Introducing Google Drive... yes, really

Post by alwaysdoit » Wed, Apr 25, 2012, 3:38 AM UTC

amirmc wrote: post #88

primigenus wrote: post #35

Here's the most important paragraph in the blog post that most people will gloss over (because Google glossed over it): "Drive is built to work seamlessly with your overall Google experience. You can attach photos from Drive to posts in Google+, and soon you’ll be able to attach stuff from Drive directly to emails in Gmail. Drive is also an open platform, so we’re working with many third-party developers so you can d…

"You can attach photos from Drive to posts in Google+" And this reminded me how much stuff I already have sitting in Google. A minor glitch last week meant I couldn't access my webmail (though I primarily use IMAP), which made me start thinking about this. I'm really pleased to see Drive come out but at the moment I feel reluctant to put too much stuff into it because I become even more dependent on the big G (and I'…

Post by bo1024 » Wed, Apr 25, 2012, 3:44 AM UTC

folktheory wrote: post #87

bo1024 wrote: post #39

Haven't seen anything on the key question here for me ... how are they monetizing this? I'd rather not upload a ton of personal data to Google until I know how they're making money off of it. (Do they plan to integrate your documents into your search results?)

They "monetize" it by charging money for use of the service.

Post by packetslave » Wed, Apr 25, 2012, 3:48 AM UTC

amalter wrote: post #420

driverdan wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've updated my post. I didn't mean does everyone have access, I meant is it even technically possible for someone with proper access to view the original file. If files are encrypted properly then no one at the company would be able to access them.

Clearly unencrypted. They dedup, enable OCR searching, transparent online access to office style documents, etc.. These features would not be possible if they encrypted your bytes before being sent over the wire. You might want to look into Tarsnap. It's more expensive and you don't get the fancy features, but they offer opaque encrypted file handling. Also, there have been a couple niche strong privacy centered prov…

Post by superuser2 » Wed, Apr 25, 2012, 3:59 AM UTC

amirmc wrote: post #88

primigenus wrote: post #35

Here's the most important paragraph in the blog post that most people will gloss over (because Google glossed over it): "Drive is built to work seamlessly with your overall Google experience. You can attach photos from Drive to posts in Google+, and soon you’ll be able to attach stuff from Drive directly to emails in Gmail. Drive is also an open platform, so we’re working with many third-party developers so you can d…

"You can attach photos from Drive to posts in Google+" And this reminded me how much stuff I already have sitting in Google. A minor glitch last week meant I couldn't access my webmail (though I primarily use IMAP), which made me start thinking about this. I'm really pleased to see Drive come out but at the moment I feel reluctant to put too much stuff into it because I become even more dependent on the big G (and I'…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Apr 25, 2012, 4:06 AM UTC

TheCowboy wrote: post #423

rogerbinns wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should also have list going the other - things Dropbox has that GDrive doesn't: * Linux support * Headless (command line interface) * Public bug tracking and feature requests (votebox) Unsure about these * Shared folders I'm struggling to come up with more.

Dropbox possibly has better customer support compared to Google's possibly non-existent customer support.