Currently Being ModeratedMar 6, 2011 2:58 PM (in response to ShortyDK)The most compatible would be Apple's Time Capsule. Of the third-party developers look to Synology and LaCie for devices most compatible with Macs and OS X. Especially if you expect to use Time Machine for backup software. I would also see what's being offered at OWC.2007 iMac, Mac OS X (10.6.6), 2GB RAM, 250GB HDD
Currently Being ModeratedMar 7, 2011 8:21 AM (in response to ShortyDK)Are you sure about that, Clio? I have been looking at the different companies in relation to Mac compatibility and discovered that QNAP is surprisingly high in mac compatibility, so think it's gonna be that company...
See guide in QNAP Mac compatibility here
Unless someone has something negative to say in relation to QNAP and Mac compatibility?iMac & MacBook, Mac OS X (10.6.6)
Currently Being ModeratedMar 7, 2011 8:23 AM (in response to Clio1)I can comment that the Synology is excellent. The TimeMachien support works, the iTunes sharing works, AFP works great, etc. I've had nothing but positive experience with Synology units.2 iMacs (me + kids), 2 MacBook Pros (work + wife), iPhone 4, Mac OS X (10.6.4), various Linux PCs and one WinXP laptop (gathering dust)
Currently Being ModeratedMar 7, 2011 9:30 AM (in response to ShortyDK)Good to hear!
I have been looking at videos on YouTube on the useability on Synology as well as QNAP and it just looks like the QNAP systems have a better system for accessing files and general usage.... But that may just be because I have been looking their way for a while :PiMac & MacBook, Mac OS X (10.6.6)
Currently Being ModeratedMar 7, 2011 9:48 AM (in response to ShortyDK)I was not familiar with QNAP so I did not comment on it. Good to hear that they are highly compatible. Synology has been designing with Macs in mind since their first product. And LaCie has been the biggest supplier of Mac external drives for years. Hence the reason I suggested them.2007 iMac, Mac OS X (10.6.6), 2GB RAM, 250GB HDD
Currently Being ModeratedApr 29, 2011 12:51 PM (in response to J D McIninch)
I recently took the NAS plunge and can concur with JD that I've been pretty happy with Synology. QNAP is also really good, but I like the clean UI and simplified interface of the Synology better.
There have been reported issues with Apple File Protocol (AFP) and Synology, but I haven't seen it.
If anyone is interested in reading about using Synology with the Mac I've been blogging about my experiences with it at: http://macsynology.wordpress.com
Currently Being ModeratedApr 30, 2011 1:11 AM (in response to ShortyDK)
Currently Being ModeratedMay 23, 2011 6:55 AM (in response to Clio1)
As far as I can see, Synology does not support HFS(+) formatted USB drives allthough they have promised this since at least 2009.(ref their forum)
QNAP does support it (allthough its reported a bug if a folder only contains .mov files)
I too like the Synology 3.1 web-interface better than QNAP`s and you will get a 4 bay NAS cheaper from Synology than QNAP. Still I would choose QNAP and it looks like the QNAP ts-412 is the best choice if you want a home NAS (abt $300 without disks). From Synology I would probably go for the 411j (abt $230 ex disks).
I would strongly recommend a 4 bay NAS instead of 2 bay since you then can use RAID 5 which gives redunancy but only "stealing" 25 % of storage instead of 50%
Another top tip is not to use WD Green disks or any other Eco disks. They have a tendancy to fail or/and make a lot of trouble in Linux based systems (which they are all based on) in RAID. (ref all forums from NAS builders)
Currently Being ModeratedAug 29, 2011 1:00 AM (in response to ShortyDK)
A small update from me:
I purchased the QNAP TS-412 and have had it now for 2.5 months. I just love it!
For home users its plenty powerful, easy to use and update.
QNAP just updated their Firmware to 3.5 to support Lion better.
They have also autoconfigure of Airport extreme so it seems they really focus on us Apple users. They also have IOS app to view mediafiles from your NAS.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 28, 2012 7:17 AM (in response to Laplace)
From my brief experience with Synology, I would like to elaborate on something Laplace noted.
Synology is not Mac-friendly. It is the antithesis of Mac-friendly if only for one reason:
The ext4 file system.
The ext4 file system disallows particular file name character combinations to the extent that many files on an HFS+ file system (i.e. Mac's) simply cannot be transferred onto the device.
Including, but not limited to, ANY invisible Mac file. Or any file with an underscore at the beginning. And the list goes on.
Why custom partitioning is not allowed is a mystery to me. If there is no way around the issue, it's a bad system for Macs, period. Anyone who tells you otherwise probably doesn't use NAS for network file storage and sharing, which is supposed to be any NAS's main job.
In summary, Synology and Mac, as they currently stand, do not mix well.
Not to mention, file names with underscores at the beginning, etc., are not too uncommon on NTFS file sytems either (i.e. Windows'). So Windows users should keep an eye out as well.
Currently Being ModeratedFeb 28, 2012 8:22 AM (in response to J D McIninch)
Which model and DSM version are you using? According to the website all Synology NAS HDDs are formatted to ext4, so maybe it's an issue with some other aspect of Synology besides the use of ext4. I really wish there were some way around the errors being received on this end. Unfortunately the Synology support forums seem 'dead' atm.