General Feedback on 6.2.3/6.2.4

---

btaroli wrote:

Jophus wrote:

It is a testament to Netgear for unofficially supporting legacy devices.

No. Netgear has officially decided NOT to do that. This is a testament to those who have acted against Netgear's business decision to instead do the right thing for customers. But beware because if something goes sideways and you need to call Netgear support, it's likely they won't.

---

I definitely appreciate your view!  Personally, by fostering a vibrant and engaged community and by enabling those exeriences to be shared via this sanctioned Netgear forum, I feel Netgear walk the line of:

• Business, turnover, upgrade culture, forced obselesence etc, and
• Enabling and supporting those who are willing to help themselves.

My experience with these forums and my Ultra 6 led me to double-down and buy a 102 to back-up my Legacy Ultra 6 (on 6.2.4).

My suggestions for the RN102 are:

• The status page on the 102 is missing a lot of information (compared to the Ultra 6), like network throughput, IO, temperature etc and history - no pretty graphs or even just some numbers.  Is there a view to include some diagnostic/snapshot information on the RN102?
• On both the 102 and Ultra 6 it would be great to have a "force compression" on shares and also an option to recompress files already on the NAS.
• This could ideally come with a warning that throughput/performance would be impacted etc.  BTFRS will only compress a file if the first few blocks of a file are compressible.  Forcing compression will do just that for all files, irrespective of the first few blocks' compressibility.  This would be perfect where my 102 (which maxes out at 41MB/s using Copy on Write/Compression - faster than USB2 on the Ultra 6) is a back-up only box and write speed is not the primary concern.