John Siracusa

That's exactly it.

they will be forced to use first-party Synology hard drives, which are themselves, you know, relabeled like Western Digitals, I think, or something like that.

The details honestly don't matter.

Even if they are legitimately their own first-party drives, honestly, I don't think that really matters either.

But this thing that was always and forever, you could put whatever drive you wanted in it, and they would slurp it up and it would be fine.

But they've announced that, oh, no, no, no, no, no, you must use our first-party stuff.

Now, in the defense of Synology, I can make some arguments in favor of that.

It's far easier to control these things.

It's far easier to guarantee that it'll work the way they want it to and thus the way you want it to.

You can figure out legitimate reasons for this, but I feel like even though they are not taking it away from legacy users like myself, it's still gross because at some point, I'm going to want a new bit of network-attached storage, and

I don't want to have to fill that with very expensive Synology drives in the same way that all things being equal, I would put third-party RAM in a Mac.

Hi, John.

Or, you know, potentially a third-party SSD in a Mac.

Hello again, John.

If such a thing were possible in the Macs that I buy, but it is not without, you know, a ton of work.

So I've been trying to set myself up for, all right, what would the future look like if I gave up on my sonology?

And to be clear, I think this will happen, but I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon.

I'm talking like maybe five plus years before this happens.

But I wanted to set myself up for it.

And so what I've been doing is trying to treat the sonology less like a computer and more like a giant array of disks.