[shuttertalk]

If you haven't heard, Google is launching their cloud storage service with 5GB free and pricing plans of up to 200GB. How does it compare though to the plethora of other cloud / sync / backup offerings out there?

This article from The Verge is one of the best and most comprehensive I've come across, and describes not only the pricing structure, but the features that each one offers - including stuff like previous versions, folder syncing, client OS support.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/24/295496...ompetition

They stop short of making a recommendation though, so you'll need to evaluate each service carefully to see whether it meets your needs.


For myself I've been a happy paid user of SugarSync for almost 2 years now - I sync multiple computers on the same account and stuff on my home computer is available on my work computer and vice versa. I only use it for my documents though, not for a full PC backup as I only have 30 GB of space. I also use dropbox to a very limited degree.

Anyone else tried any of these services and can provide feedback?

[EnglishBob]

I know which I won't be using, Google's new Drive service... From their TOS:

Google Drive
When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services.

[NT73]

I dislike Google too.
It keeps trying to sneak stuff on to my computer, - but I am keeping an watchful eye out for it.

[shuttertalk]

I know which I won't be using, Google's new Drive service... From their TOS:

Wow, that is UGLY indeed! I did more checking and that same clause appears in the TOS for both GMail and Google Docs as well. Wow... I'm torn now - I use GMail extensively and when you open up documents in gmail, it imports it into Google Docs by default.

It does say though, right before that nasty bit:

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

[NT73]

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

If (by an unintentional error ) they used your property do you think you could afford to get it back , from Google.

You have more chance with Amazon. IMO

[Toad]

Google used to have the motto "Do no evil", but it feels to me like they have become quite evil - Microsoftish in fact. Apple too for that matter.

What are you supposed to do, though? Not own a computer? Not browse the internet?

[shuttertalk]

Another comparison here from ArsTechnica - this time more on price:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2012...sumers.ars

[shuttertalk]

More on the ugly side of Google Drive:
http://www.news.com.au/technology/google...6342509249

In addition to them being able to do what they want with your data, it also opens up the avenue of them providing your data to law enforcement if requested. Another thing which is scary is that is the only service that "explicitly stated that it would scan your data in order to better market advertisements for you."

I suppose they already do that with gmail, but the lines are starting to become muddily blurred...

[EnglishBob]

Seems to me one of my favorite quotes from an old novel applies to the big 3 internet/computer icons....

"has more money than God and the social conscience of a dog on a croquet lawn."

Taken from Stark, by Ben Elton.

[shuttertalk]

Looks like Amazon has a new offering out for cheap, long term storage in the cloud - called Glacier.

Their current offering, S3, is quite expensive and more geared towards actively used data storage (websites etc.) whereas Glacier is more geared towards long term archival storage that does not change much. In my mind - that sort of scenario is perfect for photos. Anyway it's awesomely cheap - only $0.01 per GB per month... which means that 500GB will only cost you $5 a month.

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/21/amaz...the-cheap/

[NT73]

Looks like Amazon has a new offering out for cheap, long term storage in the cloud - called Glacier.

Their current offering, S3, is quite expensive and more geared towards actively used data storage (websites etc.) whereas Glacier is more geared towards long term archival storage that does not change much. In my mind - that sort of scenario is perfect for photos. Anyway it's awesomely cheap - only $0.01 per GB per month... which means that 500GB will only cost you $5 a month.

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/21/amaz...the-cheap/

So in 12 months you could have bought a 500gb HD drive and clouded your own. And you keep your own rights to everything on it.

Computers are pretty. The internet is evil. Together they are pretty evil.

I like change, after the problems have been ironed out.