Re: Argosy HD-363N

Which Tritton NAS did you purchase? I didn't realize that you could buy the
Tritton NAS without a hard drive.
http://www.trittonsales.com/products/TRINSS001.htm
http://www.unityelectronics.com/product-product_id/2375

What is kind of weird to me is that it looks an awful lot like the Argosy.
Could they possibly be made by the same company?  Just a thought.

Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Crum, Robert J (Sales Ops-Cupertino)" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: [AT] Argosy HD-363N


Just another thought....

I purchased a Tritton NAS last summer (runs Linux), and wanted to copy
music files to it from my WinMe (don't laugh) machine.  Basically, I
could never get it to work reliably, and the bottom line from the
Tritton people is that WinME had crappy networking.  I would find that I
couldn't see certain folders, the WinME machine couldn't connect to the
NAS, I could copy about 10 files to it before I started getting
networking errors, filename with 'special characters' in them would be
munged, etc.

So I bagged the WinME machine in favor of a new WinXP machine, and the
whole system has worked flawlessly.

So....FWIW...if this Argosy device is running WinCE as someone
suggested, you might just be seeing an artifact of less than robust
networking.

Cheers,
Bob


-----Original Message-----
From: Turtle Beach Audiotron User Forum
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robin Mitchell
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 1:23 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AT] Argosy HD-363N


On Thursday, February 3, 2005, 11:56:57 AM, Tim Hill wrote:

> Here's a guess: What kind of folder names are you using? Are the ones
> it's finding "simple" names (like 8.3 names without spaces)? There are

> many flavors of the SMB protocol out there and it's possible that AT
> is using one that isn't compatible with the NAS box.

That's a good thought, and I should have mentioned it -- none of them
are simple 8.3 names, but I don't see any obvious correlation between
the ones that work and the ones that don't.  And again, it's not just
the AT that isn't seeing them; TOCMaker isn't either.

For what it's worth, the AT is seeing the following three directories

Acoustic Eidolon
Ad Vielle Que Poura
Al Stewart

while missing others like

Beatles
Judy Collins

An eclectic collection, to be sure, but rather smaller than I wanted...

Still, it's a good theory.  I tried renaming all the artist and album
directories in my small collection to 8.3 names, with no effect at all
on the AT.  However, TOCMaker did see one directory that it had missed
previously, but still missed another one.  (I didn't try renaming all
the files, since it would have been a *lot* of work and seemed unlikely
to affect the directory scanning.)

   -- Robin