Comments on: Hands-On: Synology Cube Station CS407

By: MadaboutDana

MadaboutDana — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 10:41:03 +0000

We’ve been using a Synology CS407 as a NAS on our business network for a couple of years now. What a great machine! Not least because Synology is constantly upgrading the firmware, plus adding nicely judged packages (like their most recent addition: a full e-mail server with webmail included). It’s amazingly stable, amazingly easy to use (great web-based management interface, plus Ajax file manager), has Apache, PHP and MySQL built-in, and very very quick. Something you forget to mention is that Synology supply their own PC client backup software (Data Replicator), which is deceptively easy to use – i.e. it looks really basic, but is actually really powerful and very fast. It allows you to make multiple versions of backups, and is regularly updated to match the firmware. Microsoft WHS is nice, but for small-business use, gimme a Synology CubeStation any time.

By: Allan Bogild Pedersen

Allan Bogild Pedersen — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 01:04:27 +0000

I have a Synology CS407 and is very happy about it, i would never consider a WHS fore several reason:

First of all my Synology is on all the time and only uses 25 watt when in full operation with 3 1 tb. disks, a WHS would use much more that that. Synology do have https for secure acsess and the great video survailance station is really great.

By: Hans

Hans — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:05:07 +0000

@Bill -You're comparing the Netgear NAS with the Synology one? Netgear does require networkdrivers to be installed on the clients. Synology doesn't (Qnap doesnt either). Why Netgear decided to do it like that has to be guessed for.

By: AndreasK

AndreasK — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:47:42 +0000

I had a CS406 (lower processing-power but simmilar feature predecessor) in heavy use since 2006 before I recently switched to home-server. My view:
* the Synology photostation feature is perfect and I REALLY miss it on my homeserver (HP mediasmart – their WebShare feature is unuseable to me, even WHIIST is better, I did not find a comparable ASP.net solution) – will try and write something like it (my problem: lack of time). However, I ccould not easily+securely (no easy https:, only ftp:) upload files onto the Synology over the internet, which is extremely convenient on the HomeServer.
* NAS-RAID5 vs. WHS – a disk “died” in my CS406 recently. Since I was not too careful, when I initialyy put my HDDs into it, I was not totaly sure, which disk to rip+replace (free cabling and a degraded=extremely vulnerable RAID5) – the WHS duplication and hardware layout of the MediaSmart is MUCH better in this.
* Security – my CS406 was connected to the internet (running a full LAMP-stack with it’s own vulnerabilities) WITHOUT Windowsupdate – Synology releases updates approx. 2x per yr. Also without the easy https-setup, I never dared to enable anything but http over the internet.
* Backup – WHS is simply amazing (I finally get my daughter to backup her machine)
* tiny anoying things on the CS406: daylight-saving changed the file’s time-stamps on the CS406 (robocopy copying all over again during sync).

Net for me – the Synology is a GREAT file-sharing box (e.g. for me as an amateur photographer, having to password-protected share a lot of pictures wiith my models) – I really miss it’s photostation feature on my WHS. But with the current pricing of the MediaSmart vs. the CS408, and the features (backup+security) of the WHS, my choice is the WHS.

Andreas

By: Synology Cube Station CS407 - Hands-on

Synology Cube Station CS407 - Hands-on — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 07:31:31 +0000

[...] Full Review [...]

By: GaryLW

GaryLW — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 06:17:57 +0000

Sorry, cut off before I was done.
In the Sc101 you have to format your drives with a non-compatible proprietary format. Which means you must have a blank disk so you can convert those in the Sc101 back if you want to keep your data. Too much hassle.

(BTW I’m selling my SC101 if anyone’s interested )

By: GaryLW

GaryLW — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 06:13:45 +0000

I used a Netgear SC101 for a while before trying WHS. I was always having problems with it just when I needed it. Not hw but sw problems. The drivers were always going down when I had a project to move. And it slowed my network down to a crawl. Along came WHS and my network is a pleasure (most times !

By: Bill

Bill — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:22:33 +0000

I’ve found a use for my older NSLU2 NAS with my WHS. Of course with Power Pack 1, you can backup to an external drive, but it takes quite a while to back up nearly 2TB of data. My solution is to use the NAS and 2 older 500 GB drives and do daily backups of the “critical” files that change most frequently. I use a WD 2TB My Book to do an entire server backup every 2 weeks. My 2TB My Book is kept offsite, but If I need to recover a critical file, it’s on my network and ready to be restored immediately if needed.

By: Stenton23

Stenton23 — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:33:14 +0000

Well written review. Before I purchased an HP MediaSmart, this would have greatly interested me, but I was more interested in automated backup, as well.

I’m very happy with WHS, but this looks like a great NAS device.