https://www.guru3d.com/story/synology-reverses-policy-banning-thirdparty-hdds-after-nas-sales-plummet/Well, /g/? Are you ready to go back to relying on Synology™ brand Network Attached Storage© for all your online backup needs? Just look at how generous w-- I mean they are!
oh kek, now I get the last threadwith how much open sauce solutions there were to this, why did they ever think they could pull that shit off?they probably awoke some normalfags into building shit themselves, like what happened with Adobe Cloud and I think more recently with Google
>>106827686
>>106827737>with how much open sauce solutions there were to this, why did they ever think they could pull that shit off?There is a minority of vocal and unironic synology fanbois who claim to just be normal consumers wanting something easy to set up but are extremely hyperaware of all the supposed disadvantages of DIY, open source solutions and even other NAS competitors. These retards of course dominate discussions about how great synology is. Likely gave the company a false sense their fanbase is like Apple's and will never deviate from them.The reality most people buying synology truly don't know better and aren't past looking at other solutions. >they probably awoke some normalfags into building shit themselvesMaybe not building but defiantly looking at others. Although if you have built a PC there is no reason to not built a NAS.
>>106827686The fact that they did this simply on policy and there being no technical reason means you still should never buy their garbage because they can change their mind at any time. Just run Truenas and be done with it.
Why would anyone ever go back to them? They'll just try the same thing in another year or two, they've burned any good will they ever had.
>>106827686lol, lmao even
>>106827686they'll just try some other shit in 6 months. once a company starts down this path they don't stop.
>>106828403>There is a minority of vocal and unironic synology fanbois>Likely gave the company a false sense their fanbase is like Apple'skek marketing team forgot to tell dev team they had a shill campaign going
Synology - the study of China. And it's a Chinese company too.
>>106827686No.>>106828403>if you have built a PC there is no reason to not built a NASI repurposed my 10 year old computer. Now i have truenas, have raidz expansioned every few months and considering an hba card for more. Literally the easiest thing.
>>106827686These greedy taiwanese jews can rot for all I care
NAS enclosures are already insanely overpriced for the hardware they are in, their only benefit is that form factor. The gross overreach and kikery involved to say "only use our overpriced drives with our overpriced hardware" was insane, especially considering so many other companies were lining up to take that spot. Nike did similar shit taking their product off of store shelves relationships they spent decades building trying to sell it all on their online shop and got screwed when plenty of other companies were more than ready to stock those shelves with their stuff. Whatever their initial goal was if it even matters at this point was retarded beyond all fuck. I have personally stopped people buying that Synology trash and will gladly keep doing it.
I was going to spend $1500 on Synology devices before they announced that dumb shit. I ended up giving that money to qnap and won't need any new hardware for a decade at least. Lol
What baffles me about synology is how hideously underpowered their equipment is. The CPUs they shove in these things are so underpowered it's legitimately baffling. Equipment with this price point should not have CPUs this weak and 1G networking.The last place I worked at had tons of stuff that compresses astronomically better with zstd than lz4 (think going from 2x compression ratios to nearly 5x), and their systems simply cannot handle ingesting large volumes of stuff with zstd compressed enabled. I wound up setting up a shitbox running truenas on a shelf near the patch panel for half the price, and it performed better.Yeah yeah, turnkey solutions and all that. There's so many prefab shitboxes with 3-5 drive bays and n200/n305 systems these days. There's no real warranty support on them of course, but it's not like synology was worth pissing on in that department either.
>>106828847>they can change their mind at any time.It shouldn't affect existing hardware.They never made people throw away existing drives or forced them to buy proprietary replacements.
>>106830795Yes not forcing people to buy stuff seems to have fucked them they'll learn this lesson next time and force it
>>106830688Agreed.Even that mini version means for 2.5" SSD's is underpowered as fuck.And not only are the CPU's slow they are very stingy on RAM as well (and make you buy super expensive proprietary RAM if you want to upgrade).I think they are worried everybody will buy their base model and call it a day if they made it decent.But at the very least they could make their higher end models properly powerful, make them worth their price tags.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiU0HhDYK7o
>>106827737>why did they ever think they could pull that shit off?It's usually the same old tale. Somebody high up asshole and his yesman who thinks he can reinvent the wheel, ignores all the warnings, and fuck it all up and dont get punished for the fuckup and instead get to fire a shitload of people for "budget cuts because of a bad economyt"
>>106827686If you read the DSM7.3 statement carefully: "Synology is collaborating with drive manufacturers to expand the range of certified storage media, delivering more reliable options. In the meantime, 2025 model-year DiskStation Plus, Value, and J Series running DSM 7.3 will support installation and storage pool creation with third-party drives"Sounds more like they postponed their vendor lock in move to eg next year.
>>106830688It's money first and foremost to use the most bargain bin CPUs.How they rationalize it is that the average user isn't going to be doing much. They'll back up a few files here and there with the system having plenty of time to things like btrfs checksumming or indexing.More advanced users have options but for a price of course.It's enough CPU to hang yourself with that 1gb connection. The average synology user isn't even supposed to know what types of compression there is.
>>106831128They have "certification" of 3rd party drives, they just haven't touched it in years.The statement reads as if they are actually going to expand that list while allowing uncerified drives in the meantime.I would really like to know what constitutes a "certified" drive tho. What the fuck are they doing that any CMR NAS/enterprise drive would need to be validated?
>>106827686as if disabling h264 transcode without any reason didn't teach you
>>106831169>What the fuck are they doing that any CMR NAS/enterprise drive would need to be validated?Some CMR drives are CMR-emulated SMR
>>106831169>I would really like to know what constitutes a "certified" drive tho.That is the real problem.Only some very specific models are "certified", 95%+ of drives are not.For example they might certify a 6TB WD Red drive from one generation.You want a 8TB WD Red? - tough.WD improves the design of their 6TB Red drive slightly? - tough, new drive isn't certified and old drive will become impossible to find.
>>106831202>x-files theme starts playing
>>106827686>go back to relying on SynologyNah, they showed that they'll fuck me over to try and make a profit. I'll just stick with my Qnap hardware with my custom Linux install, or build my own shit if I need something more flexible.
>>106827686>Synology Reverses PolicyThe important part is in the details. The announcement covers certain models. From the press release:>25 model year DiskStation Plus, Value, and J series running DSM 7.3 will support the installation and storage pool creation of non-validated third-party drivesFootnote in the press release:>1 Creation of M.2 based storage pool and cache still requires drives on the HCL.
>>106827686Already moved to a truenas box. Far better performance!
>>106827686Probably, yes. I have my NAS but they last a long time for what I'm doing, which is extremely light office work on the built in Office Suite and some file storage.>>106830688Yeah, I was not impressed with Synology support, so if they want to go down the path of "We won't support you if you have 3rd party drives" good. Go fuck yourself. I'm not putting in a fucking ticket and waiting for some motherfucker in some third world shithole to give me advice Gemini or GPT can spit out more coherently, in less than a minute.>>106830852Nah, on most of them the RAM is typically laptop DDR4 with ECC. If you read forums you can find the right ones to buy for half the price. I think I saw some new for like, 50 USD?I was miffed that the 10gigabit NIC module was 100 USD though.That said, I shudder to imagine the lack of power my NAS has. I don't run containers or VMs, so I'm patently aware I'm not making full utility of the device.>>106832778I guess my question would be are there decent office suites? I like having a private cloud and like Synology Office, but QNAP and the others don't really have it.>>106827686Even then there was 007Revad's Github script which basically fixes the issue as a middle finger to Synology, so unless they pull some other shenanigans it should be trivially easy to remediate this issue, assuming m,aintaining support isn't a concern for you.https://github.com/007revad/Synology_HDD_db
>a company that is far from monopoly fucked around and found outHilarious, now if only we can do the same to actual monopolies like Nvidia and AMD.
>>106827686fuck these retards i want something where the company hasn't tried to screw me.UGREEN best bet?
I recently bought the cheapest synology diskstation and a single 4tb synology drive to use as a backup and help transfer my music and porn collections between devicesit was very easy to set up and has worked well so far, although if I needed more space the requirement to buy synology hdds would have been very annoying
>>106827686[discussion]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45513485
>>106827686why would you buy one of these instead of rolling your own with old/cheap hardware? i will never understand normies
>>106833853Probably becasue there's a good number of people with other life commitments besides babysitting an IT project.I know for a fact that the reason I went with a Synology was because I knew if I didn't I'd be spending my evenings after work tweaking some NAS. At a certain point I wanted to strike a balance between "tweak every last setting and babysit for all time" to "baby's Fisher Price NAS"
>>106833974docker compose run copypartywow much set hard very.
docker compose run copyparty
>>106830795>It shouldn't affect existing hardware.>NAS appliance>hardwareYeah, until they ship a firmware update and burn an e-fuse that makes it refuse to boot any older or non signed firmware.
>>106833780I like mine. I understand you can even run Synology's DSM software on it if you really want to.
>>106834050
>>106833974>besides babysitting an IT project.Just because people fuck with shit doesn't mean it needed to be fucked withI have probably the most ridiculous thing you'd call a "NAS" but I otherwise have full confidence that if I stopped doing anything, it would run indefinity and only stopped because of hardware failure.There is otherwise no magic pixie dust in Synologys and IDK where people get the idea that if you build something you are guaranteed a problem and something prebuilt is immune from everything.
I'm in Canada so the price of these NAS are already bonkers.I want to build a "poor man" NAS that supports:- one SSD for OS boot and at least 2 HDD.- hardware transcoding for JellyfinWhich old prebuilts from Dell, Thinkpad, HP should I buy?If not too pricy, which N100 (or better) PC should I buy instead of the prebuilts?Thanks in advance
>>10683478450 dollar think center on ebay
>>106827686The hard disk lock in was also stupid from a support standpoint because the devices from 2023 and earlier did not have it, while the 2025 models did. Imagine having to maintain for ten years two versions of the same OS, but one has a hard drive compatibility list and the other doesn't.
>>106827686what do you guys recommend as a prebuilt NAS?I want something small i can put next to my router.I will also install plain linux on it and run my own services instead of whatever custom solutions it comes with.
