Founded in 2011, ASUSTOR Inc. was established via direct investment from ASUSTeK Computer Inc. The ASUSTOR brand name was created as a portmanteau of “ASUS” and “Storage”.and Asus dont make cpus and you know this Asustor as you where founded by them you are funny
@@KennyjHolland Umm.... We're not ASUS. We're ASUSTOR. We've been an independent company for twelve years. We have our own support, website, accounting, registration, president, marketing, logistics, headquarters address and more. We don't sell CPUs. We sell NAS and NAS only.
@@ASUSTOR_YT Hi am not shure if you are angry at me but you do sell cpus they are on your pcb in each nas intel or amd or what ever so lets say your AS6602T that has a Intel Celeron quad core CPU (2GHz Intel Celeron J4125 quad-core processor) i hope you have a great weekend and i do like your Nas they are good bits of kit and i thank you for that and if i need help with my asustor nas i bet you will be only to happy to help as ever Kenny
I should not be worried (Toshiba drives), but I am still happy to have watched and learned. Definitely seems like a scare tactic for business users. Keep up the great work!
Thanks for the info as ever i wear my heart on my sleeve and think we are just a number to the companies, and they do things we like and not like you know this but you can not say maybe, but they all do it none of them are innocent and i do thank you for all you do its hard but somebody has to do it
Thank you so much for your valuable information. Regarding the QNAP DA - Drive Analyser, I keep receiving an alert about one of the three Western Digital WD Red WD120EFAX units (which were bought in November 2020) which state: You are receiving this email because one or more drives in your system have crossed thresholds that likely indicate mild to moderate drive problems. You may want to back up your data or take other precautions for affected drives.
Sounds like a way of WD to try and shift more drives by using a scare tactic, it would be better for WD to inform system OEMs that the Power on Hours needs a multiplier added to the alert level, having access to drive analytics is always a good thing but it sounds like the thresholds need adjusting
In my own business (early 2000's) we had about 80 workstations that copped a flogging by our developers and artists. We flip-flopped between Seagate and WD, but these days I find it hard to like WD. It seems that Seagate have forged ahead of WD in some ways. My own personal Synology DS415play it quite aged now, and I just checked the Seagate power on hours - 25,000 and still kicking along fine with old 2TB NAS grade discs. It seems weird to me that WD considers a mere 3000 hours as '3 years' - maybe true for desktop grade drives, but not NAS IMO. I would be interested to hear what other followers have in hours on their WD drives to compare - is WD really less reliable or is this just a marketing scare ?
I have a content suggestion: start tinkering with running local AI models on NAS, and report your results. That's something I'm trying to research right now, but there's almost no info available. I want to know things like: what NAS devices are best for this, how big AI models can this or that NAS run, and how well, etc. Of course, AI models tend to be pretty demanding, but they come in all sizes, and many NAS devices (esp with extended RAM, and adding GPU to a QNAP, etc) should be able to run at least small models. In some ways NAS devices are perfect for AI, because you want easy 24/7 access, being able to ask a question quickly etc. It's quite possible (imo) that NAS producers will try to capitalize on the growing AI trend by developing NAS devices built for AI. By starting to explore this option right now you'll be ahead of the curve. Just saying.
This isn't a QNAP or any other NAS manuf issue. So QNAP isn't to blame here. This is all on WD (WDDA)...let's not forget that. As you always say, you prefer to have as much information given to the end-user as possible...that's all these manuf are doing. - But now that its being talked about in a negative manner..hopefully QNAP make some adjustments for the better, in their OS with re: to it.
hey, kind of off topic, but my qnap ts 264 8 gb arrived today and the ram is not soldered on. It has two ram slots so can I just aadd 8gb or not and which ram do you recommend. would appreciate the help thank you very much.
Officially, QNAP only support Transcend or ADATA RAM modules. However, the system will work with other brands as long as their specifications match - I use ADATA and Crucial modules together without any problem.
WD is the bad player here, not QNAP. IMHO, QNAP are behaving honestly and their tools enable you to change your strategy for handling WDDA. One must bear in mind that when you build a new NAS you will normally populate it with a batch of new drives. These will therefore all get their same hours/time and will flag simultaneously. You'd be crazy to configure the NAS to failover the RAID to standby drives because you wouldn't have enough drives installed and the RAID would bog down for a long time. Out of warranty is just out of warranty; it's not a reason to junk a set of drives in an array. It stinks like WD trying to sell more drives. WD need a kick in the ass. A big kick. A 3 year/3000 hours (3yr /= 300hrs anyway) warranty period is hopelessly short of what is required by customers. A drive won't simply fail and require discarding after 3000hrs- I have drives perfectly happy after 50k+ hrs. In my experience, what matters are high temps and how active the drive head has been- more head moves, particularly for small writes of large files on a fragmented almost full drive at high temps are the drive killer. WDDA *could* be a useful step forward in conjunction with SMART, but it requires deeper analysis and interpretation of all the actual performance data of the drive's health before automatic RAID rebuilds are triggered. IMHO, drive manuf need to build in better monitoring and reporting of a drive's head mechanism to predict upcoming failure, but these data are not available in SMART or WDDA.. QNAP good. WD very very bad. SMART needs updating.
We do not and are not intending to add or support WDDA.
Founded in 2011, ASUSTOR Inc. was established via direct investment from ASUSTeK Computer Inc. The ASUSTOR brand name was created as a portmanteau of “ASUS” and “Storage”.and Asus dont make cpus and you know this Asustor as you where founded by them you are funny
@@KennyjHolland Umm.... We're not ASUS. We're ASUSTOR. We've been an independent company for twelve years. We have our own support, website, accounting, registration, president, marketing, logistics, headquarters address and more.
We don't sell CPUs. We sell NAS and NAS only.
@@ASUSTOR_YT Hi am not shure if you are angry at me but you do sell cpus they are on your pcb in each nas intel or amd or what ever so lets say your AS6602T that has a Intel Celeron quad core CPU (2GHz Intel Celeron J4125 quad-core processor) i hope you have a great weekend and i do like your Nas they are good bits of kit and i thank you for that and if i need help with my asustor nas i bet you will be only to happy to help as ever Kenny
I should not be worried (Toshiba drives), but I am still happy to have watched and learned. Definitely seems like a scare tactic for business users. Keep up the great work!
Thanks for the info as ever i wear my heart on my sleeve and think we are just a number to the companies, and they do things we like and not like you know this but you can not say maybe, but they all do it none of them are innocent and i do thank you for all you do its hard but somebody has to do it
Thank you so much for your valuable information. Regarding the QNAP DA - Drive Analyser, I keep receiving an alert about one of the three Western Digital WD Red WD120EFAX units (which were bought in November 2020) which state: You are receiving this email because one or more drives in your system have crossed thresholds that likely indicate mild to moderate drive problems. You may want to back up your data or take other precautions for affected drives.
Sounds like a way of WD to try and shift more drives by using a scare tactic, it would be better for WD to inform system OEMs that the Power on Hours needs a multiplier added to the alert level, having access to drive analytics is always a good thing but it sounds like the thresholds need adjusting
Excellent news for QNAP users - that Tailscale icon ;)
Well spotted!
In my own business (early 2000's) we had about 80 workstations that copped a flogging by our developers and artists. We flip-flopped between Seagate and WD, but these days I find it hard to like WD. It seems that Seagate have forged ahead of WD in some ways. My own personal Synology DS415play it quite aged now, and I just checked the Seagate power on hours - 25,000 and still kicking along fine with old 2TB NAS grade discs. It seems weird to me that WD considers a mere 3000 hours as '3 years' - maybe true for desktop grade drives, but not NAS IMO. I would be interested to hear what other followers have in hours on their WD drives to compare - is WD really less reliable or is this just a marketing scare ?
Wait, 3000 hours? I missed that part. It's 125 days of non-stop use. If drive runs 40 hours per week, it means 75 weeks. That's year and half.
Once again. Great video.
Cheers Trev!
Can't stop myself of visualizing this abbreviation as WDDI because of the way you pronounce it :D
I have a content suggestion: start tinkering with running local AI models on NAS, and report your results. That's something I'm trying to research right now, but there's almost no info available. I want to know things like: what NAS devices are best for this, how big AI models can this or that NAS run, and how well, etc.
Of course, AI models tend to be pretty demanding, but they come in all sizes, and many NAS devices (esp with extended RAM, and adding GPU to a QNAP, etc) should be able to run at least small models.
In some ways NAS devices are perfect for AI, because you want easy 24/7 access, being able to ask a question quickly etc. It's quite possible (imo) that NAS producers will try to capitalize on the growing AI trend by developing NAS devices built for AI. By starting to explore this option right now you'll be ahead of the curve. Just saying.
This isn't a QNAP or any other NAS manuf issue. So QNAP isn't to blame here.
This is all on WD (WDDA)...let's not forget that.
As you always say, you prefer to have as much information given to the end-user as possible...that's all these manuf are doing.
-
But now that its being talked about in a negative manner..hopefully QNAP make some adjustments for the better, in their OS with re: to it.
I don't think QNAP would shutdown and reboot when migrating a drive using Predictive Migration - given how normal migrations are done "hot".
hey, kind of off topic, but my qnap ts 264 8 gb arrived today and the ram is not soldered on. It has two ram slots so can I just aadd 8gb or not and which ram do you recommend. would appreciate the help thank you very much.
Officially, QNAP only support Transcend or ADATA RAM modules. However, the system will work with other brands as long as their specifications match - I use ADATA and Crucial modules together without any problem.
WD is the bad player here, not QNAP. IMHO, QNAP are behaving honestly and their tools enable you to change your strategy for handling WDDA. One must bear in mind that when you build a new NAS you will normally populate it with a batch of new drives. These will therefore all get their same hours/time and will flag simultaneously. You'd be crazy to configure the NAS to failover the RAID to standby drives because you wouldn't have enough drives installed and the RAID would bog down for a long time. Out of warranty is just out of warranty; it's not a reason to junk a set of drives in an array. It stinks like WD trying to sell more drives.
WD need a kick in the ass. A big kick. A 3 year/3000 hours (3yr /= 300hrs anyway) warranty period is hopelessly short of what is required by customers. A drive won't simply fail and require discarding after 3000hrs- I have drives perfectly happy after 50k+ hrs. In my experience, what matters are high temps and how active the drive head has been- more head moves, particularly for small writes of large files on a fragmented almost full drive at high temps are the drive killer.
WDDA *could* be a useful step forward in conjunction with SMART, but it requires deeper analysis and interpretation of all the actual performance data of the drive's health before automatic RAID rebuilds are triggered. IMHO, drive manuf need to build in better monitoring and reporting of a drive's head mechanism to predict upcoming failure, but these data are not available in SMART or WDDA..
QNAP good. WD very very bad. SMART needs updating.
I will never buy WD again.
A seagull-free video. For my money, WD is not getting any.