Ottawa Posted July 27, 2016 #1 Posted July 27, 2016 Does anybody know if a port of QNAP's QTS System for home servers (like an HP Proliant Microserver) exists, similar to the Xpenology port for Synology's DSM?
Jman420 Posted July 27, 2016 #2 Posted July 27, 2016 mmmMMMmmm.... nope! And we have no plans on developing one.
abced Posted July 27, 2016 #3 Posted July 27, 2016 Might be an interesting thing to look at. Their software is becoming superior in many areas over DSM in my opinion.
AllGamer Posted July 27, 2016 #4 Posted July 27, 2016 Might be an interesting thing to look at. Their software is becoming superior in many areas over DSM in my opinion. I personally believe otherwise, compared QNAP vs. Synology, DSM always end up being the most feature complete for everything you need. QNAP is more geared towards Media Player / streaming, DSM works better as a full featured server, which includes Media Play and Streaming, DSM also have more 3rd party Non Synology plug-ins and support, while for QNAP there isn't much to see outside official channels.
abced Posted July 28, 2016 #5 Posted July 28, 2016 Well packages are not even that important anymore. You can run practically anything using Docker or Virtualization station. One thing that DSM seriously lacks is proper encryption options (being able to encrypt only user made shares is a bad joke).
sbv3000 Posted July 28, 2016 #6 Posted July 28, 2016 I've had/used qnap and (real) syno boxes since the days of the '09/06/ models and something that I think syno does much better than qnap is supporting 'older' systems with newer versions of their O/S. I found qnap drop hardware from their updates after 2 years or so, but syno take the dsm version through to the 'limits' of the hardware. so if you want roi and an up to date o/s then syno probably wins
Ottawa Posted August 1, 2016 Author #7 Posted August 1, 2016 1. DSM lacks Samba V4 - I would like to have ActiveDirectory at home to serve my 3 Windows machines (roaming profiles) - not an uncommon request! 2. I have two iSCSI LUNs that are defined in my DSM 5.2, but can't be connected to (they disappear in iSCSI targets). I've read the iSCSI problems continue in DSM 6! Data integrity is has absolute priority in a server system, so I'm losing my trust in Synology. One of the main themes on Xpenology forum is "Downgrade from DSM 6.0". 3. QNAP support pages are built much more comprehensible (I'm using the German version), Synology has even problems making clear definitions and explanations of their key words of the system. A lot of the info you need is only found in forums - I hate that! If a vendor can't explain his own system properly and people in forums have to assist in threads like "I think you have to do X and then change the parameter Y, but only possible if you are root user..." - god sakes! 4. What are all the fancy features good for, if a (new) NAS-admin has a hard time even configuring standards?
Recommended Posts