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

Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

keyt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 256 posts

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#21

Post by mixcocam »

tyingq wrote: post #15
coldtea wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Charging for storage is becoming silly. Its essentially free. Storage is growing faster than humanity can fill it, and at an ever-spiraling decreasing price. And yet I can't find a cheap host for 2-4TB that's not like $10/month or so... even with Glacier it's $16/4TB/month...

KS-3 Server - Atom N2800 - 4GB DDR3 1066 MHz - 2TB SATA $9.99/month https://www.kimsufi.com/us/en/order/kimsufi.xml?reference=18... No RAID, but it's in your desired price range.

Are there any options like these with redundancy built into the storage?

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#22

Post by rq1 »

mehrdadn wrote: post #17
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #3

Charging for storage is becoming silly. Its essentially free. Storage is growing faster than humanity can fill it, and at an ever-spiraling decreasing price. It'd be like charging for windows-up or windows-down on a taxi ride.

Where does this meme of "storage is essentially free" come from? A 4TB drive is already like ~$100 and that's without any fault tolerance. Now purchase some for yourself, geo-replicate it across the world, make it be online 24/7 and accessible with high speed worldwide, and tell me how it came out to be "essentially free"?

Marginal cost. You don't build one network per drive.

I wouldn't personally say "essentially free" though.

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#23

Post by nicoburns »

part1of2 wrote: post #5

> Anil Sabharwal, Google Photos’ then-head, said in a blog post when the service launched in 2015. “And when we say a lifetime of memories, we really mean it.” Most of Google’s product strategy has been bait & switch, and I saythat with all due to respect to the engineers. It’s the leaders who make these decisions

To be fair, Google's pricing on storage is more than reasonable. I pay £2.50/month for 200gb of storage which more than covers my lifetimes worth of photos so far (in full res with a fair few RAW photos in there too).

And they're not deleting any photos that users already uploaded. I think Google deserve all the criticism they get for shutting down services. But this one seems to have been handled quite well.

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#24

Post by pfortuny »

nicoburns wrote: post #23
part1of2 wrote: post #5

> Anil Sabharwal, Google Photos’ then-head, said in a blog post when the service launched in 2015. “And when we say a lifetime of memories, we really mean it.” Most of Google’s product strategy has been bait & switch, and I saythat with all due to respect to the engineers. It’s the leaders who make these decisions

To be fair, Google's pricing on storage is more than reasonable. I pay £2.50/month for 200gb of storage which more than covers my lifetimes worth of photos so far (in full res with a fair few RAW photos in there too). And they're not deleting any photos that users already uploaded. I think Google deserve all the criticism they get for shutting down services. But this one seems to have been handled quite well.

Well it is like an infinite order of magnitude of a difference when PROMISED otherwise.

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#26

Post by mehrdadn »

rq1 wrote: post #22
mehrdadn wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does this meme of "storage is essentially free" come from? A 4TB drive is already like ~$100 and that's without any fault tolerance. Now purchase some for yourself, geo-replicate it across the world, make it be online 24/7 and accessible with high speed worldwide, and tell me how it came out to be "essentially free"?

Marginal cost. You don't build one network per drive. I wouldn't personally say "essentially free" though.

The network was hardly the culprit in my explanation. How much is the cost of 4TB of georeplicated storage do you think? Surely you have to at least pay for the storage itself? So like $300-$400 at least if it's replicated 3-4x? And I haven't even hinted at offline backups and all kinds of other things.

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#27

Post by pfortuny »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #3

Charging for storage is becoming silly. Its essentially free. Storage is growing faster than humanity can fill it, and at an ever-spiraling decreasing price. It'd be like charging for windows-up or windows-down on a taxi ride.

The price of storage is the price of maintenance not of storing.

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#28

Post by abraham »

blunte wrote: post #12

Is there yet any effective cloud to cloud migration tool or service? I don't mean cloud to PC back to different cloud ...

The Data Transfer Project is working on this although I believe it's still fairly early stage.

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/20/17589246/data-transfer-pr...

*I work at Google but not on this

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#29

Post by arnon »

pfortuny wrote: post #24
nicoburns wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, Google's pricing on storage is more than reasonable. I pay £2.50/month for 200gb of storage which more than covers my lifetimes worth of photos so far (in full res with a fair few RAW photos in there too). And they're not deleting any photos that users already uploaded. I think Google deserve all the criticism they get for shutting down services. But this one seems to have been handled quite well.

Well it is like an infinite order of magnitude of a difference when PROMISED otherwise.

For most people, 15GB can very well be a lifetime.

Re: Google Photos hooked users with free unlimited storage. Now that's changing

#30

Post by JorgeGT »

jonplackett wrote: post #18

If you have to start paying for photo storage, you may as well move them somewhere with better privacy.

I'm giving Amazon Photos a try, since they offer unlimited high quality storage with Prime. I will appreciate if someone shares their opinion about this service.
Post reply on HN