Tranquil PC announces Intel Atom-based Harmony home servers

Well, doesn't Tranquil PC seems pretty stoked about their new Atom-based Harmony home servers? Though they're not exactly mind-blowing (to us, anyway), two new fanless models should be shipping in June: the T7-HSAi (left, with a single 3.5-inch drive or two 2.5-inch drives) and T2-WHS-A3i (right, with up to two 3.5-inch drives), both featuring Ethernet, four USB 2.0 ports, 512MB or 1GB RAM options, and running Windows Home Server. With base configs and 500GB drives, the T7 will start at £278 ($550 US), and the T2 at £299 ($590 US).

[Josh @ May 25th 2008 6:38PM]

wait til after the data corruption is fixed.

[E71 @ May 25th 2008 9:34PM]

Damn. They don't have an option not to have Windows Home Server installed. I just need Linux on it.

[ethana2 @ May 26th 2008 4:14AM]

Yeah really.
Ubuntu server FTW.

[Wiigee @ May 25th 2008 6:41PM]

build you own, way cheaper and more expandable.

[Morgan @ May 25th 2008 9:24PM]

Indeed, and while you're at it, why bother with a server OS with such a high overhead? Servers don't need a flashy GUI and other bloat (minimum requirements for WHS include a video card capable of 1024x768 with 2D acceleration, and Windows Server 2003 certified hardware.) Save the license fee and go with BSD or Linux. Granted, not everyone can install and understand a true server OS, but I seriously doubt Joe User -- whose absolute greatest achievement in computing is realizing that you don't have to double-click web links -- would ever really say to himself "Gee, I think I need a server!"

[dj-kenpo @ May 26th 2008 9:30AM]

screw even using linux.
my 'windows home server' is nothing more than a celeron 500mhz running windows xp with every stupid candy coated graphic thing disabled.

slap a raid card and 2x 500gb in there and you're done. it downloads torrents and shares media to the other computers, and has no monitor/keyboard (vnc)
where's the issue?

[Hellios @ May 25th 2008 6:43PM]

Why use Atom?

Why not use an X2 4000+ instead, which is at least 3 or 4 times faster but costs the same as Atom 1.6ghz.

Sure, it generates more heat and consumes more power, but who cares, it's not a portable machine, it sits under your TV.

[Plothole @ May 25th 2008 6:49PM]

There's only so much you can do with fanless cooling. Especially in a cramped environment like most entertainment centers. So there is a major benefit to using a cooler chip.

[Wiigee @ May 25th 2008 7:02PM]

Home sorvers dont really need that much power, its better to build a cooler more energy efficent one, than super hot and power hungry. Its not like youll be running any power apps from it, youll probably just through movies and music on it.
Personaly, id rather wait for the EEE Box, throw Ubuntu home serve (when its finished) on it and run that, its small and i assume fanless, much better, plus you get satisfaction of making your own. (aswell as Linux being a fantastic server OS)

[Hellios @ May 25th 2008 7:06PM]

Well actually... the Celeron EEE cannot play 720p rips smoothly, and Atom is an energy saving upgrade and not a power/speed upgrade, I doubt the Atom will be able to smoothly play 720p movies, let alone 1080p rips.
So yeah, home servers do need some power.

[Levi @ May 25th 2008 7:19PM]

Hellios - according to the specs, the atom has built in hd codec support (controller chip iirc), meaning it should be able to handle it better than the celeron in the eee. .

[Aguiluz @ May 25th 2008 7:22PM]

Home Server =/= HTPC

The purpose of a server is to serve data/files and not to play them. Therefore Atom is fine.

[Hellios @ May 25th 2008 7:29PM]

If we're not discussing HTPCs, meaning they won't be placed in cramped spaces under your TV, than there's no reason to pay more for less just for the sake of having a fanless box.

Also, hardware HD video decoding rarely works on scene rips.

[jakem @ May 25th 2008 8:02PM]

I think you've missed the point of this Helios. It's not an HTPC, it's a file server that also does backup. Including a low-power chip like the Atom is a great idea for a machine that is designed to be alway on and the fact that it is fanless will be great for those people who haven't got somewhere like a cupboard to hide it away in.

I've got an HP Mediasmart server and until recently it was sitting next to my TV in the living room. It uses an AMD chip and the fans are noticeably noisy It also uses a little too much electricity for my liking so I'd love to be able to run off an Atom chip.

[YoYoYo @ May 25th 2008 10:58PM]

Why on earth would you get a processor that fast for a glorified home file server?

That said, I'm still at something of a loss to imagine why anyone would go this route instead of buying the $100 special refurb and throwing a couple of cheap 500GB drives into it. A P3 or shitty/similarly-slow P4 would more than handle the task at hand.

[mikeg @ May 25th 2008 7:21PM]

actually, you dont need much of a processor at all if you have the right combo of proc and gpu.
as the gpu can do onboard decoding of x264 and vc-1 streams

both intel and amd are currently releasing or about to release onboard video chips which are quite capable of doing onboard decoding of hd streams.
an atom will fit quite nicely with this.

[jakem @ May 25th 2008 8:04PM]

Home server's are headless so you don't need a graphics chip.

[Flash! @ May 25th 2008 8:40PM]

I'm afraid I don't quite understand the market this device is going for. As a Home Server, I would think storage would be more important then size and fan noise. Only 2x2.5" or 2x3.5" depending on model?

But it doesn't seem like it's meant to be a HTPC either. Even if it had the right hardware decoders to handle HD video, Home Server still doesn't have the Media Center interface like Vista Home Premium or Ultimate.

If they put XP or Linux on it and cut the price accordingly, it seems like it would compete well with the EEE Box.

[Brad @ May 26th 2008 5:28PM]

Everything here seems fine on these models. I like the low power, fanless design, and WHS.

BUT, two hard drives max is WAY too small.

Personally, I am running WHS on an ancient (circa 1998) Dell Workstation running dual PIII/800 CPUs, with 512MB RAM. (The system actually shipped with a single PII/400, which was top of the line at the time.) Cheap, totally obsolete hardware, but all I had to do was add a cheap IDE SATA and I can use the four internal hard drive bays to make a great WHS. Possibly a little power hungry, but the system cost me nothing, since it was stored in the attic. It'd run fine with even only one of the CPU's, but I can't find the old SLOT1 socket terminator that I'd need to use if I removed one CPU....