Jump to content
XPEnology Community

Say bye to Quickconnect


Salah

Recommended Posts

"Please be informed that piracy is not tolerated in the forum. The use of Quickconnect IS an abuse of Synology's services." Forum Mod. who doesn't seem to get GNU.
Also I would bet that no dev or mod has protected you against "every day ssh" password

 

Since you seem to be more than aware of what Synology, devs, mods and users (basically everyone here) do or know, maybe you could provide your knowledge instead of making obnoxious comments or PMs. Also, please avoid filling topics with single lines posts one after the other and try creating topic titles that describe your question or issue accurately.

 

If your intention is to contribute to the forum I recommend you do so in a manner that does not involve insulting or looking down on people by questioning their ability specially when the great majority of people have been here far longer than you. You might be a system administrator, yet it does not give you any superiority over others. Show your knowledge in a respectful way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Please be informed that piracy is not tolerated in the forum. The use of Quickconnect IS an abuse of Synology's services." Forum Mod. who doesn't seem to get GNU.

OK I'll bite.

The fact that the Quickconnect code may be covered by the GPL does not give us the right to use any service that it connects to. We could use the code to define how to implement our own QC service and modify our version of the DSM code so that it points to ours not Synology's. But using theirs, indeed, creating false credentials in order to do so, could well fall under the scope of various computer misuse acts around the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Please be informed that piracy is not tolerated in the forum. The use of Quickconnect IS an abuse of Synology's services." Forum Mod. who doesn't seem to get GNU.

OK I'll bite.

The fact that the Quickconnect code may be covered by the GPL does not give us the right to use any service that it connects to. We could use the code to define how to implement our own QC service and modify our version of the DSM code so that it points to ours not Synology's. But using theirs, indeed, creating false credentials in order to do so, could well fall under the scope of various computer misuse acts around the world.

 

This.

 

The code might be GNU covered (oh wait, it isn't, it's Synology's own license, just like their synobios kernel module!), but the service has an EULA, and TOS. You violate both by not using an original Synology device.

 

Let's be fair here. Synology makes a great product, both hardware and software. We take their software, which is a sales point already, and then we try to piggyback on their SOLD service, for free?

 

Just saying, that I've talked with some people from Synology. Not leadership positions, but people invested in the development of DSM and other Syno products. They confirmed that based on their current tasks, and approaches Synology is taking, it is very likely that in the near future Synology is going to license DSM separate of devices. It's mainly because of pressure from enterprise partners who wanted to run DSM on their own HW - and the first step was making the KVM version of DSM possible. It has all the hw kill switches removed, and it is possible to run that image in a regular KVM or any other VM solution, if you have the boot disk (which is eerily similar to ours, sans the model-specific stuff, plus a few VM-specific changes through the whole system). So far, based on what they got as tasks, the whole shebang will be licensed to anyone who wants to buy a license, but I'm not sure about the format ATM. But a pretty heavy-load safety feature that depended on Synology-specific HW was scrapped before the 6.1 release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@fonix232

Interesting. There is a theoretical point about not putting more restrictive terms on GPL code but we're only be arguing about a small part of the system.

What you say makes sense. Synology are not immune to the same market forces that have shaped the computer industry and that means first - you can only make money selling boxes for so long and then you need to unbundle the software and services.

Second, when you do unbundle, if you go do the route of selling upfront software licences, then at some point you find you are not getting new users and you run out of reasons to sell new licences to your existing users.

Hence Cloud and subscription based functionality.

However, this will only work for them if the guys who made their reputation in the company by shifting boxes can change their mindset to the new order. My experience in the industry says that is not certain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@fonix232

Interesting. There is a theoretical point about not putting more restrictive terms on GPL code but we're only be arguing about a small part of the system.

 

Synology is based in China. They can crap on GPL, unfortunately (theoretically even synobios should be GPL licensed, but hey, they're above the law and licensing, right? /s ).

 

What you say makes sense. Synology are not immune to the same market forces that have shaped the computer industry and that means first - you can only make money selling boxes for so long and then you need to unbundle the software and services.

 

In my understanding, there will be three different products: the hardware (which comes with software + services), software (without services), and services (only if you have software). Services would be subscription-style for software-only purchase (which is not an issue since enterprise customers won't use QuickConnect or Cloud2).

 

Second, when you do unbundle, if you go do the route of selling upfront software licences, then at some point you find you are not getting new users and you run out of reasons to sell new licences to your existing users.

Hence Cloud and subscription based functionality.

 

The services and the software would be unbundled any way, and honestly, most users are "doesn't matter what price, give me a full solution for my money". We only make a small percentage of Synology users, but the licensing is aimed at us (and also aimed at knocking companies like U-Nas out of the ring). Imagine that for 30/50$ you get all 6.x releases, all security updates included, with a bunch of drivers ready to use, and your drives a click away. Only 50$, which is pretty much half the price one would cash out for a new HDD.

 

However, this will only work for them if the guys who made their reputation in the company by shifting boxes can change their mindset to the new order. My experience in the industry says that is not certain.

 

The industry already made the statement. More and more enterprise customers are getting fed up with Syno's attitude on over-pricing hardware and dropping support. I know for a fact that Synology receives more and more requests from enterprise partners and customers for the ability to run DSM on their own hardware builds. The more this is ignored, the more customers Syno is going to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine that for 30/50$ you get all 6.x releases, all security updates included, with a bunch of drivers ready to use, and your drives a click away. Only 50$, which is pretty much half the price one would cash out for a new HDD.

I would be very happy at that price. I suspect at that level, there would be a risk of substantial cannibalisation of their hardware business but let's see what actually happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine that for 30/50$ you get all 6.x releases, all security updates included, with a bunch of drivers ready to use, and your drives a click away. Only 50$, which is pretty much half the price one would cash out for a new HDD.

I would be very happy at that price. I suspect at that level, there would be a risk of substantial cannibalisation of their hardware business but let's see what actually happens.

 

Doubt it. The 30/50$ would be for home use, where devices that are worth around 100-150$ go for 250-300$, and that already includes all the services. Enterprise, I suppose, will get a lot higher pricing (since it's used for making money), and a per-user system. I also guess that the home systems will be limited to 3-5 users.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luckily I still have the logs ....

update.synology.com

checkip.synology.com

autoupdate.synology.com

 

 

Wouldn't package updates or even DSM updates go via this?

I would have thought blocking these would prevent DSM updating itself and you have to manually download and install from your PC. That may not be such a bad idea, given the number of people who post "My DSM updated itself and now it's broken".

I think my point was that apart from the discussion around QC, DSM contacts synology.com for various reasons. It could supply your external IP, serial and mac and any other information it has if it wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...