I used to manage a computer lab at a high school with 20 iMacs running OSX 10.4. The reason for me choosing a NAS box was the old Windows Server 2000 machine at the time acting as the lab's fileserver had some serious problems.
Firstly, some files stored on the W2K box got corrupted. The files themselves were fine if they were accessed on a Mac client, but when I attached a firewire drive to the W2K machine for backup, a lot of files got messed up. Lesson learned: don't store files created on a Mac on NTFS.
Second, thanks to Microsoft's licensing policy, only 10 clients can access the server at a time. Given that there are 20 clients in this lab (more if someone brings in their laptops), some people had to wait in line until someone else logged off before they can access the server. Microsoft says that this limitation is imposed because when there are more than 10 clients in a network, it would be a mess to manage the computers without a centralized server. Well, should I be the one to determine this?
Third. Mac data files have the resource folk and the data folk integrated. The users in the lab work on collaborative projects where they would color code the files for easy identification. Files saved on the W2K machine (if not corrupted) had this color info removed. Interestingly, under FreeNAS, if the users access these color coded file under SMB, the colors are gone, but under AFP, the colors show up!
Fourth. Perhaps this is why files were corrupted. The Mac OS seems to be more liberal with the naming scheme. Mac users in general love to use unsual characters as the file names. Once a file with these "unconventional" file names were saved onto the W2k server, it got corrupted and would not be accessible by the very same Mac that had created it.
Fifth. The W2K server was slow serving out files. Maybe it was trying to work its way through the protocol stack to the Appletalk one. Also, sometimes the Mac client could not connect to the server at all.
So these were the reasons I was looking for a better storage solution.
I stumpled upon FreeNAS and gave it a shot. I installed it on a P4 with 128 MB of RAM and a 20GB IDE drive. It took me several tries to set it up because FreeNAS kept telling me that there was error in mounting the drive in the GUI, but I ignored it and it worked. Basically, it was a false positive. I could not make FreeNAS boot from a 512MB CF card attached via IDE so I settled with a two partions scheme on this 20GB drive. This FreeNAS file server was in service for nearly a year and no problems. It survived 3 unplanned shutdowns: 2 from power outages and the other because some student yanked out the powercord. The best part was no 10 users limitation. Speedwise, it was definitely faster than the old Windows server. I upgraded the NIC to gigabit as the switch in the lab was already a Neatgear Gb switch and all the iMacs were Gb as well. There was a little speed increase, but there was less congestion when multiple people access the server. The lesson here is gigabit may not give you the speedboost, but it does provide additional bandwidth. With a fatter data pipe, there is less congestion.
One major gripe I have about FreeNAS (version 0.681) though is user permissions. Although I could create groups and members to put into these groups, they all had the same access permission (read and write) to the files! Therefore, if one user in the lab carelessly or intentionally deleted all files, they would be all gone! I attached a firewire hardrive to one of the iMacs and backup all the data (18GB) everyday just in case.
In short, other than a security "problem", FreeNAS rocks. By the way, the people who used the lab were reminded frequently that the data saved on the fileserver or locally on the Mac client were not secured so if they wanted security, they had to store their files on their own USB sticks.