Very disappointed with the way the tech is developing.

[brecklundin]

I keep going back an forth about remote online storage. In my eye it only makes sense for those with either symmetric broadband connections or FIOS. Sadly most folks are at best around 768k upstream but most are as low as 128k upstream still today.

If I were to sign up and use one of these services for all my photos my systems would run 24/7 for a month or more before getting it all backed up to the server (yeah that is all the "cloud" is...a return to the old client-server model...well, ok, in theory "the cloud" is supposed to be a distributed environment...but who knows...) I dunno but I get the feeling I have no idea of who my data is being handed to. I don't care about my stuff being snooped in on, I mean that's nuts to even think is likely to happen. But it's where is my data, what country or who owns the company that stores my data, for all you know it's some company with it's servers in China. And even if today it's all US based, tomorrow might be different company swallows your "trusted" cloud-provider service.

I stick to external HDD's because for $50/TB I can store my stuff locally...messy, yeah but as attractive as the cloud seems even at $50/yr for unlimited storage I can just grab a new drive to use for the year. Of course I don't travel at all anymore so I don't need access to my data everywhere I go...

But for sure this is the direction things are moving...and funny how so many who think that this is secure and private storage...yeah, good luck with that one...any one of these service providers will roll over and give it up to anyone with a memo on {insert your favorite PITA legal organization here} letterhead. And all it takes is one person to get shafted...just ask the guys who had their case of torture by the CIA tossed out by the 9th District Court under the guise of "official secrets act"...odds if that happening to you or me? Likely zero...then again, someone always wins the Lottery, right?

But this is the way things will move, even Google is headed that way...have been since the advent of GMAIL.

Actually, if I ever get a cloud account I want the servers in some country with super strong privacy laws, say like Germany, seriously they have some tough privacy laws which more countries should emulate...I don't think I would even want it in the US anymore. So, I guess part of me still worries about security after all.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by brecklundin

I keep going back an forth about remote online storage. In my eye it only makes sense for those with either symmetric broadband connections or FIOS. Sadly most folks are at best around 768k upstream but most are as low as 128k upstream still today.

If I were to sign up and use one of these services for all my photos my systems would run 24/7 for a month or more before getting it all backed up to the server (yeah that is all the "cloud" is...a return to the old client-server model...well, ok, in theory "the cloud" is supposed to be a distributed environment...but who knows...) I dunno but I get the feeling I have no idea of who my data is being handed to. I don't care about my stuff being snooped in on, I mean that's nuts to even think is likely to happen. But it's where is my data, what country or who owns the company that stores my data, for all you know it's some company with it's servers in China. And even if today it's all US based, tomorrow might be different company swallows your "trusted" cloud-provider service.

I stick to external HDD's because for $50/TB I can store my stuff locally...messy, yeah but as attractive as the cloud seems even at $50/yr for unlimited storage I can just grab a new drive to use for the year. Of course I don't travel at all anymore so I don't need access to my data everywhere I go...

But for sure this is the direction things are moving...and funny how so many who think that this is secure and private storage...yeah, good luck with that one...any one of these service providers will roll over and give it up to anyone with a memo on {insert your favorite PITA legal organization here} letterhead. And all it takes is one person to get shafted...just ask the guys who had their case of torture by the CIA tossed out by the 9th District Court under the guise of "official secrets act"...odds if that happening to you or me? Likely zero...then again, someone always wins the Lottery, right?

But this is the way things will move, even Google is headed that way...have been since the advent of GMAIL.

Actually, if I ever get a cloud account I want the servers in some country with super strong privacy laws, say like Germany, seriously they have some tough privacy laws which more countries should emulate...I don't think I would even want it in the US anymore. So, I guess part of me still worries about security after all.

Actually, Google is just about there. You are correct about the time required to upload files initially. It took several days for me. I do not recommend cloud back ups if one doesn't have a decent broadband connection. That doesn't change the need for off site storage in addition to onsite storage. Whatever fate may befall your computer could also befall your back up if only stored in the same general area. Alternates to a cloud back up for offsite storage could be a bank safety deposit box (ideal) or a trusted friend.

[harryE123]

@Breckl

Interesting and gutsy post, I share these concerns. Unfortunately I think cloud or no cloud this really is more of a losing battle with power than anything else, that is if some have to snoop they will. The only "safe" option is a computer sans wifi that never joins the network.

Having said that I do agree it's both ridiculous and tragic the way privacy and legality of state (and other) authority is handled in the U.S. It's a wave from the dark ages, and what's more alarming is that not only fewer and fewer people share these concerns, but a younger generation seems to be the least resistant (and they are the ones who should have been the most) of all and the ones who might even consider it natural to leave in a big brother type of nation and world, case in point facebook.

Perhaps one of the most chilling quote I 've read about this is from the archetypical big brother co., google. Do no evil they say as a company moto...more like do only evil:
Eric Schmidt: “If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6e7wfDHzew

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by brecklundin

Sadly most folks are at best around 768k upstream but most are as low as 128k upstream still today.

Depends on where you are located.



In the US 768kb/s down, 128kb/s up isn't enough to even be called "broadband."

"the United States (US) Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as of 2010, defines "Basic Broadband" as data transmission speeds of at least 4 megabits per second (Mbps), or 4,000,000 bits per second, downstream (from the Internet to the user’s computer) and 1 Mbps upstream (from the user’s computer to the Internet)."

(From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_Internet_access)

My connection here in the US (provided by my cable TV company, as a consumer package, not some special professional/business deal) is 25 mb/s down, 2 mb/s up.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

I'm getting 13 and 2.58 right now on my cable connection. Even when traffic is heavy and download speeds are half that, upload speeds are still over 2.00. The slower speeds seem to be more than adequate for Carbonite.

[Fbone]

LOL ... I'm much slower than you guys because I don't pay extra for "high-speed" internet access. Also, I have a 250 GB/mos limit.

1.43 Mb/s down
0.36 Mb/s up

[HamsterRage]

We've had a number of plans to use some cloud services scuttled because there is no way, under any circumstances, that we'll allow personal customer data to cross the border and get stored on a server in the States. Patriot Act.

So if we're going to use a cloud service, it needs to be in Canada, where the data is at least going to be subject to the same search and disclosure laws that it is on our own servers.

[CyGuy]

I could see using an off-site storage service for keeping a single backup image. In fact, you really would want to just create a few True Crypt containers with very long and complex passwords and put the image inside that. However, as far as using "cloud storage" for accessing a few files on the fly as part of the normal usage of a device, that it just crazy to me. Use an external HDD, USB thumb drive, or SDHC card. Maybe create a backup once a week or so, put it in a TC container, and send it to the cloud. But to rely on a network connection just to get to a file, that really just doesn't make sense to me...

[djgreedo]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

iTunes doesn't come in a Linux variant. Nor is iTunes the premier ecosystem in my eyes when they use Apple specific formats.

iTunes has the best range of product (though Microsoft, Amazon, etc. are catching up very quickly), but iTunes is garbage. It's a terrible application for managing a music library, and it's ugly and sluggish. It's a shame I have to have it installed on my PC so I can buy music from the iTunes store. As soon as Microsoft or Google allow me to buy from them without having to circumvent geo restrictions I'll make a party out of uninstalling iTunes for the last time.

Even the inexplicably neglected Zune ecosystem is better than the Apple ecosystem (streaming 1080p on Xbox, buy from Xbox, PC, or Zune and play on either, Zune Pass, playback through Windows Media Center, 720p playback from Zune HD via HDMI vs iTunes and the Apple TV).

Micro USB is 3 mm tall (reference). The iPad is 13.4 mm thick, according to Wikipedia. I don't see a size issue, and considering that everybody else and their mother puts a USB slot on their device, I can't see cost being an issue either. They're simply commodity parts now. To not include something that won't mess with aesthetics, for pennies in hardware costs, that many people would find useful, seems asinine to me.

To Apple, aesthetics are far more important than flexibility and functionality. My phone and ereader both have micro-USB slots, and they are both thinner than an iPad.

It's also an advantage of the Apple way (from Apple's perspective). While companies like Microsoft are taking their time trying to cram features into their products so they can do whatever users want, Apple simply beats everyone to market with a stripped-down product (i.e. cheaper to make, easier to keep slim, better battery life) that appeals to people who don't really care about functionality or interoperability. A prime example is the iPad. Tablets have been around for a decade, and the oldest models can arguably do anything the iPad can (albeit with older screen/touch technology). But the older tablets were not pleasant to use. They never found the balance between functionality and usability. While the tablet PC makers were trying to make a tablet PC that was usable, Apple created a giant PDA that looked like a tablet but got a lot of usability from its drastic tradeoffs.

On a related note I think the fact that all of a sudden Apple are cagey about iPad sales figures (despite being a company that constantly brags about sales at every opportunity if they can get any positive spin) is interesting. Perhaps consumers are getting more tech savvy and thus less likely to fall for Apple's combination of brilliant marketing/crippled products. Then again, Apple might be holding off for a bigger sales announcement. If iPad sales have been phenomenal they may account for the equivalent of 10% of netbook sales, which would be impressive.

When it locks you into only one way of doing things, the Apple way, then it's not bolder. What if I don't have any other iDevice? I then look around at all the perfectly working older equipment I have that uses standard interfaces that I would have to replace with iDevices. It gets rather expensive when you do that.

DLNA is far superior to the iTunes solution. My PCs, TV, Blu-ray player, sound system and NAS are all DLNA compliant, and all interact with each other perfectly despite being from different manufacturers (i.e. I can choose which products I want based on any number of factors and not have to buy only from a single manufacturer to ensure interoperability).

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

I could see using an off-site storage service for keeping a single backup image. In fact, you really would want to just create a few True Crypt containers with very long and complex passwords and put the image inside that. However, as far as using "cloud storage" for accessing a few files on the fly as part of the normal usage of a device, that it just crazy to me. Use an external HDD, USB thumb drive, or SDHC card. Maybe create a backup once a week or so, put it in a TC container, and send it to the cloud. But to rely on a network connection just to get to a file, that really just doesn't make sense to me...

I agree. For me, Carbonite is a redundant backup in case I lose my computer and local backup. I can access it when on the road using my little netbook if I have to but, so far, haven't yet.

The problems with making a weekly back up and sending it to the cloud is, one, you have to remember to do it and, two, if your system goes belly up, you will lose everything since the last backup. Carbonite has my files backed up within an hour or less after they are created. Since it versions, it has saved my butt a couple of times when I screwed up a file and dumped the original before I realized it was screwed up. Mirroring is instantaneous but it also instaneously duplicates fatal mistakes.

[harryE123]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

I could see using an off-site storage service for keeping a single backup image. In fact, you really would want to just create a few True Crypt containers with very long and complex passwords and put the image inside that. However, as far as using "cloud storage" for accessing a few files on the fly as part of the normal usage of a device, that it just crazy to me. Use an external HDD, USB thumb drive, or SDHC card. Maybe create a backup once a week or so, put it in a TC container, and send it to the cloud. But to rely on a network connection just to get to a file, that really just doesn't make sense to me...

You don't rely on a network to get a file, you rely on it to sync files between devices, try doing that by constantly moving along a usb stick and plugging it in, as opposed to having a single cloud storage where you and others can edit said file. (as for "relying" on network connections in general, granted, but in this day and age it's hard to find anyone who doesn't, cloud or no cloud, so that argument on "reliance" falls flat too.)

[harryE123]

Originally Posted by djgreedo

While companies like Microsoft are taking their time trying to cram features into their products so they can do whatever users want, Apple simply beats everyone to market with a stripped-down product (i.e. cheaper to make, easier to keep slim, better battery life) that appeals to people who don't really care about functionality or interoperability.

3.5 million people in three months buying and ipad in a market where before they sold 3.5 million units in (what?) 5 years, and all of them not caring about functionality and interoperability? I am sorry but it's impossible to buy that. The reason ms haven't released a tablet is not the ludicrous "being busy cramming features" statement, it's because they are 4 years late with coming up with a decent mobile os, it's because there is internal havoc of competing departments within the company coming up with non functional prototypes such as the courier (which in typical ms style is only leaked to get some vapourware attention away from the competition to be then dismissed), wrecking their acquisitions such as danger for kids phones that get canceled after 45 days while selling 500 units, relying on their partners for tablets with windows desktop the very same partners (hp) that after official presentations ditch them and embarrass them, because they don't yet have a good software app store or an ecosystem to integrate it with it, it's about letting others, namely apple, create markets for them and then entering, etc. etc.

It's all that and more but being busy cramming features on their supposed tablet/reader they ain't.

(It sounded really humorous to me, you saying "better battery life" for apple products and in the very same sentence that these products are for those who don't care about functionality...)

And let me just ask if MS is so good and great, how come they force you to buy from the "terrible" itunes, and when someone asks you for you modern mobile os tablet from ms you have nothing to show them? Are they cramming features into their itunes variant too? Boy will this thing be choke full of features after 7+ years of it being non existent.

[EowynCarter]

And let me just ask if MS is so good and great, how come they force you to buy from the "terrible" itunes

What are you talking about ? MS forcing people buying from iTunes ?

[Graham]

Originally Posted by harryE123

And let me just ask if MS is so good and great, how come they force you to buy from the "terrible" itunes...

I'm not sure about the US but here in the UK I can buy music from Amazon, Napster, Spotify, We7, HMV, Tesco, and I'm sure many more.

I've been a subscriber to Napster's massive catalogue for years now, as I prefer 'renting' my music - with the access to the full catalogue that provides, direct to my mp3 player - but when I do buy the tracks I favour Napster or Amazon.

Graham

EDIT: downloads of course. There are also plenty of places to buy music on bits of plastic.

[dapriuk]

3.5 million people in three months buying and ipad in a market where before they sold 3.5 million units in (what?) 5 years, and all of them not caring about functionality and interoperability? I am sorry but it's impossible to buy that.

But I am not convinced they are the same market. Tablet PC's are used in industry, warehousing, health, military applications, also by students and academics as well as professionals, engineers etc. There may be some overlaps such as web browsing but I suspect the iPad does not address the other requirements of the various markets that tablet PCs occupy.