4 ms·
Why can google not store history only locally... there is imo only marginal utility for having this synched to the cloud..
by Phemist 3y ago
Why can google not store history only locally... there is imo only marginal utility for having this synched to the cloud..
- ocdtrekkie 3y agoIt has marginal utility for the user. It has significant utility for Google.
- Phemist 3y agoFair.. "you are the product" strikes again
- rrdharan 3y agoI use at least 9 devices (four laptops, a desktop, watch, two phones, tablet) with Maps on them and very much appreciate having the location data synced serverside.
- mmsnberbar66 3y agowhy do you have 4 laptops?
- DiggyJohnson 3y agoIt's very easy for me to imagine having two work devices and two personal devices. Imagine GP is a contractor and a gamer: 1. Work laptop for contracting firm 2. Work laptop for client firm 3. Personal laptop for general computing 4. Linux machine for development of side projects, tinkering, etc. OR a gaming laptop
- mmsnberbar66 3y agoSure! it was just an honest question from a new engineer on the market :) I only have 2 myself
- rrdharan 3y agoGood guess but it’s slightly different: - 1 work laptop at office - 1 work laptop at home - 1 work laptop in second home - 1 work desktop in second home - 1 personal/shared laptop (mostly primary home) - 1 personal/shared desktop (primary home) I regularly travel between the office and the two homes (all are transit / bike accessible from each other). I don’t like carrying laptops between places and don’t work while commuting.
- prepend 3y agoYou can sync data in a privacy preserving way. For example, chrome sync passwords but google doesn’t have access to them. Apple syncs health data and have access. Etc etc. Sync is not a reason to have server side access to location data.
- hoffs 3y agoNo it's not, for majority of people cloud backups are definitely a bonus
- minsc_and_boo 3y agoPost cloud boom, the expectation is cloud syncing, not the exception.