>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/18/review_qnap_ts_453mini_8g_nas_box/
>
>Time to stop thinking of consumer NASs as just cheap places to store files. This one has a (low-end) 4 core Celeron chip and 8GB RAM along with virtualization software so you can run various VMs for VDI or any other purpose.
>
>Amazing what they're doing with Linux these days.

Hi AL,

just to to give you some insight.

I run a QNAP TS 470 (pro) as my primary server.

This is a TS 470 pimped accordiing to http://www.meintechblog.de/2013/10/pimp-my-qnap-ts-x70-i7-3770t-und-16gb-ram/ so this is why I call it a (pro).

It runs those VMs for allmost one year now. My config has enough power to do this.

The problems are not with the VM. The problems are the crippled Linux that runs on the machine. While QNAP at least gives running support (I run an aged TS 119 for private purposes too and even this one get updates), the OS is in general aged and limited. The focus is on the fancy interface, and anything beyond this is more tricky then on any other Linux machine. What I hate most is that they have removed ODD support, so I can not create backups to DVD (What for the amount of daily data I have to backup is still pretty cheap and fast.)

They have a system of add ons that you can install - but over the years one can see how QNAP is focused on a one developer per app thing - every time a developer leaves the company a add on is no longer maintained and will be removed. Since this is all closed source (mostly against the licenses of the basic project) ... This is a pain on a server.

The good is that the newer QNAPs are very easy to be set up as a real Linux server, and then they are a reasonable good hardware.
But If you build a linux machine from desktop parts you might end up with a bigger but much quieter server. The QNAPs are very packed with noisy little fans and the HDDs are badly coupled to the case.
And the modern Linux requieres not much more skills to set up a VM then the QNAP. But there is much² more support available.

Lutz