Why Synology's new NAS drive support policy isn't as bad as I first thought

So, Synology dropped a bombshell on its users this week. After some back-and-forth with company officials, I can confidently say it’s not quite as bad as it seems. It’s not ideal, but it’s not the end of the world either.

OK, let’s back up. Synology is a company that makes network-attached storage (NAS) systems. The company makes prosumer, small business, and enterprise-level gear. In my evaluation of their small business NAS devices, compared to most of the other major contenders, I’ve found Synology’s devices to be the best solution.

Also: The best NAS devices: Expert tested

I am currently running four Synology NAS servers, with 142 terabytes stored across 23 drives. It’s fair to say I’m pretty invested in Synology. More to the point, since Synology gave me two of those servers, I’m invested in the drives running on my Synology devices.

Yes, I know it’s a lot of storage for a two-person company. But video production files, VMs running data center simulations, mirrors of my web servers, and diagnostic telemetry data from tens of thousands of users do take up space. Plus, we use the servers to store backups. One also functions as our business and family file share server.

That brings us to the bombshell. On April 18, Ars Technica reported that Synology is making a major change in its drive support policy. As of 2025, all new Plus-tier devices will require Synology-branded hard drives and will not support any non-Synology-branded devices.

Also: I retested Copilot’s AI coding skills after last year’s strikeout and now it’s a slugger

The implications of this for the storage strategy of current and future Synology users are not to be underestimated. But after considerable back-and-forth discussions with Synology executives, it’s not quite as catastrophic as most of us originally feared.

Let me break it down for you.

• 2025 and later devices: This new restriction applies to Synology Plus-tier NAS devices released this year and into the future.
• Plus tier: Devices in the Plus tier, like the 4-bay DS923+, are generally higher performance and have faster processors and more RAM.
• DSM limitation: DiskStation Manager is Synology’s excellent NAS operating system. It’s the best of any I’ve ever tested. DSM will no longer allow new drives not on Synology’s compatibility list to be installed.
• Limit to Synology-branded drives: Therefore, in practice, this means new Synology servers will only accept Synology-approved (mostly Synology-branded) hard drives.

It’s an interesting move for the company. The decision fostered quite a few serious concerns among users. In the next sections, I’ll break down each of them and give you my take.

Existing NAS installations

This change in compatibility requirements is for new NAS boxes only. The company says:

It is important to note that existing Synology products released prior to the ’25 series will continue to support third-party drives in accordance with current compatibility guidelines.

So, if your NAS currently works, this policy change won’t break it. That’s a relief because I have four of them in operation. I’d have been very upset if I had to replace 23 hard drives!

Migration of old drives

One of the biggest areas of psychological comfort in operating the Synology servers has been the ease of failure management. When a drive fails, it’s very easy to pop it out and insert another one. As long as the replacement is the same capacity or larger, the system dynamically integrates the new device into the RAID.

Also: This thumb-sized SSD finally let me break up with iCloud storage for good

For big drives like I run, this process can take up to a week of reintegration, during which the device is at risk if a second failure occurs. But I’ve never had that happen. It’s always worked flawlessly.

But what if the server itself were to fail? In that case, it’s always been possible to just pull out the drives from the old server and slot them into a new server with at least as many drive bays.

Those two mechanisms — protection from drive failure and protection from server failure — have been key to the purchase justification for these machines.

My big initial concern (okay, let’s call it panic) with this new policy was that the old drives are not on the compatibility list. So, if a replacement new-model NAS were to need to be purchased, it wouldn’t support that emergency migration.

Also: How to move massive files off your iPad – when all else fails

It also eliminated the option of upgrading the NAS for better speed or added functionality (they run Docker containers quite nicely).

But — and this is important — that concern is not valid. A Synology spokesperson told me:

Users will also be able to migrate older drives from previous Synology models into the new ’25 models, ensuring that their data is still accessible and protected. However, it is recommended they upgrade their drives to the latest compatible HDDs to ensure full functionality of DSM.

Whew! And I think it’s fair for the company to recommend updating drives after a migration.

The only thing that might be an issue here is that if you have a drive failure in one of the newer Synology NAS devices, you’ll need to replace the drive with a Synology-branded drive. But I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. I’ll explain why.

Cost of new drives

Users have been very concerned that Synology-branded drives would cost a lot more than discount drives available online. So far, that doesn’t appear to be the case.

I picked one drive as a representative sample. Synology’s HAT3310 16TB 7200RPM drive sells on Amazon for $319.

Also: Maxing out your Google cloud storage? How I deleted more than 10TB, thanks to this handy tool

While you can get refurbished Seagate Ironwolf 16TB drives for as low as $249, I think buying refurbished hard drives for data storage is, what’s the word? Stupid. You’re buying something that has already been returned because it failed. Don’t do that.

On the other hand, a new Ironwolf 16TB drive is $310. A nine-dollar difference isn’t enough to cry about, especially since Synology guarantees compatibility of its home brand.

Reliability of new drives

I want you to take a look at this comparison of the Synology drive and Ironwolf drive from Amazon. Notice anything besides the price?

Yeah, the big red block that says the Ironwolf drive is returned frequently. Do you know why the Ironwolf drive is returned frequently? It’s not that the drive sucks. Ironwolf drives are actually excellent, and I’ve happily used them for years.

You know why? My theory is that it has something to do with Amazon shipping bare drives in envelopes. Yeah, when I last bought that Ironwolf 16TB drive in December, it arrived floating around loose, with barely any padding, in a mailing envelope. As far as I could tell, every other drive of a similar capacity was also shipped with minimal packing protection.

Also: This SSD docking station is a game-changer for creators with huge media libraries

The Synology drive I showed above wasn’t available last December, but notice that it has a nice green rectangle. People generally like the drive and don’t return it. I don’t know for sure because that email hasn’t been answered yet, but I’m guessing Synology ships its drives in boxes, not loose. So, they most likely arrive safely, unlike the other drives being shipped.

And, for the record, I checked with a variety of other retailers, including enterprise suppliers like CDW, and they all shipped their higher-capacity drives in OEM form (i.e., bare naked and unprotected).

What about other drive brands?

Synology says they will curate some additional drive brands, but don’t expect that to include any of the low-end drives we’ve all been using. The company told ZDNET:

Additionally, Synology will be introducing a carefully curated drive compatibility framework for those wanting to integrate third-party drives into their Synology systems. This program will allow third-party drive manufacturers to certify their products using the more stringent and rigorous standards that Synology is currently using to test first-party drives.

Also: The best microSD cards: Expert tested

So there you go.

Is the sky falling?

When this news broke, Facebook and Reddit went full bat-crap crazy. I was pretty worried, too. I was concerned that, after spending all that time and money integrating Synology into my internal IT stack, I’d be left hanging if I had to upgrade or replace gear.

That is not the case. While this policy initially seemed a bit draconian, if Synology’s drive prices remain competitive (such as they can in a tariff-centric world), it’s actually no big deal. The company is trying to improve reliability and reduce support challenges, and that’s a smart move.

Also: The best M.2 SSDs: Expert tested and reviewed

Synology always impressed me with its very well-thought-out choices, from the design of its OS to the functionality of its devices. I’ve been relying on them for about eight years, and I’ve never had any issues.

Assuming its branded drives remain easily available and their pricing remains competitive, I don’t see any problem going forward.

What do you think? Are Synology’s new drive restrictions a dealbreaker for you, or do the migration allowances and comparable pricing make the transition easier to accept? Have you had any issues with third-party drives? Do you trust Synology’s branded hardware more? Does this shift affect your plans for future NAS upgrades? Let us know in the comments below.

Get the morning’s top stories in your inbox each day with our Tech Today newsletter.

You can follow my day-to-day project updates on social media. Be sure to subscribe to my weekly update newsletter, and follow me on Twitter/X at @DavidGewirtz, on Facebook at Facebook.com/DavidGewirtz, on Instagram at Instagram.com/DavidGewirtz, on Bluesky at @DavidGewirtz.com, and on YouTube at YouTube.com/DavidGewirtzTV.