1/ You have two HCLs. One on the only junky website, another on the new überjunky website.
2/ Those two are clearly different.
3/ Worse yet, the new one is not indexed by Google (likewise, pretty much the entire new website), due to your webmaster being a complete fail.
4/ What's the criteria to mark something as "compatible"?! As an example, those infamous ST?000DM00? drives (a.k.a. total garbage) have made it back to multiple models' HCL as "recommended" - as an example TS-212
These drives have a been a source of endless complaints all over this forum, Seagate forum (they've chosen to wipe the whole forum, cannot be linked any more), entire web (Google it). First they were recommended, after that, they went to incompatible with various changing notes and warnings about high rate of failures, instability and other issues, and now they are either back as compatible (mentioning some batches you allegedly tested) or vanished from both compatible and incompatible sections of the HCL altogether?!? Want a proof?
ST4000DM000 @TS-412 (old HCL) wrote:
These hard drives models have passed QNAP lab's compatibility verifications. However, some users have reported unstable experiences with these hard drives on older Turbo NAS firmware versions. Thus, we strongly suggest that users upgrade their Turbo NAS to firmware 3.7.1 or onward to improve compatibility. Users who still encounter issues after firmware upgrade are welcome to contact our tech support for direct assistance. The manufacturer also releases a new firmware version for these hard drive models. Please check this link for more information. Please be noticed this hard drive is desktop edition. To obtain the better system stability and reliability, we suggest using the business edition hard drive to build the RAID volume in the business environment.
Seagate paid you to pull the info and recommend garbage? Every day, people are reporting issues with those drives.
What's up here? Are you no longer interested in providing useful information to your customers?