What’s a good NAS and NAS software for home use with almost all Apple devices?

[Luba]

Looking for a good NAS hardware and software for home use with at least 2 TB. I’m guessing some NAS has better software/firmware, but their hardware is not as great, and vice versa. Security would be more important than speed as I would only occasional be accessing video files

 

[hobowankenobi]

Synology has the best overall compatibility that I am aware of. Have not used a modern QNAP, so can't say.

Synology is pretty much the hands-down leader for OS/interface/features/ease-of-use. Some folks say QNAP is a better bang for the buck on hardware specs, as you suspected.

As for security, no gripes with Synology either. Their security scan tool is simple and gives a quick checklist of potential holes to patch.

The biggest Synology negative for me: Their entry-level gear is underpowered, and not a good user experience (nor good performance). I think anybody that buys the lowest-end NAS model will be disappointed.

• Don't consider the J Series.
• Maybe look at the Value Series (I would still worry they are anemic...some can't run the BTRFS)
• Do consider the Plus Series or better

For me, the lowest cost would be the DS220+ model.

As for space, buy as big of HDs as you need. Around 4TB is the sweet spot for cost/space these days. Run one drive if you want, or two for redundancy.

 

[glenthompson]

Another option that works well with all Apple devices is a Mac Mini with a drive enclosure. Easily expanded. Familiar OS. I have a 2012 Mini with an OWC JBOD enclosure. Works great for backups and as a media server.

If you want to go with a traditional NAS then go with Synology.

 

[FilipeTeixeira]

I have the Synology DS220+ and I'm extremely happy with it. Super easy to configure and it supports time-machine straight out of the box. Can't go wrong with it.

 

[Luba]

Another option that works well with all Apple devices is a Mac Mini with a drive enclosure. Easily expanded. Familiar OS. I have a 2012 Mini with an OWC JBOD enclosure. Works great for backups and as a media server.

If you want to go with a traditional NAS then go with Synology.

What the basics of setting up a Mac Mini as a NAS? Download the server version of macOS? With the server version i can configure the Mac Mini using my iMac?

 

[icanhazmac]

+1 for Synology, I have the DS218+, super easy and reliable.

 

[hobowankenobi]

What the basics of setting up a Mac Mini as a NAS? Download the server version of macOS? With the server version i can configure the Mac Mini using my iMac?

Nope...Server is no longer what it used to be, so no benefit as a NAS (it still does a couple of other things, but nothing file serving specific).

For file sharing, you don't need anything extra, you can use any Mac as a local file server with no additional software.

If you have a Mini to spare, this is a pretty good option. If starting fresh and buying hardware, I still vote for the Synology. Main points:

• Web interface, no monitor needed, no remote desktop setup needed. Meant to be headless.
• Built-in RAID redundancies (for multi-drive models)
• Ability to swap drives on the fly, including increasing a volume size without erasing and reformatting
• Very cross-platform if you want to share with other devices (Win, iOS, Android, etc)
• Drive tool to automatically sync and backup...including over the internet without having to do router config or network tweaks

If buying gear, one would need both the Mini and an external storage box. The 220+ is likely cheaper and is more compact (one box, one plug, etc.).

PROS: Lower cost, more compact, dedicated headless, more functionality and flexibility
CONS: New OS/interface to learn

 

[Luba]

Nope...Server is no longer what it used to be, so no benefit as a NAS (it still does a couple of other things, but nothing file serving specific).

For file sharing, you don't need anything extra, you can use any Mac as a local file server with no additional software.

If you have a Mini to spare, this is a pretty good option. If starting fresh and buying hardware, I still vote for the Synology. Main points:

• Web interface, no monitor needed, no remote desktop setup needed. Meant to be headless.
• Built-in RAID redundancies (for multi-drive models)
• Ability to swap drives on the fly, including increasing a volume size without erasing and reformatting
• Very cross-platform if you want to share with other devices (Win, iOS, Android, etc)
• Drive tool to automatically sync and backup...including over the internet without having to do router config or network tweaks

If buying gear, one would need both the Mini and an external storage box. The 220+ is likely cheaper and is more compact (one box, one plug, etc.).

PROS: Lower cost, more compact, dedicated headless, more functionality and flexibility
CONS: New OS/interface to learn

I went to Micro Center, a superstore for computers and had very limited NAS options?!? I didn’t want to leave empty handed so I bought WD EX2 Ultra with 2 WD Red Plus 6 TB drives. Synology can only be bought online like at Amazon? Micro Center has a 30 day return policy so no problem there. What do you think of WD Red Plus drives? What do you think of WD EX2 Ultra (My Cloud)? Also, the 220+ only takes a 2 TB + 4 TB?? I would need a bigger Synology, 720+ model? Thanks in advance.

 

[hobowankenobi]

I have had good luck with the WD red drives in several NAS boxes and attached storage arrays.

Yes...Synology is not very common in brick and mortar stores. Never been an issue for me, mostly because I am not close to any big tech vendors anyways. B&H carries them, as do New Egg and many reputable online vendors.

As for drives...not sure where you found that info. Synology has an extensive list of compatible drives here. I have never had any issue with any popular HDs not being compatible. I see 16TB drives listed. I only see one Seagate HD that is not compatible, and it is specific for surveillance. You will notice in the B&H link above they also sell them paired with a bunch of different HD options, including 2 x 14TB.

WD My Cloud: I have not looked at one in years...but last time I did, they had very limited functionality, and had slow interfaces. As I recall, network performance was poor too. Acceptable for backups, but not very useful for working on served files. Not in the same class as any full-featured NAS. I can't say what the current crop is like.

 

[Luba]

I have had good luck with the WD red drives in several NAS boxes and attached storage arrays.

Yes...Synology is not very common in brick and mortar stores. Never been an issue for me, mostly because I am not close to any big tech vendors anyways. B&H carries them, as do New Egg and many reputable online vendors.

As for drives...not sure where you found that info. Synology has an extensive list of compatible drives here. I have never had any issue with any popular HDs not being compatible. I see 16TB drives listed. I only see one Seagate HD that is not compatible, and it is specific for surveillance. You will notice in the B&H link above they also sell them paired with a bunch of different HD options, including 2 x 14TB.

WD My Cloud: I have not looked at one in years...but last time I did, they had very limited functionality, and had slow interfaces. As I recall, network performance was poor too. Acceptable for backups, but not very useful for working on served files. Not in the same class as any full-featured NAS. I can't say what the current crop is like.

Can't remember where I read that either re: drives, must be an error. I'll go by Synology's list of compatible drives.

 

[coolajami]

I went to Micro Center, a superstore for computers and had very limited NAS options?!? I didn’t want to leave empty handed so I bought WD EX2 Ultra with 2 WD Red Plus 6 TB drives. Synology can only be bought online like at Amazon? Micro Center has a 30 day return policy so no problem there. What do you think of WD Red Plus drives? What do you think of WD EX2 Ultra (My Cloud)? Also, the 220+ only takes a 2 TB + 4 TB?? I would need a bigger Synology, 720+ model? Thanks in advance.

I have a WD EX2 Ultra as well and I find it more simple to set up and more straightforward than the Synology. Synology is excellent, I've used some models but it is a bit more than needed for a home or a small home office and costs way more than the WD NAS. Also, the WD comes with the Red WD drives that are specifically designed for NAS systems. Even if you have bought a Synology, most likely they would have suggested to you to either get the Red WD or the IronWolf Seagate drives.
The WD is much cheaper compared with the Synology, more compact, and would do more or less the same job. In fact, it is so much cheaper, that people used to shackle them in order to get the Red Drives.

 

[bradl]

+1 for Synology, I have the DS218+, super easy and reliable.

+1 for Synology as well. Not only are they reliable and easy to set up and configure, but they are durable. I'm 8 years into my DS213j, with the same pair of 3TB WD Reds that I initially bought for them. As I can also use this as a personal cloud station internal to my home network, plus Plex, plus a photo station, plus backups, Synology would be my goto again when I decide to upgrade.

BL.

 

[Luba]

Spent way more than I planned for my first NAS, $1k for DS 920+ and four 4 TB WD Red Plus HDDs. Have lots of studying to do. It's going to be adventure.

I like how RAID 10 increases read and write speeds. Is Synology Hybrid RAID (SHR) as stable, reliable, and secure as traditional RAID? The benefit of SHR is that I can increase the size of the NAS much more easily than RAID 10 down the road?

I plan on stopping my Apple Music subscription as mostly listen to my music that I ripped from CDs anyway. Will it be as easy as simply syncing my current Music (iTunes) folder with the library and its files to the NAS? I also bought quite a few movies from the iTunes Store that used to be stored in the iTunes folder, but I see now the iTunes folder doesn't exist anymore?? Anyway, in broad terms/outline what are the best ways of getting my music, movies, photos to the NAS and accessing them?

I currently subscribe to the 2 TB iCloud plan and the goal is to get it significantly below 50 GB so that my subscription for iCloud storage will be only $1 per month. Is there a way to have my @iCloud.com email on the NAS?? If yes, I think that would bring my iCloud needs down to the free tier of 5 GB. Maybe there's a way to delete emails older than 5 years on my @iCloud.com email?

 

[hobowankenobi]

My experience has been that Synology Hybrid RAID is reliable and flexible, allowing painless resizing of volumes at a future date with larger drives. Performance-wise, I would it would be similar to RAID 5, but have not done any side-by-side testing to be able to speak to that.

There are several options to serve content. That is great, but also makes it harder to narrow down the best choice. Probably depends on what the client is that is connecting to the Synology. Plex is well-liked. InFuse works pretty well to see served movies and content too.

Itunes became Music.

 

[bradl]

Spent way more than I planned for my first NAS, $1k for DS 920+ and four 4 TB WD Red Plus HDDs. Have lots of studying to do. It's going to be adventure.

I like how RAID 10 increases read and write speeds. Is Synology Hybrid RAID (SHR) as stable, reliable, and secure as traditional RAID? The benefit of SHR is that I can increase the size of the NAS much more easily than RAID 10 down the road?

SHR is definitely stable, for as far as I've used it. The big advantage of it is that you are not limited to the RAID being based on the smallest sized disk, as traditional RAID would. If you went with a traditional RAID 10, you'd have to have all of the disks be the same size. If you have, say, 3 4TB disks and 1 2TB disks, the RAID10 would be based on the 2TB disk, losing you 6TB. SHR will optimize the RAID based on the all of the disks instead of the smallest disk.

For me that hasn't been a problem since I only have the DS213j, which is a 2 disk chassis with two disks that are the same size. So for redundancy, I'm stuck with either RAID1, or DHR. If I had a 3TB disk and a 5TB disk, I'd go SHR for the optimization and redundancy, otherwise I'd lose 2TB with going RAID1.

This should help you:

What is Synology Hybrid RAID (SHR)? - Synology Knowledge Center

Synology Knowledge Center offers comprehensive support, providing answers to frequently asked questions, troubleshooting steps, software tutorials, and all the technical documentation you may need.

kb.synology.com

Also, if it helps, the last 2 numbers in the model are based on the year that the model was made. So in my case, my NAS was made in 2013. I'm at 8 years on it with the original drives I bought with it. I haven't had a problem with it since I turned it on. That's how reliable and stable it is.

I plan on stopping my Apple Music subscription as mostly listen to my music that I ripped from CDs anyway. Will it be as easy as simply syncing my current Music (iTunes) folder with the library and its files to the NAS?

You can do it this way, but it will eat up some space. For example, you can install Cloud Station (now called Synology Drive) on the NAS, and Synology Drive Client on your machines that you use to connect to the NAS (your Mac, PC, etc.). This will allow you to set up a directory that will sync across all devices you tell Synology Drive Client to use on those devices. For example, if I have /path/to/drive on my Mac, and F:\path\to\drive on my PC, I can have Synology Drive create a directory on the NAS at /home/drive, and anything I copy to /path/to/drive on my Mac will automatically be written to the NAS and the PC at their respective directories. This goes all 3 ways between those devices. The cost here is that you will be using physical space on all 3 of those devices, but it ensures that you will have those files there. Also, anything you delete from there will be deleted from all 3 devices. So it is possible to do it that way, but you'd be wasting triple the space for the cost.

The other way to do this would be to install Synology iTunes Server and let it handle everything for you:

How do I play my Synology NAS music on iTunes or Apple Music? - Synology Knowledge Center

Synology Knowledge Center offers comprehensive support, providing answers to frequently asked questions, troubleshooting steps, software tutorials, and all the technical documentation you may need.

kb.synology.com

How do I add music stored on my Synology NAS to iTunes? - Synology Knowledge Center

Synology Knowledge Center offers comprehensive support, providing answers to frequently asked questions, troubleshooting steps, software tutorials, and all the technical documentation you may need.

kb.synology.com

The only thing I don't know on this is if it stores your entire iTunes Library there, including apps and iPhone/iPad backups. And if so, how you'd sync those and back those up. I still have some 32-bit apps that I use on my iPad that haven't and/or won't be rebuilt as full 64-bit apps, so it won't be using anything newer than iOS 10.3.3, plus I'm still using iTunes 12.6.5.3 on my PC (last version that has the App Store). I don't know if those would get copied over (that's something I need to figure out). Regardless, you may also need to use Sync over WiFi on your iDevices so be aware of how much slower that sync will be over the network (just by limit of the WiFi standard versus Ethernet).

I also bought quite a few movies from the iTunes Store that used to be stored in the iTunes folder, but I see now the iTunes folder doesn't exist anymore?? Anyway, in broad terms/outline what are the best ways of getting my music, movies, photos to the NAS and accessing them?

Definitely look at the iTunes Server package Synology has. That will get you everything you need.

I currently subscribe to the 2 TB iCloud plan and the goal is to get it significantly below 50 GB so that my subscription for iCloud storage will be only $1 per month. Is there a way to have my @iCloud.com email on the NAS?? If yes, I think that would bring my iCloud needs down to the free tier of 5 GB. Maybe there's a way to delete emails older than 5 years on my @iCloud.com email?

You can do that, but that would involve installing either Synology Mail Server, or Synology MailPlus and Synology MailPlus server. That raises a couple of problems:

1. This will allow the NAS to be both the client (to iCloud being the server), allowing mail from iCloud to be delivered to your NAS. However, you would also have to make the NAS as that point become the mail server to whatever client you use. That should be doable, but your problem is that you wouldn't be able to reply back to that email, have the NAS send it, and send it with the email address of iCloud. You'd have to relay it back through iCloud's servers. The NAS can do that, but you'd have to configure that.
2. This would mean that you would have to expose your NAS to the Internet. If you are using your NAS to store any sensitive/personal data, do you want it to be on the internet? For example, it's one thing to store your iTunes Library there; no real harm done if your NAS gets hacked. But any personal info (copies of birth certificates, tax info, copies of SSNs, etc.), Time Machine backups, etc., could also potentially be exposed. Yes, you can mitigate this by only opening up your NAS on a per-service basis, but just be aware of the potential for that to happen.

The short answer is yes, but with the caveats above that you'll have to do some thinking on.

BL.

 

[Luba]

I read with a single HDD or SSD we're supposed to leave around 15%-20% empty (elbow room for the drive?) so that with a 1 TB drive I'm supposed to plan that only 850 GB is available. With SHR or RAID, do I need to leave the same 15%-20% of the array empty?

 

[bradl]

I read with a single HDD or SSD we're supposed to leave around 15%-20% empty (elbow room for the drive?) so that with a 1 TB drive I'm supposed to plan that only 850 GB is available. With SHR or RAID, do I need to leave the same 15%-20% of the array empty?

Not really applicable here, because that 15% - 20% is mainly for MS Windows, so Windows can defragment the drive. You won't have to worry about that with SHR or RAID, especially if formatted as BTRFS or EXT4, which is what you'd have with the drives being internal.

BL.

 

[lostom]

I wish I had of seen this earlier, I would have advised to buy 2 different brands of HDD, like 2 WD and 2 Seagate, only being overcautious, given in general we buy from 1 shop, they are likely from 1 batch, if 1 fails maybe a few fail.
Not sure if this would be applicable to you anyhow, since you're not using raid, just my 2c.

 

[Luba]

I wish I had of seen this earlier, I would have advised to buy 2 different brands of HDD, like 2 WD and 2 Seagate, only being overcautious, given in general we buy from 1 shop, they are likely from 1 batch, if 1 fails maybe a few fail.
Not sure if this would be applicable to you anyhow, since you're not using raid, just my 2c.

I have a 4-bay from Synology and was thinking either SHR-2 or RAID 10. Yeah, I bought all 4 WD Red Plus HDDs from one shop. Since with a 4-bay both SHR-2 and RAID 10 would cost me 50% storage, I was leaning towards RAID 10 for better performance but maybe I don’t need better performance and flexibility could be important years from now so now leaning towards SHR-2.

 

[DaveFromCampbelltown]

I use a Raspberry Pi 4 with two USB 3 HDDs attached as single drives.
Since my home network is 1Gbit, and internal transfer to/from the drives is faster than that, I don't get any benefit from a RAID system.
Using APFS I can read/write files at 100 Mbytes/sec to/from my iMac.
Using SMB I can read/write files at 100 Mbytes/sec to/from Windows
Using NFS I can read/write files at 100 Mbytes/sec to/from Linux.

The only reason I can see for setting up a RAID system in a home network is --

1. if your home network is much faster than 1Gbit/s
2. You want the reliability that a RAID will give you.

Using a NAS has the advantage that it is all set up for you, but I find that using a RPi with Webmin is nearly as simple as managing my WD NAS. And I get better performance with the RPi. And I can use it for other things at the same time.

 

[mmomega]

A synology device, then choose your drives, the Western Digital Reds are good I personally recommend the IronWolf drives, used to use the HGST NAS drives. I have HGST in my work servers and work backup devices and if they fail or I need expansion I switch to IronWolf.
I've owned 6 Synology's from 2 different 5 bay devices, 3 rackmounts, and an 8 drive.
UnRaid, gives this for those that want more control over the hardware they choose. You can turn essentially ANY computer into an UnRaid server.
I then tried Asustor NAS and while I was impressed with the form and hardware I didn't care for the software so I flashde it to run UnRaid and have been much happier with it.

After choosing whichever way you want to go, that is your on-site storage backup there, done. Now choose an off-site, such as backblaze, or amazon, or whomever you decide on, and have your on-site storage backup to your off-site. Now you have a redundancy and chances of losing a piece of data drops significantly if it is important to you.
An on-site is only as good as it's weakest part and you won't know what that is until the day you say "welll shiii..."

If you do not like off-sites or cloud, you can purchase / create 2 of the exact same backup solutions, one is your main that you access, the 2nd is it's backup. So you have 2 identical backups, or again redundancy.
Then do your main storage backup once a week, or once a month, and place it off site at work if you have the option, al a relatives house in a closet, or a climate controlled mini-storage facility. Just so the devices are away from each other in case of flood, fire, tornado, etc issue and you have a much, much, higher chance that your data survives.

Just some thoughts.

TrueNAS if you want to control hardware and have great backup reliability.

 

[bradl]

A synology device, then choose your drives, the Western Digital Reds are good I personally recommend the IronWolf drives, used to use the HGST NAS drives. I have HGST in my work servers and work backup devices and if they fail or I need expansion I switch to IronWolf.

If anyone is needing some, you may want to jump at Newegg right now. they have the 4TB Ironwolfs on sale right now at $105 before a $15 off coupon, making them cheaper than what I paid for my 3TB WD Reds a good 8 years ago.

Speaking of:

I've owned 6 Synology's from 2 different 5 bay devices, 3 rackmounts, and an 8 drive.

Slightly offtopic, but if you've had a Synology that has been working flawlessly for a long period of time, like those 8 years of mine, without having any problems with the drives or the Synology, would you consider upgrading the Synology? right now, it's doing nothing but file serving/sharing/internal cloud, and photo storage. I'm asking because while I have the DS213j, the DS220j is currently on sale. Everywhere I'm seeing with someone asking the same question is replying back with "run the DS213j until it dies", but I'm trying to fight off that upgrade urge. Thoughts?

BL.

 

[hobowankenobi]

Not really applicable here, because that 15% - 20% is mainly for MS Windows, so Windows can defragment the drive. You won't have to worry about that with SHR or RAID, especially if formatted as BTRFS or EXT4, which is what you'd have with the drives being internal.

BL.

I tend to disagree.

Yes, NTFS is a bit worse, but generally speaking, HDs do need a bit of overhead if there is any caching going on, as well as for housekeeping. Not to mention that drives must fragment files once filled to a certain amount...though it depends greatly on file size and a myriad of factors. And the innermost tracks of any drive will always be the slowest.

20% free may be too conservative, but if data security is the deciding factor...I would not like to see less than about 10% free.

 

[mmomega]

If anyone is needing some, you may want to jump at Newegg right now. they have the 4TB Ironwolfs on sale right now at $105 before a $15 off coupon, making them cheaper than what I paid for my 3TB WD Reds a good 8 years ago.

Speaking of:



Slightly offtopic, but if you've had a Synology that has been working flawlessly for a long period of time, like those 8 years of mine, without having any problems with the drives or the Synology, would you consider upgrading the Synology? right now, it's doing nothing but file serving/sharing/internal cloud, and photo storage. I'm asking because while I have the DS213j, the DS220j is currently on sale. Everywhere I'm seeing with someone asking the same question is replying back with "run the DS213j until it dies", but I'm trying to fight off that upgrade urge. Thoughts?

BL.

I wouldn't upgrade unless the current model wasn't giving you something, or a new model was a want and the price wouldn't hurt you.
I would start looking at replacement drives at some point soon. I would wager they will go out before the unit does.

I understand the urges myself, big time, and they change over the years.
Or another way to look at it is get the complete out the door + taxes + shipping to your doorstep cost of a new NAS.
Then ask yourself, would this amount of money make me more happy if I buy this NAS, or is there something else in the same price that if you looked at it would make you more happy. That is if the cost is something you are ok splitting with for a "thing".
If the NAS is perfect, you can take your eye off of it and scratch that itch with something additional.... or if there is nothing else, upgrade.... or wait.

Trying not to be too vague but I don't really tell people to or not to buy, I used to do that and they would decisions based on my opinions then if they didn't like it, somehow he was me that tipped the scale, especially if they didn't like it. I try my best to help determine if they really want it, once they do themselves, I stand behind them on it because it is what they decided to do. If that makes any sense.

 

[hobowankenobi]

Slightly offtopic, but if you've had a Synology that has been working flawlessly for a long period of time, like those 8 years of mine, without having any problems with the drives or the Synology, would you consider upgrading the Synology? right now, it's doing nothing but file serving/sharing/internal cloud, and photo storage. I'm asking because while I have the DS213j, the DS220j is currently on sale. Everywhere I'm seeing with someone asking the same question is replying back with "run the DS213j until it dies", but I'm trying to fight off that upgrade urge. Thoughts?

I tend to want to replace things before they fail...so yeah, I would arbitrarily say that 7-10 years is a good run, and would move on. Especially if there is a substantial change in tech. Synology has not had any big changes I am aware of, other than:

• BTRFS (years ago now...) requiring more resources than the low-end models provide
• DMS 7 seems to also require more resources, from what I have read...

Those two things alone would give me pause on planning to continue to use an old, low-end model.

It may not justify the cost, but faster CPUs do tend to improve both transfer speeds (a bit) and interface performance, which is nice, if not essential. More resources likely would allow more services to be run too, if one plans to leverage more than the basics...especially VMs or Docker, etc.

And...an ever-growing data set/archive might twist my arm to move up more drive bays.