jetspeedz wrote:your phone is not connected to a Gbit network so since the NAS is it will perform better
jetspeedz wrote:still not as powerful as the processor in these NAS !!!
jetspeedz wrote:Clearly you are the only who thinks so with such a contrive statement
synozomg wrote:Clueless, I guess. No, it will not perform better, the above statement makes zero sense. Here is a hint - go have a look at the NAS CPU usage when you are transferring data at high rate to the NAS. Hmmm? Still nothing?
synozomg wrote:jetspeedz wrote:still not as powerful as the processor in these NAS !!!
Which powerful processor do the low-end (say two-bay models) feature? I guess you never looked at any specs of the low-end Syno models? They have a single-core CPU and (at best) half the RAM of an over one year old Samsung Galaxy S2, e.g. The 412+ gets on par with that 1+ year old phone in the RAM department at least. Wheee!
synozomg wrote:jetspeedz wrote:Clearly you are the only who thinks so with such a contrive statement
Many people probably do not even bother commenting on nonsensical feature requests, mostly because those who are requesting such features do not have a clue about the technical implementation. Technically-minded people can safely say that it will not implemented regardless of whether 10 or even overwhelming 20 folks loudly demand it in the forum.
jetspeedz wrote:The Web Browser in this NAS would set it apart from any other product out there
jetspeedz wrote: the possibilities of what it can be used for over the Internet away from home are endless.
Yeah, possibilities of using a browser inside a browser are indeed endless. The technically-minded people there use a proxy and/or VPN - but nevermind. Critical missing feature indeed. Every NAS must have a GUI-based web browser.
synozomg wrote:P.S. If your ISP does not allow you to access port 80, I am wondering how are you commenting here. But lets just assume you came to make more of uneducated noise, right?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest