5 ms·

I like Aaron Levie too. But my thoughts on this can be summarized by quoting one of the responses to the blog post: Why use Box and not just use Drive?

CPAhem 10y ago
Drive has many reliability issues at a scale of over a few thousand files [1]. Perhaps Box is more reliable? [1] https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!forum/drive https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!forum/drive
- rayvd 10y ago
  Yep. I have 5000+ files in Box. We have users with far more (and it supports very large file sizes -- 15GB I think today?). Sync client has improved quite a bit over the years.
foolfoolz 10y ago
Google drive is terrible for shared directory structures. it's not that box is better than drive, everyone is better than drive at organizing files
- xapata 10y ago
  I'm fed up with complex director y hierarchies. Namespaces are cool and all, but flat is better than nested.
  - enraged_camel 10y ago
    Flatness can result in much more overwhelming complexity.
    - xapata 10y ago
      I suppose that depends on what you mean by complexity. I prefer lists to trees, in general. After I reorganized my Dropbox into only 1 layer of folders, I've found it much easier to navigate. But hey, that's just my anecdote.
  - r00fus 10y ago
    Drive is needlessly complex. On my laptop I have folder structures. In zip files and tarballs you have structure. You even get hierarchy in a CD. Trying to find your way around Drive (esp. when sharing between enterprises) is a nightmare for me. Google could cement some really good mindshare if they made shared folders/docs more intuitive.
- robszumski 10y ago
  I don't get why you simply can't list all of the folders that are shared with the entire Google Apps domain.
- user5994461 10y ago
  +1 for drive having the worst organization of all doc tools currently in existence. Give me a windows remote shared directory, a sharepoint, a dropbox, just anything that would let me work. Drive is only good at making a single isolated file and sharing that file over gmail. It is lacking notions of structured and shared folders. No thought was given to sharing documents across the company/teams/services, EXCEPT to make a single document sent by email.
- pritambarhate 10y ago
  Yes +1 Google drive is terrible for organising files in folders. And when multiple people share files with you daily if becomes even worse. I have given up on it. Now I just use search, which works most of the time, especially if I remember at least one word in the file title. But sometimes relevancy and order of search results seems to screwed up.
davidu 10y ago
At a company of any size, with compliance and complex sharing requirements, and advanced search and workflow needs, Drive is a non-starter.
- MrFlynn 10y ago
  The company I work at has gotten around these restrictions with AODocs. It adds a lot of enterprise features Drive is missing (workflow setup, version control, etc.). It works well for us, but it's still by no means a perfect solution.
- parent5446 10y ago
  Posting evidence of this would be useful, because Drive is pretty comprehensive in terms of compliance. Also not sure what you mean by "workflow needs". Why would you use a file storage service to manage workflows in the first place?
  - enraged_camel 10y ago
    Because most workflows involve some kind of document. Automatically routing that document to different people and standardizing the way they interact with it can be very beneficial.
    - parent5446 10y ago
      Wouldn't that what the Drive API can be used for? I may be answering my own question here, but I imagine that would be the most useful part of this Box/Drive partnership. :D
  - flukus 10y ago
    > Why would you use a file storage service to manage workflows in the first place? Person A can only read document X because they are performing duty b on project y. Not everything works with binary can/can't read scenarios.
    - 10y ago
dimino 10y ago
Basically, as I understand it based on a few talks given by Aaron, Box will bend over backwards to make sure Box fits in your org, including adding new features. Drive comes with Google's famous customer support. Box is handholding per-client, Drive is "fuck you" level customer service.
haser_au 10y ago
Speaking personally, and not on behalf of my organisation where I deployed Box (5000+ seats), the additional enterprise controls are one of the reasons Box is superior to some other file sync and share solutions. It's also stand-alone, meaning by using Box you're not committing yourself to a path towards email, docs, hangouts, etc. A lot of Google and Microsoft's value-add capabilities come if you use all of their products. If you want a stand-alone solution (which sometimes has a more focused product), Box and Dropbox are the main contenders from an enterprise perspective. Hightail also potentially.

CPAhem 10y ago

Drive has many reliability issues at a scale of over a few thousand files [1]. Perhaps Box is more reliable? [1] https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!forum/drive https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!forum/drive

rayvd 10y ago
Yep. I have 5000+ files in Box. We have users with far more (and it supports very large file sizes -- 15GB I think today?). Sync client has improved quite a bit over the years.

foolfoolz 10y ago

Google drive is terrible for shared directory structures. it's not that box is better than drive, everyone is better than drive at organizing files

xapata 10y ago
I'm fed up with complex director y hierarchies. Namespaces are cool and all, but flat is better than nested.
- enraged_camel 10y ago
  Flatness can result in much more overwhelming complexity.
  - xapata 10y ago
    I suppose that depends on what you mean by complexity. I prefer lists to trees, in general. After I reorganized my Dropbox into only 1 layer of folders, I've found it much easier to navigate. But hey, that's just my anecdote.
- r00fus 10y ago
  Drive is needlessly complex. On my laptop I have folder structures. In zip files and tarballs you have structure. You even get hierarchy in a CD. Trying to find your way around Drive (esp. when sharing between enterprises) is a nightmare for me. Google could cement some really good mindshare if they made shared folders/docs more intuitive.
robszumski 10y ago
I don't get why you simply can't list all of the folders that are shared with the entire Google Apps domain.
user5994461 10y ago
+1 for drive having the worst organization of all doc tools currently in existence. Give me a windows remote shared directory, a sharepoint, a dropbox, just anything that would let me work. Drive is only good at making a single isolated file and sharing that file over gmail. It is lacking notions of structured and shared folders. No thought was given to sharing documents across the company/teams/services, EXCEPT to make a single document sent by email.
pritambarhate 10y ago
Yes +1 Google drive is terrible for organising files in folders. And when multiple people share files with you daily if becomes even worse. I have given up on it. Now I just use search, which works most of the time, especially if I remember at least one word in the file title. But sometimes relevancy and order of search results seems to screwed up.

davidu 10y ago

At a company of any size, with compliance and complex sharing requirements, and advanced search and workflow needs, Drive is a non-starter.

MrFlynn 10y ago
The company I work at has gotten around these restrictions with AODocs. It adds a lot of enterprise features Drive is missing (workflow setup, version control, etc.). It works well for us, but it's still by no means a perfect solution.
parent5446 10y ago
Posting evidence of this would be useful, because Drive is pretty comprehensive in terms of compliance. Also not sure what you mean by "workflow needs". Why would you use a file storage service to manage workflows in the first place?
- enraged_camel 10y ago
  Because most workflows involve some kind of document. Automatically routing that document to different people and standardizing the way they interact with it can be very beneficial.
  - parent5446 10y ago
    Wouldn't that what the Drive API can be used for? I may be answering my own question here, but I imagine that would be the most useful part of this Box/Drive partnership. :D
- flukus 10y ago
  > Why would you use a file storage service to manage workflows in the first place? Person A can only read document X because they are performing duty b on project y. Not everything works with binary can/can't read scenarios.
  - 10y ago

dimino 10y ago

Basically, as I understand it based on a few talks given by Aaron, Box will bend over backwards to make sure Box fits in your org, including adding new features. Drive comes with Google's famous customer support. Box is handholding per-client, Drive is "fuck you" level customer service.

haser_au 10y ago

Speaking personally, and not on behalf of my organisation where I deployed Box (5000+ seats), the additional enterprise controls are one of the reasons Box is superior to some other file sync and share solutions. It's also stand-alone, meaning by using Box you're not committing yourself to a path towards email, docs, hangouts, etc. A lot of Google and Microsoft's value-add capabilities come if you use all of their products. If you want a stand-alone solution (which sometimes has a more focused product), Box and Dropbox are the main contenders from an enterprise perspective. Hightail also potentially.