4 ms·

It's amazing how quickly and thoroughly Google has ceded the lead in this area. I know that the Android market supports application and data backup, but IMO the

by jsight 15y ago

It's amazing how quickly and thoroughly Google has ceded the lead in this area. I know that the Android market supports application and data backup, but IMO the implementation is not as slick or simple as iCloud at this point. This is especially true for those of us with multiple Android devices (Phone + Tablet). But the lack of a comprehensive solution for photo synchronization is telling as well. I am glad to see HTC addressing the issue, but the lack of leadership on Google's part is really unfortunate.

notatoad 15y ago
google has ceded the lead here because files suck. users don't want files or filesystems. look to how iOS works for how most users want to access their files: they open an app and the documents that are relevant to that app are available to them. whether that data is stored in a filesystem or in a database, locally or remotely is totally irrelevant. google docs works like this. picasaweb (or g+ photos now i guess) works like this. google music works like this. the very nature of dropbox is to not be the ideal solution to the problem they are solving. they're the realist's solution, google is going for the idealist's solution. imho, google is leading the market here by not being a part of it.
- fpgeek 15y ago
  > google music works like this It's funny, I like a lot of the ways Google has abstracted away from files (e.g. Google Docs or Picasa), but Google Music drives me batty. Even though they're wonderful about streaming and "pinning" songs offline (even over 3G), I just want to download the music and know where it is. I often use players other than Google Music, so that's part of it, but I think I also just want tighter control over music than I want over other things. I've ended up using Amazon Cloud Player instead, even though I successfully download or stream over 3G once in a blue moon (if that).
Danieru 15y ago
Honestly I suspect Google is trying to grow a third party ecosystem. By that I mean they leave obvious problems half solved or unsolved so that someone else can come along and do a really good job of it. Cyanogen, GetJar, Dropbox, Opera, alt home screens, etc. By doing a 40% job Google leaves easy victories for third parties. I expect the 'end game' is a better OS with a healthy ecosystem and is not dependent on Google. Remember Google got into mobile to protect their ad market. A healthy competitive OS ecosystem would do this all without massive long-term engineering effort. Why build an OS and ecosystem if all you have to build is the OS?
fpgeek 15y ago
> But the lack of a comprehensive solution for photo synchronization is telling as well. If you turn on Google+ Instant Upload, you get very good photo synchronization support, especially for Android. Photos are synced to Google+ in the background, and since that is backed by Picasa, they automatically show up in the Galleries of any other Android device you have. I've been impressed with how quickly and easily you can browse your uploaded photos on another device. It isn't for everyone because Google+ limits the maximum resolution of Instant Upload photos, but it is for a lot of people because they give you "unlimited storage" in exchange.
roflharrison 15y ago
Google has nothing to do with this topic, but for what it is worth Android syncs all (if not almost all) Google related data from Android devices. If you have a Picasa account Android comes with a sync adapter which seamlessly syncs photos to all your Android devices and PC's with Picasa. What advantage does iCloud have over this for photos? Android also syncs Google docs, browser/Chrome data, contacts, calendar... The only thing I can think of that Google doesn't sync (yet) is files.
- rsynnott 15y ago
  Oh, for first-party stuff, iCloud has no advantage. It's for _third_ party stuff that it's valuable; it allows developers to sync _their_ data seamlessly between devices easily.
  - roflharrison 15y ago
    Yep, that is definitely leg up for iCloud I hadn't considered. Developers can write their own sync adapters on Android, but they would need to run their own servers (or find storage) and complications start to add up from there.

by jsight 15y ago

notatoad 15y ago

google has ceded the lead here because files suck. users don't want files or filesystems. look to how iOS works for how most users want to access their files: they open an app and the documents that are relevant to that app are available to them. whether that data is stored in a filesystem or in a database, locally or remotely is totally irrelevant. google docs works like this. picasaweb (or g+ photos now i guess) works like this. google music works like this. the very nature of dropbox is to not be the ideal solution to the problem they are solving. they're the realist's solution, google is going for the idealist's solution. imho, google is leading the market here by not being a part of it.

fpgeek 15y ago
> google music works like this It's funny, I like a lot of the ways Google has abstracted away from files (e.g. Google Docs or Picasa), but Google Music drives me batty. Even though they're wonderful about streaming and "pinning" songs offline (even over 3G), I just want to download the music and know where it is. I often use players other than Google Music, so that's part of it, but I think I also just want tighter control over music than I want over other things. I've ended up using Amazon Cloud Player instead, even though I successfully download or stream over 3G once in a blue moon (if that).

Danieru 15y ago

Honestly I suspect Google is trying to grow a third party ecosystem. By that I mean they leave obvious problems half solved or unsolved so that someone else can come along and do a really good job of it. Cyanogen, GetJar, Dropbox, Opera, alt home screens, etc. By doing a 40% job Google leaves easy victories for third parties. I expect the 'end game' is a better OS with a healthy ecosystem and is not dependent on Google. Remember Google got into mobile to protect their ad market. A healthy competitive OS ecosystem would do this all without massive long-term engineering effort. Why build an OS and ecosystem if all you have to build is the OS?

fpgeek 15y ago

> But the lack of a comprehensive solution for photo synchronization is telling as well. If you turn on Google+ Instant Upload, you get very good photo synchronization support, especially for Android. Photos are synced to Google+ in the background, and since that is backed by Picasa, they automatically show up in the Galleries of any other Android device you have. I've been impressed with how quickly and easily you can browse your uploaded photos on another device. It isn't for everyone because Google+ limits the maximum resolution of Instant Upload photos, but it is for a lot of people because they give you "unlimited storage" in exchange.

roflharrison 15y ago

Google has nothing to do with this topic, but for what it is worth Android syncs all (if not almost all) Google related data from Android devices. If you have a Picasa account Android comes with a sync adapter which seamlessly syncs photos to all your Android devices and PC's with Picasa. What advantage does iCloud have over this for photos? Android also syncs Google docs, browser/Chrome data, contacts, calendar... The only thing I can think of that Google doesn't sync (yet) is files.

rsynnott 15y ago
Oh, for first-party stuff, iCloud has no advantage. It's for _third_ party stuff that it's valuable; it allows developers to sync _their_ data seamlessly between devices easily.
- roflharrison 15y ago
  Yep, that is definitely leg up for iCloud I hadn't considered. Developers can write their own sync adapters on Android, but they would need to run their own servers (or find storage) and complications start to add up from there.