Right now I have a NAS running 24/7 for some self hosted apps (p2p, *arr…) and as primary storage for my multimedia files.

This NAS has some limitations because it has a low spec hardware and the OS is “propietary”, so sometimes I have issues with docker or I miss some random feature that “standard” Linux distros have.

I work in IT and deal with the technology at home sometimes feels like a second job. I’m thinking that maybe I could simplify my home hardware avoiding NAS servers and use only my main desktop running 24/7 . This could give me a lot of flexibility (a standard OS, VMs, standard docker, better hardware, faster file operations because no LAN involved…) and less hardware to deal with.

Does anybody went this way? Any recommendations in favor or against it?

Sorry for my english.

    • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.auEnglish
      41·
      6 hours ago

      It’s insanely powerful yet sips power like a raspberry pi.

      It has a full OS that is mainstream so it’s easy to find any help you need.

      It’s the best bang for your buck machine on the market.

      It can run everything you want a home server to run.

      Do you disagree? Why?

      • frongt@lemmy.zipEnglish
        7·
        4 hours ago

        Well, it’s apple hardware and runs macos, so it’s a bit kneecapped. It’s not as flexible. But it is solid and you can run almost anything you can on Linux.

      • salacious_coaster@infosec.pubEnglish
        41·
        5 hours ago

        I wouldn’t have even thought to purchase a new Mac anything as a server. That is definitely not their target use case.

        What are you running at home that requires “insane power?” I’m running a servarr stack on an old Xeon that cost a fraction of a Mac mini and it works just fine. And I have room in the case for full size HDDs.

        I’ve heard of people using old Mac mini as servers, and I guess whatever makes you happy. I definitely don’t see how they’re the ultimate home server.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.auEnglish
          21·
          3 hours ago

          I can have a dozen people streaming from my Plex server and it spent even break a sweat, while also handling all my *arr’s, homeassistant OS, and basically anything I would use a normal computer for.

          With the power it has it will be able to handle basically anything I want to throw at it for the next decade, while sipping electricity like a light bulb.

          I don’t see how a tiny, cheap, insanely powerful, insanely power efficient, full OS running machine isn’t the ultimate home server? What argument is there against it? What is a better one?

          • salacious_coaster@infosec.pubEnglish
            3·
            3 hours ago

            Right, so it does basically the same thing mine does, and I don’t need an external DAS, and I can upgrade hardware, and it cost me a fraction of yours. I don’t know how much power mine uses because it’s a non-issue. My bill is the exact same as before I deployed it.

          • undu@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
            2·
            2 hours ago

            Personally, I want to properly isolate the services with virtualization. The main reason is I expose some of the services online, and I don’t t want to only rely on keeping all software up-to-date at all times. This allows me to limit the damage if one of the services is compromised.

            I wouldn’t use MacOS as the virtualization platform, and instead use something else, like BSD, Linux, or xen-based for my servers