NAS Device opinions

Syndil

I was comparing the Ultra 6 Plus since it is roughly the same price level as the Synology, but you could always get the Ultra 6 non-plus with the Atom CPU if power consumption is really a concern, and save about $100 in the process.

Those Synology 5-bay expansions tax the NAS hardware even more since they have no CPU or RAM of their own. And since they cost $500 each, seems like a pretty poor choice once you compare the competition. A 5-bay Synology NAS plus a 5-bay slaved expansion (10 drives running off the same CPU/RAM) costs the same as an Ultra 6 and an Ultra 4, each with their own CPU/RAM.

And that app list is paltry compared to the Netgear's, and does not include major third-party apps like Dropbox, Egnyte, Skifta, or TiVo. Netgear's list won't fit in a screenshot, so here's the links if you're interested:

http://www.readynas.com/?cat=36

http://www.readynas.com/?cat=75

http://www.readynas.com/?cat=75&paged=2

I think there's enough info in this thread for people to make an informed decision on their own.

DMara

Definitely a list of apps that are kinda overlapped. Why do I need skifta or a bunch of other Netgear apps that do the same thing if one single app provided by Synology can do the same thing?
Same thing with Symantec, why do I need it if Synology got one with a different name?
And about the DX510 add-in, it's great for users that want a single volume, so purchasing two separate NAS would be a poor choice. I don't want to browse multiple volumes for my media; I'd rather use a desktop that way.

Syndil

DMara wrote: »

Definitely a list of apps that are kinda overlapped. Why do I need skifta or a bunch of other Netgear apps that do the same thing if one single app provided by Synology can do the same thing?

Netgear provides its own app that does the same thing as well, called ReadyNAS Remote. But if a person is already using services such as Skifta, Egnyte or Dropbox, or if they decide they want the extra features that Skifta, Egnyte or Dropbox offer, they have that choice. Choice is a good thing.

And show me the Synology app that allows you to use it with your TiVo. I don't have a TiVo now, but I may get one of the refurbs that woot.com often offers in the unforeseen future. Nice to know that I at least have the option of using my ReadyNAS with the TiVo if I do.

I also find it comforting to know that Logitech officially supports LMS on the ReadyNAS, so that when future versions come along I don't have to worry about whether or not they will work properly on my device.

If you really want a super-large single volume, Netgear will sell you a 12-bay ReadyNAS 3200 or 4200, but they won't sell it to you without a minimum of 4GB ECC RAM and a more powerful CPU. For a reason.

Do you work for Synology or something?

DMara

Well, you should have asked yourself if you work for Netgear :razz: What's with the personal attack? You seem to lose yourself there.
Qnap / Synology will sell you a NAS with more RAM and more powerful CPU, too. Just ask and you shall receive. Most reviews out there gave the Qnap NAS devices top spots, I've never had the nerve to claim that crown for Synology, but you are the one that have always sang about your Netgear. Now who works for Netgear? :razz: If you want to go low, I can do it, too :cool:

Kinda funny when you listed a bunch of apps that you didn't actually have a use for.
LMI app? Have I ever had any LMI issue streaming to my Logitech SB Touch and Duet devices? No! So why all of a sudden do I have to worry about losing LMI on my Synology? And it's been updated a few times since I bought this device.
Egnyte app? It's an app to transform your Netgear NAS into a cloud server. Well, Synology got the whole package called Cloud Station that can do the very same thing (http://www.synology.com/dsm/home_file_sharing_cloud_station.php?lang=us).
Dropbox app? Qnap also has a Dropbox app while Synology go with HiDrive Backup (http://www.synology.com/dsm/dsm_app.php?lang=us). So if you ask me about Synology's Dropbox support, where is Netgear's HiDrive support? It's just a matter of choice.
And if I'm actually interested in Tivo, then there's the combination of Synology NAS & pyTIvo. You might need to buy a Synology to verify :razz: Also, who is crazy enough to set up a NAS to run Tivo app? It will slow everything down tremendously due to the transcoding process, so I'd rather use my Intel i7-2600 / 16GB RAM desktop to mess with Tivo instead of any little NAS. You talk the talk like your little Netgear can handle Tivo smoothly :razz: Up until the end of this March, that ReadyNas' Tivo app is still having plenty of problems, so it's not really a great app at the moment.
If you want 3rd-party app? Here's the Synology page: http://www.synology.com/support/3rd_party.php?lang=us

I didn't get any problem with how good a Netgear ReadyNAS device is; I got a problem with your declaration that Netgear NAS devices are the BEST of all. You are completely clueless about Qnap and Synology, totally ignore various positive traits of those NAS devices while spit grandstanding statements out without proof. Would you please show me a report or a research that shows Netgear NAS devices as the BEST out there? And now you even came down to using personal attack. If you want to debate seriously, please get rid of that ugly habit.

Syndil

First of all, what personal attack? Just because I am offering reasons why the Netgear is a superior device to the Synology (like I was asked to do) does not make it a personal attack. Only a fanboy would equate a criticism of their brand with a criticism of themselves. The question of whether or not you worked for Synology was a serious one.

Cloud Station is Synology's cloud service, just like ReadyNAS Remote is Netgear's cloud service. But in addition to their own cloud service, Netgear offers access to existing, well-established cloud services that a user may already be using or that they may choose to use over Netgear's included solution.

Netgear offers its own built-in cloud backup service as well, called ReadyNAS Vault, in addition to the choice of using Egnyte, Dropbox, etc. Synology's HiDrive is hosted by Strato, one of Europe's largest ISP/hosting providers. To perform backup/restore operations with HiDrive on the Synology, your data travels to/from Germany, along with all the performance and security concerns that comes with. With Netgear, you get Netgear's built-in solution (here in the US), or you have a choice of existing, well-established third-party solutions.

pyTivo can be made to work on the Synology (or the ReadyNAS), but not without considerable effort. Far beyond the average home user's capabilities. Enabling Netgear's built-in TiVo support looks like this:



You check a box and activate your device.

I understand you have a problem with me declaring Netgear to be the best, because it is not your favored brand. But selling and supporting NAS devices is what I do. It's part of my job. My recommendation comes from research and experience. If a customer tells me they want to buy a QNAP or a Synology or a Thecus, Buffalo, Dlink, or LG, I sell them one, I set it up, and I support it. However most of the time the customer asks me which one they should buy, and I usually tell them to get a ReadyNAS, for all the various reasons I have mentioned in this thread. They consistently offer the most value for the dollar in terms of performance and flexibility, as well as being extremely reliable with a superb support community.

The proof you asked for is here in this thread, as I have addressed each of your concerns directly and to the point. No matter how you rephrase the question, the facts are still going to be the same.


For anyone else still following this thread, the coupon code EMCYTZT1556 is no longer valid at Newegg, but they are still offering instant rebates on most of their ReadyNAS devices, which can be combined with the 1TB or 2TB HDD combo deals. Not as good a deal as the coupon was, but still the best deal to be had. No HDD combo deals to be had with the Synology or QNAP products.

DMara

Syndil wrote: »

First of all, what personal attack? Just because I am offering reasons why the Netgear is a superior device to the Synology (like I was asked to do) does not make it a personal attack. Only a fanboy would equate a criticism of their brand with a criticism of themselves. The question of whether or not you worked for Synology was a serious one.

When you question an opponent in a debate about their employer, that's a personal attack. You should be smart enough to understand that. Why didn't I ask you if you are working for Netgear since you've been advertising for them all the time here? That's because I want you to show your opinion with proof instead of attacking your personal motive.

Syndil wrote: »

Cloud Station is Synology's cloud service, just like ReadyNAS Remote is Netgear's cloud service. But in addition to their own cloud service, Netgear offers access to existing, well-established cloud services that a user may already be using or that they may choose to use over Netgear's included solution.

Netgear offers its own built-in cloud backup service as well, called ReadyNAS Vault, in addition to the choice of using Egnyte, Dropbox, etc. Synology's HiDrive is hosted by Strato, one of Europe's largest ISP/hosting providers. To perform backup/restore operations with HiDrive on the Synology, your data travels to/from Germany, along with all the performance and security concerns that comes with. With Netgear, you get Netgear's built-in solution (here in the US), or you have a choice of existing, well-established third-party solutions.

It just doesn't make sense you you pointed out that Netgear's built-in solution is "here in the US." What? So Synology's Cloud Station and Qnap's Cloud services aren't? All of these companies got their built-in cloud services in the US also, so why do you have to add that info?
Synology's 3rd-party HiDrive Backup was praised because of the security measures. Quoted from one of the articles:
"To get people interested in their new service, the company is offering 5GB of free storage via www.free-hidrive.com ? over double that of Dropbox or Wuala.
The main selling point of Strato, however, is not the extra storage space ? it?s the way the company stores your data. Everything is saved at two ISO2709-rated data centres ? the same protection banks use to keep your money in their vaults.
The CO2-free server farm is based in Germany, which means that access to the data is protect via Germany?s strong data privacy laws ? tougher than those found in the US."

Syndil wrote: »

pyTivo can be made to work on the Synology (or the ReadyNAS), but not without considerable effort. Far beyond the average home user's capabilities. Enabling Netgear's built-in TiVo support looks like this:

You check a box and activate your device.

Checking a box doesn't mean the app is great. You admitted you have never used that app, and by the response of how that app fared, Netgear NAS owners haven't given it much approval due to bug and slowness issue. I mean, you are asking a little home NAS to do a lot of transcoding conversion, and that really is not the strong point of NAS devices.

Syndil wrote: »

I understand you have a problem with me declaring Netgear to be the best, because it is not your favored brand. But selling and supporting NAS devices is what I do. It's part of my job. My recommendation comes from research and experience. If a customer tells me they want to buy a QNAP or a Synology or a Thecus, Buffalo, Dlink, or LG, I sell them one, I set it up, and I support it. However most of the time the customer asks me which one they should buy, and I usually tell them to get a ReadyNAS, for all the various reasons I have mentioned in this thread. They consistently offer the most value for the dollar in terms of performance and flexibility, as well as being extremely reliable with a superb support community.

Nope, I have a problem with you declaring so because you have no concrete proof but your personal opinion, not because it's not my favored brand. I'm using a Netgear switch, but I decided to go against Netgear NAS and buy a Synology because of its capabilities and interface. You've also admitted that Netgear NAS has just got itself into surveillance cameras while Qnap and Synology have supported that for quite a while already.

Syndil wrote: »

The proof you asked for is here in this thread, as I have addressed each of your concerns directly and to the point. No matter how you rephrase the question, the facts are still going to be the same.

I saw fuzzy words without any other proof. Why couldn't you even provide any research or articles that put Netgear NAS as the top dog? In this thread it's all about your personal favor, not any proof. Sorry but I can't just take your words and agree with you. You've been consistent in having the last word by ignoring any point that went against your words. Well, that habit does show evidence in the Clubhouse's Blind Test argument, don't you think? (Now that's a personal attack :razz:)

DMara

March 2012: ZDNet --- http://www.zdnet.com.au/best-nas-339316969.htm#vp
March 2012: PC Magazine --- http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401086,00.asp
March 2012: PC World magazine --- http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/collection/1651/top_10_network_attached_storage_devices.html
April 2012: cNet --- http://reviews.cnet.com/best-network-attached-storage/
Amazon's current top rated NAS: http://www.amazon.com/gp/top-rated/electronics/13436301
etc.

Please let me know where people list the Netgear NAS as the top dog.

Syndil

I am not an employee of Netgear, no, but I am a Powershift reseller partner. I am also an authorized reseller of Synology products, FWIW.

I pointed out that Netgear's ReadyNAS Vault option is based in the US as a direct comparison to Synology's HiDrive, which is in Germany. Fine for small transfers, maybe, but sending large quantities of data overseas (as one might do backing up the contents of a NAS to the cloud) is not really feasible. Do a Google search for "HiDrive performance review" and most of what you will find is people backing up their mobile devices to HiDrive. Regardless, whether or not it works for you, the fact remains that it is the only option with the Synology. There is no option for Egnyte or Dropbox or any other well-established US-based cloud backup service with the Synology.

But if you're really hung up on using HiDrive, you can enable it as an RSYNC target on the ReadyNAS with minimal effort:

http://www.readynas.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=48658

With the TiVo it's the same story. pyTivo, which you mentioned in support of the Synology, is available on both the Synology and the ReadyNAS. ReadyNAS also offers their built-in solution should you choose to use that instead. If you think it's crap, don't use it. On the Synology, you don't even have the option of using it. With the Ultra and Ultra Plus Series' CPU, transcoding on the fly is not a problem. Many of the bugs you claim you have been reading about (but have not referenced) are probably due to the limited version of FFMPEG that the NAS ships with, but guess what, an enhanced version of FFMPEG is available as an add-on to resolve those issues.

As far as the surveillance thing goes, I looked into that further and have decided it's a wash, so I'm not sad that I did not go with using my ReadyNAS as an NVR instead of purchasing a standalone unit. Why? Because it requires purchasing separate licenses for each camera, at about $60 each. It's the same situation with Synology or any other NAS-based NVR. So yes, I applaud Netgear for adding the option as more choice is always a good thing, but I would not recommend the NAS-based approach over the all-in-one approach to anyone, regardless the brand of NAS.

I don't need to post any articles about how the Netgear NAS is the top dog, because like an informed consumer I have done the research myself, and have been offering the results of my research and experience here in this thread for everyone to peruse and verify on their own, if they choose to do so. The information is out there and easy to find. I don't need someone else to agree with my research in order for me to feel validated.


But since you took the effort to post the reviews, let's examine them closely. Of the reviews you posted, most failed to rate the Ultra/Ultra Plus series, which is a direct competitor of Synology's and QNAP's + series. PCMag didn't, PCWorld hasn't even reviewed one, and CNet used an older ReadyNAS NV+ in their comparison, which still managed to rank #2. The ZDnet AU comparison is a mish-mash of non-competing units, pitching a $740 Ultra 6 non-plus vs. an $850 QNAP TS-659 Pro+, which is the exact same price as an Ultra 6 Plus.

The Amazon comparison is heavily weighted by the number of reviews submitted. If you look at the actual star rating of the top-rated ReadyNAS product, the Ultra 2 Plus at number 12, you will see that is has a 5-star rating. Every Synology and QNAP in the top 11 has either a 4.5 or 4-star rating. Granted, Synology's direct competitor to the ReadyNAS Ultra 2 Plus, the DS712+, also managed to score a 5-star rating, and is right beneath the ReadyNAS at number 13 (with drives) and 14 (diskless). However it also costs $500 diskless, as opposed to the ReadyNAS at $380. The hardware in the two devices is nearly identical, except the Synology has only a single-core Atom D425 CPU, while the less expensive, more flexible Ultra 2 Plus has a dual-core Atom D525.

newrival

DMara wrote: »

When you question an opponent in a debate about their employer, that's a personal attack. You should be smart enough to understand that.

It's actually not an ad homonym attack it is technically a red herring. Specifically, appeal to motive. That is when you attempt to dismiss an argument or gain an upper-hand by questioning the motives of the opponent.

Now back to the debate!

DMara

You can't throw pricing out there as THE way to select which category a NAS should be in. If you can do so, Emotiva amps would be the top dog because users can't just put a high-end Parasound at the same level with its product. Everybody know Qnap NAS are expensive than the rest and Synology are a little more expensive than Netgear, but the important thing to compare is each device's specs and performance. For example, if you take a look at the Qnap TS-879 Pro, how are you going to compare it to a Netgear NAS via pricing? Netgear is not a NAS-major company while Qnap and Synology are, and that's one of the main reasons why their products gain much respect as well as can sell at higher prices. Why do you think most articles from well-known internet sites/online magazines didn't list Netgear NAS as #1, or not a lot of Netgear users provided comments?
It's easy for you to ignore Netgear's limitation to cling to your point stubbornly. You're the one that claimed that a 1-year-old research comparing NAS devices' read/write speed wasn't something that could be used to see which devices were better; well, if that's the case, then wait until a new research comes out to see which one is the best, don't just ignore the fact that way. You're the one that brought out the Netgear's recent release of surveillance camera support as an evidence for you to declare it "top dog," but you're also easy to put that down as soon as I pointed out that Qnap and Synology had that app a long time ago. You're so easy to ignore the fact that most of Qnap and Synology NAS devices consume less power than Netgear's. And you kept blurring the argument with apps that you're not even using like those are really popular apps. Sorry but the response from the majority out there has proved that Netgear NAS devices are not at the highest level as you claimed. I also did some research before purchasing a Synology. Mind you I'm not a Netgear - Qnap - Synology middle man like yourself, I'm just a regular user but a very picky one who can easily get rid of my devices, no mater if it's an audio/video device or computer-related device, if I don't feel comfortable with it. Well, originally I only wanted it for LMI, but it was this Synology DS1511+ NAS that brought me into the IP camera installation, the LAG bonding, the cloud servicing, and the multiple-OS media streaming, and it has never sputtered at my home entertainment demand. So that's my experience, and I even posted pics as proof. Yours? You just declared that you're a salesman, a middle man at best, and your experience on your NAS is this:

Syndil wrote: »

The only app mine is running is the Logitech Media Server. Other than that it's simply a backup target for my PCs and security DVR, so a single core was sufficient in my case. But if you plan to run a few more apps or enable the cloud features like ReadyNAS Remote or Skifta, then yeah, I might recommend springing for the dual-core.

I'd rather trust my own experience and the internet's opinion than yours. My conclusion: I agree to disagree with you

DMara

newrival wrote: »

It's actually not an ad homonym attack it is technically a red herring. Specifically, appeal to motive. That is when you attempt to dismiss an argument or gain an upper-hand by questioning the motives of the opponent.

Now back to the debate!

I would question a salesman's motive more than a regular user's :biggrin:

Syndil

First off I'm not a salesman; I am a VAR. Big difference. I have no storefront or website from which you can buy things directly from me. The people that I am selling to are people that I have support contracts with--people that trust me to make their technology decisions for them, and then maintain said technology. My margin on stuff that I sell is ridiculously small. For both me and my customers it's more a matter of convenience than anything else. They pay my company for both the support and the hardware receive on one bill, instead of me telling them to go buy such-and-such from some such company. I sell it, I deliver it, I set it up, I maintain it. Since I move so little volume, I make so little profit from the actual sales of the hardware that it's hardly worth mentioning. Often times Newegg or Amazon will be able to sell the hardware at a price that is a few dollars lower than my own cost from my distributors. So whatever ulterior motives you think I may have from selling the stuff, you're wrong. A salesperson might sell whatever they can make the most commission on and then let someone else worry about supporting it. If I did that I'd be shooting myself in the foot, since I am the one supporting it. That is why I am absolutely obsessive about the amount of research I put in to the products I recommend and sell, because if I sell crap, it makes me look like an idiot. If I recommend and sell a product, you can rest assured that it's the best available for the money, otherwise I would not sell it.

And while my own personal NAS is admittedly not doing a whole lot, I operate far more than just my own. Each NAS I sell is a NAS I maintain, and I can guarantee you my customers are doing a whole lot more with theirs than I am with my little Ultra 2. How many NAS devices do you support?

You say that Netgear is not a "NAS-major" company, but you're wrong there too. Netgear's ReadyNAS division started off as a separate company called Infrant which concentrated solely on NAS devices. Infrant was founded in 2001, and when Netgear acquired them in 2007, they were already a very well-known and well-regarded manufacturer of NASes. Netgear took the entire company with the acquisition, employees and all. The guys I would talk to when I needed help with my Infrant-branded NAS's (which are all still in use today, btw) are the same guys supporting Netgear's ReadyNAS devices today. Given their long history and well-established market presence, it's no surprise that in 2011, no one sold more NAS units under the $5k price point than Netgear (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/netgear-ranked-as-leading-nasunified-storage-vendor-in-2011-2012-04-09).

Now that that's settled... I can actually go along with something you said, which was that the important thing to compare is each device's specs and performance rather than price. But if we are to do that, it widens the gap between Netgear and Synology even further.

For instance, let's take the DS712+ and the ReadyNAS Ultra 2 Plus that I mentioned earlier. These are products that are arguably intended to compete with each other, except that the Netgear Ultra 2 Plus is $120 cheaper, while at the same time having a dual-core Atom D525 CPU opposed to the Synology's D425 single-core. If we were to match products on specs, the competing Netgear product would instead be the ReadyNAS Ultra 2 non-plus, which has the exact same hardware specs as the DS712+, but costs $200 less than the DS712+! Oh scratch that, it's not the same hardware; the ReadyNAS offers USB 3.0 connectivity while the Synology does not. My mistake.

You'll see much the same scenario with the 4-bay and 6-bay products and from other manufacturers as well. ReadyNAS simply gives you much more for the money. More hardware and more apps.

I suppose that it is a shame that there are not more reviews and comparisons of ReadyNAS products available, but obviously they don't have a problem selling them, so they must be doing something right. Perhaps they feel they are so successful that they don't need to offer review units to reviewers in order to get the word out, who knows. Anyway I did manage to scrounge up a couple reviews just for you (with benchmarks, if those are your thing). One reviewer had this to say about the Ultra 2 Plus:

This was by far the easiest NAS Device I have ever used and set up. It was plug and play essentially. I didn't have to fiddle with any settings, it just worked. There was no tweaking the setup to get optimal performance, was just there. Anything I have thrown at this device it has handled and then some. I have to give credit to Netgear's Engineers, I do not know what tweaks are hidden in the OS of the device, but the decision to use an Intel Atom dual-core processor was a great one. Its performance can clearly be seen.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1594/1/

And another had this to say about the Ultra 6 Plus:

The Ultra 6 Plus is in a class by itself for NAS devices and is approaching previous PC to PC transfer rates that I have measured. If you are looking for fast I/O, the ReadyNAS Ultra 6 Plus comes with the fastest Ethernet transfer rates I have tested on a Linux-based NAS unit.

http://www.wegotserved.com/2011/04/30/hands-netgear-rndp600u-readynas-ultra-6/

strider

I skipped over most of that back and forth, not to be rude, but because I got bored.

I did, however, check out some of the reviews etc on the Synology gear. Does look like nice stuff and the reviews are solid, just a bit pricier then similar Netgear offerings. To add a frame of reference to my predicament, right now I'm in "discussions" with the wife over the merits of an NAS set up vs storing our data solely on a cloud. We need storage for our pictures, movies, music etc. that is safe and offers some redundency. I need something that can serve my music files in a way that's commensurate with the quality of my audio system. In my opinion, I don't think a cloud can offer that. Help me sell the wife, guys. :cheesygrin:

DMara

Syndil wrote: »

I am not an employee of Netgear, no, but I am a Powershift reseller partner. I am also an authorized reseller of Synology products, FWIW.

Syndil wrote: »

First off I'm not a salesman; I am a VAR. Big difference. I have no storefront or website from which you can buy things directly from me. The people that I am selling to are people that I have support contracts with--people that trust me to make their technology decisions for them, and then maintain said technology. My margin on stuff that I sell is ridiculously small. For both me and my customers it's more a matter of convenience than anything else. They pay my company for both the support and the hardware receive on one bill, instead of me telling them to go buy such-and-such from some such company. I sell it, I deliver it, I set it up, I maintain it. Since I move so little volume, I make so little profit from the actual sales of the hardware that it's hardly worth mentioning. Often times Newegg or Amazon will be able to sell the hardware at a price that is a few dollars lower than my own cost from my distributors. So whatever ulterior motives you think I may have from selling the stuff, you're wrong. A salesperson might sell whatever they can make the most commission on and then let someone else worry about supporting it. If I did that I'd be shooting myself in the foot, since I am the one supporting it. That is why I am absolutely obsessive about the amount of research I put in to the products I recommend and sell, because if I sell crap, it makes me look like an idiot. If I recommend and sell a product, you can rest assured that it's the best available for the money, otherwise I would not sell it.
And while my own personal NAS is admittedly not doing a whole lot, I operate far more than just my own. Each NAS I sell is a NAS I maintain, and I can guarantee you my customers are doing a whole lot more with theirs than I am with my little Ultra 2. How many NAS devices do you support?

Previously you said you dealt with all kinds of NAS. I'm surprised such a VAR didn't even know surveillance camera support has been there with Qnap and Synology for a while before NetGear jumped in, so much that you used that Netgear addition announcement to proclaim their value :razz: I mean, if you don't even know your product well, how are you going to know what's best for your users? How are you going to maintain them if you don't even know some of their functions? I don't know what kind of support you provided, but to the knowledge of the majority, VAR customer support is very basic, and most issues will be forwarded to the manufacturer support, so your claim of multiple NAS devices support doesn't mean a thing to me.

Syndil wrote: »

For instance, let's take the DS712+ and the ReadyNAS Ultra 2 Plus that I mentioned earlier. These are products that are arguably intended to compete with each other, except that the Netgear Ultra 2 Plus is $120 cheaper, while at the same time having a dual-core Atom D525 CPU opposed to the Synology's D425 single-core. If we were to match products on specs, the competing Netgear product would instead be the ReadyNAS Ultra 2 non-plus, which has the exact same hardware specs as the DS712+, but costs $200 less than the DS712+! Oh scratch that, it's not the same hardware; the ReadyNAS offers USB 3.0 connectivity while the Synology does not. My mistake.

You'll see much the same scenario with the 4-bay and 6-bay products and from other manufacturers as well. ReadyNAS simply gives you much more for the money. More hardware and more apps.

It's so easy for you to marvel at all the hooplas and ignore the rest. Software-wise, all essential functions can be performed by all of the mentioned NAS, Synology with a better interface for a regular user to follow, Synology with way better power consumption saving... Why on earth do you need to power a 2-bay home NAS with a more powerful CPU? Don't you think, if all functions can run smoothly, then the most important value to be considered is to save some energy?

Syndil wrote: »

I suppose that it is a shame that there are not more reviews and comparisons of ReadyNAS products available, but obviously they don't have a problem selling them, so they must be doing something right. Perhaps they feel they are so successful that they don't need to offer review units to reviewers in order to get the word out, who knows. Anyway I did manage to scrounge up a couple reviews just for you (with benchmarks, if those are your thing). One reviewer had this to say about the Ultra 2 Plus:



http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1594/1/

Thanks for presenting that review and mentioning the benchmarks, because from the same site, at the Storage area: http://www.legitreviews.com/articles/storage/, you can find a bunch of other NAS such as Thecus N5550 and QNAP TS-419P+ that beat the Negear Ultra 2 Plus handily per read/write speed.

Syndil wrote: »

And another had this to say about the Ultra 6 Plus:

The Ultra 6 Plus is in a class by itself for NAS devices and is approaching previous PC to PC transfer rates that I have measured. If you are looking for fast I/O, the ReadyNAS Ultra 6 Plus comes with the fastest Ethernet transfer rates I have tested on a Linux-based NAS unit.

http://www.wegotserved.com/2011/04/30/hands-netgear-rndp600u-readynas-ultra-6/

Wow, have you actually read his review instead of just posting it? Here's a picture of the transfer data rate that he posted:

At this day and age, that rate can be beat by any of the Ultra 6 Plus competitors by a huge margin. He admitted didn't even have enough equipment to test dual-NIC output, so what kind of reviewer is he? In one of the pics I posted about my Synology DS1511+ transfer speed, my device can beat this Ultra 6 Plus easily.
Not only that, his conclusion about the Ultra 6 Plus speed actually came from the comparison to the following NAS:

Most of these are 2 or 4-bay devices.

But at the end of his "verdict" he wrote:

With a just announced reduction in the cost of the Ultra 6 Plus of $100, you may find this unit on your short list of NAS devices to consider if you are in market for one. Costs just prior to this cost reduction are:

$899.99 @ Amazon

?763.41 @ Amazon UK

which are in the same range as the 6-bay QNAP TS-659 Pro II for $1285.90/?968.75 or the 5-bay Synology DS1511+ for $865.99/?643.10.

Please tell me where in that speed comparison chart are the QNap TS-659 Pro II or the Synology DS1511+?

Hilarious

Syndil

I apologize in advance to readers of this thread actually interested in NAS devices. All the info you need is on the first page. Obviously at this point we are arguing just for the sake of argument, but what the hell, I'm game.

DMara wrote: »

Previously you said you dealt with all kinds of NAS. I'm surprised such a VAR didn't even know surveillance camera support has been there with Qnap and Synology for a while before NetGear jumped in, so much that you used that Netgear addition announcement to proclaim their value :razz: I mean, if you don't even know your product well, how are you going to know what's best for your users? How are you going to maintain them if you don't even know some of their functions? I don't know what kind of support you provided, but to the knowledge of the majority, VAR customer support is very basic, and most issues will be forwarded to the manufacturer support, so your claim of multiple NAS devices support doesn't mean a thing to me.

As a Value-Added Reseller, the reselling is secondary to the value-adding. My primary role with my customers, who are small to medium business, is to be their IT department. These customers don't have enough resources or the need for a full-time IT staff, but every company, no matter how small, has tech needs. That's where my company comes in. I do everything for these customers that a normal IT department would, from setting up email addresses, to virus removal, to deciding what equipment should be purchased and setting it up.

I'll admit I did not know much about the NAS-as-NVR segment before Netgear made the announcement, but that's because none of my customers have a need for it. Every one of them leases office space in buildings that provide their own surveillance. I mentioned the Netgear NVR as soon as I saw the announcement, thinking it was a pretty cool thing to be able to do with the NAS, thinking I might want to go that route for myself, and thinking that others might want to as well. But the announcement failed to mention that it was not a free add-on. Once I saw that it was licensed on a per-camera basis--as is done with all NAS-based NVR systems--it became pretty clear that this was nothing to be excited about. And it isn't. The Q-See system I have now came with a 500GB HDD, 8 cameras, and everything I need to make it work for less than the cost of 8 licenses alone would have been for the NAS. That's before cameras or any actual hardware. So yeah, if any of my customers ever do express interest in a surveillance system, I won't be recommending a NAS-based solution. Had it been license-free and all they needed to do was buy cameras--as I incorrectly assumed it would be--then hell yes I would. But as it stands now, you get much more value from a standalone system, and you can still back it up to the NAS.

It's so easy for you to marvel at all the hooplas and ignore the rest. Software-wise, all essential functions can be performed by all of the mentioned NAS, Synology with a better interface for a regular user to follow, Synology with way better power consumption saving... Why on earth do you need to power a 2-bay home NAS with a more powerful CPU? Don't you think, if all functions can run smoothly, then the most important value to be considered is to save some energy?

Hey, you're the one that said not to compare things on price but specs instead, so there it is. Of course now you call it hoopla. And power consumption? Really? The TDP of the D425 CPU in the Synology is 10W. The TDP of the D525 CPU in the ReadyNAS is 13W for a grand difference of 3W. That'll cost ~$4 a year, assuming the NAS is powered on 24/7/365. You're seriously splitting hairs over 3W power consumption? That's what I would call grasping. Any NAS isn't going to approach anywhere near the power consumption of, say, a regular PC, so an investment in a NAS--regardless the model--is going to be a power-saver for most people, as it means they can offload some of their work from their PC to the NAS. In my case, I went from running a ridiculously high-performance PC with a 1000W PSU 24/7 to a tiny NAS powered by a brick-type electronic DC power supply. Even if I had gone for the evil, power-guzzling Ultra 6 Plus that's still a huge amount of energy saved.

Thanks for presenting that review and mentioning the benchmarks, because from the same site, at the Storage area: http://www.legitreviews.com/articles/storage/, you can find a bunch of other NAS such as Thecus N5550 and QNAP TS-419P+ that beat the Negear Ultra 2 Plus handily per read/write speed.

Way to compare a 5-bay and a 4-bay device capable of running RAID 5 to a 2-bay RAID 0/1 device. :rolleyes:

But more to the point, now you're saying it's not energy consumption that matters but the performance? I see. First you say that all essential functions can be performed by any NAS, so why go for more powerful hardware. But now we're comparing benchmarks? Which is it? Either they all perform essentially the same and it's the power consumption that matters, or it's the performance that matters, which will obviously be helped by more powerful hardware. Flip-flop much?

I will say this, I don't really care what the benchmarks are, because I agree with your first position that the essential functions indeed can be performed by any NAS. The vast majority of SOHO users will never push their NAS to its performance envelope, so what does it matter if one NAS can eek out a few more MB/s than another? It doesn't. I can guarantee you that neither my own nor any of the multiple NAS devices I maintain are being pushed to their read/write limit. Aside from backups, people just don't transfer GB of data back-and-forth from the NAS on a regular basis. If they did, I'd have to have a talk with them and see what it was they were doing, because obviously there would be a procedural change in order.

The same goes for a home NAS user. The difference for a home user is not measured in MB/s--it's how it performs the non-essential functions, like being able to work with a TiVo, run Orb, LMS, or work with their favorite third-party cloud service with minimal effort. And when you are running multiple apps on a device, that extra CPU power to run those non-essential apps is going to make much more of a difference than a handful of MB/s. You say you wouldn't run pyTivo on any NAS, but if you got the horsepower to do it (as you do on a ReadyNAS) then why not?

But obviously you put a lot of stock into the benchmark numbers, so let's humor you and go ahead and examine that a bit further. Firstly, you must realize that what particular benchmark software is used makes a huge difference in the numbers you get as a result. You're not going to compare Futuremark results to Novabench results or Xbench results, because there is absolutely no parity with the numbers they spit out. It's the same with HDD benchmarks. So taking one set of benchmark numbers from one site and comparing it to other benchmarks from other reviewers is pretty much worthless.

If you want to compare raw benchmark numbers, we must at least have the intelligence to compare results from the same benchmarking software. Let's see if we can find such a comparison from a site that is widely trusted for its storage reviews.

Oh look, you posted it yourself. http://www.storagereview.com/netgear_readynas_ultra_6_review_rndu6000

Here we are comparing the 6-bay Ultra 6 non-plus vs. a 4-bay QNAP TS-459 Pro+ and a 4-bay Synology DS411. Let's look at the RAID 5 results from the QNAP and the Synology vs. the Netgear's X-RAID results. It would be nice to compare X-RAID to X-RAID, but that is yet another feature the QNAP and the Synology do not have. Anyway, we can see that while the Netgear doesn't win the speed comparison, with reads of 64.47 MB/s vs the QNAP's 68.67 MB/s, and writes of 72.36 MB/s vs. the QNAP's 89.21, it does beat the Synology when it is running RAID5 in read tests, but we are talking minor differences here.

Same benchmark software, same review, same article even. The differences are there, but they are not earth-shattering. They are not going to affect the day-to-day use of an average SOHO user ripping CDs, streaming files, making backups, etc. They are all much more than adequately fast.

But what is earth-shattering is one important feature. The Netgear is a 6-bay device, while its competition are both 4-bays. To be fair, we should instead compare a 6-bay QNAP from the same family as the TS-459 Pro+, which would be the TS-659 Pro+. Now this is a good match, because it uses pretty much the same hardware as the Ultra 6. Nevermind that it costs the same as a Netgear Ultra 6 Plus. A potential consumer isn't going to take that into account, are they? :rolleyes: Or they could pay about the same for a Synology 1512+ and get one less drive bay along with the lesser CPU and fewer apps.

You said you purchased your Synology for the prettier web UI and the very slightly lower power consumption. These are not things the average user is going to care about. How often do you use that web UI, really? Was it really enough to sacrifice an extra drive bay, a more powerful CPU, more apps and a smaller price? After a NAS is set up, the only time I need to access the web UI after that is to perform firmware updates, and it's not at all confusing or difficult, not even for an utter novice. I could talk my grandma through it over the phone.

So again, I still firmly stand by my position that the ReadyNAS Ultra series is the best NAS you can buy right now. In terms of everything you get for your dollar, nothing else comes close. And it seems pretty obvious to me.

DMara

Syndil wrote: »

And power consumption? Really? The TDP of the D425 CPU in the Synology is 10W. The TDP of the D525 CPU in the ReadyNAS is 13W for a grand difference of 3W. That'll cost ~$4 a year, assuming the NAS is powered on 24/7/365. You're seriously splitting hairs over 3W power consumption? That's what I would call grasping.

Wow, really, so much for knowing your stuff to support your customer :razz:

Have you actually read the data instead of just looking at a CPU-only standpoint?
During normal usage your Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 6 draws 80 to 85 watts, and during idling it draws 68 watts. Good luck with slowing those number down with the Ultra Plus 6's Pentium CPU.
The Synology DS1512+ draws 50 watts during access and 22W during hibernation.

Syndil wrote: »

Oh look, you posted it yourself. http://www.storagereview.com/netgear_readynas_ultra_6_review_rndu6000

Here we are comparing the 6-bay Ultra 6 non-plus vs. a 4-bay QNAP TS-459 Pro+ and a 4-bay Synology DS411. Let's look at the RAID 5 results from the QNAP and the Synology vs. the Netgear's X-RAID results. It would be nice to compare X-RAID to X-RAID, but that is yet another feature the QNAP and the Synology do not have. Anyway, we can see that while the Netgear doesn't win the speed comparison, with reads of 64.47 MB/s vs the QNAP's 68.67 MB/s, and writes of 72.36 MB/s vs. the QNAP's 89.21, it does beat the Synology when it is running RAID5 in read tests, but we are talking minor differences here.

Same benchmark software, same review, same article even. The differences are there, but they are not earth-shattering. They are not going to affect the day-to-day use of an average SOHO user ripping CDs, streaming files, making backups, etc. They are all much more than adequately fast.

But what is earth-shattering is one important feature. The Netgear is a 6-bay device, while its competition are both 4-bays. To be fair, we should instead compare a 6-bay QNAP from the same family as the TS-459 Pro+, which would be the TS-659 Pro+. Now this is a good match, because it uses pretty much the same hardware as the Ultra 6. Nevermind that it costs the same as a Netgear Ultra 6 Plus. A potential consumer isn't going to take that into account, are they? Or they could pay about the same for a Synology 1512+ and get one less drive bay along with the lesser CPU and fewer apps.

Wow, don't you think you're talking nonsense now?
The review I posted showed that even lower models from Qnap & Synology beat the 6-bay Ultra 6 in data transfer speed. On the other hand, the review you posted showed the 6-bay Ultra 6 Plus beat the lowly 2-bay versions of those manufacturers. It's completely nonsense to even think that the TS-659 Pro+ can't better the advantage if its lower model did. See the difference?

I bet this debate will go nowhere just like the Placebo/Blind Test one. So, like I said, I agree to disagree with your declaration that Netgear NAS are the best NAS one can buy right now :cool:

Syndil

DMara wrote: »

Wow, really, so much for knowing your stuff to support your customer :razz:

Have you actually read the data instead of just looking at a CPU-only standpoint?
During normal usage your Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 6 draws 80 to 85 watts, and during idling it draws 68 watts. Good luck with slowing those number down with the Ultra Plus 6's Pentium CPU.
The Synology DS1512+ draws 50 watts during access and 22W during hibernation.

Obviously I was talking about the DS712+ and the Ultra 2 Plus, but I'm sure your only pretending to be so dense as not to notice that. At least I sure hope so. Anyway it's the Ultra 6 Plus that draws 82W, not the Ultra 6, which draws 74W. If 24W is enough to break your bank, obviously you shouldn't be shopping for a NAS. You probably shouldn't even be online right now, as you could probably save more than that by simply turning the lights off in whatever room you're in right now.

Wow, don't you think you're talking nonsense now?
The review I posted showed that even lower models from Qnap & Synology beat the 6-bay Ultra 6 in data transfer speed. On the other hand, the review you posted showed the 6-bay Ultra 6 Plus beat the lowly 2-bay versions of those manufacturers. It's completely nonsense to even think that the TS-659 Pro+ can't better the advantage if its lower model did. See the difference?

Let's see who's talking nonsense.

It was the 4-bay versions in that comparison, not the 2-bay. Otherwise RAID 5 would have been impossible; you need at least three drives for RAID 5. The models tested were the 4-bay QNAP TS459 Pro+ and the Synology DS411, which you can easily verify are both 4-bay devices.

But let's assume that was a typo and you actually meant to say 4-bay. That was, in fact, part of my original point--that the differences in price caused 4-bay devices from Netgear's competitors to be pitted against their 6-bay.

Anyway I still see no reason to believe that the 6-bay version of QNAP's Pro+ series would be any faster or slower than the 4-bay version. And guess what, neither does QNAP. According to their own datasheet, the 659 Pro+ is rated at 116.1/103.4 MB/s read/write, and the 459 Pro+ at 115.4/107 MB/s read/write. And the lowly 259 Pro+ is rated at 115.1/105.7 MB/s. That's what I would call pretty much identical performance numbers.

http://files.qnap.com/news/pressresource/datasheet/TurboNAS_Business_Series_ENG.pdf

Complete nonsense to think that the 6-bay version wouldn't be faster than a 4-bay or 2-bay, huh? Oops! :redface: