41–50 of 83 posts
Well that makes choosing Google Drive a lot easier
Last time I checked Google Drive's client was a few steps behind Dropbox's. Is this still the case? I think at some point Google did not have a Linux client and I know the UI for OSX didn't look or feel as native as Dropbox did. However it has been a long time since I tried it out.
Maybe I'm too old for this, but I read the title as "Dropbox discontinues photo galleries" I still can't get used to the fact that drop means release.
> The Photos page is changing on July 17, 2017, but your pictures will stay safe in your Dropbox account. After July 17, you’ll no longer be able to create or share albums on the web, or browse photos in the current timeline view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm glad you asked :). Here's how I get all the benefits of Google Photos without relying on the service to be around in order to have my photos. https://medium.com/@jmathai/introducing-elodie-your-personal...
Isn't _the_ benefit of Google Photos (over any other storage service) the ability to search your photos for keywords e.g. "mountain"?
By separate from Google Photos (because I don't know if I'll use it forever) I have all my photos automatically organized into a customized folder structure with consistent file names.
Both the ability to search/experience my photos and preserve them are important to me. I rely on Google Photos for the former.
Consider this my PRD :) -- https://medium.com/vantage/understanding-my-need-for-an-auto...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What happens when Google Photos shuts down?
The safer bet is Apple, as the smarts are local software vs service.
I think a good compromise is smarts in the cloud vs. local copy. I do this with Google Photos / Google Drive / Synology [1]. Apple does do this to an extent with iCloud but I haven't used that to be able to comment on how well it works.
[1] https://medium.com/@jmathai/introducing-elodie-your-personal...
Trust the cloud they said, it's always there they said. In all seriousness, the need for local, speedy, transparent and ubiquitous data redundancy is still there and if anything growing. Consumers want a 'refrigerator' of data - be it documents, photos, etc. Buy, set and forget. Huge opportunity there.
The type of internet where anyone could host and interact freely with other parts of the internet are already past. People just haven't realized it. It'll be Internet TV.
Plug for SmugMug here: $40/year for, as far as I understand it, unlimited photo and video storage. Great controls over sharing, easy to order prints, and the iOS app is getting better all the time. Plus, you are not the product. They just want to do photo storage well, and that's it. Back when I was deciding on a service, I was down to Carousel and SmugMug. I liked the idea of paying Dropbox for space that would go b…
I've been on Flickr forever. It still does the job for me but I'm not really dependent on them. Everything I have is in Lightroom locally and backed up in multiple ways.
Google's version (photos.google.com) is great. I love the auto-generated albums, animated gifs and movies. It's also very easy to share and create group albums.
Trust the cloud they said, it's always there they said. In all seriousness, the need for local, speedy, transparent and ubiquitous data redundancy is still there and if anything growing. Consumers want a 'refrigerator' of data - be it documents, photos, etc. Buy, set and forget. Huge opportunity there.
I tend to agree with this. Local broadband access is good enough, and IPV6 spread widely enough, that you could make a network accessible data fridge that lived in your house work. Using the cloud for offline encrypted backups only. To work though it will require some exceptional simplification and product engineering.
Even given properly managed encryption one has to assume the system could get wiped which makes other backup regimes necessary. As you say, hard to get bulletproof. Not that most people are bulletproof today.