Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Drobo vs. Synology?
- Thread starter Mork
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ah, I didn't know that. Thanks for the heads up, I'll see if I can figure out how to upgrade... I had assumed (incorrectly apparently) that it would alert me to DSM upgrades...
DS5 now has auto package updates as an option. Plus a few other features. It's more colorful than 4.3 for sure.
Have you had any issues with DSM 5 yet? Some initial searching shows quite a few bugs and overall sluggish performance.
No issues so far, personally I've had few problems with my Synology NAS's.
I had a hibernate HDD issue once but that was with 4.x
Also a TM problem and again that was about a year ago.
I had a hibernate HDD issue once but that was with 4.x
Also a TM problem and again that was about a year ago.
Drobo vs Synology
After having a Drobo Pro (which has been a positive), using it across the network via my Mac Pro I took the gamble of trying out a Synology 412+ in the last month to try out the NAS technology (having an independent source vs rely on a computer direct). The experience thus far has been outstanding - over what I first experienced from the Drobo. While the Drobo has been reliable (overcoming some software/firmware issues over the years), the Synology has really excelled in providing more access to more Mac's and iOS devices in our house and at work. The difference for me has been it's relatively easy setup, the multitude of apps available across different needs (cloud server, file access via iPhone, Camera support), and it's speed. While the Drobo Pro admittedly is older technology, I've been happier with the Synology. Very impressed with it's ease of use once setup, and the flexibility of potential beyond what the Drobo offers today. If I was choosing either for the first time, I'd have to pick the Synology due to all the customization based on various needs and overall potential.
After having a Drobo Pro (which has been a positive), using it across the network via my Mac Pro I took the gamble of trying out a Synology 412+ in the last month to try out the NAS technology (having an independent source vs rely on a computer direct). The experience thus far has been outstanding - over what I first experienced from the Drobo. While the Drobo has been reliable (overcoming some software/firmware issues over the years), the Synology has really excelled in providing more access to more Mac's and iOS devices in our house and at work. The difference for me has been it's relatively easy setup, the multitude of apps available across different needs (cloud server, file access via iPhone, Camera support), and it's speed. While the Drobo Pro admittedly is older technology, I've been happier with the Synology. Very impressed with it's ease of use once setup, and the flexibility of potential beyond what the Drobo offers today. If I was choosing either for the first time, I'd have to pick the Synology due to all the customization based on various needs and overall potential.
Check the compatibility page over at Synology to see if your drives are compatible.
It will require a reformat so make sure you've backed up everything first.
FWIW I have been using a Drobo for a few months now and it's been running great. I was a little nervous because of patchy reviews but they were generally referring to earlier versions of the hardware.
I bought it despite the price because I basically wanted something I could set up quickly which required very little knowledge or decisions on my part. Now that I understand how things work a little better and understand my needs, possibly I could explore other options. But options isn't what I was shopping for, I just needed something that worked, and didn't bother me. Drobo was that product.
Good luck!
I bought it despite the price because I basically wanted something I could set up quickly which required very little knowledge or decisions on my part. Now that I understand how things work a little better and understand my needs, possibly I could explore other options. But options isn't what I was shopping for, I just needed something that worked, and didn't bother me. Drobo was that product.
Good luck!
I'm on 5.0 or it could be 5.1 now. Works fine for me. Not sure what version I've upgraded from but no issues. It just sits in the corner and does what it's supposed to.
I am a former Drobo owner. Their products are very user-friendly. But they seem to hit all sorts of walls when it comes to storage capacity. My first-gen Drobo was limited to drive no larger than 2 TB, despite offering a 16TB volume option -- something the hardware simply wasn't capable of. There were rumblings of it getting support for larger drives, but instead they quietly end-of-life'd the device.
I was annoyed, but recognized that could be a hardware issue. Knowing I would eventually need more than 6 TB of storage, I picked up a cheap WD scary-raid to hold me over, with the Drobo acting as a back-up.
I was considering getting a 5N, but the fact that it's limited to 16 TB while other Drobo devices can handle 32 TB (two 16 TB volumes) makes me think it will be end-of-life'd soon, too.
Long story short: Drobo devices are easy to use, but considering their price point, their limited functionality and relatively short support cycle leaves me wary.
I was annoyed, but recognized that could be a hardware issue. Knowing I would eventually need more than 6 TB of storage, I picked up a cheap WD scary-raid to hold me over, with the Drobo acting as a back-up.
I was considering getting a 5N, but the fact that it's limited to 16 TB while other Drobo devices can handle 32 TB (two 16 TB volumes) makes me think it will be end-of-life'd soon, too.
Long story short: Drobo devices are easy to use, but considering their price point, their limited functionality and relatively short support cycle leaves me wary.
Yes, the older Drobos had limits that the Drobo dev team were slow to address or never addressed at all.
Example:
1. Volume sizes are still limited to 16TB at least on their DAS devices (I don't know if this is true of their NASes).
2. Drobo 5N (which is still being sold as of today) is limited to 16TB array even though 6TB and 8TB drives are available. This means that if you load up the Drobo 5N with five 8TB drives and use single disk redundancy, 16TB of storage will simply be unused.
Fortunately, newer models have addressed the 16TB array limit. But that does nothing for those who unwittingly purchase a Drobo 5N.
The Synology products don't have these limits and update their OS on a much more frequent basis.
Example:
1. Volume sizes are still limited to 16TB at least on their DAS devices (I don't know if this is true of their NASes).
2. Drobo 5N (which is still being sold as of today) is limited to 16TB array even though 6TB and 8TB drives are available. This means that if you load up the Drobo 5N with five 8TB drives and use single disk redundancy, 16TB of storage will simply be unused.
Fortunately, newer models have addressed the 16TB array limit. But that does nothing for those who unwittingly purchase a Drobo 5N.
The Synology products don't have these limits and update their OS on a much more frequent basis.
Time Machine issue just happened again with my SynologyAccording to my log the last time this happened was Nov 2013.
"Time Machine completed a verification of your backups. To improve reliability, Time Machine must create a new backup for you."
Does anyone have any suggestions to avoid this? Is the only guaranteed solution to buy one of Apple's Time Capsules to use as the TM destination, and then subsequently back that up to the NAS on a schedule? That's extra cost and complexity that I had intended to avoid by purchasing a NAS that was supposed to be TM compatible.
If that's the only way to go, does this same error never happen with Apple Time Capsules?
Thanks all.
My Synology NAS DS718+ has now done this to me 3 times, wiping out my backup history in the process:FWIW, I've gotten this on my qnap, so much so, I now use a drobo mini to hold my TM backup
I don't know of any solution other then to do what it says
Time Machine completed a verification of your backups on "NAS.local". To improve reliability, Time Machine must create a new backup for you.
Click Start New Backup to create a new backup. This will remove your existing backup history. This could take several hours.
Click Back Up Later to be reminded tomorrow. Time Machine won't perform backups during this time.
After all this time (years), has anybody heard of an explanation or a solution, other than starting over with a full backup?
Hey Doc,
Sorry to hear about your troubles. It was super frustrating when it happened to me. Losing backup history was one thing, though not my biggest frustration — those were (a) what if a catastrophic problem happened at just the wrong moment and the TM backup was unavailable, and (b) redoing an entire TM backup took a long time and tied up the laptop to just sit there. The last time on my 2TB laptop, it took around 8 hours!
I never found a specific explanation for it or a specific solution to try. I don’t think I ever directly contacted Synology about it. I can’t recall when or how the errors started abating, but on my latest 2016 rMBP15 machine, in about 3 years of using it, I’ve only had to rebuild the TM backup perhaps once (to be more specific, I just searched my log and only found one notation from 2 years ago. It’s possible I had another but forgot to log it. From memory though, I can’t remember the last time it happened. For about 2.5 years, I’ve been running a DS918+, upgraded from a DS413j. It’s on DSM6.
Thanks for your message. I'm on DSM 6.2.2-24922 Update 4. I'll see if there's a firmware update pending, but I doubt it addresses this problem, since it's been around so long.
I’m on the same DSM version. Not sure why I haven’t experienced the problem lately. If we’re on the same DSM version, I wonder if it‘s related to the Mac? What machine and OSX are you backing up? Mine is a 2016 rMBP15 on 10.12 Sierra.
I'm on a 2017 Retina 5K iMac with macOS Mojave.
DSM claimed that it was up to date, but I just manually updated to DSM 6.2.3-25426, which was available on the download site.
DSM claimed that it was up to date, but I just manually updated to DSM 6.2.3-25426, which was available on the download site.