71–80 of 419 posts
This is all because someone thought it would be “easy” to add a stream of recurring revenue for cloud photo storage but didn’t take the time to design the service from a technical perspective to be resilient enough to not crash and burn.
from: image.canon/st/en/faq.html
so as of now there is no recurring revenue added as of now
The camera companies are so bad at software that the software companies are building better cameras than them... in the few millimeters thickness of a phone! I salivate for the day that Google or Apple buys Nikon or Leica or whatever and shoves all of that computational photography goodness under a 24x36mm camera sensor.
That said, you're also dismissing one of the biggest value propositions camera companies have, which is decades of physical user interface experience and developed hardware modularity. Phones absolutely do not replace good cameras for usability.
When travelling I take a mix of photos between my phone and camera, and when I need my camera it's irreplaceable, and when I don't need my camera, I use my phone. The phone is quick and easy, but the camera makes me a photo ninja and I get specifically configured shots quickly in a way I could never replicate with a phone interface.
There is one somewhat reassuring lesson here -- No matter the company, no matter the brand, no matter their worth: software development is wrought with challenges, and major mistakes for seemingly obvious things are made by everyone, all the time, at every level.
I take nightly images of my computer's primary drive and replicate them offsite, with alerting if it fails and automated scheduled backup restore testing. It blows my mind to think that some random schmuck like me has better backup procedures than these multibillion dollar global corporations. Companies that don't invest in their IT end up paying for it tenfold down the track.
This is all because someone thought it would be “easy” to add a stream of recurring revenue for cloud photo storage but didn’t take the time to design the service from a technical perspective to be resilient enough to not crash and burn.
This can be just calculated risk. Incredible damage for some users can be negligible damage to the company. In this case just 10TB of data was lost, so maybe thousands of users for the long term storage option. Losing customer data has potential for big reputation or brand damage, but surprisingly often the damage is relatively small. Putting in too much effort when potential damage to business is minimal may not be…
I'm not even a professional photographer and have about 2TiB of photographs.
This is barely data loss in the great scheme of things, but certainly a wake up call for Canon and their users.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This can be just calculated risk. Incredible damage for some users can be negligible damage to the company. In this case just 10TB of data was lost, so maybe thousands of users for the long term storage option. Losing customer data has potential for big reputation or brand damage, but surprisingly often the damage is relatively small. Putting in too much effort when potential damage to business is minimal may not be…
This. Outside of FAANG, Gov and finance, very few consumer facing companies have the budgets to engineer redundancies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This can be just calculated risk. Incredible damage for some users can be negligible damage to the company. In this case just 10TB of data was lost, so maybe thousands of users for the long term storage option. Losing customer data has potential for big reputation or brand damage, but surprisingly often the damage is relatively small. Putting in too much effort when potential damage to business is minimal may not be…
This comment reads as "This is normal; nothing to see here move along". Which is more of an indictment on the state of things than on the comment itself. If you can't protect people's shit, don't offer to hold onto it for money!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This can be just calculated risk. Incredible damage for some users can be negligible damage to the company. In this case just 10TB of data was lost, so maybe thousands of users for the long term storage option. Losing customer data has potential for big reputation or brand damage, but surprisingly often the damage is relatively small. Putting in too much effort when potential damage to business is minimal may not be…
This. Outside of FAANG, Gov and finance, very few consumer facing companies have the budgets to engineer redundancies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suppose that feature would be incompatible with user data in a GDPR world ??
Git is also incompatible with GDPR, you can't simply delete a file from all history.