If you want your NAS to also be a server for miscellaneous containers or VMs, then pick a QNAP. If you want a dedicated device, the UNAS is better bang for the buck. If I didn't already have a couple of QNAPs, I'd prefer the UNAS and use the savings for a mini-PC like a NUC or Protectli.
What would you guys recommend for someone who hasn’t had a NAS before? Get a more beefy NAS (I always seem to like what QNAP offers) and run the extra stuff on it OR get a simple one and just use it as a NAS and run all the extra stuff on a separate computer? Also is using NAS for surveillance recordings as well as data backup a good thing or is it best to get a dedicated NVR for surveillance? lol I don’t know what the answer is. I think I just need to buy one and accept I might make the wrong choice and fix it with my follow up NAS ☺️
@@lahmyaj It depends a lot on your requirements and also your comfort level with the technology. I have come to believe that storage should be a dedicated device. Services such a Plex should run on a separate box and access files on the NAS over the network. The files on your NAS are far and away the most valuable content and deserve the most stable environment. Even though you will back up your NAS content elsewhere, you really REALLY don't want to have to do restorations. They're extremely disruptive and time consuming. If you have an old PC lying around, I would suggest that you install a Linux distribution on it and use it for your services. As you gain experience you can make a more informed decision on dedicated, more power efficient hardware. As for NVR functionally, it depends on your requirements. For a commercial application, you absolutely want a dedicated NVR. For a residential application, you can use the NAS device but keep in mind that continuous writing should be done to dedicated drives (such as WD's purple line). You could buy a 5+ bay unit and split them into two storage pools, one for files and another for surveillance video. The software can still run on a separate box. Even a single GbE interface on the storage device can be sufficient for a home user but segmenting your security network from your NAS network is desirable and in today's market I would look for QNAP with a pair of 2.5G interfaces. If you have a network that supports VLANs, even a single interface will suffice. My sense from your question is that you are feeling a bit tentative. If you are interested in learning more about running various services, I highly recommend you start by experimenting on a Linux PC, even your daily driver. But your first priority should always be the safety of your files. Even a low end QNAP can support a surprising variety of services so don't feel that you need a high end box to do everything. If, after experimenting with VMs and containers and various services on your PC, you decide you would rather use QNAP's canned offerings, you can still do that. In the future, you can always relegate your first NAS as a backup and migrate to a newer more powerful machine. But as I originally stated, I feel strongly that NAS functionality should be kept separate from everything else if your budget and circumstances permit. One big caveat is power and noise - you really don't want to live in the same room as continuously operating computer hardware. Heat and noise will seriously erode your quality of life. This is where dedicated low power fanless devices really shine. Finally, learning how to run your own servers is a valuable life skill that ports well to many different careers. So if you have the inclination, I recommend that you dive right in!
@@KeithHanlan thanks so much for your advice. I do think going for a lower end NAS to begin with or at least one that’s more affordable of the ones that are capable of running VMs etc. is maybe a better way to start out and like you said, can then use it as a backup NAS for a newer one down the track. I guess I just don’t know which model to even start looking at in QNAP’s range as I’m just not familiar with their naming convention and product segmentation like I am for example my Apple gear lol. Do I at least get one capable of ZFS? The QuTS ones? Do I make sure to get an x86-64 one for a bit of processing headroom/future proofing rather than an ARM-based one? Im with ya on the separate pools of storage and getting specific surveillance drives for the second pool ;) Aiming at an 6~8-bay I reckon.
I can accept UNAS Pro being a simple NAS without dockers etc but I think my bare minimum threshold for a nas nowadays is it should be able to offer easy media management and access options. Just being a folder on a desktop pc is not enough and hasn't been for a while. The only way I would consider one is (as I mentioned in the previous video comment section) coupling this to a 1U server which would handle all the expected app functionality using docker and connecting to UNAS Pro. The ease of use and robustness of such a system is the biggest question in my mind.
By seeing the speed at which QNAP Support resolve some issues and the back and forth between some software editors I question myself if I should recommend QNAP to businesses. Probably to some SMBs but they will be at the mercy of the vendor but wouldn't recommend it to medium to large enterprises.
ill be getting this to use as my offsite storage hopefully remote backup once I've cloned the data locally will work alright, would be great if unifi made an app for QNAP and others that allows easy backup to the UNAS Pro.
Is that even a question??? QNAP over U-NAS and Synology. On my 3rd QNAP NAS and totally satisfied with the HW reliability and above average/excellent service and support. Have clients that have over 100 Synology NASes but none of are used for production.
From the software perspective, I concur with multiple other commenters that thr UNAS is a no thrills NAS without all the 'bloat' options other brands offer. It's network storage, very few thrills. Given that, I do believe the biggest miss here is lack of NFS. Missing such a common network storage option to me is the biggest problem with the UNAS right now. I'd also love if they could add further integration into the networking features of Unifi, better integration between the UNAS and SDN Controller for things like firewalls, network based access rights etc would be great to have. Hardware wise, can't complain much for this price point. I would love if they would instead offer dual 10G ports and NVMe caching in a future version. Full agreement on the lack of Protect support, this should definitely be an option on a device like the UNAS.
A lot have commented about NFS and even iSCSI. Enough that I feel Ubiquiti are listening and may have these added in an update. I don't know UI's roadmap, but I know they listened with RAID options and already plan to add Raid 6 to the unit, so keep the noise up about wanting NFS. UI do listen and the more noise there is the better
@@preacherplays Same. I’m running WS 2025 and have 56tb on a software raid. I hate and don’t trust it. I just want a brainless rack mount storage solution.
The UNAS is more of a "NAS" where the QNAP, Synology, TrueNAS seems like they should be called something like "NAS+" or something to designate App and other service capability.
I've been trying to find out what file systems the unifi nas pro supports, given the 8gb of ram, I presume it doesn't support ZFS but does it support BTRFS? Is there a way you can confirm from ubiquiti?
Important question: suppose the hardware (chassis)breaks and the UNAS Pro is not sold anymore. Is there a way to recover your data? Reason for asking: it is not the first time I hear people having a NAS, then the hardware breaks and there is no way to recover the data anymore afterwards. So it would be good to know if e.g. there is unifi software that can be installed on whatever box to be able to at least read the RAID when disks are dropped in another box
What don't you like about the UNAS? Is it because it is just a basic nas without the extra features or other things? Curious about that :). I kind of like the UNAS for being a basic, no thrills NAS without the extra features that I would run on a separate server rather than in my NAS.
I don't know if the redundant power supply at this price point is a big thing. Same with the NIC at the same price point. Synology, as an example, at the same price point do not have redundant power options at all, where as unifi at least has an optional device. Same with NIC's My Synology 918+ which is equivalent price point if we move to the 923 version, doesn't even have multi gbps nic. it has 2 1gbps. QNAP is definitely a different beast to Synology though. I might have to review the QNNAP vs Syno video :). When the UNVR first came out it only ran Protect. Now it can run both Protect and Access, so there is always potential for a combo style unit, but I am not sure this would fit with Ubiquiti's business model. Who would by a stand alone UNVR device if for the exact same price they had a NAS that can run Protect and have both in one device? I just can't see that happening, as much as it would be nice. Maybe I will be wrong on that :). I have never really been a fan of a NAS trying to be a jack of all trades as I feel they end up mastering none, so I do see the UNAS as a bit of a breath of fresh air. That said, I have a Synology 918+ and a Synology 416 that I use primarily with Surveillance Station (combining the two to get 4 free camera licenses through CMS) This might be why I feel like defending UI and the UNAS a little with their first entry into the NAS world. I am not saying they have it all right, as I agree that things like NFS and possibly iSCSI if they can implement it well could be good options on a NAS / Storage device. These are NAS-centric features that really need to be added. I do like the security and integration to directory services Unifi have got in at first release. This is out of the box without needing additional apps. I do wish that the RAM was upgradeable on the UNAS, but it does seem to work really well on the hardware specs it has. Protect can export to NAS devices, meaning footage can be archived to the UNAS ( or other NAS devices ) so that's kind of a good thing. that I like. Protect is still not fully up to the same feature set as the platform it replaced a couple of years ago ( Unifi Video) so Protect, as much as it is maturing, is still fairly young in the surveillance industry. Protect has really only been a contender recently, with its early days being pretty useless. Unifi Video was retired in 2021, less than 4 years ago. I know I am making some long comments lately. Just so much to consider with these NAS devices. I guess I am hoping Ubiquiti might make there way in here and have a look at the comments and get some ideas, as well as maybe sparking some conversation and alternative views as well.
For what it's worth, I definitely, definitely know that the Ubiquiti team reads these comments. You should see the feedback I am sent by them (nothing official, just their teams response to my points) on some of these vids. It's certainly worth a punt putting feedback down here in the comments!
@@nascompares The more noise we make, the more they will listen. UI Team - NFS has been a big thing in most reviews I have seen, and maybe an iSCSI implementation :). Special for them lol
My experience of QNAP is that their hardware sucks. Had a 4 bay worked fine, upgraded to an 8 bay that died with the dreaded won't boot issue. Upgraded to a much larger one thinking it was bad luck and 24 months later, that one is dead after a long series of reliability issues. I would not buy QNAP ever, they suck. Even when the machine would boot, the Plex service would die every time QNAP pushed out an upgrade until it was installed and the SAMBA server was down more often than it was up. Am moving to a TrueNAS scale build.
1:30 if you're going to let what Unifi has done to set the discussion you should have limited this to QNAP's short depth rack mounts IMHO. For that matter, this would be a great time to suggest a SHORT DEPTH RACK MOUNT SHOOTOFF. Limit yourself to the true shortdepth rackmounts (e.g. >14 inches.)
If this video was only about hardware and/or specifically that Rackmount, I would agree. However, a user will buy a solution from either of these brand as that...a solution. And a big part of that is the evolving software platform and company focus towards it at QNAP and UniFi. I reckon in 12 months time, there will be 2-3 more UNAS devices and the software will evolve (same for QNAP, but more so), so I wanted to cover the brands who respect NAS input and output as broadly as possible to keep it relevant. Hope that annoying word salad makes sense of my brain!
I really wanna be a diehard fan of Unifi, but after seeing how some of the places they cheap out its so difficult. I love their UI, but it frankly feel a bit Temu like
UniFi UNAS Pro, they gone the mac root and made it so simple that you have no real options, its get what's your given, there RAID setup being a classic example, its a terrible implementation of a NAS device from what I see, even for a novice.
Love your channel. But would like to clarify a widespread misunderstanding in knowledge about qnap deadbolt. To my knowledge, most common among people who did not update their firmware on qnap.
There's more to it than that I'm afraid. I have a video coming up on this, but deadbolt was also the result of some apps being able to open up ports when they should not have, admin credentials being enabled, SSH being left on (mixed reports on that one) and an application having hard coded credentials. Plus, the forced update afterwards for users resulted in poor customer/business relationships getting further strained.
@@nascomparesif QNAP didn't learn and change I would be with you. They just had a security issue. I had a email about it and the nas had a mandatory update. They added bitdefender to the os and zfs to smaller systems. What more could they do to please you? You seem to give Synology major passes and beat up qnap
if you are not currently in the UNIFi space, i see no reason to jump into a single purpose NAS only device. If you are a brand loyalist, then go ahead and not expect any more than simple file storage.
Mooo. But honestly it does make sense to do a side by side of one of the most frequently requested NAS entries that I can recall. I would expect a similar video to Terremaster as well.
Sure he can keep milking the unifi NAS by pitting it against each brand out there, including the likes of Aoostar and churn out another 12 videos. Mooo. Mooo. 🤣😂
Hi bud. I mean...would you rather I didn't compare this new entry into the world of NAS Vs the status quo? Sure, I would have not made the vids, or left them for a few months...but why? People are asking me to compare these, to evaluate UniFi in ALOT of ways in the world of NAS? I would genuinely welcome your suggestion for how else I can approach this? Won't be doing a Vs with Asustor or Terramaster as...well...no one asked!
you can makes videos about whatever you want. The point is that if you make a video about this unifi every second day, it feels you are milking this new product as much as possible. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, save for the bad optics. If you need ideas, for what is worth, I have noticed on Ali a couple new NAS offers from Orico and new (at least in term of style) DAS enclosures from their subsidiary Yottamaster. Edit: there are a couple Yottamaster NAS models as well.
@@nascompares Keep on comparing the UNAS Pro. It is the new kid on the block. Taking into account the track record of Ubiquiti this one indeed could disrupt the status quo on consumer/prosumer NAS hardware. Keep up the good job
If you want your NAS to also be a server for miscellaneous containers or VMs, then pick a QNAP. If you want a dedicated device, the UNAS is better bang for the buck. If I didn't already have a couple of QNAPs, I'd prefer the UNAS and use the savings for a mini-PC like a NUC or Protectli.
This!
Yes, after 3 Years with my Synologys, I'm on the same train.. let the NAS be a NAS and use different Hardware for VM and Docker.
What would you guys recommend for someone who hasn’t had a NAS before? Get a more beefy NAS (I always seem to like what QNAP offers) and run the extra stuff on it OR get a simple one and just use it as a NAS and run all the extra stuff on a separate computer?
Also is using NAS for surveillance recordings as well as data backup a good thing or is it best to get a dedicated NVR for surveillance?
lol I don’t know what the answer is. I think I just need to buy one and accept I might make the wrong choice and fix it with my follow up NAS ☺️
@@lahmyaj It depends a lot on your requirements and also your comfort level with the technology. I have come to believe that storage should be a dedicated device. Services such a Plex should run on a separate box and access files on the NAS over the network. The files on your NAS are far and away the most valuable content and deserve the most stable environment. Even though you will back up your NAS content elsewhere, you really REALLY don't want to have to do restorations. They're extremely disruptive and time consuming.
If you have an old PC lying around, I would suggest that you install a Linux distribution on it and use it for your services. As you gain experience you can make a more informed decision on dedicated, more power efficient hardware.
As for NVR functionally, it depends on your requirements. For a commercial application, you absolutely want a dedicated NVR. For a residential application, you can use the NAS device but keep in mind that continuous writing should be done to dedicated drives (such as WD's purple line). You could buy a 5+ bay unit and split them into two storage pools, one for files and another for surveillance video. The software can still run on a separate box.
Even a single GbE interface on the storage device can be sufficient for a home user but segmenting your security network from your NAS network is desirable and in today's market I would look for QNAP with a pair of 2.5G interfaces. If you have a network that supports VLANs, even a single interface will suffice.
My sense from your question is that you are feeling a bit tentative. If you are interested in learning more about running various services, I highly recommend you start by experimenting on a Linux PC, even your daily driver. But your first priority should always be the safety of your files. Even a low end QNAP can support a surprising variety of services so don't feel that you need a high end box to do everything. If, after experimenting with VMs and containers and various services on your PC, you decide you would rather use QNAP's canned offerings, you can still do that. In the future, you can always relegate your first NAS as a backup and migrate to a newer more powerful machine.
But as I originally stated, I feel strongly that NAS functionality should be kept separate from everything else if your budget and circumstances permit.
One big caveat is power and noise - you really don't want to live in the same room as continuously operating computer hardware. Heat and noise will seriously erode your quality of life. This is where dedicated low power fanless devices really shine.
Finally, learning how to run your own servers is a valuable life skill that ports well to many different careers. So if you have the inclination, I recommend that you dive right in!
@@KeithHanlan thanks so much for your advice. I do think going for a lower end NAS to begin with or at least one that’s more affordable of the ones that are capable of running VMs etc. is maybe a better way to start out and like you said, can then use it as a backup NAS for a newer one down the track.
I guess I just don’t know which model to even start looking at in QNAP’s range as I’m just not familiar with their naming convention and product segmentation like I am for example my Apple gear lol.
Do I at least get one capable of ZFS? The QuTS ones? Do I make sure to get an x86-64 one for a bit of processing headroom/future proofing rather than an ARM-based one?
Im with ya on the separate pools of storage and getting specific surveillance drives for the second pool ;) Aiming at an 6~8-bay I reckon.
I can accept UNAS Pro being a simple NAS without dockers etc but I think my bare minimum threshold for a nas nowadays is it should be able to offer easy media management and access options. Just being a folder on a desktop pc is not enough and hasn't been for a while. The only way I would consider one is (as I mentioned in the previous video comment section) coupling this to a 1U server which would handle all the expected app functionality using docker and connecting to UNAS Pro. The ease of use and robustness of such a system is the biggest question in my mind.
By seeing the speed at which QNAP Support resolve some issues and the back and forth between some software editors I question myself if I should recommend QNAP to businesses. Probably to some SMBs but they will be at the mercy of the vendor but wouldn't recommend it to medium to large enterprises.
ill be getting this to use as my offsite storage hopefully remote backup once I've cloned the data locally will work alright, would be great if unifi made an app for QNAP and others that allows easy backup to the UNAS Pro.
Is that even a question??? QNAP over U-NAS and Synology.
On my 3rd QNAP NAS and totally satisfied with the HW reliability and above average/excellent service and support.
Have clients that have over 100 Synology NASes but none of are used for production.
From the software perspective, I concur with multiple other commenters that thr UNAS is a no thrills NAS without all the 'bloat' options other brands offer. It's network storage, very few thrills. Given that, I do believe the biggest miss here is lack of NFS. Missing such a common network storage option to me is the biggest problem with the UNAS right now. I'd also love if they could add further integration into the networking features of Unifi, better integration between the UNAS and SDN Controller for things like firewalls, network based access rights etc would be great to have.
Hardware wise, can't complain much for this price point. I would love if they would instead offer dual 10G ports and NVMe caching in a future version.
Full agreement on the lack of Protect support, this should definitely be an option on a device like the UNAS.
A lot have commented about NFS and even iSCSI. Enough that I feel Ubiquiti are listening and may have these added in an update. I don't know UI's roadmap, but I know they listened with RAID options and already plan to add Raid 6 to the unit, so keep the noise up about wanting NFS. UI do listen and the more noise there is the better
They really need to add NFS, only reason I'm holding off
I've been checking UI 4 times a day waiting for the UNAS to go into stock.
SAME. All I want is storage. I have RPi's that will do the serving from the file store for anything else.
It's launching on Monday 4th for sale. *That's what they told me when I asked.....ALOT*
Same
@@preacherplays Same. I’m running WS 2025 and have 56tb on a software raid. I hate and don’t trust it. I just want a brainless rack mount storage solution.
@@nascompares I hope it’s legit this time. I stayed up till midnight to snipe one on the 25th, only for them to update it to Nov 4th
i would like a comparison to the new ugreen devices with dual 10gig nics.
The UNAS is more of a "NAS" where the QNAP, Synology, TrueNAS seems like they should be called something like "NAS+" or something to designate App and other service capability.
Interesting take. Respect.
Can we not call the UniFi secondary power solution a “battery”?
There’s no battery.
I've been trying to find out what file systems the unifi nas pro supports, given the 8gb of ram, I presume it doesn't support ZFS but does it support BTRFS? Is there a way you can confirm from ubiquiti?
Important question: suppose the hardware (chassis)breaks and the UNAS Pro is not sold anymore. Is there a way to recover your data?
Reason for asking: it is not the first time I hear people having a NAS, then the hardware breaks and there is no way to recover the data anymore afterwards. So it would be good to know if e.g. there is unifi software that can be installed on whatever box to be able to at least read the RAID when disks are dropped in another box
yeah that is called BACKUP just like any other NAS...
Not that keen on the UNAS, but I love that UniFi Mini Rack on wheels.
What don't you like about the UNAS? Is it because it is just a basic nas without the extra features or other things? Curious about that :).
I kind of like the UNAS for being a basic, no thrills NAS without the extra features that I would run on a separate server rather than in my NAS.
@@EsotericArctos it lacks functionality I look for. No iSCSI? No thanks.
If you want is an SMB share in a fancy case, then sure, go for the UNAS.
@TeeEllohwhydee iSCSI is more SAN and Enterprise level so maybe it will come with an enterprise version.
I don't know if the redundant power supply at this price point is a big thing. Same with the NIC at the same price point. Synology, as an example, at the same price point do not have redundant power options at all, where as unifi at least has an optional device. Same with NIC's My Synology 918+ which is equivalent price point if we move to the 923 version, doesn't even have multi gbps nic. it has 2 1gbps. QNAP is definitely a different beast to Synology though. I might have to review the QNNAP vs Syno video :).
When the UNVR first came out it only ran Protect. Now it can run both Protect and Access, so there is always potential for a combo style unit, but I am not sure this would fit with Ubiquiti's business model. Who would by a stand alone UNVR device if for the exact same price they had a NAS that can run Protect and have both in one device? I just can't see that happening, as much as it would be nice. Maybe I will be wrong on that :).
I have never really been a fan of a NAS trying to be a jack of all trades as I feel they end up mastering none, so I do see the UNAS as a bit of a breath of fresh air. That said, I have a Synology 918+ and a Synology 416 that I use primarily with Surveillance Station (combining the two to get 4 free camera licenses through CMS) This might be why I feel like defending UI and the UNAS a little with their first entry into the NAS world. I am not saying they have it all right, as I agree that things like NFS and possibly iSCSI if they can implement it well could be good options on a NAS / Storage device. These are NAS-centric features that really need to be added. I do like the security and integration to directory services Unifi have got in at first release. This is out of the box without needing additional apps. I do wish that the RAM was upgradeable on the UNAS, but it does seem to work really well on the hardware specs it has.
Protect can export to NAS devices, meaning footage can be archived to the UNAS ( or other NAS devices ) so that's kind of a good thing. that I like. Protect is still not fully up to the same feature set as the platform it replaced a couple of years ago ( Unifi Video) so Protect, as much as it is maturing, is still fairly young in the surveillance industry. Protect has really only been a contender recently, with its early days being pretty useless. Unifi Video was retired in 2021, less than 4 years ago.
I know I am making some long comments lately. Just so much to consider with these NAS devices. I guess I am hoping Ubiquiti might make there way in here and have a look at the comments and get some ideas, as well as maybe sparking some conversation and alternative views as well.
For what it's worth, I definitely, definitely know that the Ubiquiti team reads these comments. You should see the feedback I am sent by them (nothing official, just their teams response to my points) on some of these vids. It's certainly worth a punt putting feedback down here in the comments!
@@nascompares The more noise we make, the more they will listen.
UI Team - NFS has been a big thing in most reviews I have seen, and maybe an iSCSI implementation :).
Special for them lol
feel like if they put unifi protect on it no one would but the nvr,
My experience of QNAP is that their hardware sucks. Had a 4 bay worked fine, upgraded to an 8 bay that died with the dreaded won't boot issue. Upgraded to a much larger one thinking it was bad luck and 24 months later, that one is dead after a long series of reliability issues.
I would not buy QNAP ever, they suck. Even when the machine would boot, the Plex service would die every time QNAP pushed out an upgrade until it was installed and the SAMBA server was down more often than it was up.
Am moving to a TrueNAS scale build.
1:30 if you're going to let what Unifi has done to set the discussion you should have limited this to QNAP's short depth rack mounts IMHO. For that matter, this would be a great time to suggest a SHORT DEPTH RACK MOUNT SHOOTOFF. Limit yourself to the true shortdepth rackmounts (e.g. >14 inches.)
If this video was only about hardware and/or specifically that Rackmount, I would agree. However, a user will buy a solution from either of these brand as that...a solution. And a big part of that is the evolving software platform and company focus towards it at QNAP and UniFi. I reckon in 12 months time, there will be 2-3 more UNAS devices and the software will evolve (same for QNAP, but more so), so I wanted to cover the brands who respect NAS input and output as broadly as possible to keep it relevant. Hope that annoying word salad makes sense of my brain!
@@nascompares Perfectly sensible.
Cheers for muddling through my messy message!
Does the UNAS support more than 1 drive pool?
nope
@ hmm may not get it then
did you try installing protect on the unifi NAS yet?
BTW he right way to say ARM has always been as a word 'arm' - ooh for once in a video you switched between ARM and A.R.M, loosing your mojo ;-)
I really wanna be a diehard fan of Unifi, but after seeing how some of the places they cheap out its so difficult. I love their UI, but it frankly feel a bit Temu like
Quite fond of unsaid these days
Soldered RAM, No x86 processor, No VM software, No Buy
Out. Tough, but fair
UniFi UNAS Pro, they gone the mac root and made it so simple that you have no real options, its get what's your given, there RAID setup being a classic example, its a terrible implementation of a NAS device from what I see, even for a novice.
Love your channel. But would like to clarify a widespread misunderstanding in knowledge about qnap deadbolt. To my knowledge, most common among people who did not update their firmware on qnap.
There's more to it than that I'm afraid. I have a video coming up on this, but deadbolt was also the result of some apps being able to open up ports when they should not have, admin credentials being enabled, SSH being left on (mixed reports on that one) and an application having hard coded credentials. Plus, the forced update afterwards for users resulted in poor customer/business relationships getting further strained.
@@nascompares looking forward to this video. Thx
@@nascomparesif QNAP didn't learn and change I would be with you. They just had a security issue. I had a email about it and the nas had a mandatory update. They added bitdefender to the os and zfs to smaller systems. What more could they do to please you? You seem to give Synology major passes and beat up qnap
Sit tight for the vid mate, that'll explain my methodology
if you are not currently in the UNIFi space, i see no reason to jump into a single purpose NAS only device. If you are a brand loyalist, then go ahead and not expect any more than simple file storage.
86 the goofy screen, front ports and make it 8 bay. That or keep those gimmicks and throw 8 bays of flash in the top row
If you are looking for a 1u 4bay qnap nas, I have one for sale ! 😃
Milking the cow much? 😂
Mooo.
But honestly it does make sense to do a side by side of one of the most frequently requested NAS entries that I can recall. I would expect a similar video to Terremaster as well.
Sure he can keep milking the unifi NAS by pitting it against each brand out there, including the likes of Aoostar and churn out another 12 videos. Mooo. Mooo. 🤣😂
Hi bud. I mean...would you rather I didn't compare this new entry into the world of NAS Vs the status quo? Sure, I would have not made the vids, or left them for a few months...but why? People are asking me to compare these, to evaluate UniFi in ALOT of ways in the world of NAS? I would genuinely welcome your suggestion for how else I can approach this? Won't be doing a Vs with Asustor or Terramaster as...well...no one asked!
you can makes videos about whatever you want. The point is that if you make a video about this unifi every second day, it feels you are milking this new product as much as possible. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, save for the bad optics.
If you need ideas, for what is worth, I have noticed on Ali a couple new NAS offers from Orico and new (at least in term of style) DAS enclosures from their subsidiary Yottamaster. Edit: there are a couple Yottamaster NAS models as well.
@@nascompares Keep on comparing the UNAS Pro. It is the new kid on the block. Taking into account the track record of Ubiquiti this one indeed could disrupt the status quo on consumer/prosumer NAS hardware. Keep up the good job