Live data from Hacker News

Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

blog.canonical.com

141–150 of 209 posts

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#141
post #103
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost everyone will have at least one completely up-to-date copy of their files. It's just a matter of signing up for a competing service and re-uploading. Four months seems like a long enough time to accomplish that.

It's not only about file storage. Ubuntu One offered a Web service to programmatically access the files. Imagine you've developed an application that interfaces with Ubuntu One and is mission critical for your business.

Not essentially different from if you developed your business application on a PaaS which went bust or raised prices. These things happen unless you keep them in mind

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#142

I can see disabling new signups but not shutting the service down and erasing everyone's data - it doesn't bode well for Ubuntu in the enterprise or anywhere else trust and longevity are important.

That's a stretch. This has really nothing to do with the suitability of Ubuntu the distro or Canonical the company for "the enterprise."

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#143
post #57
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does PulseAudio have anything to do with Ubuntu? AFAIK, there is no relation between the two, other than the fact that Ubuntu offers PulseAudio (along with almost every other distro).

I must admit that, more than once, an Ubuntu upgrade killed my audio and I had to go and fix it myself. It's really painful that a distro that wants to be number 1 is so broken at times.

What distro do you propose instead that has equally fresh packages and more stability?

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#144
This is tragic and I am baffled how flawed their argument is.

>Our strategic priority for Ubuntu is making the best converged operating system for phones, tablets, desktops and more

If Ubuntu One wasn't of their strategic priorities, then certainly they didn't have their priorities right.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#145

I find the second paragraph disappointing, but unsurprising. "Our strategic priority for Ubuntu is making the best converged operating system for phones, tablets, desktops and more." My hope is that the next design fad that out-fads the current "make my 30 inch high-res monitor look like a 3 inch screen" fad will be a step back towards actual usability. Convergence is a usability nightmare. I'd rant more, but hey thi…

I don't understand why you would choose a distribution based on a vague "strategic priority" statement you found on some web page rather than any technical reason. Maybe you just meant to complain about Unity for the 4 millionth instance on HN?

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#146
post #128

To be honest. Ubuntu One never worked for me. Dropbox is a much better alternative. What are other alternatives to Ubuntu One? If they are smart, the partner with dropbox.

Dropbox, whose employees see all your files. Which fact people keep forgetting and rediscovering on an annual basis.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Silver lining in the cloud (sorry could not resist) why don't you optimise for site deployment and then resell the service?

I'm thinking on that, not sure if it's worth it. Surely I will like to open source it, is just a 17Kb script that keeps listening and add a permission layer to create directories

Time your code release so it coincides with Ubuntu One appearing wherever and piggy back on the Web interest. Timely blog post about how you plan to replace Ubuntu One.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#148
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would but I love APT. I'll just stick to Debian Testing.

> I would but I love APT As a near 100% RHEL/Fedora user I am always wondering if there is anything but a material difference between apt and yum? From using Ubuntu extensively a few years ago they seem to have near identical feature set?

As a near 100% RHEL/Fedora user I am always wondering if there is anything but a material difference between apt and yum?

Atleast some of it is momentum from being first. APT was the main reason I jumped ship from Redhat, but that was before yum.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#149
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proud custodians? Yes, they wrote the format and controlled it, but it was no different that a proprietary protocol; it was just a necessary way of allowing people to send data around. .DOC and .PSD in particular have always been proprietary messes that they wanted you to treat as a black box.

I was thinking more about OpenDocument, EPub, PNG. Things we take for granted today. It seems that once efforts transferred to the web companies simply have no desire to cooperate on their protocols. Even though cloud syncing is simple enough that dozens of companies have reinvented it, the companies don't feel any obligation (as I personally feel they have) to open up these protocols.

I don't think those examples were ever representative, and recent examples still exist: Google alone has WebP, WebM and KML, at least. And PNG didn't came from a company, it came from an ad-hoc group, and we definitively still have ad-hoc groups coming up with new standard formats.

Even though cloud syncing is simple enough that dozens of companies have reinvented it, the companies don't feel any obligation (as I personally feel they have) to open up these protocols.

I agree, but I don't agree that they used to. Most formats were and have always been proprietary. Open formats are and were an exception, and they were poorly supported by the industry at large. Yeah, we had Open Document, but the biggest Office suit didn't support them.

Similarly, ownCloud has an open protocol for syncing, but most vendors don't support it, just like they didn't used to support open formats unless they were forced to by their popularity. It's nothing new.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#150
post #68
post #2

That always seemed to me a bandwagon feature, like Microsoft's SkyDrive: they saw DropBox succeeding, they figured it would be easy to emulate, and they learned otherwise when they tried it. The only way this change affects me personally is that it gives me one less thing to go in and switch off when I install a new Ubuntu system, but I'm glad they've got a pragmatic attitude toward the possibility of spreading thems…

This is the first I'm hearing of Skydrive being considered a failure. What is that based on exactly?

I think he was saying that it, too, was a bandwagon feature. Not that it was a failure.
Post reply on HN