That seems reasonable, I don't buy NAS for datacenters (just run a modest 80tb one for my home lab) but equivalent rackmount 16-bay ones from other vendors would be more expensive (maybe $5k-6k?) and with less polish.
replyYeah, I'd certainly take it over this:
replyhttps://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1618911-REG/synology_...
> a modest 80tb one for my home lab
replyI laughed.
Pays for itself in ~40 months of not paying $100/month for streaming services.
replyEdit: Drives are not included :(
That's without storage. They are charging $750 each for 24tb HDD's, so filling it up brings that cost to $16k. Only need to run it for 13+ years and have zero HDD failures in that time, and then pay for all the media you are going to load it up with. Not exactly sure this would be cheaper or easier than just paying for streaming services and cancelling them when you don't need them.
replyYou don't have to buy from them, you can get third party hard drives. Although those are expensive too
replyYeah, not dramatically cheaper.
replydeleted
replyThe drives are the expensive part, though - 16x24TB HDDs adds another $11k.
reply(Not that you need that much for canceling streaming, I’d get a home Synology or diy TrueNAS for that anyway)
As a Synology owner, I would not recommend anyone to get into Synology at this point after the drive BS they pulled off. I'm planning on building myself a DIY server with Unraid instead.
replyI’m still on DSM 6, and just added a new unapproved drive, and it was just a click through warning. Is it much worse on the newer DSM versions?
replyEDIT oof yeah that’s pretty horrible, I take back my Synology recc. Looks like it’s partly model-based restrictions. That’s a shame, they were nice as relatively low maintenance devices.