This is quite tempting, but the Google Drive client is just too terrible. I've never once had a single problem with the Dropbox client. Ever.
I stopped using Dropbox when their OS X client repeatedly got stuck syncing on most of my machines, and started pegging the CPU and draining my batteries. Tried reinstalling a few times months apart and promptly hit the same problem each time.
Google Drive could maybe be useful if there existed some working FUSE implementation that would fit on cheap single board computers like the BeagleBoards and Raspberry Pi.
I know Dropbox will be Dropbox in 5 years. As a counterpoint to that, Dropbox might not exist in 5 years. Google most likely will. Basically, there is no answer here that guarantees the future of your cloud storage. It's useful to access your files from multiple locations, but using it for long term file archival seems like asking for disappointment (as well as being a neat way of throwing money into the sky).
If there is a choice - it is better to place your bet with the company whose main business line depends on the service you are using. Google has a long history of dropping services, because it can. It does not matter to Google that 10k people or 100k people find that particular service useful. Google is not about to drop search and search related ads any time soon - storage services it could drop tomorrow and not car…
Actually the best choice is to store your data with both.
This announcement just made that significantly cheaper, and there's opportunity here for a "cloud RAID" offering to take the hassle out of mirroring one's data. Dropbox already has the API, so they could turn this to their advantage.
It's implied. We all know (or should know) that GDrive is provided to us with a huge & complex infrastructure. Your TB drives at home do not begin to compare.
Does it? Does the average user know this?
I think the average user would get very confused by all those words whereas if you say online back up he will instantly get how it is useful for him.
I think Dropbox actually spends a fair bit more on bandwidth because of all the syncing. As far as I know Google has no desktop client (and if they do they failed to offer it to me), whereas with Dropbox it's really the way to go. But in general yeah I agree, the margins of all these storage companies are very high. As I've said in other comments here, I think I can do it cheaper using consumer-priced hardware (let a…
> As far as I know Google has no desktop client https://tools.google.com/dlpage/drive/?hl=en
I think at this point I'm a little more comfortable paying more for a company that I know won't abandon this market. I know Dropbox will be Dropbox in 5 years. How can we be sure Google Drive won't be shuttered in less time? Google is very haphazard with their web properties. Sometimes they shutter them, sometimes they stuff them in the closet. Google Reader, Wave, etc, you know. the stories. What scares me more are…
Everyone has spent time arguing which service will exist in five years. If you like Google's offering now (and I do as it's cheaper and more integrated with my workflow), then use it. Even if Google shutters it and Dropbox prevails, I'm positive they would give advanced notice. At that point, switch to Dropbox. We're acting like this is some kind of lifelong decision, but it's more importantly about what is best right now.
Dropbox is profitable yeah? Why wouldn't they be around in 5 years? Google's prices are so much cheaper than Dropbox You just answered your own question. Dropbox is convenient because you've already installed it everywhere. Google Drive is already on your Android phone and in your e-mail inbox.
I think that's actually part of the problem, I think of Google Drive as where I put attachments from email, not files and folder on my computer. I can't put my finger on it but Drive just seems clunky, especially with the GMail / Docs integration.
I would argue drive is better. Not only does it have device syncing like dropbox but it seamlessly integrates with the google ecosystem. And now its much much cheaper.
I think at this point I'm a little more comfortable paying more for a company that I know won't abandon this market. I know Dropbox will be Dropbox in 5 years. How can we be sure Google Drive won't be shuttered in less time? Google is very haphazard with their web properties. Sometimes they shutter them, sometimes they stuff them in the closet. Google Reader, Wave, etc, you know. the stories. What scares me more are…
On one hand I support DropBox, because they care about my needs - I'm (also) a Ubuntu Linux user and Google apparently doesn't care about me enough to provide me with a client. Apparently I'm so unimportant to them that they can't justify the cost of a couple of man-months. On the other hand your worry, while justified, does not apply to Google Drive. Google Drive is now an integral part of: - GMail - Google Apps - A…
"Microsoft has SkyDrive, integrated with Windows and WinPhone. Apple has iCloud, integrated with OS X and with iOS. Clearly you can see a pattern."
This is exactly the case for staying with Dropbox. Otherwise, your cloud provider has more leverage to lock you into their products. Dropbox is motivated to support multiple platforms.
I won't go near Google Drive until they fix some serious longstanding issues with the desktop client. The two that caused me to abandon Google Drive (I even have a free TB for 3 years from my Chromebook Pixel): 1. No way to re-sync existing folders on your computer (seriously). I was pushing hundreds of GBs of photos to my Google Drive, and after syncing everything, upgraded to a new computer (the files were stored o…
Point 2 is a common theme with Google Drive, Dropbox and others. Tested only on hexacore dev machines with SSD backed RAM disks, their moron developers thought it prudent to just absolutely trash the system with harddisk IO on boot, presumably to find out that nothing has changed, as a simple timestamp check could have told them.
True - most do some heavy IO when first launched. I've tested syncing modest amounts of data with Google Drive, Dropbox, Box.net, as well as backups with Dolly Drive, CrashPlan and Arq. In my experience, none of the other clients come close in terms of sustained CPU usage during the entire process like Google Drive does.
On one hand I support DropBox, because they care about my needs - I'm (also) a Ubuntu Linux user and Google apparently doesn't care about me enough to provide me with a client. Apparently I'm so unimportant to them that they can't justify the cost of a couple of man-months. On the other hand your worry, while justified, does not apply to Google Drive. Google Drive is now an integral part of: - GMail - Google Apps - A…
"Microsoft has SkyDrive, integrated with Windows and WinPhone. Apple has iCloud, integrated with OS X and with iOS. Clearly you can see a pattern." This is exactly the case for staying with Dropbox. Otherwise, your cloud provider has more leverage to lock you into their products. Dropbox is motivated to support multiple platforms.
For what it's worth, SkyDrive has sync engines on both Windows and Mac while having apps + auto picture upload on Android, iPhone and of course Windows Phone.