41–50 of 158 posts
Does anyone here still use Dropbox? (I signed up in 2009, and probably last touched it in 2011 ...) P.S. their studiously ignoring user-side encryption was a factor - if I'm getting my files exposed, might as well go with the big default services.
I still use it, but I'll likely switch once they disable the public folder.[1] It's the sole reason I use Dropbox. [1]: https://www.dropbox.com/help/16
Does anyone here still use Dropbox? (I signed up in 2009, and probably last touched it in 2011 ...) P.S. their studiously ignoring user-side encryption was a factor - if I'm getting my files exposed, might as well go with the big default services.
I pay $100/year for Pro. Cheaper and easier to have 1TB of remote storage than SD cards, USB sticks, etc, and no excessive bandwidth charges such that AWS has. EDIT: I don't care if my files are encrypted. EDIT 2: Dropbox sync is rock solid. Every experience with the Google Drive sync client has been trash. I can (and do) pay for convenience.
(I just use the cloud to sync files and generally as an USB stick of sorts - not a folder where I constantly edit stuff - so I can't vouch for their extreme sync abilities)
Aaaaagghh!!!
Just... no. Dropbox used to do one thing well (modulo creepy stuff [1]): sync a directory across multiple computers. This wasn't so hard to do, but shockingly, Apple and Google didn't just implement this feature and make them obsolete. They could have been satisfied with owning that market, but now they want to create yet another office suite? Ugh...
[1] http://venturebeat.com/2016/09/20/dropbox-now-asks-for-acces...
Being the one cloud service that sync across Linux, Windows, OS X with a native client, Dropbox is the service I'd like to give money for about 100GB of space for a couple of bucks a month, but I just don't need 1TB for $10 a month. So instead I use Google and wait in vain for a native Linux client that's probably never coming.
Why do you consider Linux support worth $0 (since you want to switch from one $1.99/mo service to another) instead of a number between $24/year and $120/year?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was initially ecstatic about Dropbox, but they seem to be at best stagnant in terms of functionality. It was my solution for having access to all my photos on all devices, but then they canceled Carousel with the promise that its functionality would be rolled into the main app. That hasn't happened. The photos feature on iOS is pathetically limited, with slow loading times, no way to organize photos (you can't even…
For your usecase, Prime Photos [1] from Amazon, where they meld the traditional album and folder metaphors with auto-classifying ML -- the latter which you can luckily turn off if it creeps you out, unlike with Google. But this is an under-served market and many people would pay to some paltry amount a month to have their family photos (or professional photographs) kept safe in the Cloud. Unfortunately most cloud sto…
Edit: it doesn't appear to provide any ability to organize photos yourself?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I pay $100/year for Pro. Cheaper and easier to have 1TB of remote storage than SD cards, USB sticks, etc, and no excessive bandwidth charges such that AWS has. EDIT: I don't care if my files are encrypted. EDIT 2: Dropbox sync is rock solid. Every experience with the Google Drive sync client has been trash. I can (and do) pay for convenience.
Any reason that you use it over Google Drive?
Meanwhile three years ago the message read: "Drive for Linux isn’t ready just yet"
I wonder why we haven't seen good open-source imitations of Dropbox yet, and why there isn't a good open protocol for file sharing. The last such protocol I've heard of is WebDAV, but it seemed to have been neglected by OS implementers (Apple's implementation was particularly bad). Also WebDAV was missing many modern features.
There are plenty of open protocols for file sharing, like HTTP or SFTP. What unmet requirements do you envision?
I wonder why we haven't seen good open-source imitations of Dropbox yet, and why there isn't a good open protocol for file sharing. The last such protocol I've heard of is WebDAV, but it seemed to have been neglected by OS implementers (Apple's implementation was particularly bad). Also WebDAV was missing many modern features.
I wonder why we haven't seen good open-source imitations of Dropbox yet, and why there isn't a good open protocol for file sharing. The last such protocol I've heard of is WebDAV, but it seemed to have been neglected by OS implementers (Apple's implementation was particularly bad). Also WebDAV was missing many modern features.
Because most people pay them for the hosting, and the UI/UX is just a bonus. There are plenty of open protocols for file sharing, like HTTP or SFTP. What unmet requirements do you envision?
Well, for starters, automatic synchronization in the background.