Advertisements

QNAP vs. Synology vs. Asustor

threeMeet the possible predecessors of the future home computer. None are ready for that title yet, but, as technology evolves, the future will regard this design as a direct ancestor. These are more than network disk drives. They’re application servers that support massive disk capacities. They run 24/7 and require an almost insignificant amount of electricity. Linux transparently controls the show. In terms of difficulty, they require only a little more effort to master than the advanced functions on a microwave oven, although some of the applications might force you to Google something new in order to learn how to use them. Your browser is your terminal.

Technologically, these devices will take over when:

  • High rate megabit broadband speeds are universal
  • i5 / i7 or better class processors with ARM or less power requirements are commonly available
  • High capacity SSD drives in the terabyte range are inexpensive

But now, today, these are still mighty useful devices.

Three manufacturers dominate the smart network drive market. There’s no way to say one is better than the others. It’s a competitive market and, if one has cornered a niche, the others will move in shortly, or so it appears. I happened to purchase a QNAP TS-120 because I wanted certain features in a one drive configuration. Had I waited a few months, another manufacturer might have offered a better model, or not.

At this time, Synology is the most well known if you only look at mass marketers for information. QNAP is regarded just as highly but is a little less well known. Asustor is the newest kid on the block.

Each has a demo site that gives you hands on experience with their operating system.

QNAP

Start QNAP’s demonstration from this page.

qnap01

Sign in here.

qnap02

This is the main QNAP screen.

qnap05

The Control Panel is used for drive operations.

qnap06

qnap07

Additional applications are selected below. This is only a small number of what’s available.

qnap08

Synology

This page will get you into the Synology demonstration.

synology01

Sign in.

synology02

The first thing you see.

synology03

The Control Panel

synology04

A few additional applications.

synology05

Asustor

Access the Asustor Demonstration from this page.

asustor01

Sign in here.

asustor02

The main screen.

asustor03

Some additional applications.

asustor04____________________

Advertisements

7 Comments on “QNAP vs. Synology vs. Asustor”

  1. ron.g.bake says:

    Are they all linux variants?
    They do look very similar, and appear to have very similar apps available.
    Tried synology and was quite impressed, but I needed a non-headless server, e.g. using the server to output to TV via HDMI, plus the flexibility of windows to fit *any* hardware (tv tuners?) and know it will work and have drivers …

    • Carl Rinker says:

      I have specific experience only with QNAP and it looks like linux under the covers. Since each have similar apps and linux is almost everywhere, I suspect all are linux derivatives. I recall reading of NAS devices with HDMI out, apparently for the purpose of TV watching. Personally, I think a small PC would offer more flexibility at this time. Zotac, Intel, and probably others sell small PCs that are designed to be media boxes. You add memory, disk, and the O/S. Apple has the Mac Mini. I think that NAS boxes are evolving to eventually become similar devices, but a dedicated full featured media computer is also worth considering if media serving is your main application. Chromecast allows you to watch whatever is on your PC wirelessly. The only downside is you need a powerful processor if you are tabcasting from Chrome. I have acceptable results using a PC with an i3 processor having a Passmark score of about 3300. Higher would be better.

      • mcianchetti says:

        Asustor’s have HDMI out. New reviews after your posts show that people are thrilled with that feature. I also saw they have a remote and USB dongle for the units. How sweet is that?

      • Carl Rinker says:

        The high end NAS market looks more and more competitive. If A has a great feature, B introduces a new feature and C figures out a way to one-up A and B. Then they do it all over again. I’m still waiting for the day when a company comes out with a utility computer that offers a powerful processor, comprehensive NAS features, and general purpose capabilities that multiple users can take advantage of. Basically a stripped down Windows-like Server on a NAS box. The home server with a minuscule power draw.

  2. Mario Smith says:

    I current use the Asustor AS7004T 4‑Bay NAS. The Intel Core i3 dual-core processor sold me on this model. The NAS was simple to setup for my family to access via the web via cell phone for uploading pictures. The surveillance app supports oem hikvision IP cameras. Also, the mobile apps, AiSecure, AiData are great.

    • Carl Rinker says:

      Sounds like a great system. Those are a lot like the specs I would look for if I replaced my little QNAP drive. It’s still adequate for storage and media server duties, but I would like to add virtual server duties to my network. The NAS is a good location. The i3 on your Asus should allow you to do just about anything you like for a long time.

  3. […] QNAP vs. Synology vs. Asustor | Advanced … – QNAP vs. Synology vs. Asustor. Meet the possible predecessors of the future home computer. None are ready for that title yet, but, as technology evolves, the future … […]


Have Something To Add?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s