Is QNAP still supported?

[Jerryacg]

As there has been no input from Progressive for the last few weeks, does anyone know if QNAP is still officially supported.

[Fifer]

Well, the Qnap version of Slimserver is still up to date and the last plug-ins update was posted only three weeks ago, so I wouldn't panic just yet. I had an email from Paul just the other day (not Qnap related) so he's very much still around at Progressive. Have you tried contacting him through the on-line support function on the Cooltopia website?

[happyfishman]

I was starting to wonder too... I haven't yet made the leap to SS6.5 because of the possible memory issues (and and a disasterous wireless router failure, but that's another story), but I would like a little reassurance that we will be able to operate our squeezeboxes at the same or better level of functionality with future SS updates, though.

That said, I'm not overly concerned about the silence from Paul/Progressive... yet...

[Seineseeker]

Well its been a few weeks without a word. And there's the memory issue, the disk spinning down issue, not to mention the patch to use slave drives.

Either Paul is busy working on these issues, or Progressive have pulled the plug on the QNAP for SS! Let's hope its the former.

[Jerryacg]

As there has been no input from Progressive for the last few weeks, does anyone know if QNAP is still officially supported.

So, to respond to my own question ... Considering the lack of response from Progresive, It would appear that the answer is No. I would now, respectfully request that Progressive post a statement on the forum regarding the support issue. True, the latest SS is on the upgrade page, but it dosn't work. This was acknowledged by Prog at the end of last month. If, as suggested a fix is being worked on, can someone from Progressive take a minute to post a message letting us know.

[Fifer]

So, to respond to my own question ... Considering the lack of response from Progresive, It would appear that the answer is No. I would now, respectfully request that Progressive post a statement on the forum regarding the support issue. True, the latest SS is on the upgrade page, but it dosn't work. This was acknowledged by Prog at the end of last month. If, as suggested a fix is being worked on, can someone from Progressive take a minute to post a message letting us know.

What doesn't work in the latest SS? Mine's ok.

[Seineseeker]

Well lets not jump to conclusions. They are still selling QNAPs with SS installed for one thing. I hope the patch for the slave appears at some point, otherwise I am scuppered when my 300GB is full!!! I am still using 6.3 and it all works very nicely for now.

[Heuer]

Mine works with 6.5. Disk spin down remains erratic but that is the only problem - and do I care - no!

Any problems with 6.5 (slow browser) are also apparent on my ReadyNAS NV and in fact the TS-101 is slightly quicker even though the NV has 1Gb of memory (hint: slow browser response may not be memory related). Paul has a business to run, we had an update three weeks ago so I think we are being a bit naive to expect they regularly read these forums. They are also dependant on the manufactuer in Taiwan or wherever so delays are to be expected.

Paul has my order for a Transporter so he has a financial incentive to continue support but I am not about to hassle him for it even though I am looking forward to getting it.

I have to admit the Infrant guys get involved on their forum but despite many posts they are no further forward in resolving the SS 6.5 issues than Qnap.

[Paul_B]

Slimserver 6.5 is usable on QNAP, the only issue is using the web interface. I have just purchased a 1.5GHz VIA based system with 1GB memory running Windows 2003 and SS6.5 and watching the CPU activity and performance stats from the SS the web browsing interface takes 0.5 seconds to complete and CPU usage hits 100% for the same period. So no surprise a 233MHz system with 64MB takes longer.

As for disk spin down I am not convinced this is solely down to SS. My disk spindown has been very erratic since I first bought the QNAP and running SS < 6.3. Only way to work out what is causing this is a better event log on the QNAP where diagnostic logging can be increased.

[simonjedrake]

Slimserver 6.5 is usable on QNAP, the only issue is using the web interface. I have just purchased a 1.5GHz VIA based system with 1GB memory running Windows 2003 and SS6.5 and watching the CPU activity and performance stats from the SS the web browsing interface takes 0.5 seconds to complete and CPU usage hits 100% for the same period. So no surprise a 233MHz system with 64MB takes longer.

As for disk spin down I am not convinced this is solely down to SS. My disk spindown has been very erratic since I first bought the QNAP and running SS < 6.3. Only way to work out what is causing this is a better event log on the QNAP where diagnostic logging can be increased.

I totally agree with the above. SS 6.5.0 is operating very well, Web interface I find pretty responsive apart from a couple of tabs which take a few seconds to refresh, but what the hell - it's only a Qnap not a super fast PC.
I love my Qnap, so much in a little box & at a good price.

[iangude]

I have been waiting for a resolution to my issue (ie not been able to access any of my music on my NAS) since August. Despite telephoning, posting here, PMing and emailing, I can get nothing out of Paul, or Progressive at all.

[funkstar]

I have been waiting for a resolution to my issue (ie not been able to access any of my music on my NAS) since August. Despite telephoning, posting here, PMing and emailing, I can get nothing out of Paul, or Progressive at all.
Now that i would have a problem with. Paul not posting here is one thing, but not being able to get support by phoning them is totally different.

[Jerryacg]

I totally agree with the above. SS 6.5.0 is operating very well, Web interface I find pretty responsive apart from a couple of tabs which take a few seconds to refresh, but what the hell - it's only a Qnap not a super fast PC.
I love my Qnap, so much in a little box & at a good price.

Obviously delighted for the guys who are happy with their QNAPs running 6.5. I'm not. That issues been discussed. I started this thread specifically to ask the question "Is QNAP still supported by Progressive" and I am still awaiting an answer to what I feel is a pretty straightforward, non loaded, question.

[Seineseeker]

I have been waiting for a resolution to my issue (ie not been able to access any of my music on my NAS) since August. Despite telephoning, posting here, PMing and emailing, I can get nothing out of Paul, or Progressive at all.

I agree that's bad, and I feel sorry for you iangude. They really should at least give you an answer.

[iangude]

I know - tell me about it. Just managed (at last) to speak to Paul.

Paul is sending me a file over to test for them to see if it works (dont ask me what happened to the fix they were testing a month ago....). If it doesnt, he has offered to RMA the unit.

For reference, Paul's email is paul.hanley@progressiveav.com - you may have better luck communicating direct than on here.

Ian

[Seineseeker]

Good luck! You didn't happen to ask him how he's getting on with any other QNAP issues did you?

[Jerryacg]

As there has been no input from Progressive for the last few weeks, does anyone know if QNAP is still officially supported.

.... Ditto

[iangude]

Good luck! You didn't happen to ask him how he's getting on with any other QNAP issues did you?

The file sent by Paul to fix this didnt work. I am awaiting a replacement fix file.

[Jerryacg]

As there has been no input from Progressive for the last few weeks, does anyone know if QNAP is still officially supported.

Bump .......

[roamingstudio]

A festive bump to you too ;-)

What sort of info do you want from the Bump?

A lot is happening on developing a new boot sequence, kernel and other areas... which will allow new TS-101 applications. It also allows me an opportunity to explore whether memory can be expanded properly... although to be honest I think it is going to be luck if it works now...

[Seineseeker]

Bump .......

We had the USB external drive fix a few weeks back. There's the ongoing ideas about a possible memory upgrade. What particular support issue are you still looking for?

[Jerryacg]

We had the USB external drive fix a few weeks back. There's the ongoing ideas about a possible memory upgrade. What particular support issue are you still looking for?

Personally.. (Whilst bracing myself for the "Mine spins down ok" responses.) I would like to know if reliable Hard disk spin down on a 101 is ever going to work, and if not, if the Ram in the 201 is enough to handle 6.5. Research into The memory upgrade route is interesting but its obviously going to be fiddly and way beyond my technical abilities. Opening up a case would surely invalidate Qnaps warranty.

[Heuer]

Mine spins down OK!

[Fifer]

Opening up a case would surely invalidate Qnaps warranty.

I doubt it. The Qnap usually is sold without a hard disk and it's difficult for owners to fit them without opening it.

(PS Mine spins down too.)

[Seineseeker]

Mine spins down OK!

You always say that!

Mine doesn't spin down, well I don't think so, but then I do have the RSS newsfeed running. I turn it off at night, not sure if thats a good thing to do.

[Andy_W]

Mine spins down OK!

This topic is interesting because I along with Heuer & Fifer bought one of the original QNAPs about a year ago from Progressive. Mine did not initially go into standby, but when I turned the clock off on the SB3 - it went into standby after 5 mins. This happens all the time every time. I am not running the latest version of SS (the one with the slow web browser - can't remember the version) but the previous one.

I have just bought another QNAP TS101 from Progressive without SS installed to stream video to my stand alone media player. Both units are running the new QNAP Beta firmware. (Original QNAP has gone into standby with every firmware version) When you enable the UPnP on the QNAP admin menu, neither unit goes into stand by. When you disable this, they both go into standby after 5 minutes!

This sounds like maybe the people who cannot get units into standby are doing something different to those of us that can.

Hope this adds to the debate

Andy

[Jerryacg]

"The Qnap usually is sold without a hard disk"



Really? So most Qnap posters in this Slim Devices forum, have had to go to Progressive to have Slimserver installed. I didn't realise that.

[Fifer]

The version of the Qnap sold by Progressive (with SS installed) is unique to Progressive. Paul fits the hard drives, not Qnap. Most Qnaps are sold without drives (and obviously, without SS). All SS equipped versions come originally from Progressive.

Here's (http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/ProductInfo.asp?WebProductID=359341&source=froogle) an example of the Qnap sans HDD.

[jonheal]

Why do you care if the disk(s) spin down? It doesn't save that much energy and it probably contributes to shorter drive life. Disk bearings are very durable. On the other hand, when a disk spins down, the heads park, and that IS wear and tear, because the heads come in contact with the disk at that point. Even if they're coming to rest on a non-data "landing zone," the heads themselves experience wear.

[Jerryacg]

The version of the Qnap sold by Progressive (with SS installed) is unique to Progressive. Paul fits the hard drives, not Qnap. Most Qnaps are sold without drives (and obviously, without SS). All SS equipped versions come originally from Progressive.

Here's (http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/ProductInfo.asp?WebProductID=359341&source=froogle) an example of the Qnap sans HDD.

I never knew that. I didn't buy my Qnap with slimserver installed from Progressive or Cooltopia. So as you say,if Progressive supply all ss equipped Qnaps. Are Progressive still supporting ss equipped Qnaps?

[Fifer]

I believe so. The firmware and SS version on the website are the current ones. Progressive is a small company and Paul goes AWOL from the forums fairly regularly as other business demands dictate, but he's yet to fail to keep SS up to date or to fix serious issues. There are commitments for (what I'd term to be) non-critical fixes which are overdue, but I'll start to worry when we don't get a Slimserver update.

[Jerryacg]

I believe so. The firmware and SS version on the website are the current ones. Progressive is a small company and Paul goes AWOL from the forums fairly regularly as other business demands dictate, but he's yet to fail to keep SS up to date or to fix serious issues. There are commitments for (what I'd term to be) non-critical fixes which are overdue, but I'll start to worry when we don't get a Slimserver update.

Without wanting to reignite the debate, It's obvious from the posts throughout this thread and forum, that though The SS version on the download page is current, in several respects, it dosn't behave the way it should when downloaded onto a TS101. Evidence of this appearing on the progressive download page itself with the the rollback option. As you state "All SS equipped versions come originally from Progressive". And until a self install package is made availible by Progressive, Unless I'm missing something, We (UK) are all reliant on them for support and updates. I'm not quite sure what relevance the size of the company has, or why it should affect the amount of support availible from a company that would appear to be in the fortunate position of having sole responsibility for providing and supporting such a cutting edge product.

[Heuer]

The Qnap may lose the initiative. Infrant have already included SS6.5.1 in their beta software and have taken seriously complaints of poor browser response. Latest version is much faster and Infrant are using their own implementation of MySQL:

Perl Version: 5.8.8 sparc-linux
MySQL Version: 5.0.24a-Debian_3.infrant1

Remote response is also now much better and Infrant seem to be working with SD to improve things further from information I gleaned off Bugzilla.

[roamingstudio]

At some point in the past the rumour mill tells me Qnap seriously considered support for the SS. However they eventually decided to include Twonky UPnP as it was more general purpose... This is a pity and emails to their support page may help spur them into doing this - it is not a difficult path.

[Jerryacg]

At some point in the past the rumour mill tells me Qnap seriously considered support for the SS. However they eventually decided to include Twonky UPnP as it was more general purpose... This is a pity and emails to their support page may help spur them into doing this - it is not a difficult path.

I agree ... It is a pity. The TS201 looks great, and I'd seriously consider it if I thought it was beefy enough to run 6.5 and future releases.

[Paul_B]

...or keep you eye on the Openturbostation project

[Jerryacg]

As there has been no input from Progressive for the last few weeks, does anyone know if QNAP is still officially supported.


Reading a few of the Post Xmas Posts it would appear that QNAPs are still being sold as a product which is still capable of running Slimserver and futre versions of Slimserver. Support disappearing is annoying for us who have already bought into this device, but to continue selling the thing with embedded SS and claiming they are compatible is a bit naughty. I'm referring specifically to the guy whos just bought a TS201 with 6.2 and is enquiring into the upgrade path. A bit odd that a state of the art TS201 is being shipped with an obsolete SS version.

[pgamble]

Hi guys

I purchased a Qnap ts-201 with Squeezebox from Ripcaster (one of the Progressive resellers) just before Christmas.

I purchased the Qnap for two reasons -

firstly, I wanted a simple stay on all the time device to run Slimserver - I hate the idea of leaving my PC running all the time.

secondly, I wanted an easily extensible NAS device with the capability of supporting me both in the house and remotely. This meant providing FTP services and web services.

The Qnap does this superbly. The SlimServer performance from the Squeezebox is instant - unless I'm rescanning, the response to the remote has zero lag. Everything worked out of the box - Squeezenetwork, AlienBBC plugins.

My iTunes library was transferred quickly to public / music - mostly 128kb/s and 256 kb/s AAC. I have also created a couple of reference Applelossless albums for comparison and these sound amazing. Everything is 54mbs wireless (I had to get a new access point positioned in the middle of the house because the SB couldn't get good enough reception with the original).

I have also now added a 250GB Western Digital Blackbook USB 2 drive. This also works fine. The only thing that is a bit of a shame is that Qnap only supports ext3 and FAT natively so the WD USB disk had to be reformatted - you could read but not right to it as FAT32 and the QNAP couldn't format as FAT - too large. It would also be nice if you could create logical shares with different access permissions on the USB drive like you can the internal ones (it appears it is seen as a single logical volume) ... oh ... and while we're there it would also be nice to have more access permissions (eg write but not read permissions - to allow adding files and the ability to disable LIST output on the FTP server so filenames are not seen ...).

As regards Paul at Progressive .... I spoke to him just before XMAS. I believe he is waiting on a formal process to be finalised with QNAP before being able to provide the self installer. It sounds (I am saying this ... Paul has not) as if this may well mean that it could be more formally supported by QNAP. These things obviously take time and they are not all within Paul's control. As such he is probably fairly frustrated responding to the same question every few days ....
In addition, his family has recently grown and he will have wanted to share XMAS with them. It's also possible he might actually like a holiday once in a while. Paul is one man trying to provide a service that is dependent on two other organisations ... he doesn't control the end to end solution.

I think we should give Paul some space and the chance to let any formal agreements finalise.

At present .... I am not aware of any new capability in 6.5 I should be excited about. Perhaps someone can tell me.

SlimServer Version: 6.3.1 - 8476 - Debian - EN - utf8 provides zero lag performance from a web browser and the SB with the Qnap ts-201 and allows the SB to do everything I believed it should / could.

The one minor frustration is that the firmware on the SB is 55 ... and this won't be upgraded (from what I understand) until I upgrade Slimserver.

It should be noted however that if Qnap decide the Squeezebox community is particularly aggressive they may abandon any support efforts they are working on ....

Some of you guys will have waited a whole lot longer than me so I can understand a degree of frustration, but I believe sometime in the next couple of months we'll see something that should eleviate those concerns.


Regards

Paul

[Jerryacg]

I wasn't aware that Qnap take any active part in this forum. So could you elaborate on the following statement?


Hi guys


It should be noted however that if Qnap decide the Squeezebox community is particularly aggressive they may abandon any support efforts they are working on ....




Regards

Paul

[Paul_B]

Paul,

I am glad you are happy with your purchase.

Most of us TS-101 owners were very happy with the SS 6.3.1 and QNAP, less a few issues with disk spindown. However, since the release of SS 6.5 performance of the web interfance is far too slow. A number of "promises" have been made by Progressive, including:

- Slave TS-101 first mentioned in the summer and never delivered (it would appear from another source that this was never on the roadmap for QNAP)
- Self-installer again mentioned in the summer and still not come to market and no ETA
- Possibly memory upgrade of TS-101 to overcome issues with SS 6.5, no update received after intial suggestions of an upgrade
- Numerous users complain of the HDD not spinning down.

Now we always were reliant on Paul of ProgressiveAV and his circumstances have changed. No-one else from ProgressiveAV has ever filled the void.

I now use my QNAP TS-101 as a pure NAS device for filesharing. I invested in a Mini-ITX "server" which runs Slimserver and is completely under my control.

BTW QNAP never supported SS it was a bundle provided by ProgressiveAV. I don't see this changing as QNAP went down the Twonky route. However, work is still being done on the QNAP TS-101 and 201 as the Openturbostation project

[pgamble]

Hi guys

as said ... I'm new to the forum and the technology.

If Qnap are considering formalised support for SS (on their own or in co-operation with another partner - eg Progressive) if I was them, I would be exploring this forum to gauge the potential customer base - not just the numbers, but also the attitude. I was merely indicating that if they were considering a more formal relationship and they looked on this forum in the last month, they may think again.

Clearly Qnap have never directly involved themselves with SS. The only reason they would (directly or through a partner) would be to increase sales and 'cheap' marketing penetration through potential Squeezebox customers. I have no idea of the commercials, but if Paul has done most of the work already and can show what would need to be done to maintain an integration moving forward and if the cost the Qnap is small, it could be a good vehicle for them.

I am very happy at the moment.

As regards spin down, my 201 will spin down after the default 30 mins if no date / time is active on the SB screensaver. It does appear to wake up for no apparent reason.
It's incredibly quiet - even when the fan is running (which is perhaps 10% of the time) and since my Tivo not only spins but writes continuously to it's 160GB (standard 7200rpm caviar) and has done 24 hours a day for 3 years ... I don't really think it's a problem (my point of view .... I know).

Should a really compelling feature come out that is SB related, I probably will start to get frustrated - so I do sympathise. I will be more frustrated if better Qnap firmware comes out and I can't upgrade to that without breaking the SS install since there are features there like granular USB attached harddisk access control and secureFTP etc that I would like.

Paul.

[Jerryacg]

Hi guys

if I was them, I would be exploring this forum to gauge the potential customer base - not just the numbers, but also the attitude. I was merely indicating that if they were considering a more formal relationship and they looked on this forum in the last month, they may think again.


Paul.

Can't add anything to Paul_Bs summing up of the situation with which I totally agree. Cannot agree however with, or indeed, understand your 'attitude' theory. Qnap (big company) won't get involved with Slim devices (Logitech - Bigger Company) because us bunch of duffers have a healthy discussion from time to time about how to get the best out of QNAP/SS? I dont think so.