3 ms·

Wait for Google to destroy their dream by releasing a competing product that integrates with Google+ and Google Apps. evil laugh

by beatle 15y ago

oelewapperke 15y ago
This is a cloud filesystem with synchronization we're talking about. Yeah, sure Google is working on one (slowly). Also: - Amazon - Shelfspace (rackspace's real name) - Telstra - Microsoft - Apple - Box.net - Live mesh - Oosah - JungleDisk - VMWare - blackblaze - ... If google is more dangerous than normal competitors it's because they usually know what they're doing. But this niche is drowning in competition with or without google.
SquareWheel 15y ago
Google Docs already acts as cloud storage, you can upload most file types there. https://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1251338 https://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answ... They also sell extra space, shared with Picasa. https://accounts.google.com/b/0/PurchaseStorage?hl=en_US https://accounts.google.com/b/0/PurchaseStorage?hl=en_US
- luckyisgood 15y ago
  True, but "most files" still doesn't cut it. I have great hopes for the upcoming Google Drive, it would solve many of the problems I'm facing right now in project management (I wrote about it on my blog: http://luckyisgood.com/blog/google-drive/ http://luckyisgood.com/blog/google-drive/) - and support for all file types is essential if Google wants to call its service "cloud storage".
  - palish 15y ago
    Holy french fries. With Google, I can get 80GB for $20/year: https://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=39567 https://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answ... With Dropbox, 100GB would cost me $199/year. I've been with Dropbox forever (I have account #315) but man, it is tempting to snag 80GB for the price of half a tank of gas. Convenience is obviously the primary loss. But I'm a nerd. It would likely be easy to figure out some way of auto-syncing my whole music folder. My other primary usage for Dropbox (and incidentally the motivation for its inception) is as a way to transfer files to other people. There's nothing like being able to host your own .html file within your own dropbox with literally zero effort. That said, a hybrid of the two seems best -- ridiculously cheap bulk storage, combined with the convenience of Dropbox when needed.

Wait for Google to destroy their dream by releasing a competing product that integrates with Google+ and Google Apps. evil laugh

by beatle 15y ago

Wait for Google to destroy their dream by releasing a competing product that integrates with Google+ and Google Apps. evil laugh

oelewapperke 15y ago

This is a cloud filesystem with synchronization we're talking about. Yeah, sure Google is working on one (slowly). Also: - Amazon - Shelfspace (rackspace's real name) - Telstra - Microsoft - Apple - Box.net - Live mesh - Oosah - JungleDisk - VMWare - blackblaze - ... If google is more dangerous than normal competitors it's because they usually know what they're doing. But this niche is drowning in competition with or without google.

SquareWheel 15y ago

Google Docs already acts as cloud storage, you can upload most file types there. https://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1251338 https://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answ... They also sell extra space, shared with Picasa. https://accounts.google.com/b/0/PurchaseStorage?hl=en_US https://accounts.google.com/b/0/PurchaseStorage?hl=en_US

luckyisgood 15y ago
True, but "most files" still doesn't cut it. I have great hopes for the upcoming Google Drive, it would solve many of the problems I'm facing right now in project management (I wrote about it on my blog: http://luckyisgood.com/blog/google-drive/ http://luckyisgood.com/blog/google-drive/) - and support for all file types is essential if Google wants to call its service "cloud storage".
- palish 15y ago
  Holy french fries. With Google, I can get 80GB for $20/year: https://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=39567 https://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answ... With Dropbox, 100GB would cost me $199/year. I've been with Dropbox forever (I have account #315) but man, it is tempting to snag 80GB for the price of half a tank of gas. Convenience is obviously the primary loss. But I'm a nerd. It would likely be easy to figure out some way of auto-syncing my whole music folder. My other primary usage for Dropbox (and incidentally the motivation for its inception) is as a way to transfer files to other people. There's nothing like being able to host your own .html file within your own dropbox with literally zero effort. That said, a hybrid of the two seems best -- ridiculously cheap bulk storage, combined with the convenience of Dropbox when needed.