3 ms·
Meh.. i do kinda forgive them. They tried, they lost, they reveserd their decision and hope to keep their customers (read:sales) happy. There are plenty of comp
by b3lvedere 1y ago
Meh.. i do kinda forgive them. They tried, they lost, they reveserd their decision and hope to keep their customers (read:sales) happy. There are plenty of companies which would double or triple down their bad decisions and flatly tell the customer is the problem.
Our customers usually want nice, but monitor/manageble NASes and Synology was quite acceptable. It got annoying when we could not put in any harddisk we'd wanted, but most of our customers did not really care, so we didn't as well. If you absolutely need superb storage you should stop using NASes anyway and get a far better (but more expensive) solution.
Then again if i myself want some NAS functionality, i'd fire up a Debian with Samba using any hardware i want.
- Jaepa 1y agoThey did that though. They have doubled down and told the users they were wrong & that this was a needed Eventually relenting because of the consequences isn't a laudable accomplishment. Also it very much appears as they not really relenting, just trying to recover some PR https://www.heise.de/en/news/Synology-only-partially-removes-drive-restriction-for-Plus-NAS-10742895.html https://www.heise.de/en/news/Synology-only-partially-removes...
- b3lvedere 1y agoI stand corrected. Thank you. I was under the assumption you could use any type of drive from any brand now again. It appears i assumed wrong. Just use any SSD brand, but forced to use Synology branded platter HDDs is not quite acceptable.
- Jaepa 1y agoMy guess is that the confusion is very much the point.