Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google One

one.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 391 posts

Re: Google One

#361

Post by chaoticmass »

sharmi wrote: post #16

Google One = Google Drive + more space + Customer Service for around $2 a month. Customer Service is not called Customer Service but Google Experts. What does this mean for actual service? The thing I like/jumps out for me is no compressing of images. That is one of the reasons I decided to go with Backblaze for backup. I would still stay with backblaze as I am not so confident about Google keeping the product around…

The no compression thing caught my eye as well, but then I started thinking-- if I actually started using it to archive ALL of my 42MP photos I would start running into the higher cost brackets, and I don't want to pay that much. I still need an archiving solution, but since my photography is only a hobby for me, I would only see using it to archive my favorite shots while I keep everything else on external hard drives.

Re: Google One

#364

Post by ksec »

dmix wrote: post #313
arbitrage wrote: post #304

Hey Google ... I know you're here, looking for how this is going to go over. It seems like a nice idea. I'm not on board with any new Google platform unless I have some sort of assurance that you're just not going to kill this off in two years, or let it suffer a slow death of neglect and attrition. Thanks, but you need to grow up a bit, Google.

This isn't some side project like Wave that they'll cut off. It sounds like a pretty core business. If anything it will get renamed and take on a different form in a couple yrs, but I doubt they'd ever stop offering a cloud service like Drive. But still, this is a very valid point. It's hard to trust any Google service and it's risky to make any significant investment of time structuring your life around them. This i…

Everything in Google apart from Search are side projects. And Everything in Google that you didn't paid for have a high chance of getting cut off.

It is actually quite simple, no revenue no services.

Re: Google One

#365

Post by snaky »

tremblane wrote: post #339
tfeldmann wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll wait for Google One 2.3

Is that the release where it's specialized for certain groups? Like, "Google One 2.3 for businesses"

Well, it's still better than "Google One 2.3 Tab S3 Plus 10.1 (EU ver), with stylus"

Re: Google One

#366

Post by callalex »

rrdharan wrote: post #130
callalex wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because valuation of a software company doesn't come from the products they offer, nor the current user base with credit cards on file. It comes from a perceived potential growth/platform/network effect so all of these companies have to pretend that they will someday be a panopticon that commands your entire life in order to keep that sweet VC money flowing in even if they just repackage s3 with a nice client.

Neither Dropbox nor Google is particularly concerned with courting VC money.

You're right. I should have just said "investor money"

Re: Google One

#368

Post by joshuamorton »

will_brown wrote: post #240
toupeetape wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we are going down this road, Microsoft copied HTC, who not only had a product called "One" but also ones called "One S" and "One X" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_One_S https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_One_X

Ok...I’m no MS fanboy. But MS OneNote was released right around the same time. But let’s be serious Google spent millions to brand/launch this, and it’s got to be embarrassing that either: a. None of the yesmen thought to speak up and say hey should we really use a name MS uses for a bunch of their products (One Note, Xbox One, One OS, One Guide); or b. Straight ripped it.

Android One is 4 or 5 years old.

Companies have been naming things with "one" since forever.

Re: Google One

#369

Post by joshuamorton »

auslander wrote: post #358
kyrra wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To quote Google's code of conduct as it exists today: > And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ Media headlines from the time gave the impression that it was removed, which was absolutely false.

It was effectively removed. 1. Moving from top of the doc to very bottom of multi page doc, after things like Trade Controls. 2. Change of first party imperative to third party - you remember, not we

Are you suggesting that the conclusion of a document isn't an important part of it?

I'd argue that the last sentence is more prominent than anything that isn't in the first paragraph.

And who is "we" if not "you" in your second sentence? That's an employee code if conduct.

Post reply on HN