure
The D-Link DNS-323 is a dual SATA enclosure, boasting an embedded Linux running on a Marvel board with an ARM5 processor. You put in the drives, and it configures them using the software raid stack from its embedded Linux. It has gigabit ethernet, and as NAS functionality goes, it only supports SMB shares. That's about where the coolness ends - with the specs. Even though it runs Linux, it is not capable of serving NFS. Even though it runs Linux, it is not capable of using ext3. But I am getting ahead of myself.
First thing I had to do based on the advice pouring from the Internet was to upgrade its firmware to the latest and greatest 1.0.4. Then I put in my 2 x 1TB drives and I started configuring it. The web interface gives the usual choice of jbod/raid0/raid1 - and after choosing raid1, it asked me how much RAID1 I want, promising that the rest will be used for a JBOD setup. I selected a 500GB setup for RAID1, which gave me an extra 1TB of JBOD scratch space I planned on using for stuff like local mirrors and caches. I did a samba mount for the RAID1 volume, dropped about 20GB of stuff on it and then proceeded to test the failure handling of the DNS-323. Power off, pull out one drive, start it up in degraded mode. As expected, the JBOD volume is gone, but the RAID1 one is still going strong, data is still there. I zero out the drive I pulled out, power off, insert it back, and power on again.
This is where the fun started. One would expect the device to reconstruct the RAID1 array, and give me an option to remake my JBOD from the space not being used for the RAID1. Sure enough, the web interface prompts me resync the new drive2, issues a failure, asks for a reboot. Upon reboot it asks again to resync the newly inserted drive2, this time it looks like it is making it through, half an hour later it says it is happy and asks me to reboot. Fine, I reboot, next time it comes up it prompts me to resync the newly inserted drive1 (note - this is the *other* drive that I have not touched, now it thinks that drive is newly inserted as well). This is testing, so I click ok, it fails, asks for reboot; reboot, starts syncing fine, completes, asks for reboot. On next reboot, it asks to resync the newly inserted drive2, and the cycle seems to keep on repeating.
On the positive side, the data continued to be available. But maybe because it was running degraded most of the time, I don't know why, it stopped being reliable. I would get random read-only errors from the smb mounts, directory tree corruption (files that should be in subdirectories show up in the root of the share), a whole bunch of problems that made me put the thing in the box it came from and send it back to Amazon. I wasn't even trying to stress test it and it failed miserably. Totally not worth my time dealing with it. How many people that declare themselves happy with the device have actually tested the recovery from a hard drive failure?
FTP has some limitations
I've only had this for a few days. Installed one of the two 1TB drives in. Want to test it some before installing the second drive and setting up raid 1. I want to primarily use FTP because this unit is for a church so that the staff can store files for sharing with various levels of access. I don't really want to have to modify a user's personal laptop. FTP access via a web browser seems like an easy solution.
Installed the drive under firmware 1.03 as it came. Found that I couldn't create a new folder when as admin using a web browser under the ftp section. Found out that this is solved in 1.04 so I downloaded this upgrade, installed it and was able to then create a new folder when I was granting ftp access rights. Now comes the limitations and one bug. I set up a Group and granted this group read/write ftp access to a specific folder. What resulted was 'read only' access. Tried several times, same results. Could successfully assign read/write access to same folder for an individual user. Emailed tech support, they replied back asking me if I had reformatted the drive after the upgrade. I didn't so I proceeded to do so.
After reformatting, same problem. Couldn't grant read/write ftp access to a group. WELL, I ftp'ed into the DNS323 as one of the users in this group and I could write to the folder. I copied a file from my laptop to the folder even though on the web browser admin screen of the DNS323 it showed the 'read only' icon for this ftp access. So there is a bug in the code for displaying read/write for group ftp access. For an individual ftp access rule, it does show the read/write icon but not for a group rule. that was the bug.
Now here is the limitations: for an individual or for a group, there can be only ONE ftp access rule. So you can't grant Group1 read/write access to folder1 while giving that group read only access to folder2. Once you install the second rule, the first rule for the group is removed from the access list. (Now when you give the group access to a folder, it also applies to sub-folders/sub-directories under that folder but the same type of access applies to all sub-folders. Now for an individual user, the same applies... only one FTP access rule can be created for that user.
Now this isn't true of network access which is a bit more flexible. However if you are like me thinking you could simply use FTP instead of network access, then you're out of luck for now. Its possible to workaround this limitation but its not really workable in all situations. You could simply create a 'generic user' that has access to folder one and a different 'generic user' for accessing folder two. So some people who would need access to both folders would have to know both IDs and passwords. This can get messy. I'm hoping they plan to enhance the FTP capabilities to the same level as the network access.
May update this review later as I test further and find out other things. I wish the documentation would be more in depth.
All Information about products including images, descriptions, editorial reviews and customer reviews © Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.