Redpill me on Synology NAS units

>>60518328
NAS units are generally a trade-off between price and how much you're expected to do/know to run it, in this regard Synology is the Apple of NASes; expensive, but idiot-proof and will generally do anything you want it to.

>>60518328
I own a Synology 1815+ and love it. Newer devices are much better of course. These days it's a tossup between QNAP and Synology.
I choose QNAP when I want to use my NAS as a player and will locate next to a screen or when I want to virtualize a machine under it's OS.
I choose the Synology at the time for the hardware AES support which for my own storage was most important.
Both are equally as easy to use.
I believe the Synology uses a SAS backplane so I judged the Synology to be of better quality at the time. In over 2 years of operation, I've never had an issue.

>>60518403
>>60519126
/thread.

Synology and QNAP are network storage for people with more money than time.

You can definitely get cheaper hardware at any performance point, but the software interfaces are leagues better than FreeNAS et al.

My personal cutoff point is 10GbE and ECC support: a normal 1GbE box isn't worth fucking around with setting up myself, but the cost of a mid-business-level NAS is marked up enough that I'll spend the time to save a few thousand bucks.

I'll be buying that 4-bay 916 model soon. Of course pre-built is better but when it comes to critical backups I don't want to fuck around or chance it.

>>60520828
You can always download DSM or QTS since they run on x86 hardware anyway.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/how-to-install-xpenology-on-a-pc-499286.shtml

>>60520841
> daily reminder that if you don't keep a second copy of data offsite, you're not really backing up

>>60521112
Reminder that if you don't back up your external backup onto another backup device, you're a fucking dunce.

Reminder that incremental backups are a meme and aren't real backups.

>>60521112
You are correct. With Synology I can set it to back up to another Synology since I have another household setup via site-to-site VPN.

>>60521153
>Reminder that incremental backups are a meme and aren't real backups.

But incremental backups are the only realistic way of having secure encrypted backups on remote sites where you aren't in ultimate physical control. I.e., periodically pushing encrypted FS deltas as files to a remote server, rather than leaking anything with file sizes or access patterns for file or live encrypted block mirroring.

>>60518328
>216+II in Raid 1
I can't speak to that model but any Synology I've worked with uses their hybrid raid.