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

Google Drive

drive.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 142 posts

Re: Google Drive

#101

Post by tomkarlo »

jlarocco wrote: post #49
diminish wrote: post #6

microsoft, canonical, apple and now google; won't any one of the bigger tech players buy dropbox instead of developing something new?

I hope not. I don't trust Microsoft, Canonical, Apple, or Google to provide cloud storage. DropBox works great for me on OSX, Windows, and a couple of Linux variants. I just can't see Microsoft, Canonical or Apple going out of their way to make things work well across platforms. And Google Drive probably ties into Google+, which kills it for me.

Curious: why would you trust Dropbox or another small provider any more/less than Microsoft, Apple or Google?

If say, Microsoft bought Dropbox, would you then no longer trust them?

Interested in the reasoning here.

Re: Google Drive

#103

Post by jarsj »

It's strange that the top comments here are blasting Google for things we couldn't care less about.

I think it's awesome. Especially the search integration and ability to build apps. Dropbox is dead.

Re: Google Drive

#104

Post by inglondon »

When running the Google Drive OSX application the CPU goes into overdrive while syncing my local files to the Google servers and pushes the CPU temperature to around 100° Celsius. Is anyone else experiencing the same issues?

Re: Google Drive

#105

Post by ja27 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #11

The Google Docs integration is disappointing. Just JSON files that open up Google Docs in your browser, nothing useful to point Time Machine or some sort of backup script at.

I was disappointed too. It's a glorified bookmark manager. I'd have thought it would at least give me csv and rtf locally or an XML format.

Re: Google Drive

#106

Post by antihero »

lomegor wrote: post #47
untouchable wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No linux client turned me off of full adoption (especially when dropbox does support linux)

While Dropbox does support Linux, I could only get the client to work on the Ubuntu distro. Not saying that Google Drive is better (they don't even have a client), but that Dropbox Linux support is not so good.

Working great on Arch!

Re: Google Drive

#107

Post by elithrar »

luser001 wrote: post #72
ozataman wrote: post #62

The best thing about this is that it will finally force Dropbox to offer more storage at a cheaper price point. $200 bucks for 100GB of personal storage per year? I've long thought it's ridiculously high for mass adoption and so many more would be using it if the price was a bit more reasonable. For me: 1. I need much more space than 100GB - I'd ideally like a TB+ on the cloud. 2. The price has to be more acceptable.…

Agreed about high dropbox pricing. But it isn't too bad imho. There are three inter-related concepts: backup (mirror of your hdd), archiving (extension of your hdd), sync (subset of files on multiple devices) and sharing. But if you're ok with using different services for different purposes, you can easily get what you want. To archive non-media files, 5 GB should be sufficient. To archive media files, pay $60/yr to…

> To archive non-media files, 5 GB should be sufficient. To archive media files, pay $60/yr to Vimeo for video and $25/yr to Flickr for unlimited storage.

Note that Flickr will only archive certain types of media—you can't store your RAW files or other related stuff (presets, actions) with them. I believe Smugmug and a few of the other services do this, though.

Re: Google Drive

#108

Post by gbog »

VikingCoder wrote: post #87
zavulon wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, those are nice commandments. But most Google users aren't nearly tech savvy to follow them.

The existence of this new product does not make users more or less tech savvy. If a user goes from 1 copy (hard drive), to 2 copies, then it's a net gain for their backups. If a user goes from 2 copies (hard drive, some backup system), to 2 copies (hard drive, Google drive), then yes, arguably, it's a net loss for their backups, because they can simultaneously have a HD failure and get locked out of their Google acco…

The lock out thing is exaggerated. Having a Google backup is much safer than local manual backup for almost everyone.

Re: Google Drive

#109

Post by gbog »

jwr wrote: post #79
trustfundbaby wrote: post #48

I'm curious to know how many people like this trend of having to watch a video when you get to a landing page. Its showing up in more and more places, and I personally dislike it (I don't want to load a video and watch a clip, if I can quickly scan text and images and figure out if I should continue), but I wanted to know what other people thought.

I rarely watch the videos. Life is too short. If I can learn about the service/product by reading, that's fine, if not — I'll just abandon the page. If the service/product is any good, it will come back to me sooner or later via friends' recommendations.

Same here, rarely watch videos, but not because life is too short, because video are very intrusive. I need to put headphones, it may download slowly, I have to focus on somebody talking to me, often with a very weird accent, in a language that is not my mother tongue. Moreover I am in China and may have to fire my VPN, switch on the proxy, all this because some guys decided videos were more than text.

Re: Google Drive

#110

Post by nextparadigms »

twog wrote: post #8

Google & Apple make outstanding marketing videos. They are routinely some of the best I see in any industry, and the clear leaders in the tech industry. The only "startup" I have seen that rivals their quality of marketing videos is Square. Does anyone know how much producing video like this costs?

I agree Google has been making some amazing video ads in the past year or so.
Post reply on HN