We save a lot of money using QNAP for the backup of Virtual machines. We installed a QNAP in the datacenter of our Cloud Provider and the cost of the backup and storage that we use is, at least, 1/10 of the cost that we had in the past. We can choose what kind of drives we can install, so if we want affordable we can use 5400/7200 hard drives, if we need speed we can use SSD drives.
If you have one user or 1000's of users (especially using Windows), Windows Server is a no-brainer! The only reason I would suggest going with a Linux server is if you have old hardware (Windows Server is more process intensive than Linux). But, Linux is open-source, so anyone can publish updates/security updates, but on the flip side, malicious people also have full access to Linux's codebase allowing for much easier writing of exploitations/viruses/malware/ransomware.
User and device management out of the box. Active directory is a proven system for doing this and works just as well as it always has.
ADFS providing integration into many third-party applications using SAML authentication. We use this heavily to make user experience as simple and straightforward as we can.
Local DHCP. It's another one of these systems that is very easy to setup and use out of the box and requires very little maintenance, if any. The system is almost unchanged throughout the years and so anyone with server experience can manage it.
Windows Server is extremely complex, and while newer versions have eased the initial setup process, setting up a server is still a very time consuming and difficult task.
The complexity of Windows Server also makes troubleshooting any problems that arise extremely difficult, both in tracking down the actual issue and then resolving the issue. Often times a problem can manifest itself in more than one way, making searching for the specific problem also difficult.
Windows Server is also very expensive, with complex and confusing licensing terms. In fact, Microsoft provides a 32-page PDF guide on Windows Server licensing, which is in and of itself dense and confusing to follow. To make matters more complicated, there multiple different version of Windows Server itself - Nano, Essentials, Standard and Datacenter edition, and each edition has different licensing terms. Licensing terms include items such as the physical processor's cores of the server, how many users will be accessing the server (called a CAL - client access license), and a plethora of other items.
Microsoft's support for Windows Server can be extremely frustrating at times. While Microsoft hosts a very active user forum, Microsoft employees who frequent those forums often provide only stock answers to questions (without actually reading the details) or no answers at all. For more in-depth - phone support can be quite expensive.
Upgrading a Windows Server from one major version to another (i.e. 2012 to 2016) is a frustratingly complex and dangerous procedure, as many things can go wrong during the upgrading, essentially breaking the entire setup. In fact, Microsoft doesn't even suggest doing an in-place upgrade, but to perform a backup of the existing server, doing a clean install of the new version, and migrating the information from the older version to the new version. In general, it is not even recommended to upgrade from one version to another as the risk significantly outweigh the benefits.
I've carefully reviewed the servers and services currently running on Windows Server 2012, and given the opportunity would renew them as is going forward. There are two systems I currently have in place, one is a very large Linux implementation for a large ecommerce site, and one is a very large backup solution front ended by FTP servers running Linux. Neither are well suited for Windows, but the overall network infrastructure is and will be Windows Server for the foreseeable future.
QNAP NAS's usability is excellent, making it accessible to both beginners and more experienced users. The setup process is straightforward, with clear instructions that guide you through everything. The user interface is intuitive, allowing you to navigate easily between settings, apps, and features. Even with its powerful functionality, such as remote access and advanced file management, it doesn’t feel overwhelming. The mobile apps make it convenient to access files on the go, and everything integrates smoothly. Whether you need basic storage or more advanced features, QNAP balances ease of use with powerful capabilities, making it a highly user-friendly NAS option.
Everything can (and should) be done through the easy to use/navigate GUI. There is no need for archaic command prompt use to administer the server. But, it is there if you have very specific needs for batch files, etc. that are not covered in the all extensive GUI.
QNAP NAS is a really good product, but I think the best part is the support for the products. Whenever I have a question or imagine something that won't happen, I can ask the support side. When the support engineer understands what I want to do, he does his best.
It has been my experience that unless there is a flaw or bug with Microsoft Windows Server, you will have to pay extra for support beyond the support web site. That said, unofficial support on the thousands of technical websites makes self-help support readily available to any technician with an internet connection. Microsoft's support website is also fairly robust, but I find using a popular search engine often returns knowledgebase articles more quickly that Microsoft's search.
Make sure that you have detailed processes in place for every server instance you plan to install/upgrade, if possible get the base OS loaded and Windows Updates applied ahead of time, and if using a VM take a snapshot prior to installing each role, as well as along the way.
QNAP NAS offers several advantages over TrueNAS and Synology. Compared to TrueNAS, QNAP provides a more user-friendly experience, with a simple setup process and intuitive interface, making it ideal for those who don’t want to deal with complex configurations. QNAP also has a robust app ecosystem, offering extensive multimedia, backup, and security features, which are easier to install and manage compared to TrueNAS. Against Synology, QNAP stands out for its greater hardware variety and expandability, with better options for PCIe expansion, memory upgrades, and 10GbE networking. Its hybrid storage approach also combines SSD and HDD caching, offering performance boosts Synology lacks.
Windows Server is more cost-effective and skills are easier to find to support the products. The deployment and management of the product can be automated with Microsoft SCCM. In my opinion, Linux seems to be more secured but takes more time and effort to learn than Windows Server. However, there are more Windows Server skills available in the job market.
The NAS Server itself is expandable, so you can develop it instead of changing it whenever you need it. Such as Ram, Network Bandwidth, Disk Capacity.
We have not experienced any hardware malfunctions in these years, the hardware structure is very stable. Even at first, the environment in which we were running the device was not what it should be, but it still did not cause any problems.
We stopped doing investment cost analysis because it looks like it will work until we retire.
