
A startup should create this storage device. I would buy it. - arnorhs
http://arnorhs.com/2010/07/05/somebody-needs-to-invent-this-storage-device/
======
jackowayed
I think you really want this to be 2 pieces: something "in the cloud" and a
local cache.

When you're accessing from your phone (at least when not on your home WiFi) or
a computer that's not at your house, it would access the one in the cloud,
which would make it faster and not rely on your home Internet working.

Most importantly, if your house burns down, you're not totally fucked.

So the local device interfaces with TVs and such and keeps you from having to
wait for anything to download because it's all cached on there. The cloud
piece keeps your data safe and makes it a lot less likely that you won't be
able to access your data because your Internet is down.

It's possible that you could use Dropbox as the cloud piece and sync mechanism
and put together a special server that can do all of the TV/remote
control/stereo integration he wants.

One issue is that even 100GB may not be enough for everyone.

~~~
ttol
When you're setting up a central storage for all your home content, 100GB is
nothing -- you need to start speaking in terms of TB's. So, for now, the best
thing is to do local=realtime, and cloud=selective backup/cache.

I've set it up like this using Windows Home Server. I use a few backup
services to point it to some of the folders on the server that are important
to me (my work folder for instance).

WHS has the ability to stream remotely, and I haven't found any speed issues
doing so from my local network. I would like what you're describing, which is
local=cache and cloud=realtime, except technology isn't there yet -- disk
space in the cloud is still too expensive and ISP <-> home bandwidth still too
slow/throttled/capped.

------
edanm
I just upgraded my Dropbox account to 50Gb, and for me, it covers a lot of
needs.

I keep all my important files in there (my mp3 collection, projects,
documents, etc.). I have Dropbox set up on 3 machines (main machine, family
computer and my laptop), so I get automatic syncing of all these files, plus
backups of all the files on 3 computers, plus access to all these files in the
cloud.

As far as I'm concerned, it's a revolution in how I work. Dropbox is now my
guardian angel, silently backing up everything I do.

The _only_ problem with this arrangement is that 50gb is too small for all my
files (videos, mostly), and even their 100gb offering is too small for that. I
expect this to change in the near future.

~~~
sprout
What I would really like is some metadata baked into the filesystem layer that
allows you to specify backup levels, which vary how often, whether or not, and
where things are backed up.

So something like:

1 - always back up to primary backup locations in full. 2 - back up to primary
backup locations if it's not too much trouble (some sort of configurable
threshold for space) 3 - like 2, but a lower threshold 4 - only back up to
secondary backup 5 - do not back up.

I know that there's a lot of configuration that would have to go into this,
but I think as data becomes a bigger part of our lives, we need to have a more
intentional attitude towards how we store our data, and not just 'let the
computer back it up.' Until movies are as easy to store as text is currently,
there will always be tradeoffs that we will want to think about.

~~~
edanm
The beauty of Dropbox is the "it just works" feeling. You put things in a
folder, it's synced to all other computers, plus the web. It really is simple
in the best sense of the word.

Having said that, the latest beta does allow you to choose to only sync some
of the folders. So you can, for example, install Dropbox on your work
computer, and choose not to sync your mp3s to it, etc. This should solve a lot
of the use cases you have.

The only thing really missing, for me, is the ability to exclude specific
files/folders from the Dropbox folder (like, for example, per-computer
configuration files). I assume they'll allow that at some point, but for now I
have to work my way around it. Still worth it though!

~~~
sprout
If I tried to sync everything over my home DSL connection, software would have
limited ability to make it seamless.

------
kenjackson
There's also Windows Home Server, which does everything you're looking for I
believe.

Here's a list of features from the wikipedia page
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Home_Server>):

<list removed because formatting made it unreadable. see Wikipedia entry for
details>

~~~
pragmatic
Yes. I do this, although I also use a dedicated HTPC by my TV. A little
expensive but gets used all the time and I can stream Netflix, Hulu, watch a
movie in almost any format including Blu-Ray.

I've looked into alternatives, (PS3, dedicated media players, etc, etc) but
nothing else has everything I wanted.

~~~
mistermann
What do you use as an HTPC (Hardware, Software)?

------
jedsmith
I've never been too crazy about a device that both (a) stores my media and (b)
plays it. Since Hollywood and the scene cannot agree upon formats for any
length of time, freezing the state of the industry into a closed box leaves me
in fear of not being able to play something in the future.

Specialize. I want a device that stores my media (I already have this), and I
can then replace the "display media on television" part with whatever I like.
When a device tries to wear too many hats, quality of each hat tends to
suffer, in my experience.

------
johnfn
This sounds a lot like Opera Unite, which was sadly totally ignored 5 seconds
after it came out.

<http://unite.opera.com/>

(As a totally tangential rant, I've been using Opera recently for no
particular reason, and it's been frustrating me how left-behind it's been,
even by the tech crowd. The latest version is both faster and more responsive
than Chrome, which had been my browser of choice.)

~~~
brianwillis
I've had similar feelings. You would think that products that are superior
from a technical standpoint would be enough for them to get _some_ traction in
the technical community.

I can't quite put my finger on why, but Opera always seems to get ignored.

~~~
jsz0
My longstanding theory is it's totally the name. What do most people think of
when they hear the word opera? Lame, annoying, outdated, slow paced,
inaccessible, old, boring, etc. I'm hard pressed to think of a worse name for
a web browser.

~~~
uptown
I completely agree. Part of their problem is absolutely a branding thing.

~~~
asnyder
Yep, the problem with their brand is that it's not Google or Apple. If Apple
or Google were to release a clone of Opera tomorrow it would have significant
higher usage stats and buzz.

Lets face it, as much as we would like to believe we judge technology based on
it's merits, the truth of the matter is we're just in High School 2.0 and what
really matters is that we're hanging out with the cool kids. In this case
Opera isn't a part of the in-crowd, a real shame.

~~~
johnfn
I don't think this is true, at least in the general case. When Chrome first
came out (and I was still using Firefox), I downloaded it to test it out, but
didn't stick with it, because it wasn't immediately compelling. I came back to
it occasionally, and after about 6 months they had turned it into a really
great browser, much speedier than Firefox.

If you look at the usage trend during the first few months, you'll notice that
it starts high and curves down, then slopes back up again. I think this
supports my argument. The reason that it gets a lot of share has little to do
with branding so much as the fact that they made it in to a _great_ browser
after a lot of hard work on their part.

The litmus test to my observation is that if this is really true, then Opera
should pick up a lot of usage share from people like me who switch between
browsers based on the latest and greatest. I remember trying out 10.10, and
although it was good, it was no where near this good.

Of course, Opera doesn't have that nice bump that Chrome does where Google
puts "Hey you! Try Chrome!" on incredibly popular websites, so we'll see.

------
ttol
What you're looking for is Windows Home Server. It's amazing. Stores all the
media you need, plus has streaming capabilities over the net. Able to expand
perpetually -- no need to reformat or anything like that. I have it running
with 10TB of space. It has a great front-end UI, and as close to zeroconf as
you can get with this type of service. See exampel screenshot:
[http://ivivo.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/windowshomeserver_2...](http://ivivo.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/windowshomeserver_28server_storage291.png)

EDIT: Forgot to mention one of the biggest pluses. Microsoft pioneered a
special file system for WHS called Drive Extender. There are no drive letters,
just folders, and it spans across all your hard drives and future hard drives.
No more "oh that video is in H:, oops I mean K:", it's just "It's in the video
folder." See:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Home_Server#Drive_Exten...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Home_Server#Drive_Extender)

The best thing is that WHS is tightly integrated with Windows, so it has
things like autobackup (selective and not), health monitoring (if any of the
PC's hooked up at your home springs an alert, like virus found, or low disk
space, etc, it notifies the other computers through dismissable systray
popup), central user/password management across all your machines, and other
cool things. Many companies have also developed plugins for WHS as well
(useful things like PerfectDisk for defragmentation). It also works/integrates
with Mac environment.

For playback of media content, I have two HTPCs connect from two different
rooms as well as some Xbox 360's (yea, the xboxes just found the folders and
was able to play the content. it just _works_ ). Also, I installed Air Video
to stream videos to ipad/iphone.

And since it needs to be always-on, I hooked up a UPS battery to it. It's
headless -- just the machine is needed, which is great for a server in the
closet. You'll manage the WHS through remote desktop/web ui. You'll also want
to get the Rosewill RSV-S8 -- you will need more and more space! (Some people
have gone the "octopus" -- lots and lots of external hard drives hooked up
through USB. I initially went this route but the throughput became a
bottleneck so I got the Rosewill - See:
[http://www.newegg.com/product/product.aspx?Item=N82E16816132...](http://www.newegg.com/product/product.aspx?Item=N82E16816132016)).

Some use-cases: I've got private directories for myself, then I've got public
directories such as Photos and Videos, with Photos being writable by certain
members of the family. This means I can create a folder, say "07.04.10 July
4th in Boston", and each of us can upload our iphone/camera images to that
folder. Now we have a global picture folder for the event we shared together.
With Videos, since WHS supports Windows Media Center as well as just normal
file streaming, I outfitted my WHS box with 1GBit ethernet card and the
machine can stream out files to each of the HTPCs and other consuming devices.

Oh yea, the new Windows Home Server release coming out later this year is
going to be even better. If you've got an MSDN subscription, download it and
mess with it. You won't be disappointed. It's one of the best products
Microsoft has put out.

~~~
nzmsv
I know WHS is probably easier to set up, but Microsoft did not pioneer the
concept of "drive extender". Linux had something called LVM since 1998.
According to Wikipedia, IBM AIX had a similar feature in 1989. MS also had
similar capabilities in NT for quite some time now (disk volume sets), they
just weren't shown to the home users.

Autobackup can be done by rsync, file access by Samba, printing through CUPS.
Oh yeah, you can run all of the above on an $50 wifi router with custom
firmware. It will also barely use any power and not make any noise.

EDIT: I am not attacking MS, and I don't hate people who don't use Linux. Just
pointing out there is a way to achieve this functionality with mostly off-the-
shelf software and hardware. Startup idea? Nah, more downvotes :)

~~~
ttol
Yea, the allure to WHS for me was the zeroconf and that it all just works with
all the devices/terminals I already have with minimal effort.

RE: concept, understood it may be used for other OS's. Was pointing out that
WHS uses a different file system than normal windows, one built to scale in
terms of drives.

------
riprock
You can dust off an old computer you don't use and set up a VPN/web server.
Tack on everything on your check list and there you go.

~~~
gdl
That was my first reaction, too. Once you add enough features (streaming
video, web interface) it stops being a "storage device" and quickly becomes a
general purpose computer, which have existed for a while now. It's not a sleek
and trendy answer, but it would sure do the trick. And it would be a lot more
customizable for whatever additional crazy plans he dreams up for it, while
any gadget equivalents quickly fade into obsolescence.

~~~
andreyf
Why are you taking his advice literally? His advice is to a hypothetical
startup. The point the author is making that a startup that would make what
you describe into a zeroconf plug-it-in-it-works solution would be very
successful.

~~~
riprock
The author also wrote in the context of a problem and under his "solutions out
there" he did not list the self-configuring solution as a possibility.
Presumably, the author may not be aware of this solution and we are just
throwing it out there as a suggestion. As gdl noted, there are advantages to
this solution over a plug-it-in-works solution. It's pretty straightforward to
configure and set up too (google instructions, download, and tweak some
settings); provided you have the hardware lying around.

------
billnapier
I don't see any really compelling reason to have all that functionality shoved
into one device. I like the idea of separating playback/record from storage.

I like the idea even better when the storage is in the cloud (with a possible
local cache, would be nice).

------
jonknee
Popcorn Hour comes pretty close. It's a little rough on the edges (more hacker
friendly than grandma friendly), but is highly versatile.

<http://www.popcornhour.com/onlinestore/>

------
mitjak
Gotta love some of the suggestions. "What you need is a linux box". It's like
saying, for syncing files all you need is rsync.

The reason services like Dropbox succeeded is not because there are no
alternatives.

------
pcbaldwin
Doh... missed the conversation. I am one of the lead developers for the open
source ClearOS server/gateway. The software is targeted at small and
distributed organizations and you can find the gory details @
<http://www.clearfoundation.com/Software/overview.html>

We have always talked about adding a new edition for the home market. In fact,
it is on the project roadmap for next year. It will be a labor of love of
course since it would be difficult to build a business around an open source
home server. As already mentioned in this thread, all the pieces already exist
-- it's just a matter of putting them together into a coherent package. The
"storage device of his dreams" is running in my house.

\- file server w/ RAID \- media center with PVR \- backup to the cloud
(documents, music and photos -- videos are too large for my crappy DSL line)
\- remote access via iPhone or web

Unfortunately, geek credentials are required to get it working and keeping it
running. It saved the day when I had to start recording the World Cup overtime
on Sunday. Fired up the iPhone on the road and added the new recording --
screenshot @ <http://www.mythtv.org/w/images/7/7c/MythWebList.png>

------
scarlson
I can understand wanting 1 ring to rule them all, but having specialized
devices has been the solution for a while now.

1 = Server

2 = NAS

3 = HTPC or Server w/ dongle

4 = HTPC again (any XBMC variant, with a receiver for audio)

5 = XBMC remote apps, I like Boxee's remote for iPhone

6 = FTP, VLC broadcasting, VNC

7 = FTP

8 = Capture Card, streaming to mobile = VLC/justin.tv
[http://apiwiki.justin.tv/mediawiki/index.php/VLC_Broadcastin...](http://apiwiki.justin.tv/mediawiki/index.php/VLC_Broadcasting_API)

9 = NAS

rsync for backups

This is all tech that's been around for a while.

------
stcredzero
I think all of this guy's requirements would be satisfied by something like a
Mac Mini with two additions:

    
    
        - The ability to mirror the Mac Mini in the cloud
        - Something like an Airport Express with an HDMI output
    

Simply leave the Mac Mini on all the time. It becomes the stand alone device,
satisfying point 1. You can use the iLife suite and a few other programs
(mostly free) to satisfy point 2. It has a remote and has been satisfying all
the other points except 4 and 9. The Airport Express+HDMI thing would satisfy
point 4. (And Apple TV already does this, but it costs too much to get just
for that function.) Being able to mirror it in the cloud would give you point
9. (It's only a matter of time before we see a Time Machine back-end in the
cloud.)

------
thoughttank
I like my thecus for much of this.

Basically it has every need filled. The only exception is the playback I
handle through a ps3/apple tv's. Home NAS storage. Easy. Plus it's built on
linux, modules are easy and fantastic.

www.thecus.com

~~~
Terretta
I also like both Thecus and ReadyNAS, with Mac Mini or Xbox 360 as head-ends
at the TV sets. Been using these for years. The (add-on|plug-in|module)
community for both NAS servers is great.

That said, both Microsoft's Media Center and Home Media Server are also
fantastic and extensible.

------
dan_the_welder
FreeNAS is awesome and extensible. Out of the box it's quite functional and
it's open source.

It's the backbone of my work/home network. All the Linux boxes have it mounted
in the home directory, so all the machines with Rhythmbox think it's local.
All the windows machines can access it easily.

There are a dozen services you can enable as your needs dictate. Setup is
straightforward through a web interface. Extra bonus it runs headless on crap
hardware, in my case a 433mghz Emachine.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeNAS>

------
afshin
In my case, this device is a Mac Mini + a Drobo. The Mini is connected to my
TV and a receiver and is pretty much always on ... I can access the files
pretty easily with MacFuse using SSHFS.

------
ori_b
DLink DNS-323 with a sync-to-cloud funplug script would probably be near
ideal. I have one of those boxes, and I have to say that it's a pretty awesome
little Linux box.

------
bigfoot
Why does Ctrl-F “crypt” not find a single hit on this web page, neither in the
blog post nor the comments (there, or on yc)? Are you guys really not
concerned about security at all? I’d demand industry-level encryption on both
the storage device and the communication protocols. Stealing the device should
leave the thief with nothing but worthless random data, decryption/encryption
should completely take place on the clients.

------
mtr
This was featured on This Week in Startups which may fit the bill:
<http://tonido.com/>

------
JarekS
Maybe you should check this out? <http://download.iomega.com/digital-
home/index_en.html>

or

[http://go.iomega.com/en/products/network-storage-
desktop/hom...](http://go.iomega.com/en/products/network-storage-desktop/home-
network-hard-drives/home-media/) ?

~~~
roel_v
I strongly advise everybody to stay away from Iomega. I bought a 1TB NAS a few
years ago when 1 TB was a lot. The web UI, to make shares, was so stupid that
it would create a tree, in memory, of _all_ directories and files on the NAS
every time you tried to make a new share (this tree was passed as javascript
to the web UI). Needless to say, after a few hundred gig the amount of files
was so big that it took longer to make the list than the timeout was set,
effectively rendering making shares impossible. There were _dozens_ of
complaints on the support forum (that's right, support through a forum!) and
after a year and a half of no updated I gave up hope. Shoddy material, and
that's being generous.

------
quantize
AKA the common man's server?

------
wazoox
Most SOHO nas devices (qnapp, tekus...) are quite close to this.

------
thibaut_barrere
A friend of mine made this - not sure it covers everything but maybe a partial
answer:

<http://www.my-ditto.com/home.html>

------
ericb
I would look at a Myth TV box for this. I wonder if someone will build a good
business around creating and selling Myth Boxes.

~~~
mistermann
MythTV is awesome...my MythTV box from ~8 years ago was light years ahead in
terms of features and UI than my cable companies (Shaw cable in Canada) PVR
today.

Does anyone know why the software is so bad on cable boxes? I mean, it is just
so incredibly bad, in so many ways, it seems like it has to be deliberate.

~~~
ttol
consumers are not used to paying for set top boxes. steve jobs stated as much
in a recent interview when they were evaluating going after the tv market or
the phone market. they chose mobile over tv for that reason.

there are many failed attempts at cracking the living room -- the cable
companies make most of the money and they have little incentive to truly
innovate the boxes that they are "renting" out to their customers.

to get truly elegant UI's that are powerful enough to do anything useful with
all the TV signals (HD, etc) requires significant hardware. when Tivo was
ported over to comcast boxes, most of the features that make it tivo were
slashed since the boxes comcast gives to customers were significantly cheaper
and underpowered.

most cable companies have a monopoly in the physical area they are servicing.
where's the incentive to increase cost by upgrading equipment for your
customers when the minimal viable product is happily received by the smith
household?

~~~
mistermann
True, but the software is __so __bad, it almost would have to be out of spite,
they could do so much better for the same cost.

------
oldgregg
And please integrate with facebook/google/twitter so I can download/stream
movies from my friend's devices.

~~~
gdl
I don't think Twitter is the best solution for streaming movies...

~~~
jedsmith
I think GP meant that social networking would announce new media available on
their servers, not that he'd stream over Twitter.

------
paul9290
Does anyone else find downloading and organizing digital media to be time
consuming? If so wouldnt u prefer to just be able to stream everything from
the cloud to ur Internet devices (iphone, apple tv, pc, etc..)?

I use to download now i find myself streaming what I want from the cloud. I.E.
Im not hyper on quality so listening to music/songs and playlists using
youtube on my iphone suits my needs.

------
djacobs
WDTVlive works fairly well for media-related stuff, not so much for other
server functions.

------
jasonlbaptiste
Why not an HTPC + dropbox?

------
Artifex
Tonido Plug + Drobo methinks.

------
codemechanic
Tonido + XBMC fits your bill

