I'll gladly pay 30% more for a Synology branded hard drive if it comes with some perks like manufacturer certification, firmware updates and better health monitoring. But 250% more for a rebranded drive with custom firmware? Not in a million years.
This is eventually going to cause Synology to lose market / mind share among users. Sure they'll make some extra cash right now whilst they have the best software in the business but at some point someone is going to come out with something that rivals Synology in the software experience and that competitor can immediately make themselves substantially cheaper by simply supporting a wider selection of hard drives. Its things like this which sour love for the brand and tempt people to look elsewhere when they make their next purchase.
If Synology branded HDDs, SSDs and RAM were like 10-20% more expensive than other brands, it would not be such a big deal and I think many people would gladly pay that. However the reality is the current prices are absolutely outrageous and indefensible. Synology also needs to get a clue and stop putting 1GbE ports in the majority of their products. The absolute bare minimum should be 2.5GbE with 10GbE more common as well without requiring an add-in card.
I just built three RS 1221+ units with 20 TB EXOS drives they are not compatible but they work just fine. I’ve talked to Synology about using their drives, but their price point is too high to use them. At this point they need to get in line with the rest of the industry.
I can't thank you enough for the info on fixing the warning about using non-synology drives and the hack that let me create a new SHR array on my most recent RAID.
This is my first time looking at getting a NAS. I was about to buy the DS1522+ from Amazon, but now I'm totally confused WTF I can and can't use in it. So... I'll get the ASUSTOR 6 bay NAS that takes any NVMEs. Phuck synology!!!! Thank you for your videos and channel. I've learnt a lot from you!!!!!!
This is an example of corporate greed where the company forgot and abandoned the customers who made them successful. Consumers purchase Synology NAS so that they can select drives that fit their needs and budgets. Synology doesn't manufacture HDD/SSD and doesn't have any IP in this area, nor do they have any specialized test to make a HDD/SSD more "compatible". HDD/SSD are based on industry standards. Unless Synology only sells NAS with pre-installed HDD/SSD, where HDD/SSD manufacturers make custom FW and have unique factory process/testing for them, such as Dell/HP, their diskless units must be compatible with the industry standards. Not the other way round. It is comical to see this statement on their website "Synology does not guarantee compatibility with listed products and reserves the right to update the list at any time." What a bunch of BS... they can't even guarantee product compatibility on their own list. Do they really think consumers will fall for their branded HDD/SSD, where they are just a slap of a different label? The markups are insane. Really, what IP or secret sauce does Synology have on HDD/SSD FW? None. Customers have choices and this won't go down well for them.
what a shame on Synology, I expected to open the third part support on my DS3622+ & 2422+ as the DSM 7.2 released.. now I am thinking about transitioning to QNAP or Truenas.
WD 16 TB Pro are just working fine in my 1821+, still got a warning when installing but that was the only thing. They are not on the compatibility list. Only the 16TB Seagate and Toshiba drives are.
I am a newbie to NAS and Synology. But I just purchased a Synology DS418. I only have one Iron Wolf 16TB drive. How do I properly setup this up….JBOD, RAID-0? I understand the risk these methods, but as I add more storage, do I have the option to revisit the RAID setup?
@NASCompares what I also don't like with Synology is they removed the 3rd party support list from NVMe's. When I bought by 1821+ a couple of years ago the list was there on their website but they removed it since. I am not sure why, as it's not like it should matter as they provide a 3rd party list for hard drives.
I currently have 2 Synology NAS, one of them is a very old one (DS413) and will be replaced soon. Because of the Synology stupid policy regarding the 3rd party drives, I seriously look at other manufacturers (not only QNAP but others like Asustor for ex), because I don't want to take the risk to being obliged to buy the (far too) costly Synology drives in the future... DSM is good, but cannot justify the price overhead of being obliged to buy Synology disks !
I'm thinking about getting a DS423+ (home media server) and by doing my research i found this great channel and learned a lot about the NAS world. As someone who works in industrial managment and does contracts sometimes I would like to point out that this whole drama is mostly for legal reasons? If Synology wouldnt give any warnings and something goes wrong... some ppl might come up and sue them, just like americans sue you after they burned themself after ordering a steaming hot coffee. I understand that they dont add 20TB HDDs on the list if they dont have have their own supported HDDs go up to 20TB. In a company meeting someone might ask "could we go for 20? a simple NO is better than "well we could, but it's not 100% supported" and then the whole mess would come up... in the end the boss would say "this is to complicated... lets go with another comapny" (welcome to corporate world). In the end it is mainly about certificates that you can hold up and say "this paper says it's not my fault". In this case SSDs COULD (not that they would, but they COULD) lose data and just to be save they lock it. I also think that they should just let you create a storage and add a warning for the SSD, but since the chance that it loses data is there they better lock you out, because if it failes it will come down to the whole "was it really that clear that it could lose data?" drama. I had arguments where someone in the company had a PC from a brand 20 years ago in their old company. In meetings ANYTIME that brand comes up the person that would call tech support for the smallest problem with their work PC, will keep telling you that THEY had a problem with that brand and that they're basicly an expert now on that brand and that there is no way the company should go with that brand, because THEY CAN TELL YOU how bad their products are.
one thing that actually confuses me even more, is that they dont list any Server/Enterprise grade HDDs (like WD Gold, HGST Ultrastar, Seagate Exos and Toshiba MG Series) for the DS923+ (and smaller) but only NAS- and Surveilance grade HDDs. I'm not sure if they are just not testing the Server HDDs with those NASs or if there actually is a compatibilty issue with those. But as they are better and currently even cheaper than the NAS grade HDD, I'd realy like to know. (on the DS920+ the servergrade HDDs are still listed as compatible)
My guess is that they want to sell their Synology disks and because of that officially dropped the other brands enterprise support on the DiskStations. I'm not sure if WD Gold is officially supported on RackStations - but so far I know even the RS don't officially support WD Gold disks.
Looking to upgrade a HD on my DS918+ and came across this article, which was very interesting, but whether intentionally or an error, as per posting date (13/10/23) , although I can see the 3rd Party dropdown it is not selectable so I can only see Synology drives. :( NB Tried on Chrome and Edge just in case
I’m about to purchase a new NAS and I had my eyes on Synology… but just found out about how they’re slowly limited third party compatibility. That’s a big deterrent for me and makes me nervous about the future of the system. Is there a better system I should look at? Looking at a simple home setup of 1522+ right now.
I'm in the same boat. Hoping someone recommends a good alternative. I'm still researching which turn key nas options, other than synology, have comparable software package.
Any idea why they don't have any 3rd party drives listed at all for the 1522+? I opted for WD Red Pros in the end, but I'm surprised that they don't have anything listed on their website other than a handful of Synology HDDs.
It seems like there compatibility list is a little too stingy but I did have an RAID rebuild issue whe I tried with a Barracuda(which is not on the list) drive on my DS923+ the other day. When I poped in a Toshiba MN08(This is on the list) it worked fine. Therefor I think Synology is doing some serious testing with 3rd party drives and I would like to give them some understanding for there shrinking list. Although the HAT5300 is way too expensive in Japan so I would like some more choices. HAT5300 costs about 2.5 times a Toshiba MG or MN drive in Japan.
so I'm really surprised they don't support the WD Gold NAS drives.... competitors like ASUSTOR does.... I am down to synology or asustor but i already have 2 new WD 6tb gold drives - anyone used WD gold in synology yet?
I have 6 WD Gold 24TB disks running in my DS1522+ and not a single issue. They are fast, they are quiet, they are cheaper than WD Red and are just absolute beasts.
When it comes to the DS223j i just like how on the compatibility list they go to 14TB, at the same time they know its a 2-bay with no possibility of expansion, yet on the product page they list a maximum single volume size of 108TB. 😂😂😂
@@eidodk I know that, you know that, Rob knows that, Synology knows that, most that watch this channel probably knows that… but its a massive assumption to think your average 2-bay NAS buyer knows that. It shouldn't be written in the way that it is.
@@IntoxicatedVortex So which limit should they write, do you think ? I mean a year ago it was 20tb ... today it's 40. Who is to say that hard drives won't be hitting that threshold at some point ? I doubt it, but it might happen.
@eidodk 14TB + 14TB = 28TB. This is the maximum that can be achieved while maintaining warranty with 100% certainty. If they want us to treat their compatibility list seriously, and that isn't trying to coerce us into buying their branded drives, then they should be up front with their marketing materials. Saying that 108TB will be right at some point, in 2045 maybe, when there are 54TB drives is a falsehood from my perspective. They can easily put the 108TB in a *** note like they do other things.
Except Synology is not an HDD/SSD manufacturer. And so for the longest time, they were actually "advertising" them. Now they've slapped a sticker on a subpar (still 3rd party in actuality) drive, compared to the competition at least, and called it their own. It is BS. And so is your analogy 😉
@@blcjck8121 They sell a product with their name on it. That is their incentive. They offer warranty on their own named drives. It's the capitalist market rule #1
@@eidodk Probably you will be happy to see a ford/toyota verified battery,wiper, tyre, engine oil, coolent restriction...or else it will be a warning sign pop up at your screen every 5 miles
I'll gladly pay 30% more for a Synology branded hard drive if it comes with some perks like manufacturer certification, firmware updates and better health monitoring. But 250% more for a rebranded drive with custom firmware? Not in a million years.
This is eventually going to cause Synology to lose market / mind share among users. Sure they'll make some extra cash right now whilst they have the best software in the business but at some point someone is going to come out with something that rivals Synology in the software experience and that competitor can immediately make themselves substantially cheaper by simply supporting a wider selection of hard drives.
Its things like this which sour love for the brand and tempt people to look elsewhere when they make their next purchase.
If Synology branded HDDs, SSDs and RAM were like 10-20% more expensive than other brands, it would not be such a big deal and I think many people would gladly pay that. However the reality is the current prices are absolutely outrageous and indefensible. Synology also needs to get a clue and stop putting 1GbE ports in the majority of their products. The absolute bare minimum should be 2.5GbE with 10GbE more common as well without requiring an add-in card.
I just built three RS 1221+ units with 20 TB EXOS drives they are not compatible but they work just fine. I’ve talked to Synology about using their drives, but their price point is too high to use them. At this point they need to get in line with the rest of the industry.
I can't thank you enough for the info on fixing the warning about using non-synology drives and the hack that let me create a new SHR array on my most recent RAID.
This is my first time looking at getting a NAS. I was about to buy the DS1522+ from Amazon, but now I'm totally confused WTF I can and can't use in it. So... I'll get the ASUSTOR 6 bay NAS that takes any NVMEs. Phuck synology!!!! Thank you for your videos and channel. I've learnt a lot from you!!!!!!
5:50 - Now I'm confused, I thought "I Hate Sea Gulls" was Western Digital's Top Tier Ultrastar Data Center Drive...
This is an example of corporate greed where the company forgot and abandoned the customers who made them successful. Consumers purchase Synology NAS so that they can select drives that fit their needs and budgets. Synology doesn't manufacture HDD/SSD and doesn't have any IP in this area, nor do they have any specialized test to make a HDD/SSD more "compatible". HDD/SSD are based on industry standards. Unless Synology only sells NAS with pre-installed HDD/SSD, where HDD/SSD manufacturers make custom FW and have unique factory process/testing for them, such as Dell/HP, their diskless units must be compatible with the industry standards. Not the other way round.
It is comical to see this statement on their website "Synology does not guarantee compatibility with listed products and reserves the right to update the list at any time." What a bunch of BS... they can't even guarantee product compatibility on their own list.
Do they really think consumers will fall for their branded HDD/SSD, where they are just a slap of a different label? The markups are insane. Really, what IP or secret sauce does Synology have on HDD/SSD FW? None.
Customers have choices and this won't go down well for them.
what a shame on Synology, I expected to open the third part support on my DS3622+ & 2422+ as the DSM 7.2 released.. now I am thinking about transitioning to QNAP or Truenas.
WD 16 TB Pro are just working fine in my 1821+, still got a warning when installing but that was the only thing. They are not on the compatibility list. Only the 16TB Seagate and Toshiba drives are.
I have a DS1821+ and I'm considering buying a larger model like RS serie. But the HDD policy made me think to change to another brand like Qnap
I am a newbie to NAS and Synology. But I just purchased a Synology DS418. I only have one Iron Wolf 16TB drive. How do I properly setup this up….JBOD, RAID-0? I understand the risk these methods, but as I add more storage, do I have the option to revisit the RAID setup?
@NASCompares what I also don't like with Synology is they removed the 3rd party support list from NVMe's. When I bought by 1821+ a couple of years ago the list was there on their website but they removed it since. I am not sure why, as it's not like it should matter as they provide a 3rd party list for hard drives.
I currently have 2 Synology NAS, one of them is a very old one (DS413) and will be replaced soon.
Because of the Synology stupid policy regarding the 3rd party drives, I seriously look at other manufacturers (not only QNAP but others like Asustor for ex), because I don't want to take the risk to being obliged to buy the (far too) costly Synology drives in the future...
DSM is good, but cannot justify the price overhead of being obliged to buy Synology disks !
I'm thinking about getting a DS423+ (home media server) and by doing my research i found this great channel and learned a lot about the NAS world.
As someone who works in industrial managment and does contracts sometimes I would like to point out that this whole drama is mostly for legal reasons?
If Synology wouldnt give any warnings and something goes wrong... some ppl might come up and sue them, just like americans sue you after they burned themself after ordering a steaming hot coffee.
I understand that they dont add 20TB HDDs on the list if they dont have have their own supported HDDs go up to 20TB. In a company meeting someone might ask "could we go for 20? a simple NO is better than "well we could, but it's not 100% supported" and then the whole mess would come up... in the end the boss would say "this is to complicated... lets go with another comapny" (welcome to corporate world). In the end it is mainly about certificates that you can hold up and say "this paper says it's not my fault".
In this case SSDs COULD (not that they would, but they COULD) lose data and just to be save they lock it. I also think that they should just let you create a storage and add a warning for the SSD, but since the chance that it loses data is there they better lock you out, because if it failes it will come down to the whole "was it really that clear that it could lose data?" drama.
I had arguments where someone in the company had a PC from a brand 20 years ago in their old company. In meetings ANYTIME that brand comes up the person that would call tech support for the smallest problem with their work PC, will keep telling you that THEY had a problem with that brand and that they're basicly an expert now on that brand and that there is no way the company should go with that brand, because THEY CAN TELL YOU how bad their products are.
one thing that actually confuses me even more, is that they dont list any Server/Enterprise grade HDDs (like WD Gold, HGST Ultrastar, Seagate Exos and Toshiba MG Series) for the DS923+ (and smaller) but only NAS- and Surveilance grade HDDs. I'm not sure if they are just not testing the Server HDDs with those NASs or if there actually is a compatibilty issue with those. But as they are better and currently even cheaper than the NAS grade HDD, I'd realy like to know. (on the DS920+ the servergrade HDDs are still listed as compatible)
My guess is that they want to sell their Synology disks and because of that officially dropped the other brands enterprise support on the DiskStations. I'm not sure if WD Gold is officially supported on RackStations - but so far I know even the RS don't officially support WD Gold disks.
Looking to upgrade a HD on my DS918+ and came across this article, which was very interesting, but whether intentionally or an error, as per posting date (13/10/23) , although I can see the 3rd Party dropdown it is not selectable so I can only see Synology drives. :(
NB Tried on Chrome and Edge just in case
I’m about to purchase a new NAS and I had my eyes on Synology… but just found out about how they’re slowly limited third party compatibility. That’s a big deterrent for me and makes me nervous about the future of the system. Is there a better system I should look at?
Looking at a simple home setup of 1522+ right now.
I'm in the same boat. Hoping someone recommends a good alternative. I'm still researching which turn key nas options, other than synology, have comparable software package.
Just set up a RS2423+... not an "xs" device and there are zero 3rd-party drives in the compatibility list. I put in 6x 20TB WD Red Pros anyway.
Are the drives working correctly without any warnings or issues?
@@whiiiz9410 They work fine, but DSM complains unless you add them to the whitelist.
Any idea why they don't have any 3rd party drives listed at all for the 1522+? I opted for WD Red Pros in the end, but I'm surprised that they don't have anything listed on their website other than a handful of Synology HDDs.
They are there.
It seems like there compatibility list is a little too stingy but I did have an RAID rebuild issue whe I tried with a Barracuda(which is not on the list) drive on my DS923+ the other day.
When I poped in a Toshiba MN08(This is on the list) it worked fine. Therefor I think Synology is doing some serious testing with 3rd party drives and I would like to give them some understanding for there shrinking list.
Although the HAT5300 is way too expensive in Japan so I would like some more choices. HAT5300 costs about 2.5 times a Toshiba MG or MN drive in Japan.
Seagate Barracuda HDDs are SMR (shingled magnetic recording) and you don't want SMR drives in a NAS as they will really slow it down.
@@daverussell457 Thank. I know it is not good but I had no issue when I was using Netgear. The CPU was too slow and I didn't need speed.
so I'm really surprised they don't support the WD Gold NAS drives.... competitors like ASUSTOR does.... I am down to synology or asustor but i already have 2 new WD 6tb gold drives - anyone used WD gold in synology yet?
I have 6 WD Gold 24TB disks running in my DS1522+ and not a single issue. They are fast, they are quiet, they are cheaper than WD Red and are just absolute beasts.
When it comes to the DS223j i just like how on the compatibility list they go to 14TB, at the same time they know its a 2-bay with no possibility of expansion, yet on the product page they list a maximum single volume size of 108TB. 😂😂😂
Because it's a software limitation. The listing is correct.
@@eidodk I know that, you know that, Rob knows that, Synology knows that, most that watch this channel probably knows that… but its a massive assumption to think your average 2-bay NAS buyer knows that.
It shouldn't be written in the way that it is.
@@IntoxicatedVortex So which limit should they write, do you think ? I mean a year ago it was 20tb ... today it's 40. Who is to say that hard drives won't be hitting that threshold at some point ? I doubt it, but it might happen.
@eidodk 14TB + 14TB = 28TB. This is the maximum that can be achieved while maintaining warranty with 100% certainty. If they want us to treat their compatibility list seriously, and that isn't trying to coerce us into buying their branded drives, then they should be up front with their marketing materials. Saying that 108TB will be right at some point, in 2045 maybe, when there are 54TB drives is a falsehood from my perspective. They can easily put the 108TB in a *** note like they do other things.
Irritates me that Synology got into bed with Seagate with the Ironwolf health management only to abandon it.
Synology is a business. You don't see Toyota or Ford advertise competitors products either, do you
Except Synology is not an HDD/SSD manufacturer. And so for the longest time, they were actually "advertising" them. Now they've slapped a sticker on a subpar (still 3rd party in actuality) drive, compared to the competition at least, and called it their own. It is BS. And so is your analogy 😉
@@blcjck8121 They sell a product with their name on it. That is their incentive. They offer warranty on their own named drives. It's the capitalist market rule #1
@@eidodk Probably you will be happy to see a ford/toyota verified battery,wiper, tyre, engine oil, coolent restriction...or else it will be a warning sign pop up at your screen every 5 miles