A business guarantees that goods will be of acceptable quality. This means that they must be: fit for all the purposes for which goods of that kind are commonly supplied - for example, a toaster must be able to toast bread acceptable in appearance and finish - for example, a new toaster should be free from scratches free from defects - for example, the toaster's timer should not fall off when used for the first time safe - for example, sparks should not fly out of the toaster durable - for example, the toaster must function for a reasonable time after purchase, without breaking down.
The issue we've all been having is that the NAS won't function to save more data once an amount of data is saved that is not 100% of the total size of the disks used.
A major problem with goods is when: you would not have bought the goods if you had known about the problem. For example, you wouldn´t buy a washing machine if you knew the motor was going to burn out after three months the goods are significantly different from the description, sample or demonstration model shown to you. For example, you order a red bicycle from a catalogue, but the bicycle delivered is green the goods are substantially unfit for their normal purpose and cannot easily be made fit, within a reasonable time. For example, a ski jacket is not waterproof because it is made from the wrong material the goods are substantially unfit for a purpose that you told the supplier about and cannot easily be made fit within a reasonable time. For example, a car is not powerful enough to tow your boat because its engine is too small, despite you telling the dealer that you needed the car to tow a boat the goods are unsafe. For example, an electric blanket has faulty wiring.
as above none of us would have purchased the unit had we known that it would not save data after a point prior to being 100% full.
When goods or services do not meet a consumer guarantee wrote:
For goods, if the problem is major, you can: reject the goods and get a refund or reject the goods and get an identical replacement, or one of similar value if reasonably available or keep the goods and claim compensation for the drop in value caused by the problem.
I asked Netgear about it and they advised me that it up to the store I got it from to replace the unit. Which is fair enough. The store has to ask for Netgear's permission anyways.
So I contacted the store and had to send the unit to them for testing. I advised them I have a case open with Netgear and quoted it. Also made sure the company know about the NZ consumers act. They have been very good and advised a new unit should be here next week. They are getting the newer model for me as all the old ones still have the issue. New model is RN10400. I have asked Netgear if this unit has the same issue and am waiting a reply.
Netgear did however get me to try two beta release firmwares that didn't fix the issue.
Hope this helps.
Regards, dratto
got this reply from dratto, hopefully I can use this forum's post and my open case with NETGEAR to get similar results from my place of purchase.
I have returned an NV+ v2 to my supplier with a (UK) successful resolution (a refund was not acceptable). I had a few tickets open with Netgear, and eventually they said:
"Please be advised that the Netgear warranty is a hardware manufacturers warranty and as such, we will replace the unit for a like for like model." and... "We welcome the list of features that you feel are not working and we can look into this and see if we can assist but please know that the warranty is a hardware one, this does not cover software after 90 days, we can replace units if there is only a hardware fault. "
Unfortunately, due to Vogon and global decency laws I am not able to reproduce my answers here 😄
IMHO the product is not up to the job, nor ever will be. It disappoints me. Not because a tech product has issues, but that the issues are FUBARing the exact capabilities I bought the product for in the first place. And that Netgear will not admit it.
What was the successful resolution then? BTW, without trying to stir things up, merchantable quality, fit for purpose, etc, all apply to UK irrespective of warranty, so in theory we could still demand a replacement.
Hello guys,we confirmed this issue has been fixed in 5.3.8 and it will be released soon enough,we hope for your understanding and sorry for so much trouble.
Actually 5.3.8-T20 is able to fix this issue,we've merged all patches in but..... if it doesn't work for you,please backup data and factory default your volume,the reason is your volume could be badly fragmented and the file system needs to be rebuilt once again.
But even with a factory default (not possible for many people), what happens when they hit fragmentation down the road again? Seems like a short term solution.
Actually 5.3.8-T20 is able to fix this issue,we've merged all patches in but..... if it doesn't work for you,please backup data and factory default your volume,the reason is your volume could be badly fragmented and the file system needs to be rebuilt once again.
That's strange. Can you describe what is exactly patched? It's some tweaks to default values or C source is modified somehow? Anyway I don't have any problems with ext3 and I can write 50MB/s constantly without any problems.
But even with a factory default (not possible for many people), what happens when they hit fragmentation down the road again? Seems like a short term solution.
exactly and for me fragmentation should be low as I've hit this problem just in copying data back to the device from one computer with single thread copy after a factory default many times....
normally fragmentation is "bad" if you copy & delete files randomly large amounts of files over time.
But even with a factory default (not possible for many people), what happens when they hit fragmentation down the road again? Seems like a short term solution.
exactly and for me fragmentation should be low as I've hit this problem just in copying data back to the device from one computer with single thread copy after a factory default many times....
normally fragmentation is "bad" if you copy & delete files randomly large amounts of files over time.
You are right, and when I try it with switchover ext3 <> ext4 with absolutely identical data (i mean 100%) - ext4 driver always lockup NAS completely. There is no fragmentation and volume is mounted in backward compatibility with ext3 then IO kills all! So I can remount same partition with ext3 driver back and problem is gone. That's why I am asking what is changed, because I saw some new kernel patches to ext4.
a) it's a driver bug b) 256MB is not enough for ext4 of this volume size
if it's b) then some tuning may solve this problem. But I don't understand why ext4 driver fails when have absolutely same conditions as ext3 (disabled extents, same data, everything is 100% same...)
But even with a factory default (not possible for many people), what happens when they hit fragmentation down the road again? Seems like a short term solution.
exactly and for me fragmentation should be low as I've hit this problem just in copying data back to the device from one computer with single thread copy after a factory default many times....
normally fragmentation is "bad" if you copy & delete files randomly large amounts of files over time.
You are right, and when I try it with switchover ext3 <> ext4 with absolutely identical data (i mean 100%) - ext4 driver always lockup NAS completely. There is no fragmentation and volume is mounted in backward compatibility with ext3 then IO kills all! So I can remount same partition with ext3 driver back and problem is gone. That's why I am asking what is changed, because I saw some new kernel patches to ext4.
a) it's a driver bug b) 256MB is not enough for ext4 of this volume size
if it's b) then some tuning may solve this problem. But I don't understand why ext4 driver fails when have absolutely same conditions as ext3 (disabled extents, same data, everything is 100% same...)
there might be kernel patches to the main kernel src but iirc T20 didn't include a new kernel, they have just changed mount settings / scripts.
That no fix. Do factory default mean all data loss. When you have proper fix ready? 5.3.8 T21? 5.3.9?
yes factory default's mean total data loss, you would have to backup and restore it each time it gets to the issue full % according to that post... NOT GOOD NETGEAR not good at all!
From the tone of the post I highly doubt a T21 or even a 5.3.9 that might actually fix the issue. if you can get your unit returned for refund if your country has laws protecting you from bad products like this one. within 1-2 days I hope to have my money refunded for this unit.
Actually 5.3.8-T20 is able to fix this issue,we've merged all patches in but..... if it doesn't work for you,please backup data and factory default your volume,the reason is your volume could be badly fragmented and the file system needs to be rebuilt once again.
I seriously hope that isn't needed. Can you at least give us an ETA ?
Actually 5.3.8-T20 is able to fix this issue,we've merged all patches in but..... if it doesn't work for you,please backup data and factory default your volume,the reason is your volume could be badly fragmented and the file system needs to be rebuilt once again.
I seriously hope that isn't needed. Can you at least give us an ETA ?
an ETA for 5.3.8-T20? it's available over here. if it's a when will netgear have a working patch, I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
Actually 5.3.8-T20 is able to fix this issue,we've merged all patches in but..... if it doesn't work for you,please backup data and factory default your volume,the reason is your volume could be badly fragmented and the file system needs to be rebuilt once again.
I seriously hope that isn't needed. Can you at least give us an ETA ?
an ETA for 5.3.8-T20? it's available over here. if it's a when will netgear have a working patch, I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
Hmm so its out already, wonder why netgear support haven't sent me this.
an ETA for 5.3.8-T20? it's available over here. if it's a when will netgear have a working patch, I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
Hmm so its out already, wonder why netgear support haven't sent me this.
netgear don't seem to like to have patches go out to everyone that's having an issue at the same time & keep you in the dark for ages.
they've gone sometimes more than a week between update messages to me in the support system, i've had more support from other consumers and community forum admin's than actual netgear employee's during the time I've had this issue.
Did you try right-clicking ("save as") and adding a .bin extension to the file name?
Maybe I was a bit to subtle with my post, on "4/22/2013 11:29:00 PM" I was asked to download 5.3.8-T20 and again on "5/13/2013 4:23:00 AM" I was asked to download 5.3.8-T20... didn't help the first time I downloaded/applied the firmware doubt it would help again now.
