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

The Synology End Game

lowendbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 360 posts

Re: The Synology End Game

#221

Post by BizarroLand »

amiga386 wrote: post #19

On that very topic, do HNers have any case and/or motherboard recommendations for a homebrew NAS? I have my NAS on a shelf in a mini-ITX case, but it only fits two 3.5" HDDs internally (as well as an SSD, but full-size HDDs are what matter for bulk data storage, the more the better) Also, it takes a normal full-size ATX PSU because I was fed up a previous case that only had room for its own custom PSU, which kept fai…

If I were starting from scratch I would look into those aliexpress motherboards that run laptop cpus.

Should save a lot on power and have plenty of muscle for anything you throw at them if you're willing to gamble on the hardware quality.

Re: The Synology End Game

#222

Post by procaryote »

pjmlp wrote: post #194
TheCondor wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a fan of optical storage and its durability (with reasonable care.) But the problem is when you need to recover and have 20 Blu-ray Discs with important data scattered about, it takes days. Or when there is a specific piece of data you want/need and only have a vague idea of where it is/was in history. Maybe if those ultra capacity discs took hold but it looks like the era of optical is ending

Same applies to NAS, how many hours have you spent clicking around shared folders on company NAS / cloud storage, to track down where a specific set of files are actually located? Search isn't helpful if the stuff wasn't properly indexed.

rgrep is easier on a nas though

Re: The Synology End Game

#223

Post by proxyon »

M95D wrote: post #50

But self-building a NAS is still a problem, and I'm also talking about this [1] article from the same blog: There are NO low power NAS boards. I'm talking about something with an ARM CPU, no video, no audio, lots of memory (or SODIMM slot) and 10+ SATA ports. Sure, anyone can buy a self-powered USB3 hub and add 7 external HDDs to a raspbery, but that level of performance is really really low, not to mention the USB r…

> I'm talking about something with an ARM CPU,

Why? There is no evidence that ARM is the only power efficient CPU. i5, i3 and n100 are all power efficient.

> no video, no audio

Why? Disable onboard video if you care that much.

> lots of memory (or SODIMM slot) and 10+ SATA ports This eats power, conflicting with the rest of your requests.

> Sure, anyone can buy a self-powered USB3 hub and add 7 external HDDs to a raspbery, but that level of performance is really really low, not to mention the USB random disconnects. And no, port replicators aren't much better.

No, that's not what you do for a power efficient NAS. You build an i3, i5 or n100, turn off all unneeded peripherals, and configure bios as needed to your level of desired power consumption. under 10W is achievable.

Re: The Synology End Game

#224

Post by immibis »

barnabee wrote: post #203
atlasduo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easily explained: when times are tough, delivering growth naturally is hard. Squeezing the customer is the lowest hanging fruit. Sure, long term reputation is severely damaged, but why would decision makers care? Product owners interests are not aligned with interests of the company itself. Squeeze the customer, get your miniscule growth, call it "unlocking value", get your bonus, slap it onto your resume and move on…

When times are tough, accept less growth (or sometimes none) so that when times get good again or someone builds a competitor, all your customers don't leave you.

The real big brain move is to be your own competitor, so you extract value from customers either way. If they don't switch, you get to extract value via planned obsolescence and plain old extortion. If they do switch to avoid the extortion, you at least get to keep the price of their new NAS, and you weren't likely to get the extortion money anyway.

America has thousands of food brands but they're all owned by about 6 companies.

Re: The Synology End Game

#225

Post by mjg59 »

shj2105 wrote: post #166
mjg59 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually easier to remove the license restrictions around their RTSP backup software than it is to set up an equivalent thing myself (Edit: I have a very particular set of skills. Having put some time into making this work with tools I could put together myself and failing, I found that my Synology had a tool that did it perfectly and refused to do so for the number of cameras I had. I fixed that.)

Are there instructions or a GitHub on how I can remove their restrictions on the number of cameras allowed for DSCam?

No, it would likely be extremely illegal for anyone in the US to do so

Re: The Synology End Game

#226

Post by tshaddox »

exmadscientist wrote: post #98

A big part of the appeal of Synology was that you could just forget about it . I have a little one in the corner that's just been sitting there serving files out over SMB for years now. It doesn't need to do anything more and I don't need to think about it. A lot of the alternatives being proposed are not so easy to maintain. A full general purpose OS install doesn't really take care of itself. And I don't have (and…

That's right. I bought a DS1019+ in 2019 and it's been running constantly for 6 years (except for a handful of power outages and house moves). The power adapter did fail last year and I had to buy a dodgy (albeit well-reviewed) third-party replacement.

Re: The Synology End Game

#227

Post by hiq »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #219
_zoltan_ wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I run 25Gbps home from my ISP and to my desktop from my NAS I run also 25Gbps.

You need to understand that you are a very unusual case. Most people can't get 25 Gbps for a connection, it's 1 Gpbs at best . Most people, even most technical people, are not running a 25 Gbps home network. You have specific needs for speed and that's fine, but they are not commonplace and most people will be served just fine with SATA drives.

I agree with you, but we're talking about a device that I'd consider keeping for 10+ years. Actually I have some Synology NAS lost somewhere that I occasionally use, and while I don't trust exposing it to the internet (never have), it still serves files fine. With this expectation it's not absurd to get a NAS that still handles a bit more than the current speeds.

Just to add a datapoint: I could also get a 25Gpbs connection in Switzerland. Actually checking that, I'm realizing that I could upgrade without paying more (maybe just a setup fee, less than 50USD).

Re: The Synology End Game

#228

Post by hiq »

exmadscientist wrote: post #98

A big part of the appeal of Synology was that you could just forget about it . I have a little one in the corner that's just been sitting there serving files out over SMB for years now. It doesn't need to do anything more and I don't need to think about it. A lot of the alternatives being proposed are not so easy to maintain. A full general purpose OS install doesn't really take care of itself. And I don't have (and…

> A full general purpose OS install doesn't really take care of itself.

A Debian stable mostly does except on upgrades, and that's rare and painless enough. Even with a Synology you still need to make sure you have proper monitoring in case the hard drives start failing.

Re: The Synology End Game

#229

Post by master_crab »

Shank wrote: post #65

I recently moved all of my NAS needs to a UNAS Pro and just have an old Intel Bean Canyon NUC in the closet running apps on top of it. Portainer is a reasonable docker frontend, though not perfect -- but more importantly, the storage is just separated from the NAS entirely. As long as your NAS can serve files to a secondary server, you the sky is the limit with what you have actually accessing the files and doing thi…

How’s the UNAS? I’m firmly in the UI ecosystem for networking and security and looked at it earlier this year (I think they released the offering only in the past 12-24 months). But my synology 1221 is fairly new so I have at least 5 (probably more) years left of useful life in it.

UI isn’t without their own faults but allowing their unifios to run on grey boxes has improved my opinion of them further.

Re: The Synology End Game

#230

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

mosselman wrote: post #142
lostlogin wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. To save some clicks: https://nas.ugreen.com/ https://www.minisforum.com/pages/n5_pro

Thanks for the links. What do you guys think about security concerns around minisform and ugreen being Chinese companies?

You couldn't pay me to put them on my network. From just a few days ago:

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/china-used-three-priva...

Post reply on HN