IS this the place to talk about the PINK Elephant in Synology's lobby ?

[Jan Janowski]

That is one reason we opted for multiple NAS’s and redundant storage locations in lieu of a Backup plan.
If things go “down”, immediate access to same data on another device wins hands down over: “Call for help, tell them the many filename(s) you want, (If you can remember their names!) and wait for them to get the data to you via hd, usb stick or ???

There is a backup config.
There is redundant data
Let repair guy concentrate on getting dead system up, not hunting for files!

Yes— More $$ at first, but contains built in expansion.
But the first time things go wrong, after everyone switches to alternate NAS, the fellow tasked with repairing NAS doesn’t have to worry about finding data off backups, he/she just concentrates on task at hand!

PS: we also have a backup power supply on the shelf, since they all use same supply and EBay sells units that have greater specs. EBay supply in use Synology is spare on shelf.

 

[Deleted member 5784]

Do bear in mind the rules of the forum. These kinds of posts rarely survive long but are important so people can speak their minds. Still, saying that this is not a blog, but a forum, so saying whatever you think would probably be best on your personal blog of some sort. Not saying that all posts here have to be "pro" Syno, no. I'm just saying that it is usually a fine line between bashing a brand and stating the obvious.

Is this not an 'independent' Synology forum? Surely a frank discussion of Synology's corporate direction as it affects us current users is relevent to such a forum? Or is the purpose of the forum just to allow your good self to field tech support Qs from newbies? I see nothing disrespectful or 'brand bashing' in this thread. Do we really need to internalise a brand to such an extent that it needs to be protected from criticism on public forums?

"they" are not, but if you think (or anyone for that matter) that Synology is backing out from pushing support only for a selected few drives that are branded as "their" drives, you are wildly mistaken. With this approach they are putting effort into only drives that they can control, they are tweaking DSM towards it and vice versa, and lifting the pressure from support lines with tickets revolving around "non-syno" gear.

<snip>

Does this mean a complete shutdown of support for any other drives? Maybe, I don't know, but best to prepare for the worse in any event. If this policy is something that you don't feel comfortable with, feel free to go with another vendor, just don't expect that the company will change its view just because you don't like the idea.

I think you're aguing both ends at once here. First you're saying Synology aren't backing out of supporting other drives; then you seem to be saying the opposite. Which is it?

<snip>
We are all buying an appliance after all, and that is a fact. This is not a custom build computer (even though atm it is still a bit of a both) so thinking that you have complete freedom and still want full support, is a bit of "a stretch" to say the least. This is just my humble opinion.

I think this is the root of the issue; in truth up to now, Synos have been based on from largely open architectures (eg ARM / Intel, SATA, standard RAM DIMMs etc) and are also built around an open source OS. Hence, why lots of us tech types like them to run things like Docker etc. They currently aren't appliances; but the direction Synology seems to be taking the brand in appears to be turning what was fairly open architecture into one. Hence discussions like the one we're having here.

 

[Pauljw]

It's good that we talk about this. Many like me are very recent NAS users so when someone comes looking for information, they need all the information, good and bad. Although it saddens me, I also understand Synology's reasoning and don't hold it against them. I assume that in time, the cost of their hardware, i.e. drives and ram, will come down to a competitive level allowing us to afford to implement them. If not, I'll find or build a suitable replacement. For now, I'm enjoying my setup, life is good.

 

[Telos]

I assume that in time, the cost of their hardware, i.e. drives and ram, will come down to a competitive level

That assumption is counter to a company strategy which uses the razor/razor blade model for sustainability. Drive and memory prices will remain "high" until it is evident that they are harming the business. Since both are currently in tight supply (which is likely intentionally set), I would expect little change over the next 5 years.

I also understand Synology's reasoning and don't hold it against them.

No one here who is not in Synology's pocket, would ever support such an arbitrary practice for memory/storage constraints, as the "reasoning" is financially based alone. An "incompatible" models list itself is sufficient.

 

[Rusty]

see nothing disrespectful or 'brand bashing' in this thread

It was already moderated

think you're aguing both ends at once here

Exactly, because nothing is set in stone atm. We are all guessing here tbh but there are decisions that are advocating towards lock down.

but the direction Synology seems to be taking the brand in appears to be turning what was fairly open architecture into one

Absolutely correct.

I think many will switch to other brand/DYI if things continue down this path, and at the end of the day, if that is the case, well nothing anyone can do about it. Syno will do what’s best for them and their business.

 

[Coop777]

I as well am not a fan of the HDD lockdown trend that looks to keep expanding, also not a fan of the increased cost of Syno (re)branded HDD/SSD's and RAM. For now, I'm fully set for the next 5 years.