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

671–679 of 679 posts

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#671

Post by theshrike79 »

al_borland wrote: post #337
rolleiflex wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar, but slightly different story for me. I ended up buying it as an enthusiast ‘Apple-grade’ product where UX was there to do something I would be able to do on my own. Then they got high on their own supply and started to believe they can be as restrictive and up charging as Apple, forgetting that they’re still a product for primarily fairly technical people. Also, for all server needs I’m running a Raspberry P…

> I just pay Apple for iCloud monthly, I consider that to be money well spent. I use iCloud Photos for my photos, so I don’t have to manage storage on my phone, while always having access to everything. I quite like it. I also have a Synology NAS for other things. A little voice in the back of my mind is telling me to also backup my photos to the NAS, because I have no idea how Apple is backing things up. I might be…

Immich isn't completely terrible for "backups". It takes forever to upload everything though, as it has to download every photo from iCloud and then upload it to Immich on your NAS.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#672

Post by mlrtime »

izacus wrote: post #471
mlrtime wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Synology photos is garbage... it does do one thing ok which is backup photos. The software stack of usability is severely missing. So they have a lot of software that kind of works, but none of it well. In that case I'd rather have the cheaper Unifi that only does storage.

Synology Photos works amazingly for me and significantly better than any alternatives I've tried.

For what, besides backing up photos?

I seriously want it to work well. How do you find 1 out of 10,000+ pictures you've taken in the last 20 years without spending hours self categorizing beforehand?

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#673

Post by mlrtime »

blindriver wrote: post #628
mlrtime wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Synology photos is garbage... it does do one thing ok which is backup photos. The software stack of usability is severely missing. So they have a lot of software that kind of works, but none of it well. In that case I'd rather have the cheaper Unifi that only does storage.

I just went through a complete restore of my NAS from backup and then migration to a new NAS. It was flawlessly executed through Hyperbackup so I don't agree with you at all.

Hyperbackup is good, but that is a core function of a NAS no? I was speaking more about apps like Photos, Videos, Surveillance, Docker, Web hosting. Things a NAS usually don't and shouldn't do.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#674

Post by stego-tech »

beart wrote: post #567
stego-tech wrote: post #304

Too little, too late. The second they made that decision, I struck Synology as a partner for both my homelab (gotta replace the DS1019+ at some point) and in my purchasing capacity at work. That was some NetApp-grade BS and I wasn’t going to tolerate it. I’m just glad the NAS scene saw the opening left by Synology’s boneheaded decision-making and capitalized on it. Unraid and TrueNAS have stormed the battlefield and…

I started with a Synology. I still have it running, but it is only used for backups now. My second system was a repurposed PC running Proxmox with various services containerized. I was impressed with it. However, I got to tinkering with Unraid and really love it. It is what synology tries to be, but better in every way (IMO).

Appreciate the insight! I’ve got Proxmox running now but I’m not a huge fan of its UX, personally. Was leaning towards TrueNAS or Unraid for my next storage box, so that sort of feedback helps immensely.

Thanks again!

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#675

Post by pabs3 »

MBCook wrote: post #429
pabs3 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you run a standard Linux distro on them? Is their OS custom or based on OpenWRT or something else?

Why would you want to? That’s not what they’re for. The kind of person who wants to do that is squarely outside their market. And you’d be paying a real premium for nothing.

I would never want to run a vendor OS on any device, they are either too proprietary or too untrustworthy or both.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#676

Post by izacus »

mlrtime wrote: post #672
izacus wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Synology Photos works amazingly for me and significantly better than any alternatives I've tried.

For what, besides backing up photos? I seriously want it to work well. How do you find 1 out of 10,000+ pictures you've taken in the last 20 years without spending hours self categorizing beforehand?

I choose location/person/timeframe and go from there.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#677

Post by sixothree »

CharlesW wrote: post #420
sixothree wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to find any other products that compare to DSM. It really is something special. It's worth a small premium in hardware costs. But I share a lot of the concerns as everyone else here and will be considering other options.

> It's hard to find any other products that compare to DSM. A friend has a Synology NAS and I have a QNAP NAS. In my experience, QNAP's QTS (QuTS Hero if you want ZFS) is directly comparable.

That's good to hear. It was pretty far behind last time I looked.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#678

Post by mrbadger »

Been using Synology for more than 10 years. Very used to DSM and my default would have been to continue.

The drive policy was a calculated insult to customers. I don't buy the argument that Synology was incurring support costs. If true it should have charged for support. It looked price gouging.

As result I switched to Ugreen (2x 4800 Plus units) and think I'm unlikely to buy Synology in the foreseeable future.

Re: Synology reverses policy banning third-party HDDs

#679

Post by itsoktocry »

TheWookieDavid wrote: post #669
itsoktocry wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They might not be moonshots or unicorns, but they always have longevity. We're going to need a fact-check on this. I'll bet the failure rate of co-ops is well beyond those of standard business structures.

And you'd lose that bet. Co-ops have a survival rate way higher than those standard business structures. Not marginally higher, a lot higher.

Where's the data?
Post reply on HN