Synology Lost the Plot with Hard Drive Locking Move

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Hardware quality and stagnation

  • Several commenters argue Synology’s hardware has lagged for years: aging CPUs (e.g., 7‑year‑old Ryzen parts in “new” models), 1 Gbit networking on “Plus” units, no true NVMe volumes or NVMe‑only models, and removed USB/codec features.
  • Others report their units (e.g., DS18xx series) as fast and reliable enough for typical SOHO workloads and appreciate the small, quiet, hot‑swap form factor.

Drive locking and vendor lock‑in

  • The new policy for 2025 “Plus” models (only Synology‑branded drives with full performance/features; reduced functionality for others) is widely seen as the tipping point: “betrayal,” “enshittification,” and a deal‑breaker for many long‑time users.
  • People object especially to:
    • Artificially degrading performance or disabling features (deduplication, lifespan analysis, auto‑firmware) with third‑party drives.
    • Obfuscating vendor/firmware info, which makes it harder to avoid same‑batch drives and correlated failures.
  • A minority express some sympathy: vendors got burned by WD’s undisclosed SMR “NAS” drives and don’t want the support burden/blame. Many counter this justifies selling “known‑good” drives or showing warnings, not hard lock‑in.

Software ecosystem vs openness

  • Synology’s DSM and apps are praised for “appliance‑like” reliability and ease: O365/Google backups, Hyper Backup, Active Backup, Synology Drive, simple photo backup, quick setup with almost no admin.
  • Others say the first‑party apps have regressed (loss of HEVC, removal of Video Station, weak photo/gallery UX, slow Docker/kernel updates) and now rely mostly on Docker/SynoCommunity apps like Syncthing, Jellyfin, Immich.
  • Many note that Synology’s only real moat is DSM; drive lock‑in undermines goodwill that made people recommend it at work as well as at home.

Alternatives and migration paths

  • Strong interest in moving to:
    • TrueNAS (Core/Scale) on DIY or vendor hardware.
    • Unraid, Proxmox + ZFS/btrfs, OpenMediaVault, plain Debian/Ubuntu.
    • Ubiquiti’s UNAS, QNAP (sometimes with Debian), Ugreen, Terramaster DAS + mini‑PC, N100/NAS enclosures, used server boards.
  • Some suggest treating the NAS as storage‑only (TrueNAS/UNAS) and running Plex/containers on a separate mini‑PC or NUC.

Broader sentiment

  • Many long‑time Synology users say this single policy moves the brand from “default recommendation” to “avoid,” even if it doesn’t affect current boxes.
  • There’s skepticism that chasing higher margins on drives will succeed: Synology risks alienating the tech‑savvy prosumers who historically amplified its reputation.