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

261–270 of 679 posts

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#261

Post by rcxdude »

baobun wrote: post #34
nicce wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Change Synology with HP, NAS with printer and HDD with ink cartridge. How does that sound like?

The printer market is a cartel with everyone pulling the same bullshit. DIYing an affordable and performant printer is out of reach for the individual. Printer ink is not a commodity otherwise. Consumers don't really have alternatives. Desktop NAS market is very different.

You can do things like ink tank modifications and so on (I think there's even a few you can buy off the shelf with that option now), they're just rarely worthwhile unless you're doing quite a lot of printing.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#262

Post by mapontosevenths »

cm2187 wrote: post #209
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…

I don’t know if their brand is that great. I have been using synology NAS for about 15 years. It is very solid and easy to use, but the hardware is expensive, non customizable, the underlying OS is based on an ancient linux kernel. I have now run into the volume size limits (200TB) and disk sizes keep increasing exponentially. And they don’t support enterprise SSDs (SAS/U.2). So in my mind I was already thinking of m…

My story is similar. I've been using them for a decade, and was shopping for an upgrade when they made the proprietary drive announcmement.

It was the impetus I needed to realize that it only takes an hour to build my own, better, NAS out of junk I mostly already owned and save a ton of money. I won't be going back.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#265

Post by pbronez »

dewey wrote: post #256

I wonder if that's related to UniFi pushing into that market for consumers ( https://www.ui.com/integrations/network-storage ) recently. It's still not there yet as there's no way to run containers etc. on the appliance itself but this surely will come within the next 1-2 years.

Yeah that’s a really interesting gap in the feature set. Ubiquiti’s new offerings seem like pretty good network storage appliances, but not home servers.

I’ve gone through a couple iterations of home server. First I upcycled an obsolete Dell Power edge. Then a N100 mini PC. Neither was as reliable as I wanted.

Now I’m running persistent apps on Railway and compute hungry stuff on my MacStudio. Pretty good so far.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#266

Post by pdimitar »

reactordev wrote: post #245
pdimitar wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Because for $40 I have a system that runs at a decent speed. For $300 I could get an ITX to run. So for the cost of an ITX, I could run a dozen RPIs. Who wants to have a server running in their bedroom? Have you heard the noise those things make? Sorry, no.

I'm uncertain of why $40 vs $300 is even a point of debate on HN. The latter is a one-time investment and you likely can expand it a bit i.e. add a 2.5" or M.2 drive later.

What's the gain of running 12 RPi, exactly? Do you do research work requiring distributed low-cost computing?

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#267

Post by ants_everywhere »

reactordev wrote: post #243
izacus wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just another version of "why Dropbox when rsync" and equally silly.

What is silly about building your own? Explain? If rsync works for you, why would you buy Dropbox? “Why Lamborghini when Honda” is equally as silly yet I’ve seen them race head to head. Honda won.

I don't agree with the grandparent comment... I don't think it's silly.

But building your own doesn't scale to all the things. For everybody who wants to build their own X, the same person doesn't also want to build their Y and Z.

They will eventually need to buy some products. So there will generally always be a market for pre-packaged solutions.

For example: someone building an app may need network storage. They may not also want to block the building of the app on the building of the network storage.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#268

Post by kstrauser »

bravetraveler wrote: post #221
kstrauser wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been there. After a while, I realized that they’re paying for my advice. If they take it, awesome. If they don’t, and I feel like I did a good enough job communicating my reasons, then that’s their option, and their consequences. It’s annoying, but either way I get paid.

I find I get stuck with the inevitable clean-up work, having voiced an opinion earlier. Learning that not many of these battles are worth choosing. There's no advancement, just bigger piles of bullshit. The goal is to get paid for shoveling the least.

I get it. The situational context makes a huge difference, too. Most of the people I advise now are Chief Something or Another. Their jobs are generally to take a whole lot of inputs and make business decisions. Maybe I’ll say “I don’t think we should do that because X”, and they’ll decide to do it anyway because Y is a higher priority. As long as it’s not something truly horrible, like “let’s sell our user list” or “we don’t have time to hash passwords” or something else egregious, eh, fine. They asked for my advice, I gave it, and they’re free to do whatever they want with it.

But sure, even then it’d get super annoying if they always ignored it. At some point it’d be obvious that my business goals don’t align well at all with theirs, so maybe it’s time to find a better fit.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#270

Post by yodon »

It's not a 1:1 comparison, but anyone have experience running Garage[0] as a locally hosted geo-distributable open source S3 clone in place of a traditional NAS? Garage seems to have simpler hardware requirements, native support for geo-replication, and for lots of applications S3 compatibility is actually what you want.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41013004

Post reply on HN