NEW Reviews Beta Feedback
Buffalo Technology LinkStation Network Storage Center
- Performance: Poor: 58
- Features: Poor: 53
- Design: Superior: 95
| Performance | |
|---|---|
| Large File Test (Read) | 436.07 |
| Large File Test (Write) | 558.58 |
| McAfee Virus Scan Test | 394.66 |
| Test Version | 1 |
| Windows File Search Test | 104.62 |
| Windows Files and Folders Test (Read) | 481.76 |
| Windows Files and Folders Test (Write) | 597.03 |
| Performance | |
|---|---|
| Cost per GB | $1.60 |
| Extras | Proprietary software for backing up NAS and clients, print server |
| Tested performance | Very Good |
| Copy speed: Time (in megabytes per second) to copy a 3.06GB folder from the tested device to the test bed. | 6.35 |
| Write speed: Time (in megabytes per second) to write a 3.06GB folder from the test bed to the tested device. | 5.13 |
| Usability rating | Outstanding |
User Reviews for Buffalo Technology LinkStation Network Storage Center
-
Reviewed by: VReggie
Duration of ownership: 1 Year
Strengths: Network Accessibility, ease of setup. Storage capability. Small footprint.
Weaknesses: Slow to respond to write requests over network link. NOS on device limits file size to 4GB, which limits or excludes the use of NTBackup or other file compression backups. The hard drives are run of the mill, just as likely to suffer the same hardware failure you're trying to protect yourself from.
Overall Evaluation: Although decently priced, and easy to use (for PCs) they're somewhat unreliable for totally automated backups. The units I've used seem to respond slowly to write requests, especially after long idle periods, which sometimes results in my backup software timing out. I've used NTBackup, Veritas Backup Exec and other compression based applications but have had the most luck using a simple XCOPY batch file.
Cameras
Camcorders
Cell Phones
Components
Desktops
HDTV
Home Theater
GPS
Laptops
Monitors
MP3 Players
Networking &
Printers
Storage

