this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
423 points (99.5% liked)

Selfhosted

46025 readers
417 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz
423
Synology could bring “certified drive” requirements to more NAS devices (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by otter@lemmy.ca to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
123 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Synology's telegraphed moves toward a contained ecosystem and seemingly vertical integration are certain to rankle some of its biggest fans, who likely enjoy doing their own system building, shopping, and assembly for the perfect amount of storage. "Pro-sumers," homelab enthusiasts, and those with just a lot of stuff to store at home, or in a small business, previously had a good reason to buy one Synology device every so many years, then stick into them whatever drives they happened to have or acquired at their desired prices. Synology's stated needs for efficient support of drive arrays may be more defensible at the enterprise level, but as it gets closer to the home level, it suggests a different kind of optimization.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

No, where am I supposed to sync the data to?

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago

To the new system you're migrating to

[–] kenopsik@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Another drive.

Edit: it's the first line of the manpage: rsync -- a fast, versatile, remote (and local) file-copying tool.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't have another drive.

[–] kenopsik@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

So by migration, you mean just using the same drive in another system? That's potentially a major data loss moment. You at the very least should back everything up before you try to "migrate" without copying files.

I don't use Synology, so I can't speak to the exact process you need to follow. But I imagine it will require you to format your drive if it's somehow locked into Synology's system in order to use it with something else.

It's likely similar to reinstalling a different OS. You have to back everything up and format the drive. It likely uses a different file system.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago

Yeah that's what I thought 😞