Shutting down Ubuntu One file services • Hacker News Board

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#91

Post by UrlichtZwei » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 3:46 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #75

Touche wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Troubling that Ubuntu One wasn't already open source. Can anyone explain to me why every cloud drive is using their own proprietary protocols to do the same thing? Why we have to install a different client for each vendor? That's one thing that annoys me greatly, and I'll never use Dropbox as long as its syncing tool is proprietary. Does anyone else remember when companies were proud that they were the custodians of…

Does anyone else remember when companies were proud that they were the custodians of a file format? No. When was that?

See: Microsoft Word, Corel WordPerfect, Adobe PSDs, WMAs, RARs, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#92

Post by pjc50 » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 3:49 PM UTC

glutamate wrote: post #82

icebraining wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried Debian + backports?

I haven't, and that seems interesting. But that still means stuck with sysvinit.

Sysvinit is the UNIX way. Besides, if it's a server, you start everything once and leave it running. Reboot time is not important, only reboot reliability.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#93

Post by forgotAgain » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 3:51 PM UTC

bentcorner wrote: post #83

jodi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft Skydrive launched in 2007, around a year before Dropbox.

Skydrive's genesis was Foldershare (I think it was Foldershare --> Windows Live Folders --> Windows Live Mesh --> Skydrive), which launched in 2002.

Skydrive -> OneDrive

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#94

Post by Crito » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 3:51 PM UTC

cones688 wrote: post #74

a124556 wrote: 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?

Only differences that I have noticed and cared about as a home user: Yum lets you do `yum search` but Apt splits that off with `apt-cache` (this is annoying because with yum I can just swap out that 'search' with my line editor). Apt tends to be faster for equivalent operations.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#95

Post by juanuys » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 3:53 PM UTC

Perhaps they can use their freed-up resources to nudge Google along with the Drive client for Linux:

https://tools.google.com/dlpage/drive/?hl=en

"Running Linux? Stay tuned - Drive for Linux isn't ready just yet."

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#96

Post by davidgerard » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 3:54 PM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #57

gtaylor wrote: 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.

I routinely update Ubuntu well before release day, on the theory that my bugs are 100% more likely to get fixed before the release than after it.

My experiences fixing the resulting brokenness and occasional unbootability is why I first claimed Ubuntu/Debian on my CV.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#97

Post by dayjah » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 3:57 PM UTC

We have entered the age of the storage wars....

The price cuts from Google last week were clearly an offensive move in this space. One of the best ways to refine a market is to run it at sustainable loss and watch those that cannot compete die off. Credit to Canonical for failing fast here. I hope they decide to reassess the situation and provide tooling for a BYOCS[1]-esque abstraction. This'll permit users to roll their data from one cloud storage company to another as they all start dropping off.

As a somewhat related aside: where is amazon in the consumer commodity SaaS world? No email, no calendar, no storage (albeit they do provide mp3 storage). Do they just have no interest in providing these user services?

[1] Bring Your Own Cloud Storage

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#98

Post by brewdad » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 3:57 PM UTC

diminish wrote: post #70

jonknee wrote: 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.

For something as important as "file storage" 12 months would be a safer option to make sure everyone was alerted and reacted. Or Ubuntu may keep the files as torrents/tars after that for up to 12 months and ask for a payment of for download.

The problem with an extended shutdown is that it eliminates any sense of urgency to act. If I know I only have 2 months to find a new provider, I'll start searching and migrating now. Give me a year, and I'll ignore the problem for 10 months before acting.

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#99

Post by laxk » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 4:02 PM UTC

What I can use as an alternative for Ubuntu One?

Re: Shutting down Ubuntu One file services

#100

Post by gtaylor » Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 4:02 PM UTC

jcastro wrote: post #84

tomswartz07 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's more that they push non-prod ready packages (yes, they do) but the fact that their update model doesn't easily allow them to fix bugs from upstream. The vast majority of the packages in Ubuntu (more notably in the LTS releases) are all custom patched by Ubu-devs. Rather than taking the raw package and pushing it through, they have a semi-opaque method of testing, patching, and then releasing to the…

Which part was semi opaque to you? We're always looking for people to help and all the packaging, patching, and releasing is all done in the open. I don't think we purposely discourage people to participate, though I can understand getting lost in the process can be confusing.

My impression wasn't so much "opaque" as it was "dreadfully, soul-suckingly bureaucratic". It's been a long time since I looked, so this may have improved since, but it was really hard to figure out what the first step towards helping with packaging is (aside from the triage/testing side).