10 ms·
IIRC OneDrive for Business is not your average cloud storage but build on top of SharePoint (unlike the normal OneDrive). Therefore this might be some kind of s
by danbruc 13y ago
IIRC OneDrive for Business is not your average cloud storage but build on top of SharePoint (unlike the normal OneDrive). Therefore this might be some kind of side effect due to way SharePoint handles documents and document versioning. It is definitely unexpected behavior but this might be a reason explaining it without bad intent on Microsoft's side.
- robododo 13y ago"OneDrive for Business" is a branding disaster, as it creates a completely rational link in people's minds that it's the same as OneDrive. In reality, it's a completely different product that acts in different ways. Sigh.
- nwh 13y agoWith no knowledge of either product, that's a fairly sane assumption.
- 0x0 13y agoJust like "surface" vs "surface pro"!
- nivla 13y ago>Just like "surface" vs "surface pro"! More correctly "Surface RT" vs "Surface Pro". "Surface" was initially Microsoft's interactive table [1], so yeah pretty much a branding disaster if we take a walk down the history lane. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_PixelSense#Microsoft_Surface_1.0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_PixelSense#Microsoft_...
- gagaga 13y agoSurface RT is now just Surface.
- 0x0 13y agoThe whole RT thing sounds like a joke. Even on wikipedia there's a circular link collection on top of each of those articles, "WinRT, not to be confused with Windows RT, not to be confused with Windows Runtime, ..." Btw, I just noticed that the old Surface is now known as PixelSense. Makes sense.
- jmspring 13y agoUm, no. Pixelsense is technology behind touch, gestures, and similar. Take a look at: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/pixelsense/pixelsense.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/pixelsense/pixelsense.aspx
- pgeorgi 13y agoYes, and something very similar used to be called Microsoft Surface (for example, see http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/web/digital-home/home-networking/microsoft-surface-pc-was-in-2005-blockbuster-130965 http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/web/digital-home/home...)
- jmspring 13y ago@pgeorgi - I was specifically responding to -- "Btw, I just noticed that the old Surface is now known as PixelSense. Makes sense." MSFT (and other companies) have a very bad habit of circular/redundant/superfluous naming conventions. In this case Pixelsense and the renamed Surface RT never had direct naming overlap.
- higherpurpose 13y agoActually "Surface RT" was the "simple" version given by the community, if you can believe that. Typically Microsoft, the official names were "Surface with Windows RT" and "Surface with Windows 8 Pro". I think the idea was to have "one" device (even though there were actually two different devices, with very different hardware) with the name of Surface, but which came in two versions, one with Windows RT, and one with Windows 8 Pro. So they were telling people: "This is Surface with Windows RT...and this is Surface with Windows 8 Pro". But yeah, a disaster. Their current names of Surface and Surface Pro may be simpler to use now, but it's actually more confusing for consumers, because this current naming implies Surface Pro is basically Surface, but with a few extra features. When in reality, they are very different. I think this confusion was meant on purpose, because they want people to believe that Windows RT is "just like regular Windows - but with fewer features". They are doing their customers a disservice by trying to trick them like this.
- emm 13y agoBTW: Surface / PixelsSnse was the most horrible purchase i / my university ever did. Bought a Samsung SUR40 in January 2012 for about 8000 €. Received it two month later. Another 3 month later Microsoft renamed it to PixelSense and stopped the development. No Windows 8, no Internet Explorer 11 Touch. We use it as a table.
- aryastark 13y agoIt's amazing how wrong companies can get marketing. Take Apple's AirDrop, for example. I spent 20 minutes one day wondering why my iPhone wasn't connecting to my Mac Mini. Turns out, "AirDrop" is two different things by the same company that are similar but completely incompatible.
- shurcooL 13y agoYeah, I hope they improve and fill the gaps in current AirDrop and AirPlay. It has come a long way, but there's still room for improvement. Namely, AirPlay between OS X devices and iOS devices (including just audio and both audio+video), in either direction. Here's hoping for OS X 10.10.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- nickbarnwell 13y agoTo expand on that, OneDrive for Business (a product formerly known as: SkyDrive Pro, Live Mesh, Grove Workspace etc.) shares the OneDrive branding (and some? interface components) but otherwise bears little resemblance to its consumer counterpart. IIRC the Office Org owns the SharePoint client while OneDrive proper is handled by the Windows Services team.
- jimbobimbo 13y agoOD4B has nothing to do with Mesh.
- camus2 13y agolivemesh was the best!
- ppog 13y ago...and, indeed, these XML namespaces (MS Office and data types) and the CustomDocumentProperties tag are already known to be added by SharePoint, and apparently for well-established reasons (though not ones I understand not being a SP user): http://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/questions/30626/why-is-spd-adding-content-to-my-file http://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/questions/30626/why-is-s...
- 0x0 13y agoIt's absolutely inexcusable to modify .php source code files for this though! Wonder if it would modify files in a git repository in the same way? Good luck recovering from that!
- 3825 13y agoFrom my bad experience, Git repositories (and I would go as far as to say any source code) does not belong on SkyDrive/OneDrive. This is OneDrive, not the newfangled Hailstorm by architecture astronauts[0]. I would recommend that everyone keep working copy of their source code outside of any form of syncing. If you must, create tape archives (or 7z or something) and sync them but never your working copy. [0] http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/05/01.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/05/01.html
- 0x0 13y agoGood to know one shouldn't treat the OneDrive as a... Drive.
- dsl 13y agoOneDrive is a drive as you would expect. OneDrive for Business is really SharePoint. Terrible branding.
- jongalloway2 13y agoI've kept most of my Git repos in my OneDrive for the past few years. It's worked great. As many others have said, OneDrive For Business is really more of a SharePoint + Groove document sharing / collaboration thing for businesses documents (as the name kind of implies). While it does similar things from a generic corporate user point of view, the mechanics are pretty different. OneDrive For Business works well for the same kinds of use cases that SharePoint does (mostly documents), but I wouldn't put source code in there.
- marshray 13y agoMicrosoft employee here, not speaking for the company just my own perspective. I work in Azure, but not on this stuff specifically. Sharepoint has its origins in managing collections of MS Office documents more so than HTML and browsers. It knows about certain document types and tries to do intelligent things with them. It's not necessarily the tool you would use for serving raw data over HTTP with arbitrary Content-Types. (Given the complex and varied rules by which browsers interpret content, I'm not actually sure how one could even do that perfectly securely short of enforcing separate second level domain names for each and every tenant.) As an old-school software engineer, we used to say the biggest part of requirements analysis is setting customer expectations correctly. It seems fair to say that the renaming of Sharepoint to "OneDrive for Business" has surprised some folks where it behaves differently from plain OneDrive or from raw BLOB store.
- emeraldd 13y ago"It knows about certain document types and tries to do intelligent things with them." There's your problem right there ....
- marshray 13y agoI'm not saying this is impossible, but I think it would be an instructive exercise: Please name three nontrivial, commercial, end-user facing apps or services that know nothing about any file or document types.
- DelightfulScone 13y agoCan we skip the grade school style questions and discuss the fact that people generally don't want storage providers 'doing things' to their files. No matter how 'intelligent' those things are said to be.
- marcosdumay 13y agoOnly file synchronization tools (commercial or not) could ever fit that description, any other kind of tool must manipulate some kind of file. The only problem is that we are talking exactly about a file synchronization tool. Thus the exercise isn't as valuable as it may appear at first.
- danso 13y agoYeah I can completely believe that this would be an unintended technical side effect, a consequence of trying to mitigate some other kind of difficulty that Microsoft's broad userbase might run into. Kind of reminds me of Excel's propensity to helpfully (and destructively) convert dates and zero-padded-numbers upon import.