Originally Posted by lattyware
I don't think WHS will, but if you are running Linux on one machine, why not use it for your server - it's definitely a tool well suited to the job.
I would, but there are a few reasons.
I have 2 Server 2008 licenses for free.
I have 1 WHS license for free.
I have 2 Win 7 licenses for free.
Also have 0 Linux boxes in the house and multiple laptops/desktops.
I just had my PERC 5 take a dump on me and I lost quite a bit of data. I want to go the WHS route to make my household a little easier with the backups and the storage pooling. I know there are Linux alternatives out there that do everything WHS does, but for the simplicity and support I'm gonna go with WHS, for now at least. Since I only have 1 license I will probably end up doing Linux somewhere as a server down the road.
I like Linux as an OS, and if I didn't have all these licenses, it would've been my main OS a long time ago. Don't get me wrong, I've grown to like Linux a lot. And like the free-ness of everything sooo much. It's just hard taking the road less taken.
** I initally had Linux on my file server with Samba. Shares worked great, it was everything I needed. I ran into a free .edu copy of Server 2008 and couldn't turn it down. Now that I have no more RAID5, I need some sort of easy, flexible redundancy. The kind WHS offers with folder duplication and DE.