Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

guru3d.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 679 posts

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#211

Post by yesimahuman »

bayindirh wrote: post #41

Thanks Synology, but it's too late. I have found out TrueNAS and ASUSTOR (which can run TrueNAS if I want to). I'll continue from that path. Thanks for all the fish, that was an enlightening experience. OTOH, I wish them luck. They look fine for un-techy folks to store their data locally. Would like them to stick around. Also, competition is always good.

Interesting how it seems a bunch of competition entered the market right as they did this as well. Unifi UNAS just came out and looks pretty compelling

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#212

Post by dangus »

reactordev wrote: post #201
jacquesm wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is interesting here is that Synology leadership is quite technical and there was no acquisition or other big event that I am aware of that resulted in this strategy. It was a complete own goal and as predictable as could be. Synology apparently wasn't aware of what their brand values were as perceived by their loyal customers and that's the kind of move you make at your peril. I'll be surprised if they survive t…

There is no reason to use a synology device anymore with RPI’s having sata shields and other SoC boards that are readily available that run Linux. Yes, Synology was easy but so is the decision to not ever use them again…

Another way to put this is that Synology misjudged their customers' appetite for alternatives.

The ease of use of the Synology solution was always a plus of the product, but Synology misjudged the values and abilities of its core customer. They also misjudged the rapidly maturing market of competitors (e.g., why am I buying a Synology instead of UGREEN?)

Their core customer always had the ability to set up their own NAS in a more manual way, they just didn't really want to have to do that when an easier solution was available.

This isn't a situation like iCloud where the whole purpose of the product is to provide a service that 99% of the customer base doesn't know how to do on their own.

For a typical Synology customer, setting up their own TrueNAS box is something that probably only takes an hour including watching a YouTube setup tutorial. The person who is considering a Synology solution in the first place tends to be highly technical to begin with.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#213

Post by bayindirh »

yesimahuman wrote: post #211
bayindirh wrote: post #41

Thanks Synology, but it's too late. I have found out TrueNAS and ASUSTOR (which can run TrueNAS if I want to). I'll continue from that path. Thanks for all the fish, that was an enlightening experience. OTOH, I wish them luck. They look fine for un-techy folks to store their data locally. Would like them to stick around. Also, competition is always good.

Interesting how it seems a bunch of competition entered the market right as they did this as well. Unifi UNAS just came out and looks pretty compelling

Asustor is not new. I remember seeing it at the university (probably) a decade ago. It was a much simpler 4 disk unit without any screens or fancy specs. My professor told that the looks might be deceiving but it was a good unit.

I took a note of them mentally at that point, but their latest gen hardware is something else. Since I'm a sysadmin by trade, having some of the features that I have in the datacenter at home is a compelling proposition for me.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#214

Post by vladvasiliu »

bayindirh wrote: post #64
Netcob wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same - replaced my smaller Synology with a UGREEN, put TrueNAS on it first thing, runs great. The HDD thing was only the final nail in the coffin, but before that, there were plenty of ridiculous "upgrades" that made products worse than in the previous generation. Literally removing features, or continuing to use the same outdated hardware. That's what companies do that don't think they have competition.

ASUSTOR's latest gen hardware is ridiculous. Ryzen processors, upgradeable ECC RAM, 4xHDD + 4xNVMe, 10GbE plus a PCIe slot... You need to add an external GPU for TrueNAS installation, but they have an official video for that. On top of that, they connected the flash which stores the original firmware to its own USB port, and you can disable it. Preventing both interference and protecting the firmware from accidental…

Do all the models support ECC ram? If not, does the website say clearly which do?

I've been looking on and off for a smallish NAS for some use, but I'd really like it to have ECC. As it stands, I'm considering more and more compromising on the size aspect and getting some ASRock + AMD combo.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#215

Post by dangus »

deelowe wrote: post #208
reactordev wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to use a synology device anymore with RPI’s having sata shields and other SoC boards that are readily available that run Linux. Yes, Synology was easy but so is the decision to not ever use them again…

Can a pi achieve the same iops? I'd be highly suspecious of any such claims.

500MB/s NVMe via the M.2 hat.

It doesn't even have to be a Pi though, just look at competing NAS solutions that have hit the market since Synology peaked in popularity.

Why am I spending more on a Synology versus something like a UGREEN NAS and just flashing a wide selection of NAS/home cloud operating systems on it? Synology's customer base certainly has the technical know-how to accomplish that.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#216

Post by pdimitar »

deelowe wrote: post #208
reactordev wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to use a synology device anymore with RPI’s having sata shields and other SoC boards that are readily available that run Linux. Yes, Synology was easy but so is the decision to not ever use them again…

Can a pi achieve the same iops? I'd be highly suspecious of any such claims.

I don't know why people love Pi-s so much. They filled a niche, once, years ago, and were quickly outcompeted not even a year and a half after.

Get some old i7 or Ryzen, get a big case, put 12-18 HDDs, spend a little extra on quality cooling solution if you have the server in your bedroom / living room, install modern Linux, tinker to your heart's content.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#217

Post by [deleted] »

izacus wrote: post #210
flkiwi wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying Synology’s move to support first party drives was a good thing? Plenty of companies deal with unpredictable hardware and, in fact, Synology has for years, in part thanks to standards.

No, the person you're responding to isn't saying that at all.

[deleted]

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#218

Post by bayindirh »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #214
bayindirh wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ASUSTOR's latest gen hardware is ridiculous. Ryzen processors, upgradeable ECC RAM, 4xHDD + 4xNVMe, 10GbE plus a PCIe slot... You need to add an external GPU for TrueNAS installation, but they have an official video for that. On top of that, they connected the flash which stores the original firmware to its own USB port, and you can disable it. Preventing both interference and protecting the firmware from accidental…

Do all the models support ECC ram? If not, does the website say clearly which do? I've been looking on and off for a smallish NAS for some use, but I'd really like it to have ECC. As it stands, I'm considering more and more compromising on the size aspect and getting some ASRock + AMD combo.

If I understood it correctly, all G3 hardware running AMD processors support ECC RAM. It's clearly labeled though.

The one I'm planning to get is at [0]. It clearly states ECC RAM.

[0]: https://www.asustor.com/en/product?p_id=86

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#219

Post by GrumpyGoblin »

anal_reactor wrote: post #113
osivertsson wrote: post #51

When leadership makes decisions that are so out of touch with their customers it also severely impacts internal morale. Yeah, so they reversed eventually. But the technical and support people at Synology probably tried to fight this and lost. That feeling of being ignored despite having given this company your everything for many years. I bet many woke up feeling that the magic that made Synology a good place to work…

I've realized that at my current workplace it's a recurring theme that I suggest a solution, it gets rejected, we circle around for a year, finally we go back to my solution. It is indeed extremely demotivating, because it gives me an impression that I'm working with stupid people. I don't want to leave the company, but I'll try to switch teams next year.

At my company there is a team like this who are solely responsible for a significant piece of internal infrastructure.

People bring them ideas. They reject them out of hand. "Can't be done" "We'd have to rewrite the whole thing" "That's not how it works". Even if you write all the code and show them exactly how to do it and that it does work.

Then they come back three moenths, six months, a year later and have a big demo showing the cool thing "they thought of". Yep, the idea they previously rejected, usually pretty close to exactly. They live by the ole adage NIH.

They're a fun bunch.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#220

Post by zeroflow »

ffsm8 wrote: post #101
zeroflow wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree with you. The appeal for me was the "it just works" factor. It's a compact unit and setup was easy. Every self-built solution would either be rather large (factor for me) and more difficult to set up. And I think, that's what has kept Synology alive for so long. It allows entry level users to get into the selfhosting game with the bare minimum you need, especially if transcoding (Plex/Jellyfin) is men…

Surprising to read your take Transcoding was the reason I moved away from Synology. The rest was fine , not great but ... Okay But there was no way to improve transcoding performance. If a stream lagged, it would always lag. Hence I jumped ship and just made my own

I often read that take. Yes, the J4125 was fine for a few easy / low effort transcodes, like 1080p to 720p for mobile streaming.

But I'm with you. The rest is fine, not great, but rather working well enough.

Post reply on HN