3 ms·

I hope the antitrust regulators are paying attention. When Gmail launched, the competitors' model was pay-for-storage, and Google's strategy was free storage fo

I hope the antitrust regulators are paying attention. When Gmail launched, the competitors' model was pay-for-storage, and Google's strategy was free storage for everyone. Now that the market is an oligopoly, Google is monetizing storage.

mc32 6y ago
People were onto the scheme when it debuted, but despite the protestation, it was too good to pass up, do people took ‘advantage’ of it. Some people’s defense of google rested on ‘Storage is cheap, it’s becoming cheaper, so cheap it costs more to meter it and charge for it’.
prpl 6y ago
Damn that google and their 17 year plan to eventually charge us for storage.
- seneca 6y ago
  > Damn that google and their 17 year plan to eventually charge us for storage. This is how monopolies are established. Corporate conglomerates able to sell a product at a loss until competition is starved out, relying on profits from other parts of the business. Once completion is gone, they exploit the monopoly. In other words, the fact that they waited 17 years doesn't diminish the OPs point.
  - myle 6y ago
    That gives too much credit to Google strategy. Remember, it is the same company that sometimes doesn't shut away from being projects.
  - d1zzy 6y ago
    Or just long term investment and planning. And in those 17 years we got so much more storage and better service that it redefined free email. When gmail launched with 1GB of free storage the competitors (Yahoo, Hotmail) where providing 10-15Mbytes, seriously, it's not even funny. Today Google gives you a lot more free storage than there were giving when Gmail was launched but it also gives you even more storage if you pay for it. Seems win-win to me and not anti-consumer. Now if they started to shrink free email storage and that affected large numbers of existing users (10% or more) maybe I'd agree this was bait&switch but otherwise this is simply giving more options.
dazc 6y ago
But...once you realise you're going have to pay for something you start looking at alternative options which may just happen to be more secure, more private and not linked to your use of other products owned by google/facebook/evil corp, etc.
- nicoburns 6y ago
  Yes, but those alternative options may not exist now that they've been competing with free for years.

mc32 6y ago

People were onto the scheme when it debuted, but despite the protestation, it was too good to pass up, do people took ‘advantage’ of it. Some people’s defense of google rested on ‘Storage is cheap, it’s becoming cheaper, so cheap it costs more to meter it and charge for it’.

prpl 6y ago

Damn that google and their 17 year plan to eventually charge us for storage.

seneca 6y ago
> Damn that google and their 17 year plan to eventually charge us for storage. This is how monopolies are established. Corporate conglomerates able to sell a product at a loss until competition is starved out, relying on profits from other parts of the business. Once completion is gone, they exploit the monopoly. In other words, the fact that they waited 17 years doesn't diminish the OPs point.
- myle 6y ago
  That gives too much credit to Google strategy. Remember, it is the same company that sometimes doesn't shut away from being projects.
- d1zzy 6y ago
  Or just long term investment and planning. And in those 17 years we got so much more storage and better service that it redefined free email. When gmail launched with 1GB of free storage the competitors (Yahoo, Hotmail) where providing 10-15Mbytes, seriously, it's not even funny. Today Google gives you a lot more free storage than there were giving when Gmail was launched but it also gives you even more storage if you pay for it. Seems win-win to me and not anti-consumer. Now if they started to shrink free email storage and that affected large numbers of existing users (10% or more) maybe I'd agree this was bait&switch but otherwise this is simply giving more options.

dazc 6y ago

But...once you realise you're going have to pay for something you start looking at alternative options which may just happen to be more secure, more private and not linked to your use of other products owned by google/facebook/evil corp, etc.

nicoburns 6y ago
Yes, but those alternative options may not exist now that they've been competing with free for years.