3 ms·
>In WD's terms, they'd tell you that if you've got e.g. your /var partition mounted over SMB to your NAS, then your NAS is receiving a Desktop workload, and so
by simias 7y ago
>In WD's terms, they'd tell you that if you've got e.g. your /var partition mounted over SMB to your NAS, then your NAS is receiving a Desktop workload, and so you should use their Desktop drives in it, not NAS drives.
That's still obfuscation bordering on scam IMO, if the drives have technical limitations they should be spelled out, not hidden behind broad terms like "NAS drive", especially when they're branded the same way as older drives that didn't have these limitations.
Also, you'll have to explain to me how having these drives perform correctly while rebuilding a RAID array is not a "usual NAS" scenario. Because reading TFA it seems like getting these drives in a NAS to begin with is a challenge on its own.
- Teever 7y agoYeah, that seems pretty scummy to be. I was under the impression that "NAS" drives were objectively better than "Desktop" drives. The clerk at the computer shop tried to upsell me on the NAS drives, chortled when I said "the "I" in RAID stands for "Inexpensive" and told me that I would regret my purchase. It seems to me that my cheapness inadvertently paid off?