@JaredBusch said in A recommendation for Buffalo NASes (or at least their support): I do prefer Synology over Buffalo though. HW wise, the main argument for synology over buffalo here in Italy is if you use a NAS as a primary file server: no Terastation 5000 has redundant powersupply, nor easy maintainance is allowed on site. If power suppl. blows: byebye data, you are KO for a couple of days. synology is really well engineered. I'm thinking specifically at TS5400r vs rs815rp+ (also buffalo do not provides units populated with 8TB disks (not yet... hell 8TB in a single disk, brrr))

@ntozier said in Buffalo NAS Return Policy Review: Maybe the person you spoke to didn't realize if was just for a single drive? I mean I find the some non-technical users think of a Tower as the "hard drive". Here is a quote from him: "And that was for the entire NAS with two 4TB drives (I only needed one drive)!!!"

@DustinB3403 said: The performance of the Pi doesn't matter, but the complexity does. That simply is not a viable option in my opinion. The second half of my previous post has nothing to do with a Pi. that would be option 3. And I agree, it's probably not with the hassle/complexity of bothering.

@Minion-Queen said: Actually given the current weather it could take you 20 hours. Parts of 90 are still shut down! With trucks and busses stranded on the thruway. Pull a Dennis Quiad from The Day After Tomorrow and hike it!

@Bill-Kindle said: @scottalanmiller Seagate surprised me with what a POS their NAS offering is. Not at all happy with it. Drive makers don't make the best storage appliances. Just doesn't go together. Their interest is in selling drives. WD does a little better, but it is a weak offering too. It's RAID 5 only so that you have to buy super expensive RE drives.

@Dashrender said in SOHO Router Equipment: Are you saying that the UNMS isn't basically the same thing? It is completely not the same thing.