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

Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

blog.dropbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 151 posts

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#71

Post by jljljl »

encoderer wrote: post #70
jamesbritt wrote: post #66

Dropbox is morally corrupt and support for them by HN users is disappointing. I wrote to Dropbox and said I wanted to cancel my account and get a pro-rated refund because of their hiring of Condoleezza Rice. Her involvement in the Iraq war and the mass surveillance of Americans is deplorable. A few days after my request my account was converted to the free version, with the limitations of the free version. I could no…

Why are you entitled to a refund? You disagree with their hiring policies? You already paid the $99 for 1 year of service. You already bought it. It's done. Your option is to cancel at renewal or not. That's my take, anyway. I also asked for a refund when Google announced their far cheaper plans for GDrive, and this just a month after I renewed. They told me the same thing -- a policy of no partial refunds. So I aske…

If OP's account is true, the took away the features but then refused to provide a refund. At best, that's a pretty serious customer service fail.

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#72

Post by gnufied »

mbillie1 wrote: post #67

I switched to Copy since the Condoleeza Rice situation and I have had no problems whatsoever. I have the app running on a macbook pro, an imac and two android mobile devices. It's also about half the price that Dropbox charges. I recommend it.

Honest question, how good is their client? The Google Drive client on OSX appears to be bit shit and I am considering moving everything away to a new system.

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#73

Post by dabernathy89 »

jamesbritt wrote: post #66

Dropbox is morally corrupt and support for them by HN users is disappointing. I wrote to Dropbox and said I wanted to cancel my account and get a pro-rated refund because of their hiring of Condoleezza Rice. Her involvement in the Iraq war and the mass surveillance of Americans is deplorable. A few days after my request my account was converted to the free version, with the limitations of the free version. I could no…

> It almost funny that they would not even respect differing opinion on their hiring of Ms. Rice and graciously offer a refund to those offended by such a move.

I'm not surprised at all that a company doesn't want to refund you because of a political disagreement you have with them.

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#74

Post by rikkus »

mbillie1 wrote: post #67

I switched to Copy since the Condoleeza Rice situation and I have had no problems whatsoever. I have the app running on a macbook pro, an imac and two android mobile devices. It's also about half the price that Dropbox charges. I recommend it.

Their max personal plan seems to be 500GB for $14.99/month. Dropbox Pro is now 1TB for £9.99/month.

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#75

Post by StavrosK »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #69
StavrosK wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it have an OSS Linux client, even headless? All I want is to encryptedly back up some directories on my home server, but nothing* really does that. I use SpiderOak at the moment, but it's not OSS. * Except attic, but I'd rather pay for a service as important as this (I don't trust the remote server to not lose files): http://www.stavros.io/posts/holy-grail-backups/

http://www.tarsnap.com/ http://rsync.net/

Thanks, but both of those are extremely expensive for backing up photos and various files (100 GB worth).

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#76

Post by [deleted] »

s3r3nity wrote: post #4
of wrote: post #3

Whoever downvoted my previous comment, can you explain to me why you care about Dropbox Pro?

I didn't downvote, but it wasn't a productive comment -- it was just snarky and condescending. I don't think this is front-page worthy of HN, sure, but anytime someone at Google/Dropbox/Apple does so much as pass gas, people around here get excited.

[deleted]

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#77

Post by cbhl »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #69
StavrosK wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it have an OSS Linux client, even headless? All I want is to encryptedly back up some directories on my home server, but nothing* really does that. I use SpiderOak at the moment, but it's not OSS. * Except attic, but I'd rather pay for a service as important as this (I don't trust the remote server to not lose files): http://www.stavros.io/posts/holy-grail-backups/

http://www.tarsnap.com/ http://rsync.net/

It's also worth asking for the HN discount on rsync.net if you're going to sign up with them.

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#78

Post by bentcorner »

StavrosK wrote: post #65
ptwiggens wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dropbox isn't ideal for backup at all. Look into Crashplan. Client-side encryption, unlimited versioning, never deletes files, and only $6/month for truly unlimited backup.

Does it have an OSS Linux client, even headless? All I want is to encryptedly back up some directories on my home server, but nothing* really does that. I use SpiderOak at the moment, but it's not OSS. * Except attic, but I'd rather pay for a service as important as this (I don't trust the remote server to not lose files): http://www.stavros.io/posts/holy-grail-backups/

I can't say one way or another if the client is OSS, but I do know you can run it headless, I've done it before.

IIRC, you need to tweak a non-headless client to direct it to the headless instance (some config file to point to the server vs localhost) and everything works from there.

Re: Introducing a more powerful Dropbox Pro

#80

Post by dmix »

drdaeman wrote: post #60
chmars wrote: post #29

It is disappointing that Dropbox still does not offer any options for secure storage. Personally, you might be fine with unencrypted stories but at least for companies in Europe, having (all) your data with an American cloud provider without local encryption on your side is simply not a legal option … Dropbox is a great service, however, it would be even greater if I could use Dropbox for all my data and not only sel…

> Dropbox competitors with encryption like Spideroak and Wuala Unless one doesn't really cares about security and wants encryption for the sake of having encryption, there's no way their implementations could be considered sufficient. Without audit you're just taking their word for it — which is exactly as when you take Dropbox's word that they won't peek at your data (unencrypted or possibly encrypted but one can't…

I don't know about SpiderOak but I totally trust Tarsnap.

But agreed we have to trust the software companies/devs when using crypto.

Not many people really trust Dropbox anymore to build client-side encryption themselves. But you could use a different program for encryption with dropbox as simple storage. That being said, you still have to trust the Dropbox binaries installed on your system as well. Security paranoia can go deep.

Post reply on HN