Then explain why one can successfully use and old synology to “mark” drives as “authentic synology” and move them into a newer DSM model to use them.

Because they have to have a way for legacy users to maintain functionality. Going forward though, new drives in new devices are handled differently. It’s basically a quality control type thing - they’re providing the support and warranty for them, so they’re only “guaranteeing” that their checks work on their drives. That makes sense. They don’t want to be on the hook for saying that a drive that isn’t theirs was perfectly healthy and then it drops dead an hour later and you lose all your data.

As explained ad nauseum on various yt channels, having a hw compatibility list makes sense for users likely to buy support, like business users.

Again though, the disks still work. The compatibility lists simply tell you if they are officially supported and will get certain features.

But add on top of it that there is no functional hardware difference between certified and non-certified, and it becomes pretty clear that Synology is to be avoided.

But add on top of it that there is no functional hardware difference between certified and non-certified, and it becomes pretty clear that Synology is to be avoided.

Avoiding them because of missing a few proprietary synology disk health checks is such a strange thing to do lol. You won’t get synologys disk health checks if you were to make your own server, so why is not having them on a synology a deal breaker?

I was about to give a genuine reply, then I read your second sentence and now I realize there’s no point. Straight to the tired old garbage “boot licker” insults. Have fun.

So not Microsofts fault then :). Universities should not be using employee licenses for students.

Synology’s software is awful. Simply controlling NFS shares is an exercise in insanity, and don’t get me started on ACLs.

Strange, I’ve had no issue controlling NFS shares or ACLs. Have set up 4 Synology NAS’s, with shares out the wahzoo. No problems. User error maybe?

Further, synology is a real bastard company currently trying to enshittify hardware (disk) upgrades, among other terrible practices:

That disk upgrade thing was a mountain out of a molehill. All they are doing is reserving some of their disk health features for synology branded disks because they’re the only ones they can verify meet their standards for their software.

Actually not in this particular case, the university had MS365 Business and gave us accounts in order for us to use the service.

Sounds like this university was an absolute shitshow then.

What is? M365 Business? M365 Family or Personal? Office suite outright purchase?

Synology NAS’s are amazing, can’t recommend them enough. Their software is what makes them so good.

You can run Plex server on them, can run docker containers for all your *arr services and even a container with a VPN for torrentin (all depends on the model obviously).

That’s fine to want, but you’re not entitled to it and never should be.

The university having M365 and the students having M365 are not the same thing. Students don’t subscribe to M365 Business because they need word or excel. Students would subscribe to M365 Family or Personal, or just buy office outright. Students get a huge discount too.

Completely disagree, and I have tens of gigs of FLAC music to go with my 10s of gigs of MP3.

Somehow I don’t think any charities with less than 10 employees were doing that, so nothing changes.

You said this too:

So for now I’d just be happy if they used LibreOffice instead of MS365

As I said, LibreOffice can’t be used instead of MS365 unless you want to lose 95% of the features of 365.

It’s not “corporate greed”. If companies have to make every device of theirs “open source” essentially, and have to make ways for their competitors to be able to run their stuff on the device, and allow people to remove all their companies stuff from their devices, guess what? No one will make devices anymore.

If you don’t like what Apple do, don’t buy Apple devices. You’re not entitled to anything other than the device doing what it says on the box. You do not own the software on it, nor are you entitled to have them give you the keys to their kingdom.

It’s not “corporate shilling” to explain basic concepts around business and how the world works. I didn’t like what Google were doing a few years back so I made the decision to switch to an iPhone and stopped using pretty much all Google services. I voted with my wallet, like you can and should.

You really can’t. With Bluetooth earbuds you absolutely can’t. With car speakers you’re not fooling anyone.

They didn’t donate all of that to that fund. They’ve donated hundreds of millions/billions to many other charities and causes that they don’t run. The money that they do donate to that fund does get used to help humanity. If you’re going to claim that it just goes back to line their own pockets, can you provide evidence of this?

Oh and what a creative way to use one of the most uncreative low-iq commie insults!

I’m just saying it literally is Azure AD renamed:

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/identity/aad-rebrand/

It does change that fact, because again - they’re forced to by law. There’s no wiggle room. Had they chosen to defy them and take them to court, Microsoft probably would have been forced to cease trading in the USA or something equally as company destroying.

Your data and email isn’t ever “safe” unless you’re hosting every single part of it yourself, and even then - if the government orders you to do something, you’ll fold like origami when faced with the alternative. Microsoft aren’t in the business of deciding who is and isn’t “tyrannical”. They are in the business of following legal orders and staying in business though.

You’re saying that Spotify don’t have employee moderators for uploaded podcasts, which they do. In this era of every person thinking they’re an influencer and everyone needs to hear what they say, the issue is that likely no matter how many they have, the number of episodes that get uploaded will always dwarf them, so they rely on their auto-moderators to find the most egregious rule breakers. They can’t catch everything there though. If a customer finds a rule breaker and reports it, they’ll take action - that’s good!

The alternative is that every single episode of every single podcast has to be manually reviewed and approved before it goes live, which is not feasible.

Because they were ordered to by the government or face enormous fines and repercussions.

Preeeeetty big thing to leave out of the headline if you ask me.

Exactly. This is a complete nothing story.