Author: Paul

  • Why I Chose TP-Link Tapo Over UGREEN, Reolink and Eufy for My Home Security Upgrade

    Why I Chose TP-Link Tapo Over UGREEN, Reolink and Eufy for My Home Security Upgrade

    Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Some links in this article are affiliate links, which help support Rack2Reality at no additional cost to you.

    I’ve been planning to replace my existing home security cameras for some time, and until recently, I thought I had a fairly good idea of what that upgrade would look like. Having already invested in UGREEN’s NASync ecosystem, its upcoming SynCare security cameras seemed like a natural choice. The hardware looked promising, the emphasis on local AI processing was appealing, and the prospect of storing recordings directly on my existing NAS meant I wouldn’t need to introduce another storage appliance into the house. It was exactly the sort of integration I’d hoped to see as UGREEN expanded beyond network-attached storage.

    Unfortunately, things haven’t quite worked out that way. UGREEN’s subsequent HomeAgent announcement revealed that SynCare cameras would require an entirely separate hardware platform, with direct NASync integration no longer part of the launch plans. That was disappointing enough to make me reconsider the entire system, particularly when the entry-level HomeAgent HA100 carries a proposed $1,599 retail price, or $799 for early crowdfunding backers. I wasn’t interested in buying another NAS, especially one that would duplicate functionality I already have, simply to operate a handful of security cameras.

    As frustrating as that announcement was, it forced me to go back to the drawing board and take a much closer look at what other manufacturers were offering. That research eventually led me to Reolink, Eufy and TP-Link Tapo, all of which have developed increasingly capable security camera ecosystems with local recording, AI detection and PoE connectivity. After spending considerable time comparing their products, I ultimately decided to purchase two Tapo C575D cameras. Not because they’re necessarily the most technically advanced cameras available, but because they offer almost everything I was looking for without requiring an excessive investment in hardware I don’t need.

    UGREEN Had Everything Going for It, Until HomeAgent

    UGREEN SynCare security cameras displayed alongside the HomeAgent AI hub and solar-powered camera.
    UGREEN’s SynCare cameras and HomeAgent promised an integrated AI security ecosystem, but the lack of direct NASync support ultimately changed my plans.

    When UGREEN first announced SynCare at CES 2026, I was genuinely excited about the direction the company appeared to be taking. I’ve been using its NASync DXP2800 for well over a year, and while the platform certainly has its limitations, I’ve generally been impressed by the hardware and how much I’ve been able to accomplish with it. As I discussed in my NASync DXP2800 review, the NAS quickly became more than somewhere to store files. I use Docker to run various services, including Home Assistant, which already manages much of my smart home. I’d also been considering using it for security camera recording, so the prospect of adding SynCare cameras to that existing infrastructure was particularly attractive.

    The SynCare OD600 Pro was the camera that initially caught my attention. Its triple-lens arrangement combines an 8MP overview camera with two additional 5MP cameras, providing 18MP of combined resolution alongside motorised tracking, PoE connectivity and AI-powered detection. At an announced crowdfunding price of $159, or $269 at retail, the OD600 Pro looked extremely competitive against established alternatives. I covered the original announcement in my first look at UGREEN SynCare, and at the time, I genuinely thought I’d found the foundation for my next home security system.

    What followed was considerably less encouraging. As I explained in my previous article, UGREEN HomeAgent Looks Impressive, But Do NASync Owners Actually Need It?, UGREEN subsequently confirmed that SynCare cameras would not connect directly to existing NASync systems at launch, with no near-term plans to introduce that functionality. Instead, the cameras are designed around HomeAgent, a separate platform combining NAS storage, security recording, smart home management and considerably more powerful local AI processing. The technology itself is interesting, and I can understand the appeal of having those capabilities integrated into a single device. Unfortunately, it also means purchasing another expensive appliance alongside hardware I already own, which rather undermines one of the main reasons I was interested in SynCare to begin with.

    What makes that decision particularly disappointing is that the cameras themselves still look excellent. I would have been perfectly willing to pay extra for advanced AI processing if UGREEN had offered an optional upgrade path for existing NASync customers, but requiring HomeAgent simply to use the cameras is considerably harder to justify. Even at its reduced $799 crowdfunding price, the HA100 represents a substantial additional investment. Two OD600 Pro cameras and the cheapest advertised HomeAgent package would cost $1,117 before accounting for additional storage or installation, which is a significant amount of money for what was originally supposed to be a relatively straightforward camera upgrade.

    I haven’t lost interest in UGREEN because its cameras are inadequate or because HomeAgent lacks potential. Quite the opposite. I was interested precisely because SynCare looked so promising, and it’s frustrating to see that potential locked behind another expensive piece of hardware. Perhaps UGREEN will eventually reconsider its approach and introduce direct NASync integration, but with no confirmed roadmap, I’m not prepared to delay my security upgrade indefinitely. The OD600 Pro remains an interesting product, but the ecosystem surrounding it no longer makes sense for me.

    Back to the Drawing Board: What Did I Actually Need?

    Once I’d ruled out UGREEN, I had to reconsider what I actually wanted from a security camera system rather than simply looking for the closest alternative to the OD600 Pro. My existing setup consists of two relatively basic SwitchBot cameras positioned around the front of the house, one covering the entrance and another looking across the front of the property. They’ve served their purpose reasonably well for checking deliveries and keeping an eye on activity outside, but they’re not particularly sophisticated, and their positioning leaves some areas inadequately covered. I wanted something more reliable, with better image quality, improved detection and the ability to maintain recordings locally without depending on cloud storage or additional subscriptions.

    The layout of my house also introduces some complications that aren’t immediately obvious when comparing camera specifications. I live in a residential neighbourhood where houses are positioned relatively close together and space around the property is limited. The front faces a residential road, while the sides and rear are separated from neighbouring properties by narrow passages. There’s no long driveway leading towards the entrance, either. People approaching the house generally arrive from one direction or the other along the road before entering the parking area, which makes camera positioning and tracking rather more important than simply pointing a wide-angle lens towards the street.

    These relatively short distances also made me question some of the specifications manufacturers emphasise in their marketing. A camera capable of monitoring a large garden or driveway isn’t necessarily ideal for a compact property, particularly if its enormous field of view includes more of the neighbours’ houses than my own. Similarly, while 4K recording is attractive, I don’t automatically need the highest possible resolution at every location. Sensor performance, lens selection, usable detail at night and the ability to capture somebody approaching from either side can all be more important than the headline megapixel count. Camera dimensions matter too, especially when installing equipment near a residential entrance where a large surveillance unit would look rather out of place.

    One requirement I wasn’t willing to compromise on was Power over Ethernet. As I discussed in my earlier article on improving the consistency of my home network, intermittent delays and inconsistent device responsiveness have been recurring frustrations, particularly with smart home automations and camera live feeds. PoE allows a single Ethernet cable to provide both power and network connectivity, eliminating separate power supplies at each camera location. I also wanted local AI detection, infrared night vision that wouldn’t require illuminating neighbouring houses, and enough flexibility to expand the system gradually. With those requirements established, the number of genuinely suitable options became considerably smaller.

    Reolink and Eufy: Impressive Technology, More Than I Needed

    Reolink was initially one of the strongest candidates, largely because it already offers the sort of established PoE camera ecosystem I was looking for. Its extensive range of wired cameras, dedicated NVRs and local storage options made it an obvious alternative to UGREEN, particularly since the cameras don’t require an expensive new AI appliance just to provide basic recording functionality. The Reolink OMVI 3i PoE was especially interesting, combining a 10MP panoramic overview with a separate 8MP tracking camera. Its 180-degree horizontal coverage, automatic framing and synchronised tracking functionality were similar to the features that had originally attracted me to SynCare, while its maximum recording frame rate of 20fps was also higher than some competing models. At $229.99 during the recent Amazon Prime sale, it was a serious contender.

    However, the more I considered the practicalities of installing one, the more I realised that much of its capability would be wasted on my property. The OMVI 3i measures approximately 202 × 151 × 125mm and weighs 1.3kg, making it a substantial piece of equipment to mount near a relatively small entrance. Its panoramic coverage is impressive, but I don’t have an enormous area to monitor, and much of that field of view would extend beyond the parts of the property I’m actually interested in. I also considered the smaller Reolink OMVI 2i PoE, although I was increasingly questioning whether I needed such an elaborate camera arrangement in the first place.

    Two Reolink OMVI panoramic security cameras with integrated motorised tracking lenses.
    Reolink’s OMVI cameras combine panoramic coverage with dedicated tracking lenses, offering more extensive surveillance capabilities than I needed for my property.

    To get a better idea of what would actually be useful, I went outside and experimented with my phone’s camera, comparing different viewing angles from approximately where I intended to mount the new security cameras. It was hardly a scientific test, and a phone camera isn’t a substitute for checking the actual field of view of a surveillance camera, but it gave me a much better understanding of how much coverage I realistically needed. Using a viewing angle similar to the Tapo C575D’s advertised wide-angle lens, I could already see almost everything I wanted to monitor. Anything beyond that was largely unnecessary, which made the argument for installing something as substantial as the OMVI 3i considerably less convincing. Reolink hadn’t suddenly become a poor choice, but I was effectively considering paying more for capabilities that offered little practical benefit in my situation.

    Four Eufy S4 Bullet-PTZ security cameras alongside a dedicated network video recorder and 4TB hard drive.
    Eufy’s PoE S4 system combines advanced tracking cameras with a dedicated NVR, offering extensive capabilities at a substantially higher initial cost.

    Eufy was another manufacturer I investigated, particularly after discovering its PoE NVR Security System S4. The four-camera package includes two advanced Bullet-PTZ units alongside two conventional 4K cameras, all managed through a dedicated NVR. Each Bullet-PTZ unit combines a fixed 4K overview with a separate motorised tracking camera, while Eufy also advertises automatic framing, cross-camera tracking and local AI-powered video searches. The system includes an eight-port NVR with a pre-installed 2TB hard drive and can expand to 16 recording channels with additional networking equipment. It’s a considerably more comprehensive package than simply buying a couple of cameras, and I can understand its appeal for someone installing an entire surveillance system from scratch.

    Unfortunately, that was also the problem. Eufy’s S4 package carries a US list price of $1,099.99, and its more advanced recording and AI features are designed around Eufy’s own NVR platform. While the amount of included hardware helps explain the price, I wasn’t looking to install four cameras or purchase another substantial recording appliance immediately. More importantly, Eufy explicitly states that its PoE S4 cameras require its proprietary NVR and cannot operate independently or connect to third-party NVR systems. Its NVR also lacks NAS integration, meaning I wouldn’t be able to use my existing storage infrastructure in the way I’d originally intended. After UGREEN’s decision to restrict SynCare to HomeAgent, committing to another proprietary recording platform was exactly what I wanted to avoid. While Eufy’s hardware and AI capabilities remain impressive, the combination of cost and ecosystem restrictions made it an easy option to eliminate.

    Ultimately, both Reolink and Eufy offered more than enough technical capability, but that didn’t necessarily make either the right purchase. Reolink’s advanced panoramic cameras were larger and more sophisticated than I realistically needed, while Eufy’s integrated approach required a much greater initial investment. I was looking for something that provided reliable coverage, useful detection and sensible storage options without turning a relatively straightforward upgrade into an unnecessarily expensive project. That’s where TP-Link’s newer Tapo cameras started to become particularly interesting.

    Why I Ultimately Purchased the Tapo C575D

    TP-Link Tapo C575D PoE security camera with fixed 4K wide-angle lens, motorised tracking lens and dual-camera live view.
    The Tapo C575D combines a fixed 4K wide-angle camera with a separate 4K tracking lens, allowing both views to operate simultaneously.

    The Tapo C575D was probably the camera that most significantly changed my impression of TP-Link’s security ecosystem. I’d previously associated Tapo primarily with inexpensive consumer Wi-Fi cameras, but the C575D offers a considerably more sophisticated design. It combines two independent 4K cameras within a relatively compact housing, with a fixed wide-angle lens providing 170 degrees of diagonal coverage and a separate 8mm telephoto lens mounted on a pan-and-tilt mechanism. The two views operate simultaneously, allowing the fixed lens to maintain an overview while the motorised camera follows subjects moving through the scene. For my entrance, where people can approach from either direction, that arrangement appeared particularly well suited to the coverage I wanted.

    Both lenses record at 3840 × 2160, giving the C575D a combined 16MP configuration, with support for person, vehicle and pet detection, automatic tracking, infrared night vision and 802.3af/at PoE. TP-Link also includes RTSP and ONVIF Profile S support, allowing the cameras to work with compatible third-party recording software rather than depending entirely on Tapo’s own storage products. This was an important consideration given that I already own a NAS, and it means I can choose how to manage recordings without having to replace the cameras if my requirements change. Local microSD recording is also supported, and the basic detection features don’t require a Tapo Care subscription.

    There are compromises, of course. The C575D records at a maximum of 15fps, compared with 20fps on the Reolink OMVI 3i, which could become noticeable when reviewing faster movement. Its advertised 18× zoom is digital rather than optical, so it shouldn’t be confused with a camera offering genuine optical zoom. The dedicated telephoto lens does provide a narrower native field of view, which should help capture more detail at a distance, but digital enlargement cannot recover information the sensor never recorded. These are limitations worth acknowledging, although neither seemed particularly significant given the relatively short distances I’m monitoring and what I’d already established from experimenting with my phone’s camera.

    I also considered other Tapo models, including the C545D and C325WB. The C545D offers a similar dual-lens concept, but its requirement for a separate power supply made it unsuitable for the PoE installation I wanted. The C325WB was more interesting for fixed-position monitoring, particularly where low-light performance matters, although PoE support depends on the hardware version. Rather than purchasing identical cameras for every location, I liked the idea of using dual-lens tracking where it would actually be useful and more conventional fixed cameras elsewhere. That would allow me to expand the system gradually without paying for unnecessary features in areas that don’t need them.

    The deciding factor was that the C575D addressed almost every requirement I’d established without introducing another expensive dependency. The wide-angle lens appeared capable of covering nearly the entire area I wanted to monitor, the separate tracking camera offered additional flexibility, and PoE meant I could install everything using a single network cable per camera. RTSP and ONVIF support also preserved the option of recording directly to my existing NAS, something that had originally been one of UGREEN’s biggest selling points. During Amazon’s October Prime sale, the C575D was available for $139.99 in the US, making the decision considerably easier. I ultimately purchased two for $279.98, substantially less than I had originally expected to spend when I first started researching the alternatives.

    That doesn’t mean I’m expecting the C575D to outperform every more expensive camera available. Reolink’s panoramic models and Eufy’s advanced tracking systems offer capabilities that could be genuinely useful for larger or more complicated installations. However, after comparing their specifications against what I actually needed, I couldn’t find a compelling reason to spend significantly more. Tapo wasn’t simply the cheapest compromise I could find. It offered the coverage, connectivity and recording flexibility I wanted, while leaving me with enough room in the budget to invest in the infrastructure needed to install everything properly.

    The Tapo H500 Makes the Ecosystem Even More Compelling

    As interesting as the cameras are, the part of TP-Link’s ecosystem that has probably surprised me most is the Tapo H500. On the surface, considering another dedicated recording hub might seem rather contradictory after criticising UGREEN for requiring HomeAgent, but there’s an important difference. With compatible Tapo cameras, the H500 is optional. I could record directly to my NAS using RTSP or ONVIF, use microSD cards in the cameras themselves, or purchase the hub for its additional functionality. In UGREEN’s case, HomeAgent is currently required to use SynCare cameras within the company’s intended ecosystem. With Tapo, I’m interested in the H500 because of what it offers, not because purchasing it is necessary to make the cameras work.

    The H500 supports up to 16 compatible Tapo cameras, including the C575D V1, although only four cameras can use continuous recording simultaneously. It provides centralised local storage with support for a 2.5-inch SATA drive of up to 16TB, while its local AI processing introduces capabilities such as facial recognition, enhanced detection and more targeted notifications. TP-Link also advertises improved detection capabilities for compatible cameras that lack certain AI features themselves, potentially extending the usefulness of older hardware. The AI enhancement system has its own processing limits, with dual-lens cameras consuming additional capacity, so that’s something I’ll need to consider if I expand beyond my initial two C575Ds. The important point is that the H500’s advanced features are supported by local processing rather than requiring a cloud subscription for every camera.

    Facial recognition is one feature I’m particularly interested in testing. Ordinary person detection tells me that somebody has entered an area, but it doesn’t necessarily distinguish between a familiar visitor and someone I don’t recognise. The H500 advertises the ability to identify known faces and provide more targeted notifications, which could make the system considerably more useful than a collection of cameras generating alerts independently. Its centralised playback and event organisation also appeal to me, particularly as I eventually add cameras around other parts of the property. Whether these capabilities work reliably in practice remains to be seen, but the prospect of adding meaningful local AI functionality without relying on a cloud subscription is attractive.

    The biggest surprise, however, is the price. The H500 spent much of its early availability selling for approximately $149.99 on Amazon US, with occasional promotional discounts taking it lower. Although its listed price subsequently increased to $199.99, it remains considerably more affordable than UGREEN’s HomeAgent HA100. The two products aren’t directly equivalent, and HomeAgent’s greater processing power, additional storage capabilities and broader smart home ambitions account for some of the difference. Nevertheless, for someone primarily interested in security camera recording and local AI detection, it’s difficult to justify spending $799 on UGREEN’s promotional package when Tapo offers such an extensive feature set for considerably less.

    Using the prices available when I purchased my cameras, two C575Ds cost $279.98. Adding an H500 at its $199.99 listing price would bring the total to $479.97 before storage and installation expenses, compared with $1,117 for two UGREEN OD600 Pro cameras and the discounted HomeAgent HA100. That’s a substantial difference, particularly when I already own a capable NAS and don’t need another general-purpose computing platform. The H500 isn’t perfect, and its continuous recording limit could eventually become restrictive if I expand beyond four cameras, but those are compromises I can evaluate before committing to the hardware. More importantly, purchasing the hub would add functionality rather than simply duplicate an expensive prerequisite imposed by the camera manufacturer.

    The Practicalities of Installing a Wired System

    With the two C575D cameras purchased, my attention has shifted towards getting them installed. My house wasn’t designed with external security cameras in mind, and running Ethernet neatly to the locations I want to monitor is proving considerably more complicated than choosing the cameras themselves. I’ve spent time investigating possible cable routes through the existing structure, with the intention of using a dedicated PoE switch and a multi-port wall connection that would allow room for future expansion. I’m currently considering this PoE switch, although I still need to finalise the installation requirements, including the number of powered ports and available PoE budget.

    I’d also considered using the opportunity to install a wired backhaul between my mesh nodes, but testing the existing wireless connection showed that it could already deliver approximately 1Gbps using the adapter I had available. Since that’s sufficient for my current requirements, I’ve decided to concentrate on the camera installation rather than complicating the project with additional network upgrades. I’m also investigating appropriate surge protection and earthing arrangements for the outdoor Ethernet runs, along with weatherproofing and cable routing. Those are things I’d rather resolve properly before installing equipment intended to remain outside for years.

    For now, the priority is covering the areas currently monitored by my SwitchBot cameras, particularly around the front entrance. The narrow passages around the sides and rear may eventually receive fixed cameras, but I’d rather assess the initial coverage before purchasing additional equipment. The installation itself will probably warrant a separate article once everything is in place, particularly because retrofitting PoE cameras to an existing home involves considerably more planning than simply attaching a camera to the wall.

    Choosing the Right Ecosystem Rather Than the Most Impressive Camera

    When I first started looking at security cameras, I expected UGREEN to be the obvious choice. I already owned its NAS hardware, the SynCare cameras looked promising, and the prospect of keeping everything within the same ecosystem was appealing. Instead, UGREEN’s decision to separate SynCare from NASync pushed me towards manufacturers I hadn’t originally considered particularly seriously. Reolink and Eufy both offered impressive alternatives, but spending more money on larger cameras, additional recording hardware and capabilities I was unlikely to use didn’t make much sense for my property.

    After comparing the alternatives, I ended up purchasing two Tapo C575D cameras because they offered the coverage, PoE connectivity and recording flexibility I actually needed at a price that was difficult to ignore. The H500 makes the wider ecosystem even more attractive, particularly given its local AI capabilities and comparatively modest cost, although I still want to see how well those features perform in practice. There are limitations to Tapo’s approach, especially around frame rates and continuous recording capacity, but none were significant enough to outweigh its advantages for my installation.

    I’m still disappointed that UGREEN’s original SynCare proposition didn’t materialise as expected, particularly because the OD600 Pro remains such an interesting piece of hardware. However, the experience has reinforced something I increasingly consider when purchasing smart home equipment. Integration is valuable, but only when it genuinely benefits the customer rather than creating another expensive dependency. Tapo appears to offer a more sensible balance between integrated features and the freedom to use existing infrastructure, and that’s ultimately what earned my money.

    Whether I’ve made the right decision will become clearer once the cameras are installed and I’ve spent some time evaluating their image quality, tracking, nighttime performance and detection accuracy. For now, the research is complete, the cameras are purchased, and I’m ready to see whether Tapo can deliver on its promises.

  • Why I Bought the BLUETTI FridgePower for Emergency Backup

    Why I Bought the BLUETTI FridgePower for Emergency Backup

    Living in a disaster-prone area changes how you think about backup power.

    Earthquakes and typhoons have caused disruption across the region again this year, and while most power cuts are relatively short, the possibility of losing electricity for a day or more is something I take seriously. It is easy to prepare for the obvious things like charging a phone or keeping a light on. The harder question is what happens after the first few hours.

    For me, one appliance kept coming back to the top of that list: the refrigerator.

    I already own an EcoFlow RIVER 2 Pro and a 160W solar panel, so technically I could plug the fridge into that during an outage. But doing so would consume the same portable battery I would want available for phones, internet access, lighting, laptops, fans and other essentials.

    That made me rethink the problem. Rather than buying one increasingly large power station and expecting it to do everything, I decided to give the fridge its own dedicated backup.

    That is what led me to the BLUETTI FridgePower.

    The fridge is a different kind of emergency load

    I have written before about different ways to keep a smart home running during a power cut, from small UPS units through portable power stations and eventually whole-home batteries.

    The fridge sits somewhere awkwardly between those categories.

    It does not use enormous amounts of electricity continuously, but it needs power for a very long time. A router might draw 10 or 20 watts. A phone only needs to be charged occasionally. Lights can be turned off when you do not need them.

    A refrigerator has to keep cycling around the clock.

    That is particularly important when an outage lasts long enough for food preservation to become a concern. Losing the contents of a fridge and freezer is expensive enough on its own, but dependable refrigeration becomes even more valuable when access to shops, transport or other services is also disrupted.

    The ideal solution therefore was not necessarily the biggest battery I could afford. It was one that could look after the fridge automatically while leaving my other backup capacity untouched.

    FridgePower is built around that idea

    The FridgePower is a fairly unusual power station.

    Inside is a 2,016Wh LiFePO₄ battery paired with a 1,800W AC inverter, but instead of the usual chunky portable-power-station design, BLUETTI has built it into a long, slim enclosure intended to live beside or around a refrigerator.

    BLUETTI FridgePower installed above a refrigerator showing its 75mm slim design and flexible placement options
    At just 75mm thick, the FridgePower is designed to fit around refrigerators and other appliances where a conventional power station would be awkward.

    It also supports up to 1,000W of solar input, and additional BlueCell batteries can expand the system from 2,016Wh to as much as 8,064Wh.

    The feature that really matters to me, though, is the UPS.

    The refrigerator stays plugged into the FridgePower and the FridgePower stays connected to the mains. If grid power disappears, BLUETTI quotes a switchover time of 10ms or less.

    There is nothing for me to reconnect and, importantly, I do not need to be home when it happens. BLUETTI lists the same 2,016Wh capacity, 1,800W output, solar capability and sub-10ms UPS behaviour for FridgePower in its product information.

    Another small but important part of that design is standby efficiency. BLUETTI says FridgePower’s self-consumption is around 4W, which matters for a device intended to sit permanently between the wall and a refrigerator. A conventional portable power station can also provide UPS-style backup, but many consume noticeably more power just keeping their inverter electronics active. I have not measured the FridgePower’s real idle draw yet, so that is another figure I want to verify in the follow-up review.

    That automatic behaviour is what separates this from simply owning another portable battery.

    A conventional power station can absolutely run a refrigerator, but it normally requires somebody to get it out, connect everything and decide how the available capacity should be allocated.

    FridgePower just sits there waiting.

    Why I kept my EcoFlow

    Initially, I wondered whether I should sell my EcoFlow RIVER 2 Pro and simply replace it with one much larger battery.

    I eventually decided that would actually leave me with a less resilient setup.

    The EcoFlow is still useful because it is portable. During an outage I can use it wherever it is needed for the router, phones, lights, laptops, fans or other relatively small loads. I also already have a 160W solar panel for it.

    Meanwhile, the FridgePower has one job.

    Keep the fridge running.

    That gives me two independent battery systems, two different ways of allocating power and potentially two separate charging sources.

    It is basically the same philosophy I wrote about in How to Design a Reliable Smart Home Using Datacenter Principles. After working around datacenter infrastructure for years, it is difficult not to think about single points of failure. You assume that individual parts will eventually fail and try to avoid designing everything around one device.

    A single huge battery would certainly be convenient. Two independent batteries give me options.

    I considered going much further

    FridgePower was not my first look at home energy storage.

    I have spent quite a bit of time researching rooftop solar and permanently installed home batteries, including going through the process of planning an Anker SOLIX X1 system.

    A proper home battery is obviously a much more capable solution.

    Instead of protecting one appliance, it can keep multiple circuits or potentially most of the house powered. Combined with enough rooftop solar, it can also reduce grid consumption during normal use rather than simply sitting there waiting for an emergency.

    The problem is that you quickly move into a completely different price category.

    Once solar panels, a large battery, installation and the necessary electrical work are included, the difference is not a few hundred dollars. It can be thousands.

    I still like the idea of a proper home battery, particularly because disaster resilience is one of my main reasons for wanting one, but FridgePower addresses one of my biggest immediate concerns without requiring changes to the house.

    It is a middle ground I had not really considered before.

    Why I chose 2kWh rather than 4kWh

    BLUETTI also sells expansion batteries for the FridgePower.

    Each BlueCell 200 adds another 2,016Wh, so one expansion battery doubles the system to 4,032Wh. Up to three can be connected for a total capacity of 8,064Wh.

    BLUETTI FridgePower with up to three BC200 expansion batteries showing different capacity configurations
    FridgePower can be expanded with up to three BC200 batteries, increasing total capacity from 2,016Wh to 8,064Wh.

    I was tempted.

    If the purpose of the system is emergency preparedness, more battery capacity is obviously attractive. But there is a point where buying additional batteries because something might happen stops being particularly rational.

    I bought my FridgePower through the Japanese launch campaign and paid approximately $714 including the platform fee after using a coupon. Adding another 2kWh battery at the time would have added roughly another $635 to the purchase.

    I decided I would rather find out what the base unit can actually do first.

    My refrigerator is a 470-litre Haier JR-GX47A rated at 285kWh per year, or roughly 0.78kWh per day under the standard test conditions used for the energy label. On paper, that suggests the FridgePower’s 2,016Wh battery could get somewhere around two days of realistic use once inverter losses and the FridgePower’s own consumption are taken into account. That is still only an estimate, though, and I would much rather publish a proper runtime test than pretend a calculation is the same thing as real-world performance.

    If I eventually discover that 2kWh is not enough, I can add another battery later.

    I lose very little by waiting.

    Solar is what makes longer outages interesting

    A battery without a way to recharge it is ultimately just a countdown timer.

    That is why the 1,000W solar input interests me almost as much as the battery itself.

    I am not about to cover the garden in solar panels purely to recharge the fridge, but the ability to add meaningful solar generation changes what the system could become during an extended outage.

    With no solar input, 2kWh buys me a finite amount of refrigeration.

    With sufficient solar input during the day, that same battery could potentially keep cycling for considerably longer.

    Obviously that depends heavily on the weather, panel size, orientation and actual refrigerator consumption. A typhoon is also not exactly the ideal time to expect perfect solar generation.

    But the option is there.

    It also means I can keep my existing smaller panel and EcoFlow as a completely separate system rather than building everything around one solar generator.

    Again, redundancy.

    Installation was not quite as obvious as I expected

    One of BLUETTI’s selling points for FridgePower is the slim design, and many of the promotional installations show it sitting on top of a refrigerator.

    That was originally where I assumed mine would go too.

    My fridge complicated things slightly because there is a large raised metal service cover across part of the top. There was technically enough space to make something work, but after looking at the weight of the FridgePower and thinking about why I bought it in the first place, putting a roughly 20kg battery high above the floor suddenly felt a little counterproductive.

    If earthquakes are one of the scenarios I am preparing for, keeping a heavy battery low makes much more sense.

    I therefore installed mine on the floor beside the fridge, underneath an adjacent kitchen counter.

    The only real complication was the power cable. The supplied cable was agonisingly close to reaching the wall outlet but came up only a few centimetres short once everything was routed properly.

    Because the FridgePower is a relatively high-power appliance and uses a protective earth connection, I did not want to solve that with a random lightweight extension cable. I ended up using a properly rated grounded Japanese extension arrangement that maintains the earth connection back to the wall socket.

    It is not quite the brochure-perfect installation with the battery disappearing above the refrigerator, but for my house I actually prefer it this way.

    It is low, accessible and much less likely to become a 20kg projectile during a serious earthquake.

    Setting it up as a real UPS

    Once connected, the software side was straightforward.

    BLUETTI offers several operating modes, including options intended for solar priority and time-of-use electricity tariffs.

    I have left mine in Standard UPS mode.

    My current electricity tariff does not have cheaper overnight electricity and expensive peak periods, so deliberately charging and discharging the battery every day would achieve very little. I would lose some energy through conversion and add unnecessary battery cycles without meaningfully reducing my bill.

    If I eventually move to a genuine time-of-use tariff, that changes. FridgePower could charge during the cheaper window and run the fridge from battery during expensive periods while still retaining an emergency reserve.

    For now, though, emergency backup comes first.

    I have also set the maximum state of charge to 95% rather than 100%.

    LiFePO₄ batteries are extremely durable, but I do not need the battery sitting at its absolute maximum state of charge every minute of the year. Giving up 5% costs me only about 100Wh of nominal capacity while reducing the amount of time the cells spend completely full.

    If severe weather is approaching or there is another reason to expect an outage, I can simply move it back to 100%.

    It feels like a reasonable compromise between battery longevity and emergency capacity.

    Where Jackery fits into this

    BLUETTI is not the only company pursuing this idea.

    I also looked closely at the Jackery SlimPower H1, which takes a very similar approach but prioritises a smaller and lighter design.

    The Jackery has 1,024Wh of capacity, an 800W inverter and up to 500W of solar input, while the BLUETTI gives me 2,016Wh, 1,800W and up to 1,000W of solar.

    The Jackery is substantially lighter, which is a genuine advantage for something intended to sit around kitchen appliances.

    If my goal had simply been to survive short outages, I could quite easily have gone in that direction.

    What pushed me toward the FridgePower was the extra capacity and, particularly, the ability to add more batteries later.

    For disaster preparedness, I preferred having the option to turn this into a 4kWh or larger system without replacing the main unit.

    Whether that was worth paying more for is something I will have a better answer to after actually living with it for a while.

    It is not a whole-home battery, and that is fine

    There is a danger with backup power of continuously moving the goalposts.

    First you want enough electricity to charge your phone.

    Then you want the internet.

    Then the fridge.

    Then the lights.

    Eventually you are pricing up enough batteries and inverters to run an air conditioner, induction cooker and the rest of the house as if the grid never disappeared.

    FridgePower does not solve all of that.

    If there is a prolonged outage, my house is still experiencing a power cut. I am still going to make decisions about what is important and what can remain switched off.

    But the fridge should continue working automatically, and my portable battery remains available for everything else.

    For the amount I spent, that feels like a much more meaningful improvement to my emergency setup than simply buying another generic power station and storing it in a cupboard.

    Was it actually necessary?

    Probably not in the sense that most of the technology I write about is not strictly necessary.

    The more useful question is whether it solves a genuine problem.

    For me, it does.

    I live somewhere where earthquakes are a real possibility and severe weather can disrupt infrastructure. This year has provided more than enough reminders that those risks are not theoretical.

    Before buying the FridgePower, my emergency-power plan depended heavily on one relatively small portable battery.

    Now the refrigerator has its own automatic reserve. The EcoFlow remains available for communications and other essentials. Both systems can potentially be recharged separately, and neither depends entirely on the other.

    I am much happier with that arrangement.

    The interesting part now is seeing how well it performs outside a spec sheet.

    I want to measure how much power my refrigerator actually consumes through the FridgePower, how long the battery lasts in a simulated outage, how much energy the system itself consumes while operating as a UPS and how useful solar charging really is when the battery is powering a fridge continuously.

    Those results will determine whether 2kWh was enough or whether I eventually add another BlueCell.

    For now, though, the logic behind buying it has held up.

    I did not need one enormous battery capable of running everything.

    I needed a reliable way to make sure one particularly important appliance keeps running when the grid does not.

    And giving the fridge its own battery turned out to be the solution that made the most sense.


    Interested in the BLUETTI FridgePower?

    I bought the FridgePower featured in this article with my own money. If you’re considering one yourself, you can check current pricing through either of these links:

    Disclosure: The links above are affiliate links. If you make a purchase through them, I may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support Rack 2 Reality and has no influence on what I write or recommend.

  • UGREEN HomeAgent Looks Impressive, But Do NASync Owners Actually Need It?

    UGREEN HomeAgent Looks Impressive, But Do NASync Owners Actually Need It?

    UGREEN has finally revealed the next stage of its smart home plans, with HomeAgent now sitting at the centre of an ecosystem spanning security cameras, local AI, smart home control, voice assistants and local storage. There is a lot here that interests me, particularly after waiting most of the year for more information on the SynCare cameras first shown at CES.

    The new hardware looks impressive, and UGREEN’s focus on keeping processing and storage local is exactly the direction I want smart home technology to move in. However, after going through the announcement, I am left with one fairly important question: if you already own a UGREEN NASync, do you actually need HomeAgent?

    That matters because this isn’t quite how UGREEN originally presented SynCare.

    SynCare Was Originally Built Around NASync

    When UGREEN announced SynCare at CES 2026, it presented the range as a complete home security ecosystem consisting of indoor and outdoor cameras, the DB600 Pro video doorbell and a D500 smart display. More importantly for existing NAS owners, UGREEN specifically said the system would use encrypted local storage through UGREEN NASync, eliminating cloud storage fees. The OD600 Pro was also described as supporting uninterrupted 24/7 recording. Rack 2 Reality

    That was one of the main reasons SynCare caught my attention. I already own a NASync, so the idea of adding a couple of PoE cameras and storing everything directly on hardware I already have makes considerably more sense than paying for another cloud subscription or buying a separate NVR. I went into much more detail on the original announcement in my first look at UGREEN SynCare, and at the time the relationship with NASync was one of the things that made the whole ecosystem particularly appealing.

    UGREEN also said at CES that the SynCare range would arrive during the latter half of 2026. Fast-forward to September and the ecosystem now looks quite different. The D500 smart display and DB600 Pro doorbell are absent from the current crowdfunding lineup, while UGREEN has introduced an entirely new piece of hardware called HomeAgent and positioned it at the centre of its smart home ecosystem.

    Update: SynCare Won’t Support Existing NASync Systems at Launch

    Since publishing this article, UGREEN’s AIoT team has clarified the question I was waiting on. SynCare cameras will not connect directly to existing NASync systems at launch and are currently designed to work only with the HomeAgent series.

    That is particularly disappointing given how SynCare was originally presented at CES, where UGREEN specifically promoted encrypted local storage through NASync. When asked about direct NASync support, UGREEN has not provided a roadmap or target date, and its team has said there are no near-term plans for integration with the existing NAS/iDX line.

    For me, that changes the buying decision considerably. I was interested in the OD600 Pro specifically because I already own a NASync and wanted to add a couple of PoE cameras without buying another storage appliance. Requiring a $899 HomeAgent to use those cameras makes the setup very difficult to justify.

    Unless UGREEN commits to direct NASync support, I will probably look at alternative PoE cameras that can record to the NAS I already own instead.

    HomeAgent Is Much More Than a Smart Home Hub

    UGREEN HomeAgent HA100 local AI smart home hub and NAS
    UGREEN HomeAgent HA100 combines local AI processing, smart home control, NAS storage and NVR functionality in one device.

    There are three HomeAgent models, although realistically only the entry-level HA100 is going to make sense for most home users.

    The HA100 uses a Rockchip RK3588 processor with 16GB of LPDDR5 memory and 26 TOPS of local AI performance. It has two SATA bays for normal NAS storage, a third dedicated NVR drive bay and an NVMe slot, alongside 2.5GbE networking and the hardware required to run UGREEN’s local AI system. UGREEN is offering it at $899 for the Super Early Bird Kickstarter tier, followed by $1,079 Early Bird pricing and an eventual MSRP of $1,799.

    The HA100 Pro takes that considerably further with 32GB of memory, 205 TOPS of AI performance and 10GbE networking, but also jumps to $2,999 during the Super Early Bird period and $5,999 at retail. At the top sits the Nvidia Jetson Thor-powered MasterAgent MA100, with 128GB of shared memory and a completely different level of AI compute. It starts at $9,999 and carries an eventual $19,999 MSRP, so this is clearly no longer normal consumer smart home territory.

    The interesting part of HomeAgent isn’t really the storage, though. It is the processing layer UGREEN is building on top of it.

    HomeAgent is intended to analyse security footage locally, recognise people, vehicles, pets and packages, generate event summaries and allow recorded footage to be searched using natural language. UGREEN is also promising cross-camera tracking, where activity captured by several cameras can be linked together into a single timeline rather than forcing you to search each camera individually.

    UGREEN is then extending that same platform into general smart home control. HomeAgent supports Matter and ONVIF devices, with Zigbee and Thread support also part of the platform, while Uliya acts as UGREEN’s own local voice assistant. The idea is effectively to combine a NAS, NVR, smart home hub and local AI server into one device.

    As a concept, I like it. Local processing means considerably less reliance on somebody else’s cloud, and UGREEN says local data is protected with AES-256 encryption while remote access uses end-to-end encryption. There are also no mandatory cloud storage fees attached to the core system.

    The problem is that I already own part of this system.

    So What Does My Existing NASync Still Do?

    Since publication, UGREEN has made its launch position clearer, although not in the way existing NASync owners were hoping.

    My NASync already gives me local storage. It already runs Docker applications, and I already use it as part of my smart home setup. I actually run Home Assistant directly on the NAS through Docker, something I covered in my UGREEN NASync Home Assistant setup guide. More importantly, UGREEN specifically told us earlier this year that SynCare would use NASync for encrypted local storage. Nothing in the current announcement explicitly says that support has been removed.

    What UGREEN does now say repeatedly is that certain SynCare features require HomeAgent.

    That warning appears throughout the new camera material alongside features such as AI recognition, proactive alerts, event summaries, keyword video search and cross-camera timelines. The OD600 Pro itself is still advertised as using local AI to recognise people, vehicles, pets and packages, but UGREEN doesn’t provide a proper breakdown showing which processing happens on the camera and which requires HomeAgent.

    That distinction is extremely important for existing NASync owners.

    If my NASync can still provide 24/7 recording, timeline playback, remote viewing, normal notifications and the basic detection features I actually need, then I struggle to see why I would spend another $899 on HomeAgent. I am realistically looking at using two or perhaps three cameras, not building a sixteen-camera surveillance system.

    I don’t need a second two-bay NAS just to tell me that a delivery driver walked past the house.

    On the other hand, if UGREEN is moving basic SynCare functionality behind HomeAgent rather than limiting it to the more computationally intensive features, then the value proposition changes considerably.

    What UGREEN really needs to publish is a simple NASync versus HomeAgent feature comparison. Can NASync still handle continuous SynCare recording? Can footage be viewed and searched through the normal UGREEN software? Do basic person and vehicle alerts work without HomeAgent? Does the OD600 Pro perform any useful recognition itself? Is HomeAgent only required for things such as natural-language search, event summaries and cross-camera tracking?

    At the moment, we don’t have those answers.

    The distinction between a NAS and a dedicated NVR is something I’ve looked at separately in my guide to storing security camera footage on a NAS or NVR. HomeAgent effectively tries to combine both approaches, which makes sense for someone starting from scratch, but is much harder to justify when a capable NAS is already sitting on the network.

    The OD600 Pro Still Looks Like the Standout Product

    UGREEN SynCare OD600 Pro PoE outdoor security camera with triple-camera design
    The UGREEN SynCare OD600 Pro uses a triple-camera design with 4K and dual 3K sensors, PTZ coverage and PoE connectivity.

    Putting HomeAgent aside, the OD600 Pro remains the product in this range I am most interested in.

    It is a wired PoE outdoor camera using an unusual triple-camera design, combining an 8MP 4K camera with two 5MP 3K cameras, PTZ functionality and up to 9x zoom. A single Ethernet cable provides both power and data, which is exactly how I would rather install permanent outdoor cameras than rely on batteries and Wi-Fi. UGREEN currently lists it at $159 during the crowdfunding campaign, compared with a $269 MSRP.

    This also lines up closely with what I have been looking for since I started planning a replacement for my existing Wi-Fi cameras. In my PoE security camera buying guide, the priorities I settled on were PoE, RTSP and ONVIF support, strong infrared performance and much more reliable AI detection. The OD600 Pro potentially ticks most of those boxes, which is why it remains considerably more interesting to me than HomeAgent itself.

    There is also the ID500 Pro indoor camera at $89 during the campaign and $149 retail, while the battery-powered OD800 Pro costs $199 during crowdfunding and $339 according to UGREEN’s current page. The OD800 Pro has a 10,000mAh battery, a 6W solar panel and combined PIR and radar detection for installations where running Ethernet isn’t practical.

    The camera hardware therefore still looks competitive. My concern isn’t really the hardware at all. It is how dependent that hardware will be on HomeAgent once it reaches customers.

    There is at least some encouraging news on interoperability. HomeAgent works with ONVIF-compatible cameras, which shows UGREEN isn’t attempting to make the hub completely dependent on SynCare hardware. What I would also like confirmed is whether the SynCare cameras themselves expose standard ONVIF or RTSP streams. If they do, the cameras become much safer purchases because they could potentially be moved to another NVR platform later rather than becoming useless if you leave UGREEN’s ecosystem.

    Not Everything UGREEN Is Promising Has Been Demonstrated Yet

    The other reason I wouldn’t rush into HomeAgent is that much of the interesting software is still largely theoretical.

    Engadget attended UGREEN’s launch event and reported that only one working HomeAgent was available. Basic smart home controls such as operating lights and curtains worked as expected, but more complex capabilities such as creating automation rules through natural-language voice input weren’t demonstrated. The SynCare facial-recognition system was demonstrated and reportedly worked, but we still haven’t seen enough of the complete HomeAgent experience to judge how reliable the finished product will be.

    There is also currently no official Home Assistant integration for HomeAgent, which is a strange omission for a product aimed at users willing to spend this much money building a local smart home. That looks even stranger when Anker and Eufy’s competing local smart home platform is already being positioned with Home Assistant support. Matter compatibility gives UGREEN access to a growing range of third-party hardware, but that isn’t the same thing as properly exposing HomeAgent’s cameras, AI detections and automation engine to Home Assistant.

    That doesn’t make HomeAgent a bad product. It just means I would treat the current feature list as a roadmap until we see production hardware and finished software being tested independently.

    The SynCare Release Has Slipped Into 2027

    There has also been a significant change to the release schedule since CES.

    UGREEN originally said SynCare would arrive during the latter half of 2026. Its new crowdfunding schedule now says the OD600 Pro and ID500 Pro are scheduled to begin shipping in late January 2027, alongside the HA100. The HA100 Pro and battery-powered OD800 Pro aren’t expected to begin shipping until late April 2027, while the MasterAgent MA100 follows in July.

    That doesn’t necessarily rule out UGREEN announcing some form of normal retail availability separately, but there is currently no confirmation that the original second-half 2026 SynCare launch is still happening. Anyone buying through this campaign should therefore work on the assumption that the first cameras won’t ship until January.

    There is another slightly awkward detail for people who are only interested in SynCare. UGREEN currently describes the HA100, HA100 Pro and MA100 as the main Kickstarter rewards, while the SynCare cameras, Gallery displays and Uliya speaker are listed as optional add-ons. That raises a fairly obvious question over whether someone who only wants an OD600 Pro will actually be able to pledge for the camera by itself when the campaign goes live.

    That seems like an odd way to introduce security cameras that were originally marketed as working with an existing NASync, and it reinforces why UGREEN needs to clarify its plans for existing NAS owners before the Kickstarter campaign begins.

    Do I Actually Want HomeAgent?

    As a piece of technology, HomeAgent is genuinely interesting. As something I would actually spend $899 on, I am much less convinced.

    The local-first approach is exactly what I want from a smart home platform. Keeping security footage inside the house, processing AI locally and avoiding another monthly subscription are all strong points. Natural-language video search and cross-camera tracking could also be genuinely useful rather than simply being AI features added for the sake of marketing. If UGREEN can make everything work reliably, HomeAgent could become one of the more capable self-contained smart home systems available.

    The problem is that I already own a NASync and already have a smart home platform. HomeAgent therefore duplicates a significant amount of hardware and functionality I already have. At $899, I would effectively be buying another NAS and NVR primarily to access UGREEN’s more advanced local AI processing. With only a couple of cameras planned, that is difficult to justify. At the eventual $1,799 MSRP, it becomes considerably harder again.

    For somebody starting from scratch, the calculation is different. If you need a NAS, local camera storage and a smart home controller anyway, combining all of that with dedicated AI processing inside one appliance could make a lot of sense. There is a much stronger argument for HomeAgent when it replaces several devices rather than sitting beside hardware you already own.

    Existing NASync owners are now in a much worse position than UGREEN originally suggested. SynCare was first presented as something that would work with the NAS we already owned, but UGREEN has since confirmed that the cameras will not connect directly to existing NASync systems at launch. That makes HomeAgent less of an optional upgrade and more of a requirement for anyone who wants to use SynCare in its current form.

    For me, that changes the decision completely. I was interested in the OD600 Pro because I already own a NASync and wanted to add a couple of PoE cameras without buying another storage appliance. That setup is no longer possible at launch.

    Requiring HomeAgent changes the value proposition completely. I can understand paying extra for advanced AI features such as event summaries, natural-language search and cross-camera tracking, but I cannot justify spending $899 on another hub simply to make the cameras work with a system that was originally promoted around NASync storage.

    Unless UGREEN changes course and adds direct NASync support, the OD600 Pro is no longer the obvious choice for me. The hardware still looks excellent, but I will probably end up looking at alternative PoE cameras that can record directly to the NAS I already own.

  • The Smart Home Automations I Actually Use

    The Smart Home Automations I Actually Use

    It has been a few months since my last post. Life has been busy, and although I have continued tinkering with things at home, I haven’t had much time to sit down and write about any of it.

    That has at least given me an opportunity to see which of my smart-home automations remain useful after the initial novelty has worn off. I enjoy experimenting with Home Assistant, sensors and networking, but I don’t want to automate something simply because I can. The better automations are the ones I gradually stop noticing.

    My setup is not especially complicated, and it certainly isn’t finished. Some parts run through Home Assistant, others remain in the SwitchBot app, and at least one motion sensor continues to make me question my choice of hardware.

    Arriving home after dark

    One of my more useful automations is also one of the simplest. When either of us arrives home after dark, Home Assistant turns on the entrance light along with the main living-room lights.

    The automation watches the device trackers for our phones and triggers when either one changes to home. Before switching anything on, it checks the illuminance reading from the SwitchBot Hub 2. If the reading is below 70 lux, the entrance light, living-room light and globe light are switched on.

    The entrance light turns itself off again after five minutes, while the living-room lights remain on. This gives us enough time to get inside and put everything down without leaving the entrance illuminated unnecessarily.

    Home Assistant YAML automation that turns on the entrance and living-room lights when someone arrives home after dark
    Home Assistant checks whether either of us has arrived home and uses the Hub 2’s illuminance reading to decide whether the lights are needed.

    The light level check is important. A time-based condition would be easier, but sunset does not necessarily mean the house is dark. Weather, curtains and the time of year all affect the amount of light inside, so using the actual illuminance reading produces more consistent results.

    There are also a few smaller automations built around the same idea. Lights can switch off after a delay, and presence conditions stop certain routines from running in an empty house. None of these is particularly impressive by itself, but together they remove several small jobs from the day.

    Making geofencing work remotely

    The awkward part of the arrival automation was not controlling the lights. It was making sure Home Assistant could receive reliable location updates while I was away from home.

    Home Assistant is not exposed directly to the internet, and I would prefer to keep it that way. Instead, I use Tailscale to provide a secure connection back to my home network. This allows the Home Assistant companion app on my phone to communicate with the server remotely without requiring me to open ports on the router.

    Once Tailscale was configured correctly, presence detection started working reliably while I was away. It has been largely uneventful since then, which is exactly what I want from the networking underneath an automation.

    There can still be a slight delay before a phone reports that it has entered the home zone, so I would not use this arrangement for anything where a few seconds really matters. For turning on lights as we arrive, however, it has been dependable enough.

    Keeping the living room comfortable

    Summer temperatures here regularly reach the mid-to-high 30s, so keeping the living room comfortable is less of a luxury than it might sound. I normally aim for approximately 27°C with humidity around 60%.

    The SwitchBot Hub 2 already measures and displays the temperature and relative humidity, so I use those readings as part of a climate automation. When motion is detected in the living room, the automation checks that I am at home and that the room is both above 27.5°C and above 60% relative humidity.

    If all of those conditions are met, the air conditioner switches on in its automatic dry mode and the Switchbot circulator starts moving air around the room.

    SwitchBot automation using presence, living-room motion, temperature and humidity to control the air conditioner and circulator
    The SwitchBot automation checks presence, motion, temperature and humidity before switching on the air conditioner and Switchbot circulator.

    This is particularly helpful when I am working from home. The temperature tends to rise gradually, and I often do not notice until the room has already become uncomfortable. The Hub 2 can react before I reach the point of abandoning whatever I am doing to find the remote controls.

    The automation also avoids cooling an empty room. Presence confirms that I am home, while the living-room motion sensor provides a reasonable indication that the room is actually being used. It is not sophisticated room-presence detection, but it is sufficient for this purpose.

    This climate automation currently runs through the SwitchBot app rather than Home Assistant. The Hub 2 can control the air conditioner using infrared, and the Switchbot circulator is available through SwitchBot as well, so Home Assistant would add another layer without providing much benefit.

    I like having everything visible in Home Assistant, but I no longer think every automation has to run there. If a manufacturer’s local setup can perform a straightforward task reliably, I am happy to leave it alone. Home Assistant is most valuable when I need to combine devices and information from different systems.

    The troublesome hall motion sensor

    The hall automation is probably the weakest part of the current setup. Its job is straightforward: detect movement, turn on the hall light when it is needed, and turn it off again after a delay. In practice, the SwitchBot motion sensor was not always reporting movement reliably.

    The Bluetooth signal was the obvious problem. At its worst, the sensor was reporting approximately −99 dBm, which is extremely weak. At that level, missed or delayed updates were not particularly surprising.

    After changing the sensor battery and adjusting the placement, the signal improved to just under −80 dBm. That is a substantial improvement, although both changes happened at roughly the same time, so I cannot say with confidence how much each one contributed.

    The automation is behaving better now, but −80 dBm still leaves room for improvement.Walls, furniture and the position of the sensor relative to the TP-Link Bluetooth adapter all affect reception, and a motion sensor needs to report quickly if it is going to control lighting without becoming irritating.

    This is why I am still considering replacing the SwitchBot motion sensors. They are convenient and work well with the rest of the SwitchBot equipment, but the hall has exposed the limitations of relying on a weak Bluetooth connection. A Zigbee-based sensor, or another device with better local coverage, may eventually be a more dependable choice.

    I am not rushing to replace anything while the existing sensor is working, though. For now, I am monitoring the signal and seeing whether the battery and placement changes continue to make a difference.

    Keeping the setup practical

    The current arrangement is a mixture of different approaches. Home Assistant handles the arrival automation because it needs presence data, illuminance readings and lights from different parts of the system. Tailscale provides remote access without exposing Home Assistant publicly. SwitchBot handles the climate automation because it already has everything required to measure the room and control the appliances.

    That mixture is less tidy than forcing everything into one platform, but it has proven more practical. Centralising a device in Home Assistant is useful when it creates new possibilities. Doing it purely for the satisfaction of having another entity on a dashboard can create more work without making the house any better to live in.

    Reliability matters more to me now than the number of automations I can list. A basic light automation that works every evening is more valuable than an elaborate routine that needs regular attention. The hall sensor has been a useful reminder of that.

    Hardware behind my setup

    As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Some links below are affiliate links, which help support the site at no additional cost to you.

    The main hardware used across my smart home and Home Assistant setup includes:

    • UGREEN NASync DXP2800 — my two-bay NAS and the machine running Home Assistant in Docker. Read my review here.
    • TP-Link UB500 Bluetooth 5.0 Nano USB Adapter — connected to the UGREEN NASync DXP2800 to give Home Assistant local Bluetooth access to nearby devices.
    • UGREEN US3000 UPS — protects the NAS and Home Assistant installation against sudden power loss.
    • SwitchBot Hub 2 — measures temperature, humidity and illuminance while also controlling the air conditioner.
    • SwitchBot Motion Sensor — used for motion-based lighting and living-room detection.
    • SwitchBot Circulator Fan — automatically circulates cool air when the living-room climate automation runs.
    • Philips Hue Bridge — connects the Philips Hue lighting system to Home Assistant.
    • Philips Hue smart bulbs — used for the entrance and living-room lighting automations.
    • SwitchBot Outdoor Camera — part of my wider smart-home monitoring setup.
    • AAA batteries — useful spares for the SwitchBot motion sensors, particularly when troubleshooting unreliable readings.

    Where I’ve landed

    None of these automations is especially dramatic. Lights come on when we arrive home, the living room cools down when it becomes hot and humid, and the hall light responds when somebody walks past. That is also why they have remained useful.

    For now, I am happy when the lights come on before I reach the switch and the living room starts cooling down without me having to think about it. The hall sensor is behaving better at just under −80 dBm, although I still haven’t ruled out replacing it.

    That is probably the reality of my smart home: it is never completely finished, but it is gradually becoming more useful.

  • How to Access Home Assistant Remotely with Tailscale on a NAS (No Port Forwarding Required)

    How to Access Home Assistant Remotely with Tailscale on a NAS (No Port Forwarding Required)

    One of the biggest things I wanted after setting up Home Assistant was reliable remote access.

    At first, I assumed this would be simple. Install Home Assistant, install the mobile app, sign in remotely somehow, and that would be the end of it.

    The deeper I got into self hosting though, the more I realised remote access is one of those areas where things become complicated surprisingly quickly. Every guide seemed to recommend something different, from opening ports on the router to setting up reverse proxies, SSL certificates, Cloudflare tunnels and domain names.

    None of those things are inherently bad, but when you are still building your understanding it becomes difficult to know what is actually necessary and what is just adding complexity.

    There was another factor as well: subscriptions. I completely understand why Home Assistant Cloud exists and for many people it is probably the right solution. But like a lot of people these days, it feels as though everything wants a monthly fee.

    I was not trying to avoid spending money entirely. I just wanted to see if I could achieve reliable and secure remote access using the hardware and software I already had, without exposing Home Assistant directly to the internet while I was still figuring things out.

    That is what led me to Tailscale. It gave me a way to get remote access working without turning it into a much bigger networking project.

    My setup

    For reference, this is the setup I am currently running.

    The NAS itself is a UGREEN NASync DXP2800 running Docker containers for both Home Assistant and Tailscale. If you’re interested in the hardware itself, I covered my experience in my  UGREEN NASync DXP2800 Review After 2 Months.

    There is no port forwarding, no reverse proxy, no public Home Assistant exposure, and no Home Assistant Cloud subscription.

    That probably sounds restrictive at first, especially if you spend enough time reading forums where people are building very advanced setups. But honestly, that was exactly the point.

    Despite working in IT, I did not want this to become a project that required constant maintenance. I wanted something that was secure, made sense, and just worked day to day without needing to be constantly revisited.

    Just because a solution is more advanced does not automatically make it better for your situation. For me, the goal was not to build the most complex setup possible. It was to build one that was secure, reliable, and easy to live with long term.

    That is what pushed me towards Tailscale.

    Why I chose Tailscale

    The biggest reason was simplicity, not because the alternatives were beyond me, but because I was trying to solve a specific problem rather than build a networking project.

    There are plenty of ways to provide remote access to Home Assistant. You can use reverse proxies, SSL certificates, Cloudflare tunnels, domain names, port forwarding and various other combinations depending on how much control you want.

    The problem is that every additional layer becomes something else to configure, secure and maintain.

    For some people that is part of the hobby, and there is nothing wrong with that. For me, the goal was simply to access Home Assistant securely when I was away from home.

    Tailscale felt like a very clean solution to that problem. Instead of exposing Home Assistant publicly and then protecting it afterwards, it creates a private encrypted network between devices you already trust.

    In practice, that meant my phone could communicate directly with my NAS without Home Assistant ever being exposed to the public internet.

    That shift in approach made everything much easier to reason about. I was not publishing a service and securing it, I was extending a private network.

    For a home setup, that balance between simplicity, security and reliability was hard to ignore.

    The benefit I was not expecting

    When I first started looking at remote access, I was focused almost entirely on Home Assistant. The goal was simply to be able to open dashboards and make sure automations worked when I was away from home.

    What I did not really think about at the time was that I was solving a much bigger problem.

    Once Tailscale was working, Home Assistant was only one of the things I could access remotely. I also had other services running on my NAS, including my Recipe App and Home Dashboard. Several of these are applications I discussed in my  Docker Containers I Still Use One Year Later article, and Tailscale effectively gave me secure remote access to all of them at the same time.

    That was the point where it clicked. Tailscale stopped feeling like a Home Assistant tool and started feeling like part of the underlying infrastructure of my home network. The more services I added locally, the more useful it became.

    The Home Assistant benefits were still significant. Presence detection became more reliable, location updates worked more consistently, and geofenced automations behaved the way I expected them to.

    But the bigger takeaway was that I only needed to solve remote access once. Every service I run now, and anything I add in the future, can use the same setup.

    Before you start

    This guide assumes you already have Home Assistant running and accessible on your local network.

    If you are starting from scratch, make sure you can access Home Assistant locally first, for example:

    http://192.168.x.x:8123

    Do not move on until this works reliably. Otherwise you end up troubleshooting multiple things at once.

    Checking Home Assistant locally

    Before adding Tailscale, confirm Home Assistant is actually listening on port 8123.

    sudo ss -tulpn | grep 8123

    You should see Home Assistant (usually as python3) listening on that port. If not, fix that first.

    Installing Tailscale in Docker

    Tailscale running as a Docker container on a UGREEN NAS alongside other self-hosted applications.
    Tailscale running as a Docker container on my UGREEN NAS.

    Install Tailscale as a Docker container on your NAS.

    docker pull tailscale/tailscale:latest
    docker run -d \
    --name=tailscale \
    --hostname=nas \
    --network=host \
    --cap-add=NET_ADMIN \
    --cap-add=NET_RAW \
    -v tailscale-data:/var/lib \
    tailscale/tailscale:latest

    Check the logs to get the authentication link:

    docker logs tailscale

    Open the URL shown, sign in, and approve the device.

    Make sure to click this link right away, as Tailscale login URLs expire after a few minutes. If it has expired, simply restart the container or re-check the logs to generate a new one.

    Note: In this example, Tailscale stores its configuration in a Docker named volume called tailscale-data. If you prefer to keep your container data in a specific folder for easier backups or management, you can replace the named volume with a local path that suits your environment.

    For example:

    -v /path/to/tailscale-data:/var/lib

    The exact location will depend on your operating system, NAS, or Docker setup.

    Verify the connection:

    docker exec -it tailscale tailscale status

    Setting up Tailscale on your phone

    Tailscale mobile app showing connected devices and assigned tailnet IP addresses.
    The Tailscale app lets you confirm your devices are connected and quickly find your NAS Tailscale IP address.

    Installing Tailscale on the NAS is only half of the setup. You also need it running on the device you actually want to connect from, which in my case is my iPhone.

    Download the Tailscale app from the App Store and sign in using the same account you used to authenticate the NAS. Once signed in, your phone will appear in your Tailscale admin console alongside your NAS.

    At that point, your phone is part of the same private network. Your phone is no longer “connecting into” your home network, it is effectively part of it.

    One useful thing is that the Tailscale app shows all connected devices and their assigned IP addresses. That means you can quickly check your NAS Tailscale IP directly from your phone without needing to SSH in.

    This is useful when setting things up or troubleshooting because you can confirm:

    • your NAS is online
    • your phone is connected to the tailnet
    • the correct Tailscale IP is being used

    Finding the Tailscale IP

    Get the Tailscale IP:

    docker exec -it tailscale tailscale ip -4

    You will get something like:

    100.x.x.x

    Use that to access Home Assistant remotely:

    http://100.x.x.x:8123

    This uses HTTP, not HTTPS. Tailscale already encrypts the connection, so forcing HTTPS here will break things.

    Configuring the Home Assistant Companion App

    Home Assistant Companion App server settings showing internal and external URL configuration.
    Directly after “Configuring the Home Assistant Companion App” and before you explain Internal vs External URLs.

    In the Home Assistant Companion App, you need to set the Internal URL and External URL.

    On iPhone, open the app and go to:

    Settings → Companion App → Server Settings

    (If you have multiple servers configured, tap your server first, then open Server Settings.)

    Use your local IP for Internal URL:

    http://192.168.x.x:8123

    Use your Tailscale IP for External URL:

    http://100.x.x.x:8123

    Both should use HTTP. Tailscale already encrypts the connection, so you do not need HTTPS here.

    Once set, back out of the menu and give the app a few seconds to reconnect. If everything is correct, it should connect both on WiFi and over Tailscale without any errors.

    VPN On Demand on iPhone

    One thing I highly recommend enabling is VPN On Demand inside the Tailscale app.

    Enable it for both WiFi and cellular so the connection is automatic. That way you do not need to remember to manually connect before opening Home Assistant.

    This makes the whole setup feel much more seamless day to day and also improves reliability for things like presence detection and geofenced automations because your phone maintains a consistent connection back to Home Assistant.

    The issue that caused the most confusion

    The biggest problem I hit was not Home Assistant. It was Tailscale Serve taking over port 8123.

    sudo ss -tulpn | grep 8123

    If you do not see Home Assistant on that port, something else has taken it.

    Fix it with:

    tailscale serve reset

    Hardware I Use

    Before I wrap up, a quick note: some of the links below are Amazon affiliate links. If you choose to purchase through them, I may earn a small commission at no additional cost to you. I only recommend products I personally use or have hands-on experience with.

    The software in this guide is free, but if you’re curious about the hardware behind my setup, this is what I currently use:

    I’ve been using this setup for Home Assistant, Docker containers, remote access through Tailscale, and various self-hosted projects. If you’re building something similar, these are the components I have the most hands-on experience with.

    Final thoughts

    Tailscale ended up being one of the most useful additions to my setup, not because it was flashy, but because it removed friction.

    Once it was configured, I stopped thinking about remote access entirely. Combined with a stable home network, which I discussed in  What Actually Happens on Your Network (Why WiFi Feels Inconsistent), it became one of those rare pieces of infrastructure that simply fades into the background and does its job.

    There are more advanced ways to achieve the same result, and for some setups they will make sense. But for me, this struck the right balance. It solved the problem I actually had without introducing more moving parts to maintain.

    Looking back, that was the biggest win. Not just remote access, but a simple foundation I can keep building on without having to rethink it every time I add something new.

  • The Docker Containers I Still Use One Year Later on My NAS

    The Docker Containers I Still Use One Year Later on My NAS

    A year ago I wrote about the best Docker containers to run on a NAS. At the time, I was still in the “this is exciting, what else can I install?” phase. That phase is useful, and honestly it is part of the fun, but it is not the same as living with these containers day after day.

    After a year, my view has changed quite a bit. I no longer think the best Docker containers are always the most impressive ones. The best ones are the ones that keep solving a real problem without creating new ones.

    That sounds obvious, but it’s very easy to forget when you first set up a NAS. You start with storage, then Docker appears, then suddenly you are looking at dashboards, monitoring tools, media servers, smart home platforms, DNS blockers, download managers, and random utilities you did not even know existed two weeks earlier.

    This post is not another “install these 20 containers” list. I already wrote that kind of post n my earlier post on the best Docker containers for a NAS. This is the follow-up I wish more people wrote: what I actually kept, what I removed, what I still want to revisit, and what I would tell someone setting up Docker on a NAS for the first time.

    How Docker changed how I use my NAS

    When I bought my NAS, I mostly thought of it as storage. I wanted somewhere for backups, files, photos, and maybe some media. That’s still important, but Docker changed the role of the NAS completely.

    Instead of being a box that only stores files, it became a small home server. It could run Home Assistant for smart home automation, local apps that only I use, monitoring tools, and services that sit quietly in the background until I need them.

    That’s the part that’s hard to appreciate until you try it. A NAS with Docker is not just “storage plus apps”. It becomes infrastructure for your home. It can run things locally, keep data inside your own network, and remove some dependence on cloud services.

    But there is a catch. Every container you install has a cost. Not always a money cost, but a maintenance cost. It might use CPU, RAM, storage, network access, database writes, logs, or background activity. It might wake your HDDs when you expected the NAS to stay quiet. It might need updates. It might break. It might make your setup more complicated than it needs to be.

    That’s the lesson I learned over the last year. Docker is powerful, but it is also easy to overdo.

    My current rule: install for a problem, not for curiosity

    The biggest change in my thinking is that I no longer install containers just because they sound useful. I still like experimenting, but I now separate “interesting” from “actually worth running all the time”.

    A good container should do at least one of these things:

    • fix a genuine day-to-day annoyance
    • replace a cloud service I do not want to depend on
    • make the NAS more useful day to day
    • run quietly without constant maintenance
    • justify the resources it uses

    If it does not meet one of those, I probably do not need it running permanently.

    That does not mean you should never experiment. Experimenting is how you learn. But there is a difference between testing a container for a weekend and letting it become part of your permanent setup.

    Home Assistant: the one that genuinely changed my setup

    Home Assistant is the container that made the biggest difference for me.

    Custom Home Assistant dashboard running on a NAS with smart home controls, weather information, lighting zones, and sensor data.
    My Home Assistant dashboard running locally on my NAS. I recently rebuilt the layout from scratch, so it’s still very much a work in progress, but it already gives me a much cleaner overview of lighting, sensors, and smart home controls around the house.

    At first, I used it for simple automations. Motion sensors turning on lights, basic routines, and small quality-of-life improvements. Nothing too advanced. But even those simple automations changed how the house felt.

    The important thing I learned is that Home Assistant is only as good as the reliability of the devices and network around it. If a motion sensor is slow to report, or a light takes a second too long to respond, the automation feels bad even if Home Assistant itself is working perfectly.

    That was a big shift in how I thought about it. When something was delayed, my first instinct was to blame the automation or the container. In reality, the issue was often the communication path. Sensor to router, router to Home Assistant, Home Assistant back to the device. Every wireless step can add a little inconsistency.

    Once I improved my network setup, Home Assistant became much more dependable. A lot of that came down to reducing weak wireless paths and removing inconsistent connections between devices, which I covered in more detail in my post about WiFi vs wired consistency for smart home setups.

    That is why Home Assistant is one of the first things I would recommend if someone is interested in smart home control, but I would also warn them not to judge it too quickly. If it feels inconsistent, check the network and devices before assuming Home Assistant is bad.

    Who should install Home Assistant?

    Install Home Assistant if you have more than a couple of smart home devices and want them to work together instead of living in separate apps.

    It is especially useful if you have devices from different brands and want one central place for automations. For example, you might have SwitchBot devices, smart lights, sensors, and other equipment that all work fine individually but become much more useful when linked together.

    Who should skip it for now?

    If you only have one or two smart devices and are happy using the manufacturer apps, Home Assistant may be overkill. It is powerful, but it also rewards patience. You will probably spend time tweaking, testing, and learning how your devices actually behave.

    For me, it is worth it. But it is not a “set it and forget it in ten minutes” container.

    One thing I have added since then is Tailscale so I can securely access Home Assistant remotely without exposing my network directly to the internet. That alone completely changed how useful the setup feels day to day, especially when checking automations or devices while away from home. It also lets me use geofenced automations remotely without needing to pay for Home Assistant Cloud, which was a nice bonus. I will probably do a separate post on that because remote access is one of those areas where it is very easy to do the wrong thing if you are new to self hosting.

    Uptime Kuma: useful, but not essential for my setup

    Uptime Kuma is one of those containers that feels brilliant when you first install it. It gives you a clean dashboard showing whether your services are online, and it can notify you when something goes down.

    If you run a lot of services, it makes sense. If you host things for other people, it makes even more sense. It is also great if you are learning because it helps you understand what is actually running on your network.

    I liked it. I really did.

    The problem is that I eventually removed it because one of my monitoring containers seemed to be keeping my HDDs active. I am not saying Uptime Kuma is bad or that everyone will have that problem, but in my setup, I started caring more about disk activity, noise, and letting the NAS sit quietly when idle.

    That is something beginners often overlook. A monitoring tool is useful, but it also has to monitor things constantly. Depending on how it is configured, where its data is stored, and how often it checks services, it may create background activity you did not expect.

    Would I still recommend Uptime Kuma?

    Yes, but with context.

    If you are running several containers and want a simple way to see whether they are online, Uptime Kuma is excellent. It is one of the easiest monitoring tools to understand, and the interface is beginner friendly.

    But if your NAS is mainly for storage and you care about keeping HDD activity low, I would treat it as optional rather than essential. Install it, test it, and pay attention to whether your disks stay active more than expected.

    A good container can still be the wrong fit for your priorities.

    Portracker: helpful for learning, but I did not keep it

    Portracker was another container I liked because it helped me understand what was happening with my ports and services. When you are new to Docker, it is easy to lose track of what is exposed, what is mapped, and what is actually reachable on your network.

    That kind of visibility is useful. It gives you a better mental picture of your setup.

    But like Uptime Kuma, I eventually removed it. Again, the issue was not that it was bad. It was that my setup had changed. I no longer needed constant visibility enough to justify keeping every monitoring-style tool running.

    This is probably one of the biggest lessons from using Docker long term: some containers are great teachers, but not permanent residents.

    Portracker helped me learn. Once I understood my setup better, I did not need it running all the time.

    The DNS blockers: my unfinished business

    Pi-hole is the container I wanted to love, but I never got it working the way I wanted.

    To be clear, the problem was not that I could not start the container. The problem was that I could not get my network traffic to actually route through Pi-hole properly. In other words, Pi-hole may be running, but if your devices are not using it for DNS, it is not doing anything useful.

    That distinction is important for beginners.

    Installing the container is only step one. The real work is making sure your router, DHCP settings, DNS settings, and devices are actually pointing at it. If they are not, you can stare at a perfectly healthy Pi-hole dashboard while your network completely ignores it.

    That was my issue.

    At the time, I probably did not understand my network well enough to troubleshoot it properly. Since then, I have learned more about VLANs, mesh behaviour, DNS routing, and how devices actually communicate across the network. Because of that, I actually want to give Pi-hole another proper attempt.

    The appeal is obvious. Network-wide ad blocking, cleaner DNS control, and better visibility into what devices are requesting. For people who like understanding their network, Pi-hole is still one of the classic self-hosted tools.

    But I would not describe it as “install and done” for everyone.

    If your router makes it easy to set a custom DNS server, Pi-hole can be straightforward. If your router hides those settings, uses its own DNS behaviour, has awkward mesh or IoT network handling, or if your devices bypass local DNS, it can become frustrating quickly.

    That does not mean Pi-hole is bad. It means DNS is one of those areas where the container is only half the story.

    I also experimented with AdGuard Home briefly because I liked the cleaner interface and overall approach, but I never spent enough time with it to make a fair comparison. Right now, both of them sit in the category of “containers I still want to figure out properly” rather than containers I can fully recommend from long-term experience.

    That will probably become a future post by itself.

    My self-hosted recipe app: the thing that changed my mindset

    The most unexpected part of running Docker on my NAS was not installing someone else’s container. It was eventually hosting something I built myself.

    I created a local recipe app so I can store recipes in a way that works for me. It runs on my NAS and is available on my local network. It is not a huge commercial-style project, and that is exactly the point.

    It solved a specific problem I had.

    That changed how I looked at the NAS. It was no longer just a device for storage or prebuilt apps. It became a place where I could run my own tools.

    Self hosted recipe app running locally on a NAS with meal categories, recipe cards, and meal planning features.
    One of the unexpected benefits of Docker was eventually hosting my own apps locally. This recipe app runs entirely on my NAS and is used day to day for meal planning and recipe storage.

    This is one of the most underrated parts of Docker. You are not limited to whatever your NAS app store provides. If you can build or find a small web app, you can often run it yourself.

    Why this matters for beginners

    You do not need to be a professional developer to appreciate this idea. Even if you never build your own app, understanding that your NAS can host local tools changes how you think about it.

    Maybe it is a recipe app. Maybe it is a dashboard. Maybe it is a small tool for your household. The point is that Docker turns the NAS into something flexible.

    That is when the NAS stops feeling like “a hard drive on the network” and starts feeling like a small home platform.

    What I learned about NVMe and Docker

    Another thing I understand better now is where fast storage actually matters. I also touched on some of this in my UGREEN NASync DXP2800 review because Docker workloads changed how I approached storage much more than I originally expected.

    For bulk storage, HDDs still make the most sense. They are cheaper per TB and ideal for backups, media, archives, and general file storage.

    For apps and containers, NVMe can make the system feel more responsive. Containers often involve lots of small reads and writes, databases, thumbnails, logs, configuration files, and web interfaces. Those are the kinds of workloads where SSDs feel much better than HDDs.

    That does not mean everyone needs NVMe on day one. If you are building your first NAS, I would still prioritise enough HDD capacity first, especially if your main goal is storage.

    But if you plan to run Docker seriously, NVMe is worth considering. Not necessarily massive drives, but enough fast storage for apps, containers, and potentially cache.

    The key is not “NVMe is better than HDD”. The key is using each type of storage for the job it suits best.

    What I would install first today

    If I was setting up Docker on a NAS again from scratch, I would not install ten containers immediately.

    I would start with one container that solves a real problem, then build from there.

    For me, the first serious install would still be Home Assistant because it has had the biggest day-to-day impact. After that, I would consider a monitoring tool like Uptime Kuma, but I would pay close attention to whether it increases disk activity. Then I would revisit Pi-hole carefully, making sure the DNS routing side is actually working before judging the container itself.

    I would not install things just because they appear on every “best Docker containers” list.

    That is how you end up with a busy NAS, a dozen dashboards, and very little that actually improves your life.

    What I would avoid as a beginner

    The biggest mistake is installing too much too quickly.

    Every container adds another thing to understand. Where does it store data? Does it need a database? Does it expose a port? Does it need internet access? Does it write logs constantly? Does it wake the drives? How do you back it up? How do you update it?

    None of that means Docker is bad. It just means containers are not free from responsibility.

    I would also avoid exposing anything to the internet until you understand what you are doing. Running an app locally on your home network is one thing. Opening ports so you can access it from anywhere is completely different.

    For most beginners, local-only is the right starting point.

    What I still think Docker is best for

    After a year, I think Docker is best for three things on a home NAS.

    First, smart home control. Home Assistant is the obvious example here.

    Second, useful local services. This could be a monitoring tool, a DNS tool, or a small personal app.

    Third, learning. Docker teaches you a lot about networking, storage, ports, backups, persistence, and how services actually run.

    That learning curve can be frustrating, but it is also what makes the NAS more valuable over time.

    Final thoughts

    A year ago, I mostly thought Docker was a way to add cool features to my NAS.

    Now I think it is more about choosing what deserves to run permanently in your home.

    Some containers stayed because they genuinely improved my setup. Some were removed because they added more background activity than value. Others, like Pi-hole, are still on my revisit list because I know the idea is useful even if my first attempt did not work.

    That is the honest version of Docker on a NAS. It is powerful, flexible, and genuinely useful, but it is not about installing everything.

    It is about building a setup that solves real problems without creating too many new ones.

  • Fixing WRITE FPDMA QUEUED Errors on UGREEN DXP2800 with WD Red Plus WD80EFPX

    Fixing WRITE FPDMA QUEUED Errors on UGREEN DXP2800 with WD Red Plus WD80EFPX

    I Thought My NAS Drive Had Failed. It Hadn’t.

    My NAS told me one of my drives had failed, yet SMART reported everything as healthy. The logs told a completely different story. What made it more confusing was that these weren’t old drives, with roughly 9,000 hours of runtime, well within their expected lifespan. If you are running a UGREEN DXP2800 with WD Red Plus drives and have seen “WRITE FPDMA QUEUED” errors, this post may save you from replacing a perfectly good disk.

    TLDR

    If your DXP2800 shows “WRITE FPDMA QUEUED” errors with WD Red Plus drives, especially WD80EFPX, it may be a SATA interface compatibility issue rather than a failing disk. Forcing SATA to 3.0Gbps resolved it in my case.

    My Setup

    NAS: UGREEN DXP2800

    Configuration: RAID 1

    Drives: 2 x WD Red Plus 8TB, model WD80EFPX

    The Problem

    WRITE FPDMA QUEUED error in UGREEN DXP2800 system logs
    Example of the “WRITE FPDMA QUEUED” error appearing in the system logs

    My storage pool suddenly became degraded and the drive in Slot 2 was marked as broken. When I checked the logs I kept seeing the same error, “WRITE FPDMA QUEUED”. At first I assumed this had just happened, but after digging into the logs properly I realised the same error had been appearing intermittently for weeks, possibly months. I had simply not noticed it earlier because everything continued to function until the RAID finally dropped the disk.

    Symptoms to Look For

    If you are seeing a degraded RAID, SMART showing no issues, and repeated “WRITE FPDMA QUEUED” errors in your logs, you are likely dealing with the same problem.

    What I Tried First

    I started with the usual checks to rule out something simple. SMART data looked normal, quick and extended tests passed, and temperatures were well within range. I then reseated the drive using hot swap. After reseating, the NAS automatically began rebuilding the RAID, which initially looked promising. However, during the rebuild the same WRITE error appeared again. That confirmed this was not a loose connection or a one off glitch.

    Why This Was Confusing

    When a drive fails you normally expect SMART warnings, reallocated sectors, or obvious read or write issues. In this case everything pointed to a healthy disk, yet the NAS had removed it from the array. That mismatch is what makes this issue particularly frustrating.

    What I Found

    After searching around I found multiple reports of the same behaviour with the DXP2800 and WD Red Plus drives, especially the WD80EFPX models. The same error kept coming up, which strongly suggested a compatibility issue rather than a failing disk.

    Contacting Support

    At that point I contacted UGREEN support and shared my logs. They responded much faster than I expected, in some cases within minutes, and got straight to the point. This was easily one of the best support experiences I’ve had with any company. They reviewed the logs, identified the root cause, and provided a clear fix without any unnecessary back and forth. They explained that some WD Red Plus drives have a narrow tolerance for signal timing at higher SATA speeds, which can cause instability with certain units. In other words, the drive and the NAS were not failing, but they were not communicating reliably at full speed.

    The Fix

    The solution they provided was to force the SATA interface to operate at 3.0Gbps instead of 6.0Gbps. This improves signal stability and prevents the write errors. The change is made by adding the kernel parameter “libata.force=3.0Gbps” to the boot configuration.

    ⚠️ Important Before You Try This

    The steps below were provided directly by UGREEN support after reviewing my logs. Since this involves system level changes, take your time and double check each step before applying it. Mistakes here can prevent the system from booting correctly. Make sure your RAID is healthy or your data is backed up before making changes, and avoid interrupting the system while editing or rebooting. If you are unsure or running a different configuration, I would strongly recommend contacting UGREEN support first. I am simply sharing what worked in my case.

    Step by Step Fix

    Example showing the libata.force=3.0Gbps parameter added to the boot configuration

    These commands are run on the NAS itself via SSH. The SSH connection step works the same on macOS and Windows PowerShell.

    1. Connect to your NAS via SSH

    ssh yourusername@your-nas-ip

    Enter your NAS password when prompted.

    2. Gain root access

    sudo -i

    Enter your password again if prompted. You should now see a prompt ending with # which means you are running as root.

    3. Confirm the files exist

    ls -l /boot/EFI/debian/grub.cfg /boot/EFI/debian/grub.am

    4. Backup the configuration files

    cp /boot/EFI/debian/grub.cfg /boot/EFI/debian/grub.cfg.bk
    cp /boot/EFI/debian/grub.am /boot/EFI/debian/grub.am.bk

    5. Edit grub.cfg

    vi /boot/EFI/debian/grub.cfg

    When the file opens:

    Press i to enter insert mode.

    Find the line that starts with:

    linux /boot/vmlinuz

    Move your cursor to the end of that line and add:

    libata.force=3.0Gbps

    Make sure there is a space before libata.

    Press Esc to leave insert mode.

    Type the following and press Enter to save and exit:

    :wq

    6. Edit grub.am

    vi /boot/EFI/debian/grub.am

    Repeat the same process:

    Press i to edit.

    Find the line starting with:

    linux /boot/@VMLINUXZ@

    Add to the end of that line:

    libata.force=3.0Gbps

    Press Esc, then type:

    :wq

    and press Enter.

    7. Reboot the NAS

    reboot

    Your SSH session will disconnect. Wait a minute or two for the NAS to come back online.

    8. Verify the change

    Reconnect via SSH and run:

    cat /proc/cmdline

    libata.force=3.0Gbps shown in /proc/cmdline after reboot on UGREEN DXP2800
    Verification showing the libata.force=3.0Gbps parameter active after reboot

    You should see libata.force=3.0Gbps in the output. If it is present, the fix has been applied successfully.

    9. Exit root and SSH

    exit

    exit

    Does This Affect Performance

    In practice it does not. SATA 3.0Gbps provides roughly 300MB per second of bandwidth, while most mechanical hard drives top out around 200 to 250MB per second. The interface is still faster than the drive itself, so there is no noticeable impact in real world use.

    The Result

    After applying the fix the RAID rebuild completed successfully, the storage pool returned to a healthy state, and the WRITE errors stopped appearing. Everything has been stable since.

    Fix or Replace

    If SMART shows no issues and you are seeing these specific errors, it is worth trying the fix first. If errors continue after applying it, or the disk drops from the array again, then replacing the drive becomes the safer option. Alternatives such as Seagate IronWolf or Toshiba N300 have worked well for others.

    Note for the Future

    This change is applied at the boot configuration level. If you update your NAS firmware or system software, these files may be overwritten.

    If the error ever returns after an update, check whether the libata.force=3.0Gbps line is still present in both files.

    Final Thoughts

    This caught me off guard. Everything about the setup was technically supported, and the drives themselves were still relatively new, so a failure was not something I expected. It turned out to be a compatibility issue that only showed up under real world conditions, which made it even harder to diagnose. Credit to UGREEN support for identifying the root cause quickly and providing a fix that worked straight away. Hopefully this helps if you run into the same problem.

  • How I Actually Fixed My Home Network (Without Buying Anything New)

    How I Actually Fixed My Home Network (Without Buying Anything New)

    What my setup actually looks like

    Here’s the real setup in simple terms. I have an ONU (Optical Network Unit, the device that converts fibre from your ISP into usable internet) feeding into a TP Link BE85 router, with a mesh node in my office for coverage. One thing to be aware of is that mesh nodes can connect back to the main router either wirelessly or via a cable. A wired connection, known as wired backhaul, is more stable, while a wireless one can still introduce the same inconsistency you’re trying to reduce. I’m using fairly high-end gear here, but the same principles apply even if you’re using your ISP’s router.

    My NAS (Network Attached Storage, essentially a local server or private cloud running in your home) connects directly to the router and handles most of the heavy lifting. It runs Docker, Home Assistant, and a few custom apps like a recipe app I can access locally. Everything I run is only accessible inside my home network. I’m deliberately not exposing any of this to the internet. Full breakdown of the NAS here: UGREEN NASync DXP2800 Review After 2 Months.

    Everything else in the house connects over WiFi, including phones, smart devices, and currently my SwitchBot outdoor cameras. I don’t currently use a switch, but I’m planning to add a PoE (Power over Ethernet, where both power and data are delivered through a single network cable) switch when I upgrade to wired cameras. I also run a separate IoT VLAN so smart devices aren’t on the same network as everything else. That’s the full picture as it stands today.

    Home office setup with TP-Link Deco BE85 mesh router and NAS device on a desk.

    Where things actually felt off

    Nothing in my setup ever completely broke, which made this harder to figure out. Things just felt inconsistent. Home Assistant automations didn’t behave the same way every time. Sometimes a motion sensor would trigger a light instantly, other times there’d be a noticeable delay.

    My cameras were similar. Opening the live feed might be instant one time, then take a couple of seconds the next. Even accessing apps on my NAS sometimes felt slower than expected when I was on WiFi. This is where Docker really stood out, because everything I was running locally should have felt instant. If you’re curious what I run, I’ve listed them here: Best Docker Containers for Your NAS.

    Individually, none of this is a big issue, but together it makes the whole setup feel unreliable.

    What I thought the problem was

    At first, I assumed it was performance. Maybe the NAS wasn’t powerful enough, maybe Home Assistant needed tweaking, or maybe the cameras just weren’t great. So I started looking at upgrades. Better hardware, faster gear, new devices. None of that was actually the problem.

    What the problem actually was

    The issue wasn’t speed, it was consistency. Anything running directly on the NAS was solid. Docker apps loaded properly and Home Assistant itself wasn’t struggling. The inconsistency only showed up when WiFi was involved.

    WiFi isn’t bad, but it introduces small variations. Signal strength changes, interference comes and goes, and devices don’t always respond at the same speed. You don’t notice this until something needs to behave the same way every time.

    The test that made it obvious

    The Unstable Path: Sensor → (weak WiFi) → Router → (WiFi) → NAS
    The Stable Path: Sensor → (strong WiFi) → Router → (wired) → NAS

    The simplest thing I did was plug my laptop directly into the router using an Ethernet cable. If your laptop doesn’t have an Ethernet port, you’ll need a simple USB to Ethernet adapter for this. I then repeated the same tasks I was doing over WiFi, like opening NAS apps, transferring files, and accessing Docker services.

    The difference wasn’t just speed, it was predictability. A file transfer that used to fluctuate suddenly behaved the same way every time, and apps loaded without that occasional hesitation. If plugging in one cable removes the inconsistency, WiFi is the weak point.

    What I actually changed (this is the important part)

    I didn’t redesign the network, but I did make a few specific changes that improved the “network path”. I made sure the devices that matter always connect to a strong signal by moving the mesh node so the areas I actually use had consistent coverage instead of borderline signal.

    I also made sure my NAS was always accessed over the most stable path possible. It was already wired, but I stopped relying on weak WiFi connections to reach it. If I’m doing anything heavy or testing behaviour, I plug in directly.

    I reduced how many things were competing on weak connections by spreading devices more evenly across the mesh. Finally, I paid attention to physical placement, since devices behind walls or far from a node will always be less reliable.

    None of these changes are dramatic on their own, but together they reduce how many weak links exist between the sensor, router, Home Assistant, and end device. That’s what “improving the network path” actually means.

    A real example: Home Assistant

    When a motion sensor triggers a light, it isn’t a single action. The sensor detects motion, sends a signal over WiFi to the router, the router passes that to Home Assistant running on the NAS, Home Assistant processes the automation, and then sends a command back over WiFi to the light.

    Each wireless step can introduce a small delay. Before, I saw behaviour like this:

    • Trigger 1 → ~0.4 seconds
    • Trigger 2 → ~1.8 seconds
    • Trigger 3 → ~0.6 seconds
    • Trigger 4 → ~2 seconds

    Nothing was broken, but it felt random. After improving the network conditions, the behaviour became consistent rather than faster:

    • Trigger 1 → ~0.7 seconds
    • Trigger 2 → ~0.8 seconds
    • Trigger 3 → ~0.7 seconds
    • Trigger 4 → ~0.9 seconds

    The difference is that there are fewer random delays in the chain. The NAS is always instantly reachable because it’s wired, and the WiFi connections are more stable. The system behaves the same way every time, which is what makes it feel reliable.

    A real example: cameras

    My current setup uses SwitchBot outdoor WiFi cameras. They’re fine for basic use, but you can feel the limitation. Sometimes the feed loads instantly, other times there’s a delay. That delay is the problem, not because it’s slow, but because it’s unpredictable.

    That’s why I’m planning to move to a PoE setup. I’m currently looking at this direction: UGREEN SynCare AI Home Security. A wired camera should load instantly and behave the same way every time, without depending on signal strength.

    What a switch actually is (and when you need one)

    If you’ve never used a switch before, it’s simply a small box that gives you more Ethernet ports. Your router might only have a few, and a switch expands that so you can connect more wired devices. I don’t currently need one, but I will when I move to PoE cameras.

    What you should actually do

    If your setup feels inconsistent, try this first. Take a device you use regularly, like a laptop, and plug it directly into your router with an Ethernet cable. Then repeat something you normally do, such as opening your NAS, transferring a file, or triggering a Home Assistant automation.

    Ask yourself one question: does this feel more consistent? If the answer is yes, you’ve found your issue.

    What to change after that

    Don’t try to fix everything at once. Identify what feels unreliable, test it on a wired connection, and if it improves, that device or workflow shouldn’t rely on WiFi. Most people jump straight to upgrading hardware, but changing how things are connected usually has a bigger impact.

    If you want to copy this setup

    You don’t need everything I have. At a minimum, you need your existing router and one wired connection to whatever runs your core system, whether that’s a NAS or a PC. If you run out of ports, a small switch is enough to expand this. From there, focus on what actually feels inconsistent and improve that first.

    What the IoT VLAN is actually doing

    A VLAN (Virtual Local Area Network) is a way of splitting your home network into separate groups, even though everything uses the same router. Without one, every device sits on the same network. With one, you can separate things.

    In my case, I keep smart devices on a separate network from my main devices like my laptop and NAS. This gives me better control, keeps things organised, and slightly improves predictability by reducing unnecessary traffic between devices.

    You don’t need a VLAN to fix basic issues, and if your setup is small, you can ignore it for now. Not all routers support it directly, and on many systems it appears as an “IoT Network” or “Guest Network” option instead.

    Final thought

    Most people try to fix their network by upgrading hardware. In my case, the biggest improvement came from changing how things were connected. If your setup feels inconsistent, start there.

  • How to Design a Reliable Smart Home (Using Datacenter Principles)

    How to Design a Reliable Smart Home (Using Datacenter Principles)

    Most people do not think about infrastructure when building a smart home.

    They buy a few smart bulbs, maybe a camera or two, add a smart speaker, and slowly build up automation over time. Everything works well enough until the day something goes wrong.

    The internet drops. The router crashes. A power outage hits.

    Suddenly the entire smart home stops being smart.

    After working in datacenters for years, I cannot help noticing the difference between how systems are designed at work compared to how most homes are set up. In a datacenter, failure is not a surprise. It is expected. Systems are designed with that in mind from day one.

    At home, the opposite is usually true. Devices are added one by one with very little thought about what happens if something breaks.

    The interesting thing is that you do not need enterprise hardware or complicated setups to borrow some of those design principles. A few small decisions can make a home setup far more reliable.

    Typical smart home vs infrastructure focused smart home network diagram
    A typical smart home often relies on a single router, creating a single point of failure. Adding infrastructure like UPS protection, segmentation, and local automation improves reliability significantly.

    Design With Failure in Mind

    One of the biggest mindset differences between home setups and datacenters is the assumption that things will fail.

    Hard drives fail. Networks crash. Power goes out.

    In a professional environment the question is rarely if something will fail. The real question is what happens when it does. Disks fail, switches reboot, firmware bugs appear, and power drops unexpectedly. Systems are designed so that these events do not bring everything down at once.

    Most homes are not built this way. There is usually a single router handling WiFi, internet access, and often the entire smart home platform. If that device stops working, everything connected to it stops too.

    I experienced this myself early on when my network dropped and suddenly Alexa became completely unresponsive. At the time, almost everything in the house relied on voice control. Without the network, nothing worked.

    There are plenty of other small failures that can cause the same frustration. A router firmware update might reboot unexpectedly. An ISP outage can disconnect cloud services. A failing disk in a NAS can degrade performance long before it completely dies.

    It was a good reminder that smart homes are only as reliable as the infrastructure behind them.

    Since then I have tried to make sure that if something fails, it does not take the entire house down with it.

    Smart home infrastructure stack showing power, network, platform, device and automation layers
    A reliable smart home works like an infrastructure stack. Power and networking support the platforms, devices, and automations above them.

    Protect the Power First

    In a datacenter, power protection is taken extremely seriously. Sudden power loss can damage systems, corrupt data, or bring down services unexpectedly.

    At home, most people plug everything directly into the wall and hope for the best.

    One of the first things I recommend for anyone running a NAS, router, or home server is a UPS (uninterruptible power supply).

    A UPS does two very simple but important things.

    First, it protects equipment from sudden power loss. This prevents things like NAS corruption when drives are actively writing data.

    Second, it gives systems enough time to shut down safely during longer outages.

    In my own setup, the UPS is dedicated to the NAS itself. It is a NAS-specific unit designed to protect the system during outages, allowing it to shut down gracefully rather than losing power abruptly. That has already proven useful in practice. During power cuts, the UPS has kept the NAS running long enough to shut down properly, and when power returns, the NAS powers back up without drama.

    My router is not currently backed up in the same way. If I needed temporary network power during an outage, I do at least have an EcoFlow River Pro 2 available as a fallback, but that is a more manual solution rather than something permanently integrated into the setup.

    If you are curious about the specific unit I use, I covered it in detail in my review of the UGREEN US3000 NAS UPS:

    UGREEN US3000 NAS UPS review

    I also wrote a broader overview of different backup power approaches for smart homes here:

    Smart home power backup solutions

    Backups Should Not Live in the Same House

    Another lesson from working with infrastructure is that backups only matter if they survive disasters.

    A lot of people buy a NAS thinking they are now fully protected. In reality, a NAS alone is not a backup strategy.

    If the NAS fails, gets stolen, or the house experiences fire or flood damage, the data disappears along with it.

    This is why many professional environments follow the 3-2-1 backup rule:

    • 3 copies of your data
    • stored on 2 different types of media
    • with at least 1 copy stored off site

    At home the same logic applies.

    If you are running a NAS at home, this becomes even more important. I run my own storage on a UGREEN NASync system, which I reviewed after two months of real-world use:

    UGREEN NASync DXP2800 review after two months

    In my case I automate off site backups using rclone to send encrypted backups to cloud storage on Azure:

    Automated NAS backups with rclone

    In my case I run backups from my NAS to an external location so that important data exists in more than one physical place. Even if something catastrophic happened to the house, the data would still exist elsewhere.

    Network Segmentation Without Overcomplicating Things

    In datacenters, networks are carefully segmented so different systems do not interfere with each other.

    Most homes run everything on a single flat network.

    Phones, laptops, cameras, smart plugs, TVs, and automation devices are all mixed together. For many homes this works fine, but as the number of devices grows it can start to cause problems.

    One approach borrowed from professional infrastructure is network segmentation. This separates certain devices from the rest of the network so they operate in their own space.

    The good news is that modern routers have started making this easier.

    For example, my current router, the TP-Link Deco BE85, includes a dedicated IoT network designed specifically for smart home devices.

    I covered the router itself in more detail in my full review here:

    TP-Link Deco BE85 review

    Modern routers are also beginning to support newer local first smart home standards. The Deco BE85 can act as a Thread Border Router, allowing Thread based devices to communicate locally without relying on cloud services.

    This fits well with the broader idea of building a resilient smart home infrastructure. If the internet connection drops, devices that communicate locally can continue working rather than becoming completely unresponsive. This allows things like cameras, smart plugs, and sensors to live on their own network while the main network handles laptops, phones, and other personal devices.

    This provides some of the benefits of network segmentation without needing to manually configure VLANs or advanced networking features.

    Monitoring Matters More Than You Think

    In professional infrastructure environments, systems are constantly monitored.

    Disk health is checked. Power status is monitored. Alerts are triggered when something starts to fail.

    At home, problems are often discovered only after something stops working.

    Many NAS systems already include built in monitoring tools that track things like SMART disk data, temperatures, and system health. These systems can send alerts if a drive begins reporting errors or if something starts behaving unexpectedly.

    Catching a failing disk early is far less stressful than discovering the problem after the array degrades or fails.

    Even simple notifications can prevent major data loss.

    Cloud Dependence Is a Hidden Weak Point

    Smart homes often rely heavily on cloud services.

    Voice assistants, device integrations, and automation platforms frequently depend on an active internet connection to function. When the internet goes down, the entire system can suddenly stop responding.

    Since then I have tried to favour systems that can run locally where possible. Platforms like Home Assistant allow smart home devices to continue working even if the internet connection drops.

    I run Home Assistant directly on my NAS, and documented the setup here if you are interested in building a similar local first automation system:

    Installing Home Assistant on a UGREEN NAS

    This reduces reliance on external services and keeps automations functioning even during outages.

    A Simple Smart Home Reliability Checklist

    If you want a quick starting point, a few small decisions can make a surprisingly big difference.

    • Reliable router and stable home network
    • UPS protecting network equipment and NAS
    • Automatic NAS backups
    • Off site backup copy
    • Local automation where possible

    None of these require enterprise hardware, but together they dramatically improve reliability.

    You Do Not Need a Datacenter in Your House

    All of this might sound like over engineering, but the goal is not to turn a home into a miniature datacenter.

    The real takeaway is simply thinking about reliability earlier.

    A reliable router.

    A UPS protecting important devices.

    A backup strategy that survives disasters.

    Those three things alone already make a smart home far more resilient than most.

    Final Thoughts

    Working in datacenters has probably made me overly cautious about infrastructure. When you spend your days thinking about redundancy, monitoring, and failure scenarios, it is hard not to apply that thinking at home as well.

    The funny thing is that once you start thinking this way, it becomes difficult not to apply it everywhere. You start asking small questions most people never consider.

    What happens if the router dies?

    What happens if the internet drops?

    What happens if a drive fails overnight?

    Those questions are exactly what keep datacenters running smoothly. And surprisingly, they work just as well in a normal home.

    The good news is that building a reliable smart home does not require enterprise budgets or complicated setups.

    It mostly comes down to a few sensible design choices and remembering one simple principle.

    Things will eventually break. Planning for that ahead of time makes everything else work far more smoothly.

  • Thinking About a Home Battery? My Experience Planning an Anker SOLIX X1 System

    Thinking About a Home Battery? My Experience Planning an Anker SOLIX X1 System

    Solar and home battery systems turned out to be far more difficult to approach than I expected when I first started looking into them.

    Most information online jumps straight into specifications, capacities, and acronyms, often without stopping to explain what any of it actually means in day to day use. Without a background in electrical engineering or energy systems, it is easy to feel overwhelmed before you even understand whether a system makes sense for your home.

    That problem is compounded by the fact that many articles assume a perfect scenario. A permanent home, predictable usage, ideal solar conditions, and a buyer who is confident they will never move. For a lot of people, that simply is not reality.

    Once I got past the surface level marketing, I realised how little practical, experience led information there actually was from the point of view of a homeowner trying to make a sensible decision.

    What follows is me working through the decision in public: how I expect to use a home battery system, what the planning and quotation process actually involves, and how the Anker SOLIX X1 compares to both other fixed home battery systems and large portable power stations from brands like EcoFlow and Bluetti.

    The goal is not to tell anyone what to buy. It is to help people understand the benefits, the drawbacks, and the trade offs involved in what is often a very large financial decision.


    Why I Am Considering a Home Battery System

    This was not something I arrived at quickly. I went back and forth on it more than I expected, largely because of the cost and the long term commitment involved.

    The primary goal is to rely less on the grid.

    Electricity grids are highly reliable until they are not. Extreme weather, infrastructure damage, or unexpected events can all lead to outages that disrupt daily life far more than most people anticipate.

    A home battery system changes that relationship. Instead of being entirely dependent on the grid, you gain stored energy that can power essentials such as lighting, refrigeration, networking equipment, and heating or cooling depending on the season.

    In regions where natural disasters or severe weather are a real risk, outages are not hypothetical. They are something households need to plan around rather than dismiss.


    Day to Day Use Versus Emergency Use

    One thing that took me a while to get comfortable with was separating how the system would be used most of the time from how it would be used in a worst case scenario.

    This is not an emergency only setup.

    On a day to day basis, a battery system can be used to smooth household energy usage by storing energy when demand is low and using it when demand is high. It can reduce exposure to peak pricing and provide stability during brief outages or brownouts that would otherwise reset appliances or knock out connectivity.

    In an extended outage scenario, priorities shift to essentials rather than full household usage. That distinction is important when sizing a system realistically.

    The appeal is not just backup power. It is knowing that when the grid goes down, life does not immediately stop.


    What Is the Anker SOLIX X1

    I came across the SOLIX X1 fairly early on in my research, but it took a while for it to click why it was being positioned differently to a lot of other systems.

    The Anker SOLIX X1 is a modular home energy storage system designed to scale over time rather than forcing homeowners into a fixed capacity from day one. On paper that sounds like a small distinction, but in practice it changes how you think about the entire purchase. This was the first aspect of the system that genuinely caught my attention.

    At a high level, this means:

    • Modular battery units that can be added over time
    • Integrated inverter and energy management
    • Support for backup power operation
    • Long term warranty coverage depending on region
    • Designed to integrate with rooftop solar systems

    Rather than oversizing the system upfront, the X1 allows capacity to grow as real world usage becomes clearer.


    Warranty Coverage and Expected Lifespan

    This section took me longer to get my head around than I expected, mostly because warranty language can be surprisingly opaque if you are not used to reading it.

    Warranty terms vary by region, but the design intent is clearly long term residential use rather than short lifecycle consumer hardware.

    In some markets, the system is offered with:

    • Up to 25 year warranties on solar panels
    • Up to 20 year warranties on battery and power management units

    These figures are at the higher end of what is currently offered in the residential energy storage market.

    Long warranty periods are not just a marketing feature. They reflect expected cycle life, thermal management design, and long term degradation modelling. Modern lithium iron phosphate based systems are typically chosen for residential installs because of their stability, safety characteristics, and slower degradation over time.

    The expectation with a system like this is a usable lifespan measured in decades rather than years.


    Modularity and Expansion Over Time

    This is the part of the system I kept coming back to while comparing options, because it has a much bigger impact on long term flexibility than I initially realised.

    What actually matters with the SOLIX X1 is how modularity is implemented, not just the fact that it exists.

    Each battery module is treated by the system as an individual storage unit that is managed collectively through the inverter and energy management system. Capacity is pooled at the system level, but the batteries themselves remain discrete modules rather than a single monolithic pack.

    This matters because it allows additional battery modules to be added later without replacing or reworking the existing installation. Expansion is additive rather than duplicative.

    In practical terms, this allows homeowners to:

    • Install only the capacity they actually need at the start
    • Add more storage later as usage patterns become clear
    • Expand without having to replace the inverter or core system
    • Avoid paying for excess capacity upfront

    This is where the difference starts to matter in real world planning.

    With systems such as the Tesla Powerwall, each unit is a sealed battery with a fixed capacity. If you underestimate your needs, expansion means installing an entire additional Powerwall. While multiple units can be stacked, they are typically sized, planned, and installed together to ensure correct system design and load balancing.

    As a result, Powerwall installations tend to push homeowners toward buying all required capacity upfront. Adding more storage later is possible, but often less straightforward and more expensive than modular expansion.

    By contrast, the X1 approach allows capacity to grow incrementally. You are not doubling capacity in large steps, you are extending it in smaller, controlled increments.

    For most households, accurately predicting ideal battery capacity before living with a system is difficult. Modularity reduces that risk and makes long term planning far more flexible.

    Anker SOLIX X1 modular home battery units shown in a scalable configuration
    An example of the modular design of the Anker SOLIX X1, where battery capacity can be added incrementally rather than all at once

    Comparison With Other Fixed Home Battery Systems

    Many fixed home battery systems target the same core use case but approach it differently.

    Some prioritise high single unit capacity and tight software integration, while others focus on conservative designs backed by long established installer networks. These systems can work very well, but they often require larger upfront commitments and offer limited flexibility after installation.

    The X1 sits in the middle ground. It combines a modular approach with long warranty coverage and a design philosophy that treats the battery as part of the home infrastructure rather than a one off appliance.


    Home Battery Systems Versus Large Portable Power Stations

    This is a comparison I kept coming back to while researching, because on the surface the price difference feels hard to justify.

    A common point of comparison is between fixed home battery systems like the SOLIX X1 and large portable power stations from brands such as EcoFlow or Bluetti.

    At first glance, portable power stations appear far cheaper and more flexible. They can be moved, do not require installation, and often support solar charging.

    However, they serve a very different role.

    Portable power stations are well suited for:

    • Camping and outdoor use
    • Temporary backup during short outages
    • Powering individual appliances
    • Situations where installation is not possible

    Fixed home battery systems are designed for:

    • Automatic whole home or partial home backup
    • Seamless switchover during outages
    • Integration with household wiring
    • Long term daily use over many years

    While portable power stations can act as a stopgap or supplementary solution, they do not replace a permanently installed system. Capacity, output, longevity, and automation are all fundamentally different.

    The higher cost of a fixed system reflects its role as permanent home infrastructure rather than portable equipment.


    Selling Power Back to the Grid

    This was another area that initially sounded more attractive than it turned out to be once I looked into it properly.

    Selling electricity back to the grid can be a benefit where available, but it should not be treated as the primary justification for installing a battery system.

    In many markets, buy back rates are significantly lower than retail electricity prices. As a result, using stored energy yourself is usually more valuable than exporting it.

    Export capability is best seen as an optimisation rather than a guarantee of financial return.


    What Will Decide Whether This Is Worth It

    By this point in the process, I found it useful to step back and write down what actually mattered to me, rather than what looked good on a spec sheet.

    Before committing to a system like this, there are a few criteria that matter more than headline specifications.

    Non negotiables

    These are the points I found myself coming back to repeatedly, regardless of which product or installer I was looking at.

    For my situation, the most important requirements are:

    • Outage resilience, with automatic switchover during power cuts
    • Long warranty coverage that reflects long term use rather than short product cycles
    • Automation and intelligent energy management rather than manual intervention

    In regions where earthquakes or severe weather are a real risk, backup power is not a luxury feature. It is a practical consideration.

    Potential deal breakers

    There are also clear factors that could stop this from making sense entirely:

    • Overall cost, especially if financing or a loan is required
    • Poor installer support or unclear responsibility for long term maintenance
    • A lack of clear expansion options if needs change

    Subsidies and incentives can help offset costs in some regions, but they are often complex. Clear guidance from installers on what is available and how it applies would be a significant factor in the decision.

    Payback expectations

    This is where I had to be honest with myself rather than optimistic.

    Financial payback is a nice to have rather than the primary driver.

    If the system can meaningfully reduce electricity costs over time or help offset financing costs, that is a strong bonus. However, resilience, reliability, and peace of mind matter more than chasing a fast break even point.

    Cost versus peace of mind

    Lower upfront cost is appealing, but not at the expense of reliability or longevity. A system that fails early or cannot be supported long term would undermine the entire point of the investment.


    What Comes Next

    The next step for me is gathering detailed installation quotes and proposals and comparing them properly. This is the part of the process I am in right now.

    That means looking at more than just the final price. System design, warranty handling, automation features, installer support, and long term flexibility all matter. These details often make a bigger difference than small variations in capacity or headline specifications.

    Once those proposals are in hand, the plan is to sit down and evaluate them against real world needs. That includes how the system would be used day to day, how it would behave during outages, and whether it still makes sense given the possibility of a move in around five years.

    Resale value is part of that consideration. A home battery system is unlikely to return its full cost at sale, but if it improves the appeal or value of the property, that changes the equation.

    In future posts, I plan to break down the quotes received, explain the differences between proposals, and walk through the decision making process step by step. The aim is to make this as transparent as possible, because these are exactly the questions most people have when they start looking into home battery systems.

    The real test will be whether the numbers, flexibility, and long term value still make sense once everything is on the table.