Joined: 23 Jul 2017
|Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:30 Post subject: QNAP QTS vs dd-wrt
|This is not, strictly speaking, a general question. Rather, a shout out for dd-wrt.
I recently added a QNAP TS-228A to the home network: Realtek 1295 4 core 1.4 GHZ SoC, 1 GB DDR4 ram. Impressive hardware specs compared to most routers. The plan was to plug in my Canon inkjet and use it as print server, a NAS (of course), DLNA server (of course), and get faster transfer speeds than my Archer C9 running dd-wrt on all of 128MB of ram with an ext4 formatted WD 4TB MyBook plugged into it.
Well, I got the faster transfer speeds and RAID 1. But the QNAP DLNA server interface decided for me that I wanted a half dozen virtual organization folders to divvy up my music, video and picture collection. dd-wrt understood I organized them into folders I wanted for a reason already! And mapping users to NAS share folders was quite frankly a bit clunky compared to dd-wrt.
I'm keeping the QNAP (for NAS - my WAPs are dd-wrt all the way!) - it's about 2x to 3x faster on transfers than my lowly Archer C9 running a NAS with dd-wrt. That goal was at least achieved. And the backup features are nice. But you know what? That's about its only advantage. dd-wrt was (and is) simple, elegant, did what I needed, presented a better (less complicated) interface to my home network for DLNA and Samba, worked well, and all on incredibly low capability hardware compared to the QNAP NAS no less!
Oh yeah, and my printer server? QNAP QTS couldn't even recognize my printer (neither from Windows 10 nor from Manjaro). So I plugged it back into my Archer C9 flashed with dd-wrt and it works great again.
Overall, I was underwhelmed with the QNAP NAS, because dd-wrt had spoiled me w.r.t. what I should expect. When one ponders the wide disparity in hardware capability and corporate support, the capability dd-wrt delivers is just amazing.
Thank you for some truly great work!