Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs • Hacker News Board

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#51

Post by osivertsson » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:01 AM UTC

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 is gone.

My guess is they will continue to lose the most valuable employees unless they replace management with some internally well-respected staff that understands their customers well.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#52

Post by finaard » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:02 AM UTC

RedShift1 wrote: post #30

aborsy wrote: post #7

But their hardware is also terrible. Their disk stations for consumers had 1G NICs until recently, and still underpowered CPUs. The sales had to decline for them to be convinced to upgrade to 2.5G in 2025. But then they removed an optional slot for 10G in 923+ model (they still would have made money from it, as it costs +$150), so when the industry moves to 10G, you can’t upgrade the component and should buy the whol…

I don't know why you got downvoted, you're right. Many models that are currently on sale as new models have CPUs that are 10 years old.

That's fine, some of those also have kernels that are EOL for almost 10 years.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#53

Post by teruakohatu » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:02 AM UTC

RedShift1 wrote: post #30

aborsy wrote: post #7

But their hardware is also terrible. Their disk stations for consumers had 1G NICs until recently, and still underpowered CPUs. The sales had to decline for them to be convinced to upgrade to 2.5G in 2025. But then they removed an optional slot for 10G in 923+ model (they still would have made money from it, as it costs +$150), so when the industry moves to 10G, you can’t upgrade the component and should buy the whol…

I don't know why you got downvoted, you're right. Many models that are currently on sale as new models have CPUs that are 10 years old.

The Synology DS925+ for example does not have GPU encoding. For an expensive prosumer-positioned NAS this is crazy. They can't let us have both 2.5gb NICs and a GPU.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#54

Post by Etheryte » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:02 AM UTC

Daedren wrote: post #20

walterbell wrote: post #8

> According to some reports, sales of Synology’s 2025 NAS models dropped sharply in the months after the restriction was introduced. What did NAS customers purchase instead?

There's quite some competition even in the same form factor, like QNAP, ASUSTOR or even UGREEN which got their product in not too long ago.

Many people recommend Ugreen, but looking at their entry-level 2-bay NAS it's nearly a hundred bucks more expensive than a 2-bay one from Synology. Sure, it has higher specs and whatnot, but that overlooks the fact that I don't care about specs. I just need a 2-bay device to backup my home devices, high performance is not a requirement.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#55

Post by haunter » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:03 AM UTC

Is there a decent (budget) NAS with 2.5" HDD support? I have like ~30 1TB 2.5" HDD sitting on my shelf and would love to put together at least one NAS with them but a Synology slim is like... 500€? Not even all the disks worth that much

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#56

Post by throw_m239339 » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:04 AM UTC

fasteo wrote: post #25

> According to some reports, sales of Synology’s 2025 NAS models dropped sharply in the months after the restriction was introduced. What did NAS customers purchase instead? I honestly can’t believe anyone at Synology thought this would turn out differently.

Companies like that will always tried once they believe they are captured enough market shares. If I can influence that kind of decision, I will certainly advocate not to renew Synology gear parcs...

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#57

Post by calini » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:05 AM UTC

HA HA HA HA HA I really hope the C-suite that decided this gets no bonus and hopefully a salary cut this year. Stupid, anti-consumer measures like this need proper consequences so they stop happening. Until then, let's keep boycotting companies with anti-consumer practices.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#58

Post by esskay » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:05 AM UTC

Too little, too late. You'd have to be nuts to willingly go back into their walled garden now.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#59

Post by calini » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:06 AM UTC

fennecbutt wrote: post #42

I have a ds920 4 bay from synology. It's a pretty decent product, their browser OS for it is incredibly good and useful, the performance is pretty good and I've stuck extra ram in it, ssd for caching reads/writes (altho I have it disabled for writes). But after what they've done recently I don't know if I'd use em again. I know everyone jusy says "build your own!!!11" I used to be like that too I love tech. But somet…

What are the specifics of the SSDs you chose? I understand you have to go for specific types/models to make sure they don't melt down too quickly.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#60

Post by Hamuko » Wed, Oct 08, 2025, 9:06 AM UTC

>Critics say the entire episode has damaged Synology’s reputation. The company seemed to believe that after QNAP’s well-known ransomware troubles, it could tighten control of the market without losing customers.

Granted that there might be some bias at work as a Synology customer, but I heard a lot more about Synology's lockdown efforts than I heard of QNAP's ransomware troubles.