Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

A tiny bit easier, at the risk of reducing the profitability of the company, which could mean losing their jobs.


It depends on who their target audience is. VMware for example have strict hardware compatibility lists because their target audience is big enterprise. But Synology being a consumer NAS, this decision was perhaps not wise. They're sort of standing in two markets. They need to make a decision as to which products are enterprise and which are consumer.

I don't think any enterprise clients would mind a strict HCL.


Evidently profitability went down due to the change, so if anything they were fighting for their jobs by opposing it. (If it is indeed true that they were opposing it internally, still not sure where exactly that claim is coming from.)


Doesn't make much sense to me? How would they argue that? "Don't ban third party HDDs, you'll earn less on sales and you won't have to pay me". Wut




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: