Slickdeals is community-supported.  We may get paid by brands or deals, including promoted items.
Heads up, this deal has expired. Want to create a deal alert for this item?
expired Posted by 69jojo almost 3 years ago
expired Posted by 69jojo almost 3 years ago

Synology DiskStation DS220j 2-Bay NAS Enclosure

+ Free Shipping

$160

$190

15% off
B&H Photo Video
121 Comments 50,197 Views
Visit B&H Photo Video
Good Deal
Save
Share

Community Voting

Deal Score
+40
Good Deal
$160$19015% off
Get Deal at B&H Photo Video
Deal Details
B&H Photo Video has Synology DiskStation DS220j 2-Bay NAS Enclosure on sale for $159.99. Shipping is free.

Thanks to community member 69jojo for finding this deal.

Features:
  • 2x 3.5/2.5" SATA HDD/SSD Drive Bays
  • 1.4GHz Realtek RTD1296 Quad-Core
  • 512MB of DDR4 RAM
  • 1x Gigabit Ethernet Port
  • 2x USB 3.0 Type-A Ports
  • RAID 0, 1, Basic, Hybrid, and JBOD
  • Up to 112MB/s Reads and Writes
  • Hardware Encryption Engine
  • Synology DiskStation Manager OS

Editor's Notes

Written by megakimcheelove | Staff
  • About this deal:
    • Price good until 11/15/2021 11:59pm ET
    • Our research indicates that this offer is $12.90 lower (7% savings) than the next best available price from a reputable merchant with prices starting from $172.89
  • About this product:
    • Limited 2-Year Warranty
  • About this store:
    • B&H Photo Video return policy here
    • As a courtesy during the busy holiday season, we have extended our usual 30-day limit on returns and exchanges. You have until February 1, 2022 to return or exchange items purchased after October 18, 2021 through January 2, 2022. All other standard return policy conditions apply.

Original Post

Written by 69jojo
Community Notes
About the Poster
Deal Details
Community Notes
About the Poster
B&H Photo Video has Synology DiskStation DS220j 2-Bay NAS Enclosure on sale for $159.99. Shipping is free.

Thanks to community member 69jojo for finding this deal.

Features:
  • 2x 3.5/2.5" SATA HDD/SSD Drive Bays
  • 1.4GHz Realtek RTD1296 Quad-Core
  • 512MB of DDR4 RAM
  • 1x Gigabit Ethernet Port
  • 2x USB 3.0 Type-A Ports
  • RAID 0, 1, Basic, Hybrid, and JBOD
  • Up to 112MB/s Reads and Writes
  • Hardware Encryption Engine
  • Synology DiskStation Manager OS

Editor's Notes

Written by megakimcheelove | Staff
  • About this deal:
    • Price good until 11/15/2021 11:59pm ET
    • Our research indicates that this offer is $12.90 lower (7% savings) than the next best available price from a reputable merchant with prices starting from $172.89
  • About this product:
    • Limited 2-Year Warranty
  • About this store:
    • B&H Photo Video return policy here
    • As a courtesy during the busy holiday season, we have extended our usual 30-day limit on returns and exchanges. You have until February 1, 2022 to return or exchange items purchased after October 18, 2021 through January 2, 2022. All other standard return policy conditions apply.

Original Post

Written by 69jojo
Leave a Comment
To participate in the comments, please log in.

Top Comments

Synology NAS are especially good as Apple Time Capsule backup device replacement and I've installed lots of these for that purpose.

IMO this model is too slow for anything else.

NAS with 2 bays is always better than a single bay (Having a single drive is just begging for data loss).
Wait for 220+
This will work great for anyone who doesn't need docker or the transcoding (Plex, Emby)

121 Comments

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

almost 3 years ago
2,392 Posts
Joined Oct 2012
almost 3 years ago
Jaxidian
almost 3 years ago
2,392 Posts
Quote from trikster2 :
Name one with something similar to: "grant Synology a right to access to your facilities, equipment, books, records and documents"

I've never seen anything like this for any other network equipment.

Any such EULA (allowing a Republic of China company access to your property/records/documents) would make it a non-starter for U.S. government purchases so it would be hard to imagine any major network vendor including it?

And VPN? Privacy software that gives a foreign company access to your books/records/facilities? I don't believe it. Show me one.....
Cisco: "allow Cisco and its auditors access to the Verification Records and any applicable books, systems (including Cisco product(s) or other equipment), and accounts"

Dell is far more vague, but ambiguity allows for the exact same things: "cooperate fully and timely with Dell and its auditors if Dell notifies You that it will conduct an audit to confirm Your compliance with this EULA"

I'm not going to keep digging into EULAs to find more, sorry. These clauses simply are not rare with business-licenses network appliances. You're welcome to try. FWIW, i only looked into 3 companies. I tried to get a variety of options. Of the three I looked into, only Ubiquiti didn't have such a clause.
Last edited by Jaxidian November 17, 2021 at 05:26 AM.
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Joined Jul 2008
almost 3 years ago
macpro
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Quote from nobody2000 :
3. The typical home server models say they won't support more than 8gb of RAM. This is partially true - they will support 16gb, and it WILL run better, but for some stupid reason, when I had 16gb in there, I got weekly kernel panics during plex transcoding. Not the case when I rolled it back to 8gb....
Your upgraded RAM was either bad, or didn't quite have the right specifications for your NAS.
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Joined Jul 2008
almost 3 years ago
macpro
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Quote from dealsquirrel :
I'm looking to replace my company dropbox, with local syncronization. Would this be powerful enough?
No it's not good for that purpose. You want a Synology model with a + in the name.
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Joined Jul 2008
almost 3 years ago
macpro
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Quote from Ajgaguy83 :
A few dumb questions…… I'm trying to learn about these to set-up as storage for my wife's photography. Can she save her raw photos directly to the NAS so it doesn't slow the computer down so much? If so, which Synology would you recommend? I appreciate any help.
If she's working with RAW she needs a much better NAS with at least 4 bays to get the performance a pro photographer expects.
Last edited by macpro November 17, 2021 at 08:49 AM.
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Joined Jul 2008
almost 3 years ago
macpro
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Quote from _A2 :
Not sure what you mean by "slow the computer down so much". Storing files on the computer shouldn't slow it down (unless the OS drive is filled almost to capacity)....
You clearly haven't dealt much with users in the real world. Every week I encounter a user who has their system drive (which is where they cram everything) filled to at least 90% of capacity, and often filled even more. They only remove things / do file clean up when their system screams about running out of disk space, or they get horrendous slowdowns (which *always* happens when a system is run with a nearly full drive for a long time).
almost 3 years ago
2,188 Posts
Joined Nov 2004
almost 3 years ago
_A2
almost 3 years ago
2,188 Posts
Quote from macpro :
You clearly haven't dealt much with users in the real world. Every week I encounter a user who has their system drive (which is where they cram everything) filled to at least 90% of capacity, and often filled even more. They only remove things / do file clean up when their system screams about running out of disk space, or they get horrendous slowdowns (which *always* happens when a system is run with a nearly full drive for a long time).
I don't have to deal with users in the "real world" in this context in order to understand and offer advice/information, right? Maybe I'm missing your point, not sure.

I specifically said "
(unless the OS drive is filled almost to capacity).". My comment was intended to convey that they shouldn't see a "slow down" as a result of dumping RAW files to a machine, unless the OS drive is almost filled to capacity. If it's not filled, and there is plenty of free space, there's no reason why dumping RAW (or any) files to the machine should slow it down. That's all.
Last edited by _A2 November 17, 2021 at 11:18 AM.
almost 3 years ago
287 Posts
Joined Jul 2005
almost 3 years ago
nobody2000
almost 3 years ago
287 Posts
Quote from macpro :
Your upgraded RAM was either bad, or didn't quite have the right specifications for your NAS.
Specs were 100% on point, and the memory passed all diagnostic tests - I researched it well, but remained hopeful that I wouldn't experience the problems users faced. I was wrong about the latter.

The problem is common with my model (TS-453Be) and QTS some version released in 2019 and all versions after. Users found that this configuration was prone to crashes when the memory was being accessed beyond 12gb or so. Running PLEX either in docker or in QNAP's own .qpkg version produced the problem. Users reported that keeping the 16gb of RAM and then moving to something like TrueNAS eliminates the problem.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Joined Jul 2008
almost 3 years ago
macpro
almost 3 years ago
1,289 Posts
Quote from _A2 :
I don't have to deal with users in the "real world" in this context in order to understand and offer advice/information, right? Maybe I'm missing your point, not sure.

I specifically said "
(unless the OS drive is filled almost to capacity).". My comment was intended to convey that they shouldn't see a "slow down" as a result of dumping RAW files to a machine, unless the OS drive is almost filled to capacity. If it's not filled, and there is plenty of free space, there's no reason why dumping RAW (or any) files to the machine should slow it down. That's all.
And what I'm saying is that, based on typical user behavior that I see doing I.T. work, the person who's working with the Raw files who is experiencing slowness, is almost certainly filling (or nearly filling) their system drive. That's what people do.
almost 3 years ago
3,486 Posts
Joined Aug 2009
almost 3 years ago
HunterOne
almost 3 years ago
3,486 Posts
Quote from aegrotatio :
I have the 2018 version of this (DS218j). The processor is strong enough and I'm baffled why they only put 512 MB of memory in it. I'm even more baffled that the 2020 version (DS220j) in this deal also only has 512 MB of memory.

I am upgrading to the DS220+ instead, which comes with 2 GB of memory and can be upgraded, along with a much stronger processor.

I'm still puzzled why Synology only puts 512MB in the "j" series even though the software offers features that far exceed the memory provided but don't exceed the CPU provided.
512MB is fine if used only as a local storage/backup, BUT, if one wants to do remote backups from one Synology NAS to another at different locations, and also work remotely off one of these NASs, get Synology NASs with at least 8GB each or more either already installed or can be upgraded.

Get 16GB or more for each NAS if more than a few people will be working remotely at the same time off of one of these two Synology NASs, especially if working with large files like database, CAD, video, etc.

IF you value your data and, say, you're located in a high hazard zone like earthquake CA or a flood plain, or a hurricane or tornado area, better have a NAS backup in your parents' or a friend's home in IL, or MI, or MN, etc., hopefully not in a riot prone city.
Last edited by HunterOne November 17, 2021 at 09:36 PM.
almost 3 years ago
2,629 Posts
Joined Feb 2007
almost 3 years ago
trikster2
almost 3 years ago
2,629 Posts
Quote from Jaxidian :
Cisco: "allow Cisco and its auditors access to the Verification Records and any applicable books, systems (including Cisco product(s) or other equipment), and accounts"

Dell is far more vague, but ambiguity allows for the exact same things: "cooperate fully and timely with Dell and its auditors if Dell notifies You that it will conduct an audit to confirm Your compliance with this EULA"

I'm not going to keep digging into EULAs to find more, sorry. These clauses simply are not rare with business-licenses network appliances. You're welcome to try. FWIW, i only looked into 3 companies. I tried to get a variety of options. Of the three I looked into, only Ubiquiti didn't have such a clause.
That's not nearly as broad as synology. It does not allow access to the building. I don't think that's even legal in the USA without a search warrant. And it's limited to "verification records" (which are specific to use of cisco products) and "applicable documents" versus the much much broader " a right to access to your facilities, equipment, books, records and documents". Plus synology is a Republic of China organization demanding this access vs a USA company. I'm betting they never demanded and gained access to USA properties.....
almost 3 years ago
2,392 Posts
Joined Oct 2012
almost 3 years ago
Jaxidian
almost 3 years ago
2,392 Posts
Quote from trikster2 :
That's not nearly as broad as synology. It does not allow access to the building. I don't think that's even legal in the USA without a search warrant. And it's limited to "verification records" (which are specific to use of cisco products) and "applicable documents" versus the much much broader " a right to access to your facilities, equipment, books, records and documents". Plus synology is a Republic of China organization demanding this access vs a USA company. I'm betting they never demanded and gained access to USA properties.....
The Cisco one literally says books and equipment. You're not going to carry your racks out into a parking lot, so that means inside your facilities. The Dell one doesn't say those words but they're implied and therefore included (assuming these are even enforcible - that i don't know).

And I don't know why you keep talking about China. I've never said anything about China. I'm just talking about these clauses. If they're enforcible for an American-owned company, then they're likely are for a French or Chinese company as well. People have entered into crazier contracts with foreign governments before that have been upheld.
almost 3 years ago
2,188 Posts
Joined Nov 2004
almost 3 years ago
_A2
almost 3 years ago
2,188 Posts
Quote from macpro :
And what I'm saying is that, based on typical user behavior that I see doing I.T. work, the person who's working with the Raw files who is experiencing slowness, is almost certainly filling (or nearly filling) their system drive. That's what people do.
Right... And I still don't see the relevance lol. Why not let that user chime in and tell us whether or not that's the case? Let them check, and reply back as to whether their OS drive is crammed or not.

There's zero value in pointing out what someone "thinks" the average user might or might not be doing laugh out loud. I replied to them:

"
Storing files on the computer shouldn't slow it down (unless the OS drive is filled almost to capacity).". They haven't replied yet.

But you felt like you had to question whether or not I'd dealt with users in the real world LOL. Congratulations.

"You clearly haven't dealt much with users in the real world.". Something that continues to be irrelevant.


It's as if I said:
"Hey, if your low oil pressure light is flashing on and off while you go around corners, you might be low on oil. I would check that before assuming the pickup tube screen is blocked."

And you replied:
"Oh well you clearly haven't dealt with drivers in the real world. They're terrible with maintenance, and never check their oil level!".


Oh wow, thanks! Zero value there. My 20 years of experience working on and dismantling cars tells me that MANY people don't take great care of their cars. They end up spending more money to rectify problems than they ever might have preventing them. But my level of experience doesn't preclude me from suggesting steps to help someone investigate an issue. If I had minimal experience, I could still make a valid suggestion to someone in terms of troubleshooting.
Last edited by _A2 November 18, 2021 at 09:55 AM.
almost 3 years ago
428 Posts
Joined Sep 2008
almost 3 years ago
aerischan
almost 3 years ago
428 Posts
Quote from aegrotatio :
I have the 2018 version of this (DS218j). The processor is strong enough and I'm baffled why they only put 512 MB of memory in it. I'm even more baffled that the 2020 version (DS220j) in this deal also only has 512 MB of memory.

I am upgrading to the DS220+ instead, which comes with 2 GB of memory and can be upgraded, along with a much stronger processor.

I'm still puzzled why Synology only puts 512MB in the "j" series even though the software offers features that far exceed the memory provided but don't exceed the CPU provided.
I think the reason is quite obvious: cost. If you spend more, you get better hardware.

The "j" series is Synology's absolute entry-level line. The DS218play and DS218 have the same CPU as the DS220j but have 1GB and 2GB RAM respectively. Of course, MSRP for those are $40-60 more. The DS220+ has $110 higher MSRP so naturally, it's going to be better than the "j".

Personally, I got the DS220j as a cheap entry to familiarize myself with Synology's software. I think I'll probably upgrade to either DS920+ or DS1520+ and relegate the DS220j as offsite backup or something.
almost 3 years ago
2,529 Posts
Joined Aug 2003
almost 3 years ago
aegrotatio
almost 3 years ago
2,529 Posts
Quote from aerischan :
I think the reason is quite obvious: cost. If you spend more, you get better hardware.

The "j" series is Synology's absolute entry-level line. The DS218play and DS218 have the same CPU as the DS220j but have 1GB and 2GB RAM respectively. Of course, MSRP for those are $40-60 more. The DS220+ has $110 higher MSRP so naturally, it's going to be better than the "j".

Personally, I got the DS220j as a cheap entry to familiarize myself with Synology's software. I think I'll probably upgrade to either DS920+ or DS1520+ and relegate the DS220j as offsite backup or something.
The "j" series have weaker ARM processors. The Plus series have x86 64-bit Intel Celeron processors. The "j" series is no fun beyond being a NAS and some limited application functionality. I just upgraded my new x86 DS220plus with a total of 10 GB of RAM and it's a joy to use with tons of apps running compared to the "j" which barely manages a handful of them. I must also mention that the "j" and Play do not support support many apps that the x86 models like the Plus do).

I'm not sure whom the DS220play is intended for to be honest. It doesn't seem to be strong enough to support Plex.
Last edited by aegrotatio November 26, 2021 at 10:21 PM.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

almost 3 years ago
428 Posts
Joined Sep 2008
almost 3 years ago
aerischan
almost 3 years ago
428 Posts
Quote from aegrotatio :
The "j" series have weaker ARM processors. The Plus series have x86 64-bit Intel Celeron processors. The "j" series is no fun beyond being a NAS and some limited application functionality. I just upgraded my new x86 DS220plus with a total of 10 GB of RAM and it's a joy to use with tons of apps running compared to the "j" which barely manages a handful of them. I must also mention that the "j" and Play do not support support many apps that the x86 models like the Plus do).

I'm not sure whom the DS220play is intended for to be honest. It doesn't seem to be strong enough to support Plex.
It's DS218play so it's from 2018. Maybe they're just continuing to sell old stock. Mind, it's only the Plus and higher that have x86. The J and Value series have ARM. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if pricing is intentionally structured to get customers to "pay just a bit more" to upgrade to the higher end models.

As for Plex, none of the ARM-based NAS will work for Plex transcoding. They're fine for basic Plex server use as long as the playback client supports direct stream/play and the network is fast enough to support original bitrates.
1