I recently looked at Synology options for a friend and I was quite disapointed.
I used their product comparison system and only 2 of them supported 4k transcoding, both having low drive counts. Who is going to drop $700 US or more on a larger enthusiast system (5-8 disks) and not want 4k future proofing?
Then there's the 2.5/5 and 10Gb networking options, not much there either. I recall when I thought Synology wiped the floor with QNAP but some of the later product offerings are pretty competitive. Expensive but they do offer them for that home enthusiast with the dollars.
I also like the idea of giving AMD some money, be it a lightweight Ryzen, or even Epyc 3000 system. Running VMs docker, etc - this is all potentially viable with a half decent system. Sure you can't run 6 VMs on a 16GByte NAS and ensure it runs great but the option to run a few of them for the advanced home tinkerer is wonderful.
At the end of the day, 4 years ago I decided to opt for a FreeNAS machine on an AMD Microserver platform and I'm very happy with it. Fast forward to now, I think I'll have a little peek at Synology and things have improved but still not where I would consider moving there.
Very few options on the Denverton range, why not offer an 8 or even 12 core which can ensure 4k transcoding? It seems they offer very few with the Denverton processor and what they have is 4 core, no more.
I wish them well. I'd rather spend a bit more money and make a full FreeNAS machine though. Plus you learn too.
I'm lost with his rant, Synology recently added 4K support to a number of older devices as well (anything released in the last year or two generally has enough power to transcode 4K)
I recently added a DS418 (I think?) to my home network after great experience with the Rackstations we have at work. We have entirely replaced our Windows servers with Rackstation RS816's ($500 diskless units) while offloading necessary Microsoft services to Azure and Office365, with the Synology devices integrate with perfectly (single sign-on, domain member, even LDAP.)
I agree that it's weird that Synology's 6-bay and 8-bay drives (i.e., considering the size of 4K content) don't have 4K transcoding, including the DS1618+ that just released.
You don't understand 4k then. You don't need a beefy CPU despite what products say. You can do 4k on a intel NUC if you want. The "support" is simply software they have, nothing more. You can run Plex or whatever you want on it and get 4k if you want.
Disappointed that he side stepped the hardware performance and nBaseT questions. I like Synology's products, but they're frequently CPU limited in my experience.
True, I would have liked some commitment to nBaseT outside of some PCIe addon card they offer for their $2000 units that actually have PCIe slots. In general CPU performance has been ok for our needs, and we have fairly low-end units.
They need to bring prices down if want to make more impact on market especially for average consumers. I mean 2 bay empty enclosure with dirty cheap ARM chips or Atoms should not be at: $150-300 price range. Populate 2HDDs into that and you are easily at $400-500, With 4 bay plus units is it even worse.
To be fair, a significant percentage of the "value" proposition of a Synology product is the mature software. If you don't care about the features of DSM and you just want a budget NAS, Synology shouldn't be on your list. They're not really interested in playing in the low margin, ultra-low end space.
If customers would know more they would buy a cheaper AMD 2200G install FreeNAS or a Lignux NAS as Open Media Vault and have 4k video served if they want to.
They're getting their money not only for the hardware but also for the ease-of-use of their software. I don't want to judge their quality, but "if customers would know more" is not going to change anytime soon.
Hijacking the topic a bit since I haven't seen anything else approaching a general purpose NAS article lately.
I'm planning to replace my current WHS2011 based NAS in the next 9-15 months. I primarily use it as a backup target. One of the things I really like about it's backup tool is that it's a client-server architecture not client-file share. That means that if one of my client PCs gets infected with a locker, unless the infection spreads to the NAS itself, it can't lock my backups because it doesn't have directly read/write access to where they're saved. Since I keep a number of historical snapshots, I could just roll back to a backup before the infection only losing my most recent work instead of everything since my last cold snapshot.
Are there any other mainstream backup tools that work similarly? I'm open to both another DIY NAS running either windows or *nix, or a prebuilt box like Synologies.
Are you saying synology includes a client-server model backup app with their NASes, or that they provide equivalent protection by then uploading the backups to the cloud? I'm asking because I absolutely do not want full system images uploaded to the cloud (and not just because up/download times would be much slower than local restore).
It's possible what I want could be done that way, but what WHS does is just instead of a backup client app on the PC and a fileshare on the server that the PC is able to write freely to and which thus could be destroyed by a locker at the same time as the PC itself, WHS has a backup server app on the NAS as an intermediary. The PC app then says "these are all the changes made since last nights backup" and sends them as generic network traffic. The server app receives the changes and creates writes a new version to a file share that the client app on the PC can't directly access. That precludes any malware on the PC from being able to delete/corrupt/etc older backups, meaning that in the worst case I just need to step back and restore the last one from prior to being infected to recover.
I don't see the problem with using a standard file share target, sending over the diffs, but then having the server claim ownership of the snapshots and setting them to ro. Even if the client becomes infected, it can't overwrite the previous snapshots.
That strikes me as a brittle setup because the server would have to guess when the upload was done to lock it down, meaning there'd either be a window when new uploads were vulnerable, or any network glitch would kill a days backup because the file got locked down during the outage. It'd also limit me to backup tools that kept each upload in a separate file and didn't maintain any metadata files that needed to be updated with each new version.
It seems I'm not being particularly clear so rather than address each of your concerns allow me to suggest you explore the space with the following acting as initial areas of interest.
dm-thin -- device mapper subsystem with a thin provisioning target (supports data/metadata separation) lvm - a wrapper for device mapper btrfs - tread warily
Higher level tooling dedicated to backups: rsync - you've probably heard of this one burp - supports an untrusted user, server initiated backup model (two versions, though I'd stick with the one based on librsync) duplicity - again, uses librsync but built with security in mind
"Additionally, we have high-priority support for our reseller partners or users with HIGH END models, such as XS/XS+/FS products. These users usually receive SEVERAL responses during the day, which is not bad compared with other paid support offerings."
Grrrrr, This is simply maddening to me. This is not bad compared to no support at all. This level of tech support is probably just find for SMB/SOHO, but they actually are targeting their high end models for enterprise usage and while Mr. Wang discussing further support improvements, I think he's setting the bar WAY too low. This post is few years old, but I think not much changed since: https://www.boredsysadmin.com/2015/10/a-bit-of-ins...
I actually want a NAS with Btrfs with no other features. I don't need VPN, Cloud Station, Download Station, Email Server, Photos station etc....
I need a DAS like NAS where the Devices is plug into my Network and I could use it. It should be very fast. And by default does not send anything off to Internet Ie I cant access it from outside. Only within my own Network.
They are just that, if you want that other stuff in future you install it via packages. They have official and unofficial packages you can use. Lots of them to choose from.
Yeah on my QNAP boxes I switch everything off except for file sharing and the anti-virus. Untick/untick/untick/uninstall/uninstall/uninstall...done! Stripped down to the bare bones.
I've just looked at the HPE's Proliant MicroServer which currently under sales in my area. The (discount) price is pretty close to many ARM-base server, plus it is much easier to hack (as it is x86-based server). Unfortunately I've just upgraded my home's wireless network so I have no budget to get one of these.
Anyway, for advanced home-use server, this might become an alternative to those ARM-based micro-server in the near future.
HP's microservers have long sat on the line between "I want to build everything from scratch" and "I want a backup appliance" in that they've offered a prebuilt mITX sized 4 drive box to install whatever you want.
And for a short period of time the download section of Synologys website listed the DS719+ (2 Bay), RS819 (4 Bay) und DS1819+ when searching for 19-series models but this has since been taken down again (and very quickly indeed).
I've been a very happy Synology user since 2012 when I got my first NAS, a DS1512+. Like many others here, I'm disappointed in the latest hardware, but my complaint is slightly different. I want a 5-8 bay DS (non-rack mount) unit that I can put both 10GbE and M.2 SSD caching in. All of the Plus series units have one single expansion slot, so they support /either/ 10GbE, OR SSD caching.
I'd probably go the HPE MicroServer route, except I really like the Synology software ecosystem. I heavily use NoteStation, MusicStation, CloudStation (backup and drive), HyperBackup, etc., and the thought of searching for alternatives or switching to something like FreeNAS seems daunting... so I'll continue to wait patiently for the Synology NAS that has both 10GbE and M.2 slots.
It'd certainly be nice if they contributed to the upstream of those projects that make their products possible. On a personal note, I'd love to see them help out with the stratis project ( https://github.com/stratis-storage ). It's basically designed for the storage tiers that Synology plays on.
It sounds like they're a very conservative company when it comes to hardware, which, because these are storage systems in use for many, many years - is a good thing. They move very cautiously on things that could have unforseen consequences and affect their software - and by extention - users data - so they keep it slow and steady.
Good for them, and I think it's the right move. My last NAS was a homebuilt one which I had up for almost 10 years. I finally replaced it with a rackmount server running ZFS and serving over NFS/SAMBA connections (30TB of ZFS storage for a total cost of about $700)
I've deployed several RT2600ac routers now. I have been very happy with the consistency of performance, reliability, and the fact that unlike many consumer grade routers, they have a solid update policy. Spectre update has already been released. consequently, I was a little surprised to hear that their NAS units don't have it yet, but I'm sure it will be here soon. My old Linksys and Netgear routers only received a handful of updates over the life of the product and often left major vulnerabilities unpatched for a long time or even indefinitely. Synology's security posture alone is enough for me to recommend their routers over many of their competitors.
I have used both Synology and Qnap for a number of years and I feel Qnap have been improving at a faster rate. As other have pointed out if you need quick turnaround neither Synology or Qnap will give you anything approaching enterprise support but the cost is not at the enterprise level either. I have had issues with both products but Qnap has always come up with a solution that has been at the very least satisfactory. Synology not so much. I have had units replaced under warranty by Synology but it has not always been easy to do so. Recently we had a problem with and older expansion unit which was out of warranty. We didn't expect warranty service but were surprised to learn no repair parts were available so we stripped the fans out for backup on other units.
We had a problem with a new Qnap unit and after discussion with tech support they asked for the unit back and replaced it with a better model at no charge. We have been using mostly Qnap for awhile and although the Synology are good units and have a few useful features the Qnap seems to be surpassing them.
I'm not really knocking Synology we still buy some of their smaller units for special uses but based on my experience Qnap has the better products with better long term support
I am surprised that there is no mention about the miserable service Synology is giving on their Intel processor issues. They state they have only seen limited returns on this but the last year I had more then half om my 20 DS1515+ models fail. Yes they have added an extra year warranty but halm mu devices will be out of warranty witin a couple of months and then I am stuck with dealing with this myself. Every failure costs me couple of days a site without service, and time raising RMA, preparing and shipping the unit, rebuilding the replacement unit as at will (stock?) Synology sends the DS1517+ model (3 out of 11 units) Synology should be replacing the units of their customers before they break, Cisco is doing this with their products with the same issue. I used to be the biggest Synology fan there was, but after this experiance I will never buy a product of them ever. I would recommend everyone choose any brand but stay away of Synology.
I have found that their tech support is unacceptable and there is no way to contact anyone at this firm other than tech support which in this case is of no help at all. A company that HIDES from their customers... should not be able to stay in business. Our experience is simply horrible and recommend for those that don't already own this POS to stay far away.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
42 Comments
Back to Article
AbRASiON - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
I recently looked at Synology options for a friend and I was quite disapointed.I used their product comparison system and only 2 of them supported 4k transcoding, both having low drive counts.
Who is going to drop $700 US or more on a larger enthusiast system (5-8 disks) and not want 4k future proofing?
Then there's the 2.5/5 and 10Gb networking options, not much there either.
I recall when I thought Synology wiped the floor with QNAP but some of the later product offerings are pretty competitive. Expensive but they do offer them for that home enthusiast with the dollars.
I also like the idea of giving AMD some money, be it a lightweight Ryzen, or even Epyc 3000 system. Running VMs docker, etc - this is all potentially viable with a half decent system. Sure you can't run 6 VMs on a 16GByte NAS and ensure it runs great but the option to run a few of them for the advanced home tinkerer is wonderful.
At the end of the day, 4 years ago I decided to opt for a FreeNAS machine on an AMD Microserver platform and I'm very happy with it. Fast forward to now, I think I'll have a little peek at Synology and things have improved but still not where I would consider moving there.
Very few options on the Denverton range, why not offer an 8 or even 12 core which can ensure 4k transcoding? It seems they offer very few with the Denverton processor and what they have is 4 core, no more.
I wish them well. I'd rather spend a bit more money and make a full FreeNAS machine though. Plus you learn too.
imaheadcase - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
Huh? The $700 one (I use DS918+) does 4k transcoding just fine.Samus - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
I'm lost with his rant, Synology recently added 4K support to a number of older devices as well (anything released in the last year or two generally has enough power to transcode 4K)https://www.synology.com/en-us/knowledgebase/DSM/t...
I recently added a DS418 (I think?) to my home network after great experience with the Rackstations we have at work. We have entirely replaced our Windows servers with Rackstation RS816's ($500 diskless units) while offloading necessary Microsoft services to Azure and Office365, with the Synology devices integrate with perfectly (single sign-on, domain member, even LDAP.)
AbRASiON - Thursday, July 26, 2018 - link
Both of you are incorrect OR Synology own website is terrible.https://www.synology.com/en-global/products?transc...
4 bays maximum if you want 4k transcoding?
They should use beefier CPUs
ikjadoon - Sunday, July 29, 2018 - link
I agree that it's weird that Synology's 6-bay and 8-bay drives (i.e., considering the size of 4K content) don't have 4K transcoding, including the DS1618+ that just released.imaheadcase - Sunday, July 29, 2018 - link
You don't understand 4k then. You don't need a beefy CPU despite what products say. You can do 4k on a intel NUC if you want. The "support" is simply software they have, nothing more. You can run Plex or whatever you want on it and get 4k if you want.imaheadcase - Sunday, July 29, 2018 - link
What do you mean "only 4 bay". Is 40TB not enough for you for 4k...because its fine for %99.99 of the world.bsd228 - Saturday, August 11, 2018 - link
it's only 40TB if you don't care about disk failure. Or don't want to include some SSD storage as well.saratoga4 - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
Disappointed that he side stepped the hardware performance and nBaseT questions. I like Synology's products, but they're frequently CPU limited in my experience.Samus - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
True, I would have liked some commitment to nBaseT outside of some PCIe addon card they offer for their $2000 units that actually have PCIe slots. In general CPU performance has been ok for our needs, and we have fairly low-end units.milkod2001 - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
They need to bring prices down if want to make more impact on market especially for average consumers. I mean 2 bay empty enclosure with dirty cheap ARM chips or Atoms should not be at: $150-300 price range. Populate 2HDDs into that and you are easily at $400-500, With 4 bay plus units is it even worse.rhysiam - Wednesday, July 25, 2018 - link
To be fair, a significant percentage of the "value" proposition of a Synology product is the mature software. If you don't care about the features of DSM and you just want a budget NAS, Synology shouldn't be on your list. They're not really interested in playing in the low margin, ultra-low end space.mitcoes - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
If customers would know more they would buy a cheaper AMD 2200G install FreeNAS or a Lignux NAS as Open Media Vault and have 4k video served if they want to.MrSpadge - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
They're getting their money not only for the hardware but also for the ease-of-use of their software. I don't want to judge their quality, but "if customers would know more" is not going to change anytime soon.Lolimaster - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
So true.Even underclock the 2200G to like 1.5Ghz.
DanNeely - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
Hijacking the topic a bit since I haven't seen anything else approaching a general purpose NAS article lately.I'm planning to replace my current WHS2011 based NAS in the next 9-15 months. I primarily use it as a backup target. One of the things I really like about it's backup tool is that it's a client-server architecture not client-file share. That means that if one of my client PCs gets infected with a locker, unless the infection spreads to the NAS itself, it can't lock my backups because it doesn't have directly read/write access to where they're saved. Since I keep a number of historical snapshots, I could just roll back to a backup before the infection only losing my most recent work instead of everything since my last cold snapshot.
Are there any other mainstream backup tools that work similarly? I'm open to both another DIY NAS running either windows or *nix, or a prebuilt box like Synologies.
imaheadcase - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
That is what they do, backup to NAS, then to cloud.DanNeely - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
Are you saying synology includes a client-server model backup app with their NASes, or that they provide equivalent protection by then uploading the backups to the cloud? I'm asking because I absolutely do not want full system images uploaded to the cloud (and not just because up/download times would be much slower than local restore).tuxRoller - Wednesday, July 25, 2018 - link
I THINK you're describing is thin provisioning + snapshots that are stored externally?DanNeely - Wednesday, July 25, 2018 - link
It's possible what I want could be done that way, but what WHS does is just instead of a backup client app on the PC and a fileshare on the server that the PC is able to write freely to and which thus could be destroyed by a locker at the same time as the PC itself, WHS has a backup server app on the NAS as an intermediary. The PC app then says "these are all the changes made since last nights backup" and sends them as generic network traffic. The server app receives the changes and creates writes a new version to a file share that the client app on the PC can't directly access. That precludes any malware on the PC from being able to delete/corrupt/etc older backups, meaning that in the worst case I just need to step back and restore the last one from prior to being infected to recover.tuxRoller - Friday, July 27, 2018 - link
I don't see the problem with using a standard file share target, sending over the diffs, but then having the server claim ownership of the snapshots and setting them to ro. Even if the client becomes infected, it can't overwrite the previous snapshots.DanNeely - Friday, July 27, 2018 - link
That strikes me as a brittle setup because the server would have to guess when the upload was done to lock it down, meaning there'd either be a window when new uploads were vulnerable, or any network glitch would kill a days backup because the file got locked down during the outage. It'd also limit me to backup tools that kept each upload in a separate file and didn't maintain any metadata files that needed to be updated with each new version.tuxRoller - Monday, July 30, 2018 - link
It seems I'm not being particularly clear so rather than address each of your concerns allow me to suggest you explore the space with the following acting as initial areas of interest.dm-thin -- device mapper subsystem with a thin provisioning target (supports data/metadata separation)
lvm - a wrapper for device mapper
btrfs - tread warily
Higher level tooling dedicated to backups:
rsync - you've probably heard of this one
burp - supports an untrusted user, server initiated backup model (two versions, though I'd stick with the one based on librsync)
duplicity - again, uses librsync but built with security in mind
boredsysadmin - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
"Additionally, we have high-priority support for our reseller partners or users with HIGH END models, such as XS/XS+/FS products. These users usually receive SEVERAL responses during the day, which is not bad compared with other paid support offerings."Grrrrr, This is simply maddening to me. This is not bad compared to no support at all. This level of tech support is probably just find for SMB/SOHO, but they actually are targeting their high end models for enterprise usage and while Mr. Wang discussing further support improvements, I think he's setting the bar WAY too low.
This post is few years old, but I think not much changed since:
https://www.boredsysadmin.com/2015/10/a-bit-of-ins...
iwod - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
I actually want a NAS with Btrfs with no other features. I don't need VPN, Cloud Station, Download Station, Email Server, Photos station etc....I need a DAS like NAS where the Devices is plug into my Network and I could use it. It should be very fast. And by default does not send anything off to Internet Ie I cant access it from outside. Only within my own Network.
koaschten - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
Well out of the box a synology NAS won't run any cloud, vpn or mail services. They all have to be configured.imaheadcase - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
They are just that, if you want that other stuff in future you install it via packages. They have official and unofficial packages you can use. Lots of them to choose from.jabber - Wednesday, July 25, 2018 - link
Yeah on my QNAP boxes I switch everything off except for file sharing and the anti-virus. Untick/untick/untick/uninstall/uninstall/uninstall...done! Stripped down to the bare bones.mr_tawan - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
I've just looked at the HPE's Proliant MicroServer which currently under sales in my area. The (discount) price is pretty close to many ARM-base server, plus it is much easier to hack (as it is x86-based server). Unfortunately I've just upgraded my home's wireless network so I have no budget to get one of these.Anyway, for advanced home-use server, this might become an alternative to those ARM-based micro-server in the near future.
DanNeely - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
HP's microservers have long sat on the line between "I want to build everything from scratch" and "I want a backup appliance" in that they've offered a prebuilt mITX sized 4 drive box to install whatever you want.slowfox - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
It is a mystery to me why Alex Wang does not provide any more information about upcoming products after it has already been made public by Synology at the beginning of June (https://www.synology.com/en-global/events/2018_sol... with details following quickly after the event (http://koolshare.cn/thread-141134-1-1.html). One week later at CEBIT the entry level DS119j with a 64bit dual core ARM-based CPU and 256 MB RAM has been added to the lineup (source in german: https://stadt-bremerhaven.de/synology-zeigt-ds119j... and a possible spec update for the DS619slim habe been announced (https://nascompares.com/2018/06/12/ds619slim-nas-a... Since then the RS1219+ is the first to publicly appear on the website of Synology Taiwan.And for a short period of time the download section of Synologys website listed the DS719+ (2 Bay), RS819 (4 Bay) und DS1819+ when searching for 19-series models but this has since been taken down again (and very quickly indeed).
itnAAnti - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
I've been a very happy Synology user since 2012 when I got my first NAS, a DS1512+. Like many others here, I'm disappointed in the latest hardware, but my complaint is slightly different. I want a 5-8 bay DS (non-rack mount) unit that I can put both 10GbE and M.2 SSD caching in. All of the Plus series units have one single expansion slot, so they support /either/ 10GbE, OR SSD caching.I'd probably go the HPE MicroServer route, except I really like the Synology software ecosystem. I heavily use NoteStation, MusicStation, CloudStation (backup and drive), HyperBackup, etc., and the thought of searching for alternatives or switching to something like FreeNAS seems daunting... so I'll continue to wait patiently for the Synology NAS that has both 10GbE and M.2 slots.
Lolimaster - Tuesday, July 24, 2018 - link
They're "good" till they brake, RAID IS NO BACKUP.Manual mirroring (software) is always better
Best NAS is one you built yourself
jabber - Wednesday, July 25, 2018 - link
Nope, it's the one that 'just works'.tuxRoller - Wednesday, July 25, 2018 - link
It'd certainly be nice if they contributed to the upstream of those projects that make their products possible.On a personal note, I'd love to see them help out with the stratis project ( https://github.com/stratis-storage ). It's basically designed for the storage tiers that Synology plays on.
bill.rookard - Wednesday, July 25, 2018 - link
It sounds like they're a very conservative company when it comes to hardware, which, because these are storage systems in use for many, many years - is a good thing. They move very cautiously on things that could have unforseen consequences and affect their software - and by extention - users data - so they keep it slow and steady.Good for them, and I think it's the right move. My last NAS was a homebuilt one which I had up for almost 10 years. I finally replaced it with a rackmount server running ZFS and serving over NFS/SAMBA connections (30TB of ZFS storage for a total cost of about $700)
tuxRoller - Thursday, July 26, 2018 - link
That cosr can't possibly cover storage.BurntMyBacon - Wednesday, July 25, 2018 - link
I've deployed several RT2600ac routers now. I have been very happy with the consistency of performance, reliability, and the fact that unlike many consumer grade routers, they have a solid update policy. Spectre update has already been released. consequently, I was a little surprised to hear that their NAS units don't have it yet, but I'm sure it will be here soon. My old Linksys and Netgear routers only received a handful of updates over the life of the product and often left major vulnerabilities unpatched for a long time or even indefinitely. Synology's security posture alone is enough for me to recommend their routers over many of their competitors.rbksc55 - Friday, July 27, 2018 - link
I have used both Synology and Qnap for a number of years and I feel Qnap have been improving at a faster rate. As other have pointed out if you need quick turnaround neither Synology or Qnap will give you anything approaching enterprise support but the cost is not at the enterprise level either. I have had issues with both products but Qnap has always come up with a solution that has been at the very least satisfactory. Synology not so much. I have had units replaced under warranty by Synology but it has not always been easy to do so. Recently we had a problem with and older expansion unit which was out of warranty. We didn't expect warranty service but were surprised to learn no repair parts were available so we stripped the fans out for backup on other units.We had a problem with a new Qnap unit and after discussion with tech support they asked for the unit back and replaced it with a better model at no charge. We have been using mostly Qnap for awhile and although the Synology are good units and have a few useful features the Qnap seems to be surpassing them.
I'm not really knocking Synology we still buy some of their smaller units for special uses but based on my experience Qnap has the better products with better long term support
wells18 - Thursday, August 2, 2018 - link
find the routing numbers of wells fargo here - https://wellsfargoroutingnumberus.com/1030175 - Wednesday, January 23, 2019 - link
I am surprised that there is no mention about the miserable service Synology is giving on their Intel processor issues. They state they have only seen limited returns on this but the last year I had more then half om my 20 DS1515+ models fail. Yes they have added an extra year warranty but halm mu devices will be out of warranty witin a couple of months and then I am stuck with dealing with this myself. Every failure costs me couple of days a site without service, and time raising RMA, preparing and shipping the unit, rebuilding the replacement unit as at will (stock?) Synology sends the DS1517+ model (3 out of 11 units)Synology should be replacing the units of their customers before they break, Cisco is doing this with their products with the same issue. I used to be the biggest Synology fan there was, but after this experiance I will never buy a product of them ever. I would recommend everyone choose any brand but stay away of Synology.
Gareth
[email protected] - Monday, June 3, 2019 - link
I have found that their tech support is unacceptable and there is no way to contact anyone at this firm other than tech support which in this case is of no help at all. A company that HIDES from their customers... should not be able to stay in business. Our experience is simply horrible and recommend for those that don't already own this POS to stay far away.