4 ms·

I read/skimmed the whole article, and still don't understand why this is better than Dropbox. Also, aside from mentioning Middle Out compression, this was indis

by zellyn 10y ago

I read/skimmed the whole article, and still don't understand why this is better than Dropbox. Also, aside from mentioning Middle Out compression, this was indistinguishable from Pied Piper… :-p

aaronpk 10y ago
It seems they're pushing one of the differences which is that this doesn't sync to a folder on your computer. The files only live in the cloud. Why this is better than a syncing approach is not clear to me. I was hoping the "new spin" would be something a little more radical.
- dannylandau 10y ago
  No syncing -- you get all the benefits of accessing from the cloud without overloading your local storage. Just a guess.
- kornish 10y ago
  It's better than a syncing approach because most people can't utilize the full extent of their sync-based storage due to local hard drive limitations. An example: if I have a 320GB local drive and Dropbox keeps all its files on my local drive, I can't store the full 1TB of files in Dropbox that I'm paying for. However, I probably don't need all of those 1TB of files at the same instant, just various subsets which change over time, meaning that a cloud storage solution which doesn't require constant client-server sync lets me actually utilize the full volume of the service.
  - jpalomaki 10y ago
    Dropbox project Infinite should help with this. It should make it possible to replace some contents of the Dropbox folder with place holders that only get downloaded when they are accessed. Personally I'm very much waiting for this. The current selective sync is too cumbersome. https://blogs.dropbox.com/business/2016/04/announcing-project-infinite/ https://blogs.dropbox.com/business/2016/04/announcing-projec...
- bluecalm 10y ago
  Obligatory: https://youtu.be/Ml92QEqE-RQ?t=45 https://youtu.be/Ml92QEqE-RQ?t=45 On serious note it would be very nice to have a choice in dropbox about what stays locally and what is cloud only. I don't understand those things that well but I suspect it would be relatively easy for them to add that if it's becoming a selling point for the competition. They must think they have more potential selling points if they are getting 77M.
ljoshua 10y ago
Sounds similar to Bitcasa's original approach, or Dropbox Infinite, just without the option of what you manually sync. I wonder what it's like in practice.
bobsil1 10y ago
"Phone/tablet with infinite storage." Everything in cloud with transparent local cache, not a sync metaphor. File granularity, not folders. Next-gen compared to Dropbox, which replaced hard drives and then flash drives for syncing home and work. Competes more with iCloud than Dropbox. Will probably try and get acquired by Apple/Google.
rogerbinns 10y ago
Dropbox has two good things going for it. One is that its syncing is reliable (not perfect, but usually better than the rest). The other is Linux support, which competitors ignore. Linux may not affect you directly, but if anyone in the org or collaborators use it, then you really want to be able to work with them too. Those two things aside, Dropbox is very poor. They don't have multi-account support. (There is some abomination where you can combine exactly one personal account with one business account, in a frankenmonster hostile user experience.) Their activity logs don't tell you which machine made changes, only which user. The mobile app doesn't sync, but many users think it does. I don't know how competitors differ in these kind of things, but that is because I use Linux.

by zellyn 10y ago

I read/skimmed the whole article, and still don't understand why this is better than Dropbox. Also, aside from mentioning Middle Out compression, this was indistinguishable from Pied Piper… :-p

aaronpk 10y ago

It seems they're pushing one of the differences which is that this doesn't sync to a folder on your computer. The files only live in the cloud. Why this is better than a syncing approach is not clear to me. I was hoping the "new spin" would be something a little more radical.

dannylandau 10y ago
No syncing -- you get all the benefits of accessing from the cloud without overloading your local storage. Just a guess.
kornish 10y ago
It's better than a syncing approach because most people can't utilize the full extent of their sync-based storage due to local hard drive limitations. An example: if I have a 320GB local drive and Dropbox keeps all its files on my local drive, I can't store the full 1TB of files in Dropbox that I'm paying for. However, I probably don't need all of those 1TB of files at the same instant, just various subsets which change over time, meaning that a cloud storage solution which doesn't require constant client-server sync lets me actually utilize the full volume of the service.
- jpalomaki 10y ago
  Dropbox project Infinite should help with this. It should make it possible to replace some contents of the Dropbox folder with place holders that only get downloaded when they are accessed. Personally I'm very much waiting for this. The current selective sync is too cumbersome. https://blogs.dropbox.com/business/2016/04/announcing-project-infinite/ https://blogs.dropbox.com/business/2016/04/announcing-projec...
bluecalm 10y ago
Obligatory: https://youtu.be/Ml92QEqE-RQ?t=45 https://youtu.be/Ml92QEqE-RQ?t=45 On serious note it would be very nice to have a choice in dropbox about what stays locally and what is cloud only. I don't understand those things that well but I suspect it would be relatively easy for them to add that if it's becoming a selling point for the competition. They must think they have more potential selling points if they are getting 77M.

ljoshua 10y ago

Sounds similar to Bitcasa's original approach, or Dropbox Infinite, just without the option of what you manually sync. I wonder what it's like in practice.

bobsil1 10y ago

"Phone/tablet with infinite storage." Everything in cloud with transparent local cache, not a sync metaphor. File granularity, not folders. Next-gen compared to Dropbox, which replaced hard drives and then flash drives for syncing home and work. Competes more with iCloud than Dropbox. Will probably try and get acquired by Apple/Google.

rogerbinns 10y ago

Dropbox has two good things going for it. One is that its syncing is reliable (not perfect, but usually better than the rest). The other is Linux support, which competitors ignore. Linux may not affect you directly, but if anyone in the org or collaborators use it, then you really want to be able to work with them too. Those two things aside, Dropbox is very poor. They don't have multi-account support. (There is some abomination where you can combine exactly one personal account with one business account, in a frankenmonster hostile user experience.) Their activity logs don't tell you which machine made changes, only which user. The mobile app doesn't sync, but many users think it does. I don't know how competitors differ in these kind of things, but that is because I use Linux.