Goodbye Synology

[jekyll]

@scottwilkins
So what are you stating...

Are you saying that the synology system did not do what it said on the box when you bought it.

or...

Are you saying, that since buying the synology system the extra functions that have been integrated did not work properly?

if it is the last statement, you didn't buy into the extras... they are free for existing customers, that is why if you want the new features you have to pay!

It's like paying for support... only you get to keep the old hardware.
quite a deal really, they could offer a year or two updates and make you pay extra.
that way, you dont get to keep your old hardware... ad personally my old trusty 106 still works for certain things like work where my 407 is for personal use.

[jjankechu]

First and probably last post here:

I purchased a bare CS406 in July 2007 for >$500. After adding 4 disks, the total cost was close to 1k, which made this a substantial investment. The decision to EOL this product occured 1/2009, less than 1.5 years later. For a 4-bay network data appliance, this seems like an unacceptable amount of time.

The shipping firmware worked fine, even if it was rough and unpolished. I chalked it up to Synology being a smaller company, and it was something I expected when I made my purchase. As time went on and regular firmware updates were released, I was pleasantly surprised as things got better and better. I started to tell my friends about Synology and how they've differentiated themselves from the competition by providing regular updates. This is a compelling story. When people came over and saw my setup, I had nothing but good things to say about Synology, a company that none of them had heard of before.

I think the regular firmware updates built you some goodwill with us, your customers. You are still a relative unknown (at least here in the US) amongst other names and products -- drobo, netgear/infrant, buffalo. Amongst the nerdier set, there's qnap and thecus, too. And the space is only going to get bigger and more crowded with larger CE names -- I saw LG announce a NAS at this past CES 2009. Throw in consumer-friendly Windows Home Server products from HP, and even products like Apple's time capsule / Apple TV and really, where does that leave Synology? Why abandon the momentum you've built with your best and loudest customers? We are early product adopters who are willing to take a chance on "no-name" because we have the technical expertise to overlook rough and unpolished products.

Here's the thing Synology: in late 2007, this space was still relatively new. I was grateful for the firmware/application updates. But that's not the case anymore in 2009 -- you have competitors, namely data robotics, that have very compelling 3rd-party apps. So really, these updates are no longer "favors" so much as they are (or should be) par for the course. By cutting off support to us, you're moving the Synology experience backwards, not forward. And I will remember that when it comes time to replace my Synology, or when I talk to people about my home NAS setup.

And ultimately, it sucks all the more because I really doubt that the C406 cannot be supported. I can kinda get it for the consumer-level devices, but this leaves a very unpleasant taste in my mouth.

[Lord Chaos]

I must say that with the high cost of the synology units I would expect longer lifetime. I am happy with my Synology as it is right now, but it has been a long and expensive way of buying new synology products every so often (406->407->DS508->DS509+), heck rather sucked that they couldn't make the DS508 compatible with the DX5, so we had to buy yet another Synology box just to take advantage of it.

Seems a little shady way of sucking money out of customers...I think it would be better if they had more customers, but sucked less out of each individual one.

[jekyll]

rather sucked that they couldn't make the DS508 compatible with the DX5

It's down to the esata IC! it's not port multiplier aware
You cant blame syn for not integrating it when the DX5 was not in production.

[peterk]

rather sucked that they couldn't make the DS508 compatible with the DX5

It's down to the esata IC! it's not port multiplier aware
You cant blame syn for not integrating it when the DX5 was not in production.

I think it is. According to this, the esata IC is a Silicon Image Sil3512, which i believe is port multiplier capable.

[jekyll]

I think it is. According to this, the esata IC is a Silicon Image Sil3512, which i believe is port multiplier capable.

I understand what your saying... however theres no info in that page that states the Sil3512 is port multi aware.
I've also had a quick google and found nothing...

It maybe that it's SW related, i know of another IC that synology use... and it's been stated that the certain IC does not support a script... when the maker of the IC specifies it does...

I guess you'll have to look more in depth and share your results!

[peterk]

I think it is. According to this, the esata IC is a Silicon Image Sil3512, which i believe is port multiplier capable.

I understand what your saying... however theres no info in that page that states the Sil3512 is port multi aware. I've also had a quick google and found nothing...

Look at here for example: Press Release Silicon Image Demonstrates SATA Port Multiplier Capability

"The demo, to be shown at Silicon Image's booth #502 at the Intel Developer Forum being held at the San Jose Convention Center this week, shows one channel of Silicon Image's new SATALink™ SiI™ 3512™ host controller communicating with multiple Serial ATA hard disk drives through Silicon Image's prototype Serial ATA port multiplier."

I'm not 100% sure though. The brochure of other known multi aware chips of Silicon Image like 3132 explicitly states that those chips are capable for port multiplying, while the brossure of 3512 does not say a word about it. So... i don't know.

[jekyll]

Hello peterk,

Today i found 2 PDF's, 1 on the Silicone Image IC and another on Port Multipliers...
See page 85 of the SI IC for PMP 16 through 19, aparently PM allow upto 15 devices from a single IC!

I was going to reply today, however it's been a busy day..

You possibly know this info already, but to anybody else out there.. it could make an interesting read...

Enjoy