Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft to Offer Free Online Storage

athloi writes "Microsoft Corp. is giving computer users up to 500 megabytes of online storage for their documents, music, photos and video. They're offering it to a select 5,000 test users for now, but will make it widely available later this summer. This move is the latest in a series by the previous large corporation we all loved to hate to compete with the newest large corporation we might hate and fear, Google."

290 comments

  1. Too little... by A+Nun+Must+Cow+Herd · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... too late, and too Microsoft.

    1. Re:Too little... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Exactly. Gmail offers a gig, and plenty of third party applications store documents there. 500 megabytes explains why Bill Gates is a billionaire- as if anybody needed to be hit over the head with the fact he's a cheap penny pincher.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    2. Re:Too little... by jt2377 · · Score: 0

      why? Not everything created by Google is a home run. MS also enter the Game console late as well and Xbox360 is doing better than expected. If you don't even enter the market, how do you know it's too little and late? how do you know MS's online storage is too little? it's in beta and have you sign up to try it?

    3. Re:Too little... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I imagine this is less of a GMail-killer, and more of a .Mac-killer. Some have speculated that the iPhone will have .Mac integration before long. Would be nice to have their Zune automatically sync with this service over wifi before they get there, no?

    4. Re:Too little... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Zune doesn't need to. But it sure would be nice if Windows Mobile did (Get your direct competitor products right).

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    5. Re:Too little... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Informative

      AOL's XDrive.com has been offering 5 GB for free about 6 months now.

    6. Re:Too little... by L.+VeGas · · Score: 4, Funny

      Too little...too late, and too Microsoft. No kidding. I've seen MySpace pages bigger than that.
    7. Re:Too little... by Thwomp · · Score: 5, Funny

      //TODO: Insert obligatory '500MB should be enough for anyone' comment here.

    8. Re:Too little... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Searching for Windows Vista PrOn Compression utility... here it is .. sweet!!

    9. Re:Too little... by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow. Usually when AOL offers something, it's a sure sign that the fad around it is over.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Too little... by nschubach · · Score: 1

      /*TODO:
      * 1. write 500MB of gibberish (and hard to compress) files
      * 2. upload to use the space given to me
      * 3. PROFIT!!
      * 4. invite others to do the same
      */

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    11. Re:Too little... by DECS · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The iPhone already has .Mac integration, because iTunes already syncs it with Safari's bookmarks, email/contacts/calendars, and email settings. ITunes in turn, syncs with .Mac. Users don't have to do anything, and they don't even need to pay for .Mac unless they have various systems they all want to sync together.

      Also, bookmarks, contacts, and email can be accessed from .Mac via the web, which the iPhone can do too. I suppose there would be further ways to integrate or expand .Mac, but it works as is already. I don't know what Microsoft offers that is comparable.

      --

      ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley Says Apple's iPhone Needs ActiveSync
      Mary Jo Foley, who describes her ZDNet blog as "an unblinking eye on Microsoft," seems to have been charged with the unpleasant task of producing a somewhat positive sounding iPhone story, and gave it her best shot. Unfortunately, it wasn't very well thought out, and reflects a preoccupation with flattering Microsoft.

    12. Re:Too little... by DECS · · Score: 1

      Certainly Google can stumble, but what did you say about the 360 entering late and doing better than expected? HAHA!

      The 360 jumped the gun on the next gen consoles, so it entered the game a year ahead of the Wii and PS3. Even so, Microsoft had to stuff the channel unmercifully just to meet its US goals. It has not done anything in foreign markets, and in the US it satiated the market and has not been doing well.

      This spring, Microsoft even dropped their 5 million estimate for the first half of 07 down to 2. The growth is dead, and the Wii is outpacing it rapidly, even with an exclusive year head start for the 360. The market is panning both the 360 and PS3 as more of the same, and sales are very much not doing even as good as expected.

      It's one thing to be excited about a product, but don't make up shit that isn't remotely true just because you like playing xbox.

      Myth 7:The Xbox Success Myth
      Ten Myths of the Apple TV: Xbox and Hardware

    13. Re:Too little... by Cal+Paterson · · Score: 2, Informative

      Exactly. Gmail offers a gig, and plenty of third party applications store documents there. 500 megabytes explains why Bill Gates is a billionaire- as if anybody needed to be hit over the head with the fact he's a cheap penny pincher.
      This statement is far to dismissive for a product that isn't even concrete yet. It's just heading into beta, there is little available data, and you have already dismissed it.

      I'm not even someone who is a big Microsoft fan - this is posted from a Debian machine, and I personally concur with the politics of Debian.

      On a side note, Bill Gates did not make money from being a "cheap penny pincher". He made money by entering a market where the only real costs of manufacture are the initial R&D. As he is able to "value price" a product at ~£200 (windows) that has a per-unit cost of only a few pence (cd, booklet, box), he is a billionaire.

      I could very easily just mod you down (I have mod points) but I decided that the scale of your ignorance warranted a challenging post.
    14. Re:Too little... by Bwana+Geek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A gig? Where have you been? My Gmail storage limit is currently 2869 MB, and tomorrow it'll be even higher. That's all beside the point, though. I love Gates-bashing as much as the next guy, but Microsoft is offering a site designed specifically for web storage. Using Gmail for file storage, last time I checked, was neither supported or even condoned -- hence the reason you need third party apps to do it.

      A much better comparison would be to AOL's online storage service, as mentioned in the article.

    15. Re:Too little... by loganrapp · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's a trick. Get an axe.

    16. Re:Too little... by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      "This statement is far to dismissive for a product that isn't even concrete yet. It's just heading into beta, there is little available data, and you have already dismissed it."

      Gee, kinda sounds like the article describing the Safari beta for Windows.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    17. Re:Too little... by j00r0m4nc3r · · Score: 1

      He made money by entering a market where the only real costs of manufacture are the initial R&D. As he is able to "value price" a product at ~£200 (windows) that has a per-unit cost of only a few pence (cd, booklet, box), he is a billionaire.

      Those R&D costs are probably astronomical for a product like Windows. And don't forget the cost of support, infrastructure, real estate, localization, marketing, testing, security, etc... It's not like they just do some R&D and then there are zero expenses aside from manufacturing.

    18. Re:Too little... by jdray · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't trust my content to them. Every time MSN "upgrades" Hotmail, I lose everything. Luckily I migrated to GMail years ago, so don't lose anything important these days. That all went in the first "great purge." I logged onto my Hotmail account one day to find several years of archived messages had gone up in smoke, and (more importantly), lists of addresses. For some of my contacts, it was the sole repository for information on them.

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    19. Re:Too little... by jt2377 · · Score: 0

      roughlydrafted.com? oh, please. anything that come out of that website is not creditable. Xbox360 is one year ahead of both PS3 and Wii (of course it won't sell as much as Wii since it's not the new "hawtness" such as Wii) and MS have the best online gaming piece (Xbox live) that Wii and PS3 can't match.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox360

      Xbox 360 already sold 12million and keep selling at a steady pace.

      Why don't you try not to make up shit like you did at Digg.com? Everyone know you(roughlydrafted.com) submit your own story that is not creditable and down right laughable! wigger, plz.

    20. Re:Too little... by bruno.fatia · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Profit from what exactly? Having at&t (note the lowercase) cancelling your subscription because you're excedding the unlimited upload bandwitch?

    21. Re:Too little... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Informative
      Those R&D costs are probably astronomical for a product like Windows.

      Windows makes a profit margin of more than 85 percent. To put this in personal terms, for every dollar you spent licensing the OS last year, Microsoft spent less than 15 cents on all Windows packaging, marketing, support, and, oh yeah, improving the product.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    22. Re:Too little... by hxnwix · · Score: 1

      He made money by entering a market where the only real costs of manufacture are the initial R&D. No. A great number of companies exist in this market, and yet Microsoft has cornered entire sectors of it. Why? What sets them apart? Is it that they are frugal and efficient? Penny pinchers, even?

      I could very easily just mod you down (I have mod points) *rolleyes*
    23. Re:Too little... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Practice) accounting adjusts for situations where you have massive up front costs and extremely small production costs. They book the value of the R&D as an asset and then "pay" amortization on the R&D over the course of the product's life time. So the shareholders look at the GAAP reports and they don't see the up front cost, they just see a bunch of amortization payments over the next 5 years or whatever.

      This may seem misleading, and in a way it kind of is, but this is the way GAAP accounting is done. GAAP has little relation with the actual cash flows in a reporting period, but the way it works sort of averages things out over several periods so it shows you what an average profit or loss would be under the current conditions. Without doing things this way, it can be very difficult to tell if a company is making money or losing money.

      So when Microsoft prices one of the thousands of versions of Vista, they aren't just pulling the number out of the air, they've got an estimate of what the real unit cost will be and they consider estimates from marketing on how much they can sell at different price points and other bullshit. So from their perspective, which is also the shareholders' perspective, they don't have a 99% profit margin on everything they sell.

    24. Re:Too little... by Nullav · · Score: 1

      Profit from forcing MS to rethink the space limit and forcing ISPs to rethink their business model.
      I couldn't care less about online storage, but I'd love to be able to get a decent connection speed (particularly upstream) without having to spend three hours haggling on the phone with my ISP.

      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    25. Re:Too little... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You're probably too young to have experienced this since the antitrust conviction, but Microsoft has a long history of announcing products years in advance, without actually having a product. This used to be called vaporware, but you're probably also too young to know the terminology in case you're too young to have experienced the behaviour in its heyday.

      The point of the vaporware marketing tactic is that lots of people like you would actually believe the claims made by Microsoft, or at least give them the benefit of the doubt. That would be enough to hold off on buying an existing, competing product, because Microsoft would promise everything including the kitchen sink, except that it didn't actually have anything concrete like, say, C source code.

      Given its history, the only rational response to Microsoft's claim is to dismiss it out of hand. If they ever come up with a real product, there will be plenty of time then to compare the pros and cons evenhandedly.

    26. Re:Too little... by mashade · · Score: 1

      I think it'd be funnier to fill your 500MB with Windows Updates / Service Packs and Linux ISOs ;)

      --
      Technology tips and tricks.
    27. Re:Too little... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      So from their perspective, which is also the shareholders' perspective, they don't have a 99% profit margin on everything they sell.

      No, but they have more than 85% profit margins in their Windows line.

      It's commonly called "Monopoly rent". Their pricing isn't based on production costs, it's based on the demand curve for their product. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_profit

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    28. Re:Too little... by McFadden · · Score: 0

      The iPhone already has .Mac integration, because iTunes already syncs it with Safari's bookmarks, email/contacts/calendars, and email settings. ITunes in turn, syncs with .Mac.
      That's a new take on integration. It's good to see the reality distortion field is still functioning magnificently.

      Let's take a real world example. A guy has sex with his girlfriend (which after all is a type of integration). She goes off and has sex with another guy (more integration). By your logic, therefore the two guys also integrate (which in our case means having sex). So, by definition, pretty much the entire male population are homosexual.
    29. Re:Too little... by DECS · · Score: 1

      Weren't you paying attention when they explained that [everyone you have sex with] * [everyone they have sex with] = everyone you've had sex with?

      Oh wait, this is Slashdot. Never mind, and I'll get out of your basement and leave you alone with your game. You mom says keep the shouting down.

      --

      One thing that is interesting: Apple has a web based newsreader up on .Mac designed for the iPhone: http://reader.mac.com/

      So yes, there is more integration that you might have imagined going on.

    30. Re:Too little... by Lord_Sintra · · Score: 2, Informative

      Gmail is currently at 2869MB, so that's almost 3GB.

    31. Re:Too little... by ydra2 · · Score: 1

      Better come up with a better compression algorithm because Windows Updates alone already overflows 500MB. But here's an idea, how about using some of that 500GB disk drive you have in your computer. Maybe you could use Linux to access everything over 32GB or whatever the Microsoft limit is.

    32. Re:Too little... by Nullav · · Score: 1

      It's just heading into betaYou could probably use that in defense of GMail three years from now.

      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    33. Re:Too little... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Informative
      But it sure would be nice if Windows Mobile did

      It's not for Windows Mobile either.

      LiveDrive is one of the Vista features that slipped from the actual release. http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Microsof t-confirms-Live-Drive-plans/0,130061733,139267189, 00.htm

      Looks like the space they're offering has slipped a bit too. Still, size isn't important, is it guys?

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    34. Re:Too little... by Nullav · · Score: 1

      A guy has sex with his girlfriend (which after all is a type of integration). She goes off and has sex with another guy (more integration). By your logic, therefore the two guys also integrate (which in our case means having sex). So, by definition, pretty much the entire male population are homosexual.

      Someone's never had a health education class.
      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    35. Re:Too little... by pipatron · · Score: 1

      Cool, do you have any sources for this?

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    36. Re:Too little... by inspectorm · · Score: 1

      www.humyo.com already offers as much storage as you want with a better interface.

    37. Re:Too little... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      do you have any sources for this?

      Just search for Windows Profit Margins. There's a lot of news and discussion about their SEC filings.

      This from the top-ranked page:

      Profit margins for desktop versions of Windows came in shy of 86 percent, according to the 10-Q. That's up from about 82 percent during the same period a year earlier. Office profit margins were 78 percent in the first quarter compared with 76 percent a year earlier.
      http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-966219.html
      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    38. Re:Too little... by Andrzej+Sawicki · · Score: 1

      And still doing the same (not making backups), just switching to another vendor, is better how, exactly?

    39. Re:Too little... by arth1 · · Score: 1
      I bet they rely on two things:

      1. Most people will only use a fraction of that storage
      2. Most people will store highly compressible documents


      I think it'd be a perfect place to store a 500 MB random data file.
    40. Re:Too little... by SpinyManiac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only 32GB limit Microsoft imposes is the maximum FAT32 partition size you can create with Windows 2000 and higher. They can access bigger FAT32 partitions, just not create them.

      If I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will tell me.

      --
      It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
    41. Re:Too little... by nirjhari · · Score: 1

      I think we are talking about two different things. Years ago, I lost a whole lot of messages when Hotmail changed its policy and started deleting messages in sent. Notification about change to their policy and their implementation was simultaneous. Yeah, sure it's a free service, they probably can do whatever they want, but I haven't had similar experience with Yahoo! or Gmail. I have to confess I am "still doing the same thing" even when Gmail offers convenient and free POP3 access, whereas with Yahoo! it is available only for premium service. And as for Hotmail, I don't care any more...

    42. Re:Too little... by Cal+Paterson · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has a long history of announcing products years in advance, without actually having a product. This used to be called vaporware
      I am not sure this is vapourware, as it seems they have some kind of working version, but are just limiting it's use. I could well be wrong though.
    43. Re:Too little... by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

      Which is why MySpace sucks, actually. When visiting a page, you never know how much utter garbage will be downloaded before the page is finished loading. :(

      --
      -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
    44. Re:Too little... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Using Gmail for file storage, last time I checked, was neither supported or even condoned -- hence the reason you need third party apps to do it.


      IME, those third party apps tend to break everytime Google makes a change. I don't really blame either Google or the third party app-maker for that, but the fact is, using Gmail for file storage is like playing Russian roulette with your data.
      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    45. Re:Too little... by penp · · Score: 1

      Not if it's actually just "free for 6 months" :)

    46. Re:Too little... by MDHowle · · Score: 1

      I have my mom using http://mozy.com/ for her backup. It's free for 2GB storage or unlimited for $5/mo. The client is only for Windows, but they have a beta version of the Mac client out.

    47. Re:Too little... by hoggoth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > I bet they rely on two things:
      > Most people will only use a fraction of that storage
      > Most people will store highly compressible documents

      That would be a pretty bad bet, since ONE movie video breaks both of those bets.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    48. Re:Too little... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Exactly how much "video" are you supposed to fit into a lousy 500mb?!?! Even with heavy Divx or Xvid encoding, that wouldn't even hold a single movie.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    49. Re:Too little... by Kozz · · Score: 1

      Fascinating... but what's the catch? TANSTAAFL. Sure, I can't hold them liable for lost/missing data, and their TOS says they could start charging a fee at any time (at which point they'd send users an email).

      How does this business recoup their costs, and what is the ultimate "cost" to me? Again, TANSTAAFL.

      If it's for real, I might start using this service today.

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    50. Re:Too little... by jdray · · Score: 1

      I'm in the same camp. Yeah, I use GMail's POP3 access to download all my mail. But I still lost all the e-mail addresses, etc. to Hotmail's purge, and even if I had backed all the data up, it would only be available where I backed it up, not in a web-based mail client.

      If it had happened just once, I wouldn't feel too bad about it. But I've been the recipient of several purges. They (MSN/Hotmail) have established themselves as untrustworthy with my data. Google, to date, has not.

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    51. Re:Too little... by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 1

      And, I am going to trust my important things to be stored on M$ servers? Isn't that like just throwing your chickens into the foxes lair?

      --

      Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
    52. Re:Too little... by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

      So, by definition, pretty much the entire male population are homosexual.
      But not much of the /. population :)
      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    53. Re:Too little... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      the fact is, using Gmail for file storage is like playing Russian roulette with your data.

      What? That is not a fact.

      Unless gmail is throwing away messages (AFAIK, every email lost by gmail so far has been restored) your data is quite safe. You might not be able to access it through a programmatic tool. But that's not gmail's fault, and it doesn't compromise the integrity of your data.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    54. Re:Too little... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Even with heavy Divx or Xvid encoding, that wouldn't even hold a single movie.

      Depends on the resolution. I have 700MB DivX movies ~2 hours long which are damned near indistinguishable from a DVD - and at the same resolution.

      If you drop down to a lower resolution, still higher than SDTV, you can most definitely get a full movie in 500MB.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    55. Re:Too little... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Gmail offers a gig

      A gig? From my gmail, "You are currently using 201 MB (7%) of your 2870 MB." I do remember when they only offered a gigabyte, though :)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    56. Re:Too little... by ldephil · · Score: 1

      From their privacy policy :

      Please note that any video, audio, image, or other content file you choose to share on HUMYO becomes published content and is not subject to this Privacy Policy.

      That's the catch

    57. Re:Too little... by BattleRaisin · · Score: 1

      This looks like utter crap! Shiny utter crap... If you're looking for a good file hosting site try MediaFire it's far superior in every possible way.

  2. "We"? Speak for yourself. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I still hate Microsoft, and still love Google. You hear that Google? I love you, and this submitter doesn't. When you take over the world, you know who had your back.

  3. Google already done it... indirectly by Yoooder · · Score: 5, Informative

    GMail storage anyone? It lets you use your GMails many GB's of storage as a network drive. 500 fixed MB is pretty paltry in comparison...

  4. Oh puhlease by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    That's not even enough space for a regular linux ISO. Come on Microsoft, you can do better than 500MB - it's about time you helped getting decent software out to the masses. /me ducks

  5. Love for... by ajenteks · · Score: 5, Funny

    They're offering it to a select 5,000 test users for now ... each and every one of the Zune adopters?
    1. Re:Love for... by whiteranger99x · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sure, but where do the other 4995 test users come from?

      --
      Join the TWIT army now!
    2. Re:Love for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adopters is too politically correct; those poor people would have lost their jobs

    3. Re:Love for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For Zune owners plus Vista users...

    4. Re:Love for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but where do the other 4995 test users come from? All the Vista users!
    5. Re:Love for... by n3tcat · · Score: 1

      More than likely, they're spambots who accidentally filled out the registration form.

    6. Re:Love for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pink! And probably Purple!

    7. Re:Love for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me and my 4 mates have bought Zune, you insensitive clod

  6. You've Got To Be Kidding... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Would that all my "stolen" music and "pirated" movies would fit in 500MB.

    Frankly, MS, that's smaller than my current USB drive, and that drive isn't actually very large by today's standards. And it has faster access, too.

    It's easier, when I want to store something, to GMail it to myself. They have over 5X this amount of storage -- and aren't Microsoft!

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:You've Got To Be Kidding... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Informative

      "It's easier, when I want to store something, to GMail it to myself. They have over 5X this amount of storage..."

      And a 20 megabyte attachment limit.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:You've Got To Be Kidding... by njhunter · · Score: 2, Funny

      The size of their thumb drive array must be enormous.

    3. Re:You've Got To Be Kidding... by greenguy · · Score: 1

      I believe it's 1.5 miles high.

      --
      What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
    4. Re:You've Got To Be Kidding... by ScottyMcScott · · Score: 0

      yah not to mention all the prOn.

  7. cool by blhack · · Score: 1

    Evil microsoft aside, this is actually pretty cool. I know that i keep quite a few little apps and docs and stuff inside of $home so that i can grab them via scp (pscp on windows). With this service, I won't have to go through the steps of googling PSCP, then downloading it to whoever's C:\WINDOWS\system32\ folder. Most of these files used to reside on a flash drive, but given the ubiquity of high speed internet these days, the necessity of keeping a 2-3mb file on removable media seems to be kindof gone.

    This service just simplifies a process that most /. users probably perform several times a day.

    --
    NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    1. Re:cool by timmarhy · · Score: 1

      what the hell? how does do anything that isn't out there and million times better do?

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    2. Re:cool by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Set up a WebDAV server with SSL, then you can just mount it as a folder using the 'Web Folders' thing in Explorer, mount it on a *NIX box, or use any of a large number of tools for accessing it.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > what the hell? how does do anything that isn't out there and million times better do?

      Not does do anything that isn't out there and million times better does?

    4. Re:cool by Threni · · Score: 1

      > This service just simplifies a process that most /. users probably perform several times a day.

      Except most Slashdot users have figured out that Google offer the same, only with almost 6 times as much storage, and with an email address thrown in.

    5. Re:cool by fireman+sam · · Score: 1

      http://folders.live.com/ http://tou.live.com/en-us/default.aspx

      Section 8: ...snip...

      However, by posting or otherwise providing your submission, you are granting to the public free permission to:

              * use, copy, distribute, display, publish and modify your submission, each in connection with the service;
              * publish your name in connection with your submission; and
              * grant these permissions to other persons.

      --
      it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
    6. Re:cool by John3 · · Score: 1

      I agree with you on this. Been testing Windows Home Server which also offers remote access to files. With the availability of high speed Internet service (I have FIOS at home...blazes) I really don't see why someone (novice or average user) would want to maintain a home server or even a NAS device. Just use Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, whomever for remote file storage. Flickr already does something similar but just limited to photos. They provide an easy to use upload location, tools to manage the photos, and tons of space.

      --
      "We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
    7. Re:cool by DECS · · Score: 1

      Privacy, security, speed? Even with a hot downlink, you generally get a slow upload. And many people don't have fast internet, particularly here in the backward US.

      Relying on service providers is great as long as they work flawlessly. Once they go "offline for maintenance" at random times, or lose your data "sorry, we recommend backups," your perspective changes. Google is also infamous for deciding on a whim to cancel user's accounts, which makes depending on them a bit risky. Is Microsoft going to do better? This company playedforsure its own significant partners, is it going to give a crap about joe schmoes?

      --

      Using Apple's iPhone in the Enterprise
      The iPhone is quite obviously targeted at consumers. However, it offers a significant leap forward in key features which make it attractive to business customers, particularly executives who like having the best communications tools available.

      ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley Says Apple's iPhone Needs ActiveSync
      Mary Jo Foley, who describes her ZDNet blog as "an unblinking eye on Microsoft," seems to have been charged with the unpleasant task of producing a somewhat positive sounding iPhone story, and gave it her best shot. Unfortunately, it wasn't very well thought out, and reflects a preoccupation with flattering Microsoft.

  8. Hate what? by jshriverWVU · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This move is the latest in a series by the previous large corporation we all loved to hate to compete with the newest large corporation we might hate and fear, Google.

    Wait what? We hate who... I can guess we all dislike MS, but I dont think fear or hate should be in the same sentence with Google.

    1. Re:Hate what? by Zeebs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Google hasn't burned it's social credit with tech types, yet. I'm not claiming they will, and I'd like to think they won't.(Why yes I am interested in buying a bridge why do you ask?) I think the might hate and fear is a little strong but not far off in meaning.

      --

      Happy Noodle Boy says "F###ing doughnut! Mock me? You fried cyclops!!"
    2. Re:Hate what? by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      Lately, some Slashdotters have been posting about how they fear Google is going to know everything and abuse this knowledge. I noticed there has been a lot of this "Googlebashing" going on lately. I don't know whether it's just a few loudmouth posters, or a general feeling of unease among many posters, or just MS astroturfing.

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    3. Re:Hate what? by russotto · · Score: 4, Funny

      Lately, some Slashdotters have been posting about how they fear Google is going to know everything and abuse this knowledge.
      Yeah. The difference is that while it's fear and caution with Google, it's the next best thing to certain knowledge with Microsoft. Entrusting your data to Microsoft is like entrusting your hand to the garbage disposal.
    4. Re:Hate what? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      "hate" - no, not yet. No real reason to hate.

      But

      "fear" - definitely. The bigger they get and the more information they accumulate the easier it will be for them abuse their power.

      The best way to ensure people or corporations or governments don't abuse their power is to refuse to give it to them in the first place. Trusting them because they're the 'good guys' is a very distant second place.

      At this stage google has enough marketshare in search, and enough presence in email, analytics, google payments, social networking, stuff like youtube, etc that the potential for abuse is becoming enormous. If you have any sort of google account they can link a tremendous amount of stuff to it if they wanted to... or if they are ordered by a court to. Even if you don't have a google account, they can link a tremendous amount of information together, and possibly even identify you.

      For example if you so much as reply to someone with a gmail address google gets a source ip address they can link to search history if they wanted to. Sure its not fool proof, and yes ip addresses change all the time... but its reliable enough to be useful for some tasks, and promising enough to be alluring to those who'd want to abuse it. After all, the number of households who've used the ip address I currently have in the last 18 months is probably around 2-3.

      The point is googles 'net' is now wide enough, that it can snare almost anyone. Simply having that much power, even if they don't currently plan to use or abuse it is clearly a much higher risk than if they simply didn't have that power in the first place. Perhaps paranoid levels of 'fear' are unjustified, but they've reached the point where their moves should be scrutinized with caution. And then there is always risk that they'll be coerced to abuse that power by government.

    5. Re:Hate what? by turing_m · · Score: 1

      Google logs a little over 50% of all searches in the US. And rising - another 1% in only the last three months.

      For those people who use it, it decides what is newsworthy and what is not, acting as an overriding editor for many people as print declines. But it has more power than the television networks and movie studios used to; it's more like the telescreen in 1984 in that you are being watched at the same time, always.

      It knows what you search. It knows what pages you like. It never forgets. Daniel Brandt articulates it better.

      http://www.google-watch.org/

      I don't yet have reason to hate google. But fear, certainly, just as any entity wielding a large enough cudgel should rightly be feared. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    6. Re:Hate what? by MorpheousMarty · · Score: 1

      Entrusting your data to Microsoft is like entrusting your hand to the garbage disposal.
      Exactly, only do it when you have to and make sure no one else is near the switch.
    7. Re:Hate what? by Cappy+Red · · Score: 1

      Lately, some Slashdotters have been posting about how they fear Google is going to know everything and abuse this knowledge. I noticed there has been a lot of this "Googlebashing" going on lately. I don't know whether it's just a few loudmouth posters, or a general feeling of unease among many posters, or just MS astroturfing. I got most of the "_____-bashing" out of my system with Microsoft a few years ago, so now I keep my feelings of unease somewhat quieter. And with me, it is a personal general feeling of unease towards Google. It is something only vaguely rooted for the most part, but nonetheless present.

      Anyway, I do my best to bash them for wrongs they have actually committed, and not for my personal feelings of discomfiture alone.
      --
      This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
  9. No problem, I one for one welcome... by 605dave · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder if that enough disk space for all my most sensitive documents.

    Because if there is one company I trust not to abuse their power...

    --
    Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
    1. Re:No problem, I one for one welcome... by NickFortune · · Score: 1

      Suddenly, I have this overwhelming urge to upload 500 megs of encrypted white noise, and just leave it there. Maybe pick a mildly suspicious name for the file.

      I mean, if they play fair, no problem. Of course, if they get curious they could expend a lot of resources trying to find the plaintext in that package :)

      Still, so long as everyone didn't start doing it, there'd probably be no problem...

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
  10. and how! by twitter · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Too little too late, indeed. .mac springs to mind as do dozens of specialized services from Yahoo, Google and others. Offerings by "social networking" sites and photo sharing sites redouble it all. How much do you want to bet that M$ adds insult to injury by selling adverts on the service?

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:and how! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, that was stupid

    2. Re:and how! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me just remind the parent that .mac still costs money. On a subscription model, no less

      From: http://www.apple.com/dotmac
      Basic Membership
      One-year subscription $99.95

  11. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Informative

    And will be doing it for real shortly with Gdrive, which is apparently no longer a rumor.

  12. I'll let you in on a little secret by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ftp.exe

    1. Re:I'll let you in on a little secret by blhack · · Score: 1

      Most home DSL connections use a dynamic IP address, not to mention the fact that upstream spead on my cable modem is something around 30kbps.

      --
      NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    2. Re:I'll let you in on a little secret by nschubach · · Score: 1

      http://www.dyndns.org/ (and my Linksys router updates it auto-magically every time it changes) 30kbps = 2MB file in 9-10 minutes(?) You still have to upload the file even with the internet drive alternative. Either way, your going to take at least 9 minutes for that 2 MB file. The difference being, one you can do while you wait for your coffee to brew while shooting the shit with your coworker and the other you can do when you leave for work. It's a matter of preference I guess. Then again. If you have an FTP server at work, you can just upload it and leave for work as well. The FTP solution has so much more flexibility.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    3. Re:I'll let you in on a little secret by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean around 30KBps, your upstream in kbps is in the 300ish range.

      And if someone tries to correct me with KiB or something, I'll kick them square in the nuts! (cartman's voice).

    4. Re:I'll let you in on a little secret by Arterion · · Score: 1

      FTP is pretty insecure...

      --
      "That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild
  13. Interesting Combination of Apps Coming Up by popo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It should probably be noted that Microsoft also bought FolderShare.com (which is a very sweet little app).

    The free-storage combined with FolderShare's file swapping is starting to paint an interesting picture... IMHO I wouldn't discount this as "trying to be like Gmail"...

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:Interesting Combination of Apps Coming Up by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      This isn't nearly like "trying to be like gmail". If it was, it would have significantly more storage space (as was mentioned earlier) and would allow access via standardized hooks. Any bet on the microsoft product implementing a broken virtual filesystem design that only works with Windows Vista?

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
  14. Here's hoping Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comes out with something similar.

    This is a killer product offering, and having something clean and open would be great.

    I'm thinking Google Talk (ie, Jabber with any client able to connect) vs MSN Messenger

    If you haven't already, time to get going Google!

    1. Re:Here's hoping Google by timmarhy · · Score: 0, Troll

      how the fuck is this anything killer? news flash storing files on teh intarweb is nothing new.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  15. Re:"We"? Speak for yourself. by AchiIIe · · Score: 1

    Have you tried it yet?

    Don't speak so fast, competition is ultimately good for the consumer.

    Here you go, give it a spin: http://folders.live.com/

    --
    Nature journal lied in Britannica vs Wikipedia Ask to retrac
  16. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Yoooder · · Score: 2, Interesting
  17. What does it mean by pembo13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I rather the evil Google corp have (some) of my data than Microsoft have any of my data?

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:What does it mean by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

      I guess it means you have no problem with a company literally slogging through your data, mining it for info so as to target ads and do who knows what else with it.

      --
      -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
  18. Would you like a chocoleet! by Adambomb · · Score: 1

    GMailFS. Why wait to see how long before microsofts offerings are available.

    Overhead is a bit of a pain but its certainly useable, unless you're wanting to swap to it of course =).

    --
    Ice Cream has no bones.
  19. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Utopia · · Score: 1

    Hotmail also offers mailbox sizes with several GBs.
    The primary problem with mail based storage is that you have to split the files and use http form upload.
    Http form uploads are very unreliable.

  20. 500M document by zakeria · · Score: 0

    with all the crud thats included in their document formats you'd think they would have the scenes to give quite a bit more space than 500M this is an excellent opportunity to embed some MP3's / Movies or even Linux distro's inside the documents... warez

    1. Re:500M document by Aleksej · · Score: 1

      with all the crud thats included in their document formats you'd think they would have the scenes to give quite a bit more space than 500M this is an excellent opportunity to upload a minimal Microsoft® Office 2007 document...

  21. Omnidrive by Simon+Garlick · · Score: 4, Informative

    www.omnidrive.com

    Users get 1Gb free, and up to 50Gb is available if you want to pay.

    Disclaimer: not a shill, just a happy beta tester.

    1. Re:Omnidrive by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      I can't really rely on a service to host a full 1 GB if it's
      1. Still in beta
      2. Of an unknown brand. Yes, it matters. A well known company has much much more PR to lose if they mess up. A startup company has very little.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  22. Gdrive by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    where's the Gdrive?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Gdrive by charlieman · · Score: 1

      Right here!

  23. yahoo? by euice · · Score: 1

    I sure can understand yahoo writing such a story: Only compare your dick with smaller ones.

  24. I'd love to see the EULA by RobertM1968 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The most relevant information to this whole thing (to me) is the EULA MS is foisting on people. Some of their previous EULAs for their online properties have included giving them the right to sell, market and/or redistribute any content you create and upload to those online properties. That, and other privacy issues (using the information to profile you in some manner and then sell ads to you via their LiveSearch stuff for instance - as referenced in a previous post regarding their work on obtaining as much private, identifying data on people as possible) are things I'd like to see clearly addressed and spelled out in their EULA.

    I am also interested in how this all fits in with their current DRM schemes and related practices. Will they DRM any music I upload? Report me to the RIAA? Assume the program archives I upload are pirated and sue me?

    All in all, I see this service as one for only the brain dead - based off MS's previous track record for trustability. (Yeah, it's probably not a real word, get over it).

    1. Re:I'd love to see the EULA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you just consider uploading your files *unencrypted* to this Online Storage service? I think the brain dead is you.

    2. Re:I'd love to see the EULA by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      The most relevant information to this whole thing (to me) is the EULA MS is foisting on people.

      Read it for yourself.

      That, and other privacy issues ...are things I'd like to see clearly addressed and spelled out in their EULA.

      It doesn't sound that far removed from Google's.

      I am also interested in how this all fits in with their current DRM schemes and related practices. Will they DRM any music I upload?

      Apparently, no. I just uploaded, via XP+FireFox, a DRM free mp3, from an eMusic file I own. Then accessed and downloaded that same file via Ubuntu+FireFox box. Plays just like any other mp3.

    3. Re:I'd love to see the EULA by MorpheousMarty · · Score: 1

      If you are one of these 5.000 people with access to this service write a review and post. Nothing kills FUD more than an article showing that a service works exactly as advertised, with no magic or booby traps.

    4. Re:I'd love to see the EULA by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      If you are one of these 5.000 people with access to this service...

      I didn't think I was. Got no notice or anything. Went to http://login.live.com/ and signed up. Already had a MS Passsport logon from long ago. It let me sign up. Checking again this morning, my account is still active.

    5. Re:I'd love to see the EULA by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      Ah... this would be the part then:

      However, by posting or otherwise providing your submission, you are granting to the public free permission to:
      * use, copy, distribute, display, publish and modify your submission, each in connection with the service;
      * publish your name in connection with your submission; and
      * grant these permissions to other persons.

      So they can sell or re-distribute your work, and give others permission to do the same...

      And then there is this section...

      9. Privacy. We consider your use of the service to be private. However, we may access or disclose information about you, your account and/or the content of your communications, in order to: (1) comply with the law or legal process served on us; (2) enforce and investigate potential violations of this contract; including use of this service to participate in, or facilitate, activities that violate the law; or (3) protect the rights, property, or safety of Microsoft, its employees, its customers or the public. You consent to the access and disclosures outlined in this section.

      We may use technology or other means to protect the service, protect our customers, or stop you from breaching this contract. These means may include, for example, filtering to stop spam or increase security. These means may hinder or break your use of the service.

      In order to provide you the service, we may collect certain information about service performance, your machine and your service use. We may automatically upload this information from your machine. This data will not personally identify you. You may read about this information collection in more detail in the privacy policy at http://privacy.microsoft.com./

      Which we have learned from previous cases (in court) and previous anti-trust actions, truly means that MS WILL collect personally identifiable information, under the clause of better serving you/better maintaining their service (which is vaguely covered in the related link they provided - and stretched in reality/practice to include such actions).

      And then this section:

      19. Assignment. We may assign this contract, in whole or in part, at any time with or without notice to you. You may not assign this contract, or any part of it, to any other person. Any attempt by you to do so is void. You may not transfer to anyone else, either temporarily or permanently, any rights to use the service or any part of the service.

      Which allows them the rights to permanently or temporarily re-assign their rights to others - which translates into "we can give anyone whatever we want that you upload, and the rights to see all the data we collect on you - as defined in the parts of the agreement where you gave us those rights - but you cannot do the same."

      Just some of the relevant ones I gleaned...

      Ah well... it's to be expected... and a far cry from Google's attitude of keeping your private data private. Though they (MS) have re-worded the "We can give away or sell or re-license your content" section to be more ambiguous, it is still there... along with the "we'll gather whatever information we want on the basis of improving the service" section.

    6. Re:I'd love to see the EULA by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      No, I considered that (even if it wasnt MS, who from working with them in the past, I know not to trust) I would use my own backup scheme (NAS, USB, SCSI array)...

  25. they've got complete access to those files now so- by Locutus · · Score: 1

    it's no big deal if you're worried about that. And if you're worried about security.... WTF are you doing on Windows to begin with? ;-)

    I can see the lemmings falling over themselves to jump off this cliff already.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  26. MiSpace by kaos07 · · Score: 1

    Is that what they'll call it I wonder...

  27. B-b-but it's F-F-FREE! by Telecommando · · Score: 1

    Of course we all know Microsoft would never, EVER mine your personal data for it's own gain.

    Pass. Mostly because I have no need of it.

    Between my music player, camera SD cards and USB sticks, I'm carrying nearly 18G of storage in my pockets right now.

    --
    Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
    1. Re:B-b-but it's F-F-FREE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here I thought you were just happy to see me.

  28. Re:they've got complete access to those files now by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    they don't have access to MY files.

    I never run MS update, live. I use the offline method and my xp box NEVER connects directly to the net.

    (ctupdate is the thing I use. I now swear by it.)

    never let your winblows box 'autoupdate' itself ever again. always update OFFLINE. much more sane, that way. and secure.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  29. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Utopia · · Score: 5, Informative

    Its against Goog policies to use file storage software and your can can be suspended.
    http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answe r=43692

  30. Re:"We"? Speak for yourself. by AchiIIe · · Score: 4, Informative

    Meh, I spoke too fast.

    I tried it. It sucks.
    Nothing innovative, plain old technologies. You go to a page with 5 filename inputs, you select each file, you put them in folders, you share certain folders.

    Screenshots:
    * http://tinyurl.com/2vaa7e (main page)
    * http://tinyurl.com/38fsb9 (uploading screen )
    * http://tinyurl.com/2j53kp (folder with files)

    It does not seem to be "mountable" either.

    --
    Nature journal lied in Britannica vs Wikipedia Ask to retrac
  31. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Chabil+Ha' · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, but you can only send emails that are a maximum of 20MB. I'd love to have to split up a bunch of archives in 20MB chunks...

    That aside, the mere fact that nobody can be held liable for the lost of data and that backups are likely not made, I wouldn't feel bery comfortable with the data being there as a means of recovery.

    --
    We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
  32. Great. Just great. by sweetandy · · Score: 1

    That's a brilliant idea! I can't wait to read the EULA saying "Microsoft Corp can at any time access, copy, edit, and delete any and all files uploaded by users for whatever users." Except in a quieter way. Awe this is great, as if privacy ever existed with MSFT! I hope that there isn't a single sorry sod who falls for this nonsense.

    1. Re:Great. Just great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont know, it still has a high degree of usefulness even if its a untrusted(unauthorised copying of your content) and unreliable (subject to deletion at any time) storage medium. There are proven mature methodologies already in place that turns such a resource into a valuable service:

      Use volume managers to chain blocks of microsoft-diskspace together with RAID5-style checksuming validation - deleted stuff will be regenerated, with "hot spares" microsoft-diskspace volumes cycled in when needed in to keep a degree of redundancy. Use encrypted filesystem volumes to stop your stuff from being read by or taken by Microsoft. All are well understood functions that are easy to implement.

      If you understand the workings of something like FUSE, you could write a linux filesystem driver in an hour or two, utilising existing raid and encrypted volume support. It sure sounds like a great place to store & serve linux ISOs and free software development projects from! Too bad if you run Microsoft software though...

  33. The same as everyone else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    How much do you want to bet that M$ adds insult to injury by selling adverts on the service?

    How much do you want to bet that everyone else does? Oh, wait. They already do. Never mind. Clever use of the dollar sign, though.

    1. Re:The same as everyone else by DECS · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For all that can be complained of .Mac, it has no ads.

      --


      ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley Says Apple's iPhone Needs ActiveSync
      Mary Jo Foley, who describes her ZDNet blog as "an unblinking eye on Microsoft," seems to have been charged with the unpleasant task of producing a somewhat positive sounding iPhone story, and gave it her best shot. Unfortunately, it wasn't very well thought out, and reflects a preoccupation with flattering Microsoft.

    2. Re:The same as everyone else by CrabbMan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, for a hundred bucks a year for 1Gig of storage, I'd say there'd better not be any ads.

    3. Re:The same as everyone else by DECS · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, you do get what you pay for. I'd agree that .Mac needs a significant upgrade, but the baseline service is $99, for the same as what MS is offering. What .Mac really needs is a speed upgrade and far higher bandwidth limits, so it makes any sense as a hosting service.

      When I had the chance to skewer Steve Jobs about it, it did.

      -

      Answers from Steve Jobs at Apple's Shareholder Meeting
      At Apple Inc.'s May 10 annual shareholder meeting, a series of proposals were presented for voting after which CEO Steve Jobs answered a series of questions from the audience.

      ZDNet's Mary Jo Foley Says Apple's iPhone Needs ActiveSync
      Mary Jo Foley, who describes her ZDNet blog as "an unblinking eye on Microsoft," seems to have been charged with the unpleasant task of producing a somewhat positive sounding iPhone story, and gave it her best shot. Unfortunately, it wasn't very well thought out, and reflects a preoccupation with flattering Microsoft.

    4. Re:The same as everyone else by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I pay 7.99 a month for dream host, and I have 246 GB of data storage. Ok, I haven't actually tried to upload that much. Currently I have 1.5 gigs up there, but 246 GB is my quota. Why pay for something like .MAC when you can just get some shared hosting. You can use it as a website too. I'm surprised that more people don't have shared hosting plans. They are cheap, and provide you with a lot of features.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    5. Re:The same as everyone else by Grimbleton · · Score: 0

      I love Dreamhost. I got in on one of their uber deals a few years back and I'm hardly paying anything for my web storage... er.. I mean my "website" ;D

    6. Re:The same as everyone else by Secshunayt · · Score: 1

      Or, you could take that money and buy a 250 gig SATA drive for your PC, thereby not having to worry about pesky things like slow upload speeds. With your plan, it would pay for itself in about seven months.

    7. Re:The same as everyone else by enomar · · Score: 1

      Shared hosting companies don't market or tailor their products to the masses. Most of them have terrible user interfaces that mix 10 useful features with 1000 worthless ones; just so they can claim they they provide more features for 50 cents less a month. It's a commodity business where everyone is competing via # of features / price. That isn't a formula that results in wide appeal.

      --

      :wq
    8. Re:The same as everyone else by suv4x4 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I pay 7.99 a month for dream host, and I have 246 GB of data storage. Ok, I haven't actually tried to upload that much.

      Oh yea, those 246 GB on a shared host what a great example.

      You get 246 GB of disk quota, and if you upload more than 5-6 GB, the FTP mystically gets slow. At ~10 GB, the support calls you to say "you seem to, uhh, be using too much resources on our server, get it? yea... resources. watch it".

      At ~20GB they shut you down and mail you that you're a an effin abuser of their resources, and all the poor users on the same server had their sites down because of you. They forgot to mention that they managed to stuff 200 sites on a server with 100 GB disk and promise them all 246GB quota.

      If you're a thick head and keep uploading, at around 40 GB upload they'll send a hitman in a black mercedes to circle your house and watch at you suggestively.

      At around 60 GB, they call the hitman to hit you, your family and anyone who ever knew you hosted with them.

      Truth is, most people upload their "page coming soon. LOL!" index, and forget about the rest, so get to live on.

    9. Re:The same as everyone else by satoshi1 · · Score: 1

      A bit angry, are we?

    10. Re:The same as everyone else by maztuhblastah · · Score: 4, Informative

      Bullshit.

      Again, I call bullshit. Yes, Dreamhost does oversell like crazy. They even admit to it!. But they actually will let you use all the bandwidth and disk you're given. All of it.

      Right now, a quick look at my panel shows that I'm using 64.1GB of space (as of last measurement). This month, I've moved over 1TB of HTTP traffic alone (I've used another 20GB or so of FTP traffic). No black mercedes. No phonecalls. Not even a damn e-mail from Dreamhost.

      As Dreamhost points out, the only usage-related issue they'll cut you off for is CPU usage. For serving static content (i.e. not PHP pages), Dreamhost actually kicks ass. They really will let you hit both your quotas. Sure, you won't be able to run the next iTunes Movie Store off one of their shared hosts, but you can actually use all the space and not get so much as an e-mailed warning.

    11. Re:The same as everyone else by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Only on /. could someone clearly drawing an argument on ad absurdium be described as "Interesting".

    12. Re:The same as everyone else by corsec67 · · Score: 1

      Which is funny, because I am on Dreamhost, same plan, and am at about 100GB full.
      But, I don't use ftp, I use scp, and don't use Dreamhost for mail or database.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    13. Re:The same as everyone else by operagost · · Score: 1

      Or he could do what he's doing and not worry about the house burning down with his pesky data. Or carrying a pesky little external drive to a safe location every day.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    14. Re:The same as everyone else by bluephone · · Score: 1

      I must be dead. I have 88GB on my DH account right now. And a year or so ago I pushed 380GB in traffic in one day. The biggest thing that DH cracks down on is CPU use, which they try to limit to about 30 CPU minutes a day.

      --
      jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
    15. Re:The same as everyone else by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      At around 60 GB, they call the hitman to hit you, your family and anyone who ever knew you hosted with them.
      I think you may possibly be exaggerating.
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    16. Re:The same as everyone else by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      That is a strange definition of "offsite backup".

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
  34. Not Enough! by BillGatesLoveChild · · Score: 1

    > Microsoft Corp. is giving computer users up to 500 megabytes of online storage

    500Mb is not enough. It should be at least enough to store an upload of a Vista DVD. ;)

    > This move is the latest in a series ... of companies doing exactly what someone else has already done. Oooh look! Someone's written a web browser!

    1. Re:Not Enough! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Remember when search engines were the latest thing? Suddenly everyone and their dog wrote one. Or when blogging went mainstream? Suddenly, you had a billion blogging places all over the net.

      It's just the same now. There will be a culling and when the dust settles, 3-4 places will remain, with maybe one or two others that are kept afloat artificially with the financial aid from some large company. This is probably one of the latter group.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  35. Re:they've got complete access to those files now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > never let your winblows box 'autoupdate' itself ever again.
    > always update OFFLINE. much more sane, that way. and secure.

    WTF are you talking about? Microsoft have full system access every time you install an update - you've no way of knowing what they're installing.

  36. One question by edwardpickman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Are viruses included in that 500 meg total? They could really cut into that 500 meg number.

  37. Best Buy has been... by martin_henry · · Score: 1
    ....offering the same or better for only around $25!

    http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7773 117&st=512+usb&type=product&id=1142289732645

    it's worth the investment once you consider microsofts storage will require internet :P

    --
    www.purevolume.com/martyd
  38. Already a free alternative by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    There's a free service called Openomy which offers 1GB of free "network drive" space.

    The whole thing seems very dot-com-era-ish to me; I'm not clear on how they're going to make money off of it, and until I understand their business model I'm not going to trust them with anything valuable, but hey -- it would beat emailing myself stuff. Apparently they're going to offer "Premium Memberships" in the future which will offer extra services (this sounds a little like "3. ???", but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt).

    They have an open API, and file organization is done via tags (which is either a bug or a neat feature depending on your stance on tags vs folder-hierarchies in terms of organizational paradigms). The API is similar, in some ways to Flickr's -- applications need to be authorized before they can access user data, using cryptographic keys, and it uses simple HTTP calls for the actual interaction/transfer.

    Anyway, I haven't played with it much but I'm definitely pretty intrigued. I think that online file storage is definitely harder to monetize than free email (you can't offer context-sensitive ads when the user only accesses the site through an API and a frontend app, and if their files are all encrypted archives or something), but it seems like there are enough possibilities that we're going to see some serious competition in the market soon.

    And there's nothing better than a bunch of cash-flush tech companies competing to give the most stuff away for free...reminds me of 1998...

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  39. Re:subby loses by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

    Now that's a lie. I think most of the people singling Google out for privacy are stupid(everyone else regularly does much worse and nobody calls them up on it) but there are quite a few non-MS-lovers who think Google is evil. The obvious one is the GoogleWatch guy although he's mostly mad that nobody linked to his website so he got no PageRank.

    --
    Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  40. Warez, pr0n, MP3's... by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 1

    Won't take long for the "creative programmer" community to turn Microsoft's new offering into a wonderful, free, shared, non-traceable BIG FILE SERVER for all the warez, pr0n, and MP3's they'd like to keep online.

    Microsoft isn't competing with Google, they're competing with Pirate Bay. Why torrent or FTP when you can just mount a drive?

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
  41. If you like the little guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try XDrive at www.xdrive.com. 5 gig for free.

  42. once upon a time.. by josepha48 · · Score: 1
    .. I use hotmail. then MS bought them, and converted over to IIS. They promptly lost some of my email. When I contacted them about it, they said, sorry, we cannot recover it. Ever since then I have not trusted MS with my email, so I can't see trusting them with my documents either.

    Also consider that for less than $40 USD, you can get a 4Gig usb drive, why do you really need this online storage?

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!
    Does slashdot hate my posts?

  43. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by w3stfa11 · · Score: 1

    Xdrive is what you're looking for. It's got 5GB just for you with no attachment limit.

  44. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Google is ahead of them, this is MS's response. Platypus and more on Platypus.

  45. I've got it covered by Statecraftsman · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm perfectly capable of losing my files and documents all by myself. Thanks anyway.

  46. i will store? by vx922 · · Score: 0

    the finest in goatse and hot shemale action

  47. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Jugalator · · Score: 1

    Gmail is awkward though. Mostly because it's intended for mail, and comes with a 20 MB attachment limit. There are workarounds like GDrive and stuff, but if this service would come with actual merged files without cludges to solve the limitations, I'd much rather use that.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  48. Free? Perhaps you already paid for it! by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
    I didn't RTFA or RTFS, but if this is only for Windows users then you've long ago paid for this with your Windows purchase.

    If not locked in to MS, then expect some sort of incentives of the form 500MB for everyone, 2GB for Vista systems. A nice low-cost bait to get people to buy a high price product.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  49. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by DogDude · · Score: 1

    You're talking about a bad workaround, in violation of the Gmail terms of use. MS actually might get to free online storage before Google. It's obvious they're playing catch up, but if they can do it, it'll still be big among the rest of the population that are not Slashdot freaks.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  50. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by cperciva · · Score: 2, Funny

    [Gdrive] is apparently no longer a rumor.

    I think you mean "Gdrive has been rumoured for the past year to no longer be just a rumour". There's no announcement or even confirmation from Google.

  51. Format of the storage... by Vexler · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...will be a .PST file.

    First 500 MB are free? That is, until it hits that 2 GB limit. Then everything goes down the toilet.

  52. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Anonymous+McCartneyf · · Score: 1

    And Yahoo!Mail now has unlimited storage, plus links to a blog site (for public storage--complete with photo album option) and what used to be Flicker. Their e-mail folder actually has links for "photos" and "attachments."

    --
    There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
  53. Re:"We"? Speak for yourself. by John3 · · Score: 1

    Probably still in the early stages in terms of features and interface. They need to work out the performance and reliability issues and get some user feedback from the initial testers. They obviously are taking it slow because they are limiting the hours the server is even available for use during the initial test.

    --
    "We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
  54. Trust by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Who would honesty trust their data to some company that you dont even have a valid contract with? ( i dont care if its yahoo, microsoft, or countless others )

    Sure, if you are paying customer to a remote datacenter with TOS, i can see this, but some free service that is subject to terms that change on a dime, security holes all over the place, or it might suddenly dissapear?

    No thanks, ill stick with my ( encrypted ) 2gb usb key, that doesnt even need network access.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  55. Re:subby loses by Goaway · · Score: 1

    Actually, no, he just suffers from that particular kind of paranoid schizophrenia that makes people write huge amounts of incoherent text on badly-designed websites, and draw diagrams with lots of images and arrows (http://www.google-watch.org/gifs/connec5.gif).

  56. Awesome by obeythefist · · Score: 1

    Microsoft will compete with Google, maybe they will compete in terms of volume, so we will get about 2GB from MS and 2GB from Google as well. If I make up enough dummy accounts I can back my whole home network up over the wire. And distributed too! MS can keep one copy and Google can keep the other. That way if one destroys the other when the war comes, I'll still have a good backup.

    --
    I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
  57. Stop bashing Microsoft so ignorantly by MasaMuneCyrus · · Score: 1

    Hotmail already offers 2GB. This isn't an e-mail storage service like GMail (though Gmail can and is used for some file storage), this is a separate endeavor meant entirely for file storage.

    1. Re:Stop bashing Microsoft so ignorantly by Checkmait · · Score: 1

      Hotmail already offers 2GB. ....and also requires you to have some bullshit Windows Live ID stuff. I lost huge amounts of valuable information using Hotmail (mailing lists and addresses) when they switched over suddenly. Since I didn't want to sell my soul to Microsoft to regain the data I had lost, I had to start over again. It sucked.

      this is a separate endeavor meant entirely for file storage. I have learned that Microsoft almost always has a financial motive or incentive behind its actions. Even the donations which it makes, as these are tax-deductible and also improve M$'s standing in the public eye and on the political scene. Here, it is clear that Microsoft wishes to make even more people dependent on them (and their servers) instead of Google and GMail. The same idea as with Hotmail, to corner the webmail market. It's old wine in new bottles.
      --
      "All you need is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." -- Mark Twain
    2. Re:Stop bashing Microsoft so ignorantly by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

      "I have learned that Microsoft almost always has a financial motive or incentive behind its actions."

      OMG, how old are you, twelve?

      You think your hero Google doesn't have finantial motives for its actions? Do you still believe in Santa too?
      Wow. Welcome to the real world, pal.

      --
      -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
    3. Re:Stop bashing Microsoft so ignorantly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG I'm guessing you're barely into double-digit years, yourself.

  58. Admiral Akbar: "It's a Trap!" by CheeseburgerBrown · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is an obvious honeypot ploy to draw unsuspecting, God-fearing users everywhere to upload their copywrong material and thereby indict themselves for extraordinary rendering by a nefarious acronym.

    Run away! Run away!

  59. Now you have to read the EULA! by jskline · · Score: 1

    I betcha!!! Just read the EULA before you sign up for the *free* service. A requirement buried in the document will state that at any time they can seize your documents or files and use them for any purpose what-so-ever without any responsibility to you--not even financially. And the lawyers will make sure of that.

    Better not put anything up there that is important!

    --
    All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
  60. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

    The primary problem with mail based storage is that you have to split the files and use http form upload. Http form uploads are very unreliable.

    Uh, or you can just use POP/SMTP, as GMail supports that.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  61. Hi I'm a Mac 7500 ... by ta+ma+de · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I was made in 1997 and I want my freakin hard drive back.

  62. Paranoia, or is it? by Ub3rT3Rr0R1St · · Score: 1

    Who knows if this is just a way for the "good folks" at MS to get a look at their client's common files, and use it as some sort of marketing ploy for spam and whatnot.

    I say this, because the ISP I used to work for, whose name I won't mention, used to scan customer e-mails, and require that we ask for alternate e-mails for spamming purposes.

    Honestly, if this is MS's scheme, it really wouldn't surprise me.

    If it isn't the case, and this is just for the sake of competition, then MS should realize that they're name and quality has been smeared enough, and they should try to improve on their current merchandising ventures instead of dabbling with new ones. For God's sake, make what you already have actually function, don't just make more and more useless crap.

  63. yes! how! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Yes! ads! on the! service! just like! everyone! else! you don't! know! what is is! but it's! insult! to injury! very insightful!

    Seriously, who mods these comments up? Pownce is Kevin Rose's (of Digg) new venture, and it looks like they're fine with the adverts:

    Can my company buy advertisements?

    But of course. We haven't had the chance to build a self-service advertising system (something we might do in the future) so send us an email to advertising@pownce.com and we'll work with you to run a campaign that suits your needs. Big or small, we can likely build a campaign with you.

    Just like everybody else. But this is "M$" so it's "insult to injury". Way to go.

    And .mac? That's a great example, considering they don't have ads because they nail you for $99/yr (or $200 "for the kids"). Only Mac users who have no clue about teh interwebs sign up for that crap. Of course, for $99 a year I can only expect I won't see any ads. But you never know.

  64. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the deal with their certificate chain? xdrive signed by "VeriSign" (no, not the right Verisign) that is signed by an AOL dialup user-issued certificate?

    Why do they fake a certificate of VeriSign? And once you accept the chain, what else will this new "VeriSign" sign for you?

    Something doesn't smell right here.

  65. Privacy issues? What about using TrueCrypt? by SpecialAgentXXX · · Score: 1

    As I read this article, the very first thing that popped into my head was privacy issues. We've all ready how the NSA, CIA, FBI, etc. accessed AT&T's phone records, etc. I wouldn't put it past them if they are already accessing and data-mining Yahoo! and Google E-mail.

    The service gives users who e-mail documents between home and work computers an alternative way to access their files on the go. Users can keep files private or share them with people they know or with anyone on the Web.

    When I need to take some of my work home with me to finish it up, I always use TrueCrypt to create a volume and use AES-Twofish-Serpent with Whirlpool. Since it is free, I recommend that everyone here use it. You have nothing to lose if you do and if you don't - you don't want to be in the news as the employee who lost another database of customer records.

    Sadly, "in this day and age (tm)," you need to be vigilant of all of your data as everyone from hackers to governments want to see what you are doing.

  66. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  67. AOL's XDrive blows Microsoft's trial away by scrim · · Score: 2, Informative

    AOL's XDrive is available now and offers users 5Gb for free. It certainly makes 500Mb look paltry. And of course don't forget, the Microsoft offering will exclude Macintosh users. When they go to Microsoft Live they get told they are not running a supported browser. This just goes to show that Microsoft's real strategy is turf protection of their Operating System monopoly.

    --
    Mark S Twitter/AIM/Skype:ekivemark B: http://ekive.blogspot.com
    1. Re:AOL's XDrive blows Microsoft's trial away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it require IE specific tech?

      If so, I can understand. IE on Mac is a horrible pos.

  68. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by trolltalk.com · · Score: 1

    ... or leave your home linux or bsd box on and have it text message you when its IP changes (about once a year if you're on cable) and have a terrabyte of raid5 storage available, as well as ftp, http (if your ISP blocks port 80, listen on another port), ssh, etc for an initial investment of ~$350.00 for 3 x 400 gig hds.

    Its not like you have to have this set up on your fastest box - you're limited by your upload speed, so drag that obsolete sub-gigahertz duron or celery out and put it back to work.

    ... or do you really want Microsoft (or google, or AOL, or anyone else) to hold your files for you?

  69. Need for a cool app by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 1

    Someone needs to write an app that would let a user group various free storage locations (google, ms etc) into one mountable drive. Just a thought. If this already exists let me know.

    1. Re:Need for a cool app by SpectralDesign · · Score: 1

      nice idea -- even better, build it to be transparent to software raid.

      --
      Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr. Seuss
  70. 500 megs. by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Now, call me ungrateful, but 500 megs? Let's see what such a service could be good for.

    1. Offsite backup.
    2. Making your data "mobile", by making it available wherever you are.
    3. Transfering your data to another machine (local or remote).
    4. Distributing data

    Should anyone have other ideas, please share them.

    Well, for 1, I'd choose pretty much anything BUT Microsoft. They aren't really the company that comes to my mind when it comes to data security.

    For 2, there are USB sticks. Now, you may argue that they cost money while this service is free, but c'mon, 500 megs? I just gave away a 1GB USB stick 'cause it was too small for my needs, and sticks in the 500m region don't cost a fortune.

    For transfer, locally I'd suggest USB as well and for remote, connect the machines directly.

    And for distribution, especially of ... erh ... content whose copyright I cannot claim legally, I'd again choose anything BUT Microsoft.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:500 megs. by Terrasque · · Score: 1

      and sticks in the 500m region don't cost a fortune. Around here a 512 stick cost less then a decent hamburger, so this is really a nobrainer.

      BTW, I am a bit disappointed that the "itsatrap" tag haven't shown up yet ;)
      --
      It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
    2. Re:500 megs. by MojoStan · · Score: 1

      Now, call me ungrateful, but 500 megs? Let's see what such a service could be good for.

      1. Offsite backup.
      2. Making your data "mobile", by making it available wherever you are.
      3. Transfering your data to another machine (local or remote).
      4. Distributing data

      Should anyone have other ideas, please share them.

      5. "File sharing component of the Windows Live application suite."

      That's what Brian Hall, general manager of Windows Live, is calling it in a much better article from PC Magazine. According to that article, the current limited beta is also limited to 50MB per item (so I can't share my WMV HD-encoded home sex video with my friends).

      Hall also says "Live Folders" can be private, public, or shared with certain users (e.g. co-workers having edit permissions on an Excel spreadsheet). I'm sure other free "storage" services allow this. E-mail notifications about shared folders can be sent to whoever is sharing the folder.

      Hall seems to hint that "Live Folders" will integrate nicely with their other "Live" applications and their upcoming "Windows Live Suite." (A list of current betas, apps, and services here.) Since I don't use any Live apps, I'll wait for online reviews to see if it will be worth checking out. I'm not "camping out" in anticipation.

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

  71. Nice by ixtapa · · Score: 1

    This is fantastic! I need to free up some space on my hard drive, so I'll upload my copy of Vista I got from The Pirate Bay. More seriously, does anyone actually trust them wrt privacy issues?

  72. I don't need storage: I NEED BANDWIDTH! by Tracy+Reed · · Score: 1

    What the heck good is 500M of free storage when it still takes way too long to upload 500M of data? I seem to get around 70k/s upload speed on my Cox cablemodem (business cablemodem, I think I have 512k/s upstream) and it takes two hours to upload 500M. The average user will take even longer.

    I currently use Amazon S3 for storage (mostly backups) and I have 100G of stuff on there for my 4 monthly full backups. It takes me 4 full days to upload a full backup. So I spend nearly a quarter of the month constantly uploading! Thank the FSM that I have a Linux box doing QoS using the fine Wondershaper script so I don't even notice the uploading.

    1. Re:I don't need storage: I NEED BANDWIDTH! by adpowers · · Score: 2, Informative

      Amen. I'm experimenting with S3 for backup (offsite backup, in additional to my optical media backups), but the upload time is killer. What scripts/program are you using for backup? I'm currently using JungleDisk because it looked like the best of OS X.

    2. Re:I don't need storage: I NEED BANDWIDTH! by Tracy+Reed · · Score: 1

      I use two things for backup. The first and simplest is that I use s3cmd and a shell script to backup my EC2 instance to S3. s3cmd is part of s3sync which is found at s3sync.net. My shell script is as follows:

      export AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID=myaccesskey
      export AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY=mysecretaccesskey
      hostname=`hostname -s`
      cd /home/treed/s3sync ./s3sync.rb -d --progress -r -v /mnt/tmp/ mybucket:
      # Sync up anything that didn't make it in the last attempt the previous night
      # Delete everything so we don't fill up the disk
      rm -rf /mnt/tmp/*
      # Make a new backup and upload it
      cd /mnt/tmp
      tar -zcvf amazon-`/bin/date +%y%m%d`.tar.gz --exclude /proc --exclude /sys --exc
      split -b 1073741824 amazon-`/bin/date +%y%m%d`.tar.gz amazon-`/bin/date +%y%m%d`
      cd /home/treed/s3sync ./s3sync.rb -d --progress -r -v /mnt/tmp/ mybucket:

      But that is just a kludge which I use since the EC2 instance has such a fast connection to S3. For my home machines I use bacula to do the backup to file storage volumes and then I use a python program which I hacked together using the BitBucket library to query the bacula mysql database for full volumes and then it looks into the directory where bacula dumps the volumes and if it finds them there it uploads them to S3. When the upload finishes it deletes the volume from the local disk. I cron this program to run every 5 minutes checking for stuff to upload. This turns out to be a pretty slick solution and is working really well so far. You can find the source code on my blog at http://tracyreed.org/

    3. Re:I don't need storage: I NEED BANDWIDTH! by adpowers · · Score: 1

      Interesting, thanks for the reply. If you don't mind me asking, what are you using EC2 for? IIRC, it is still a closed beta.

    4. Re:I don't need storage: I NEED BANDWIDTH! by adpowers · · Score: 1

      Nevermind, I'm an idiot, I just tracerouted your website.

      PS: Grr, slashdot reply time limits.

    5. Re:I don't need storage: I NEED BANDWIDTH! by Tracy+Reed · · Score: 1

      At the moment I am just using it to host my personal website/blog, backup MX, dns, etc. Great performance and at $70/mo for a xen virtual machine with 2G of RAM it is a great deal. Every now and then they open up some slots. I posted on the message board and someone (from Amazon IIRC) dropped me a line when they had some capacity opened up. They call it beta like google calls everything beta: It's pretty solid. I have been using it for around 5 months and had no problems. Just be aware that the data stored in EC2 is not persistant and you can't go wrong.

  73. Tight integration could make this useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only way I could see this being useful is if it's tightly integrated with the OS. For example if you could walk up to any windows machine, select "Log onto Microsoft [name here]", type in a user name and password and it automatically mounts your 500 megs no extra software required.

  74. Yes, but is it ssh(fs) accessible? by macemoneta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    AOL gives everyone that signs up for an IM account 100MB of web space, but the interesting thing is it's ssh accessible. That means that you can mount it with sshfs or sftp, making it a handy place to keep (encrypted) data that you access from multiple machines. For example,

    sshfs userid@members.aol.com: /some/directory

    The above (after responding to the password prompt) makes the 100MB available in your local "/some/directory/". The data is also web accessible at:

    http://members.aol.com/userid/

    I find the space, even though small, very handy for storing small amounts of useful information. Using encfs on the sshfs mounted space allows remote access to things like server status/logs in a secure fashion, even when the machine is not directly SSH accessible.

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    1. Re:Yes, but is it ssh(fs) accessible? by brian.gunderson · · Score: 1

      Not to call you out on it, but I do believe you are the lone, sole AOLuserSlashdotter. That is pretty sweet tho.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    2. Re:Yes, but is it ssh(fs) accessible? by macemoneta · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm not an "AOL user", but I do have an IM account. Signing up for AIM is the only requisite to get the space.

      --

      Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    3. Re:Yes, but is it ssh(fs) accessible? by N7DR · · Score: 1

      OK, I've tried everything I can think of, but I can't get this to work. I can sshfs mount the AOL space just fine, but I simply cannot get it to work properly if I then apply encfs. encfs mounts the space properly, but the space is then not writeable :-( I tried using the --public option to encfs, but then the sshfs-mounted filesystem can't be found. Whatever I do, I eventually end up with an error message. If you have any interest in helping or simply providing instructions, please e-mail N7DR at arrisi dot com (unless you want to post public instructions here).

    4. Re:Yes, but is it ssh(fs) accessible? by macemoneta · · Score: 1

      The problem is that you need to pass the "--no-default-flags" to encfs. For example, I typically use:

      sshfs -o follow_symlinks,reconnect,workaround=rename user@members.aol.com: /some/directory

      followed by:

      encfs --no-default-flags /some/directory /some/decrypteddirectory

      The 'sshfs --help' command will provide useful info on sshfs, and 'man encfs' will give you the details on encfs. There's always help at linuxquestions.org too.

      --

      Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

  75. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

    Why not just get a shared hosting account. I'm currently getting 246 GB for 7.99 a month. A lot cheaper and a lot less maintenance than your solution. Plus you don't have to worry about your cable company getting angry with you for running a server.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  76. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by WhiteWolf · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned already, honestly. Add the benefit of knowing exactly who is looking at your data, and the potential to access your data the way YOU want it, and it sounds like a win.

    Security Focus - by way of the Register - had an interesting "birds eye view" of why you might not want your data in the hands of a third party here.

    Paranoia? Maybe, but wouldn't it suck if your personal data happened to be living in the same storage as $PERSON_OF_INTEREST who was the subject of a FISA Warrant or a pedophile?

    --
    Eye kneed eh Grammer chicken.
  77. It's all part of the government conspiracy by falken0905 · · Score: 0

    Yes sir, encourage everyone to store all their documents and files online with Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, etc. All the much easier for the government(s) to go snooping around hoping to find someone they can charge with something nebulous and awful. What? You say 'they can't do that!'? Wanna bet? Secret courts, secret searches, secret detentions, secret prisons, secret (fill in the blank). Thank you, no. I'll keep all my stuff on my own drives and equipment. At least if they decide to search my stuff it hopefully won't be a secret from me. Unless, of course, they secretly enter my house, secretly diable my alarm system, kill my ferocious dog, and secretly search my stuff. But HA! Just let them try to secretly search the body cavity where I keep my secret USB drive. Ha!

  78. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd love to have to split up a bunch of archives in 20MB chunks...

    You already are splitting them up into chunks, and much much smaller chunks than that. They're called blocks. Practically the whole raison d'etre of filesystems is to abstract over silly little implementation details like this. The fact that GMail has a very large block size (20MB instead of 4kB or what have you) doesn't seem like that big of a problem to me.

  79. .mac is fast! by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    connections to most free online drives tend to be slow, usually the best is about 100Kb/sec and usually a quarter of that. .mac goes at megabytes per second.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  80. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Zantetsuken · · Score: 1

    That aside, the mere fact that nobody can be held liable for the lost of data and that backups are likely not made
    Ya, but how much do you wanna bet (without even RTF or checked any of MS's pages on this) that the TOS/EULA on this new service from MS includes a clause that they aren't responsible for data-loss, and another clause that no file may be bigger than 30MB.

    The reason I say 30MB is its *just* enough for MS to say "Hey, ours is more than Google!" but yet not by enough to really matter (as in you still won't be able to put anything more than 50-100MB up). A week from now I'll bet that Google will announce a superior competing service - assuring many chairs flying in Redmond accompanied by many an utterance of "I'm gonna fucking kill Google!"
  81. Oh puhlease-PXE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny but since most computers nowdays can network boot using PXE. A service having premade OS images could be useful. The only problem I see is that it doesn't work over the internet, but a reflashed Linksys could help bridge the gap.

  82. Redundancy! by SimonShine · · Score: 1

    Dude, just use two synchronised Gmail accounts! Then if one breaks, the other will still be around! ^_^ (Alright, some humour intended)

    --
    Take off every 'ZIG' !!
    1. Re:Redundancy! by Chabil+Ha' · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but since the implementation of the accounts is abstracted from our control, who is to say that the data for both accounts happens to live on the same HD array? And if it goes kaput, our data is still gone! This is akin to creating two partitions on a single HD, one your working copy, the other backup and the physical disc gets corrupted. Both go with it.

      --
      We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
  83. Re:I am Microsoft! by fatlaces · · Score: 1

    suck my kiss

          This is once again too little too late again by macroshaft industries again. What a boring corporation.

  84. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

    There's no announcement or even confirmation from Google.

    Did you check? I tried digging for a bit, and amusingly enough, I got the link for this page from Google:

    This blog from a week ago shows that it's possible the project is active and mayhaps even advancing...

    --
    Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
  85. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by trolltalk.com · · Score: 1

    I have a hosting account already. However, lets face it - remembering to load stuff onto a remote server can be a real PITA, especially if what you want is sitting on your home box, which is turned off because you figured you had everything you need on the shared hosting box.

    Then there's the convenience of being able to ssh in and do whatever I want.

    And being able to run stuff that exceeds the shared hostings per-process memory limit (twiki, for example, requires 32 megs).

    Lastly, not having to worry that Microsoft or Google or anyone else is "collecting stats" or "doing research".

  86. A select 5000 Testers? by Your.Master · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm confused at the summary. I just signed in at that site with my live ID to check it out and I could access it, upload and download. Unless I just happen to be one of the select 5000, and nobody told me.

  87. Re: Pulp Fiction's Jimmie: "Did you see a sign..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jimmie: "Now let me ask you a question. When you came pulling in here, did you see a sign out in front of Microsoft that said Dead Data Storage?"

    Jules: "Jimmie, you know I ain't seen no..."

    Jimmie: "Did you see a sign out in front of Microsoft that said Dead Data Storage?"

    Jules: "No, I didn't."

    Jimmie: "You know WHY you didn't see that sign?"

    Jules: "Why?"

    Jimmie: "Cause it ain't there! Cause storing data ain't their f****** business, that's why!"

  88. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for the helpful tip tip.

  89. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
    GMail storage anyone? It lets you use your GMails many GB's of storage as a network drive.

    Not the same thing. You can't share that unless you give everyone your password. If I just want to store stuff for myself, I have DVD sneakernet.

    Yahoo has a "Briefcase" for filesharing, but it's total is just 30 MB. Presumably after MS goes online they'll up that, as they did total mail storage when GMail came. So even though I probably won't use it, I welcome MS's entry.

  90. Ha! by ddusza · · Score: 1

    "All your files are now belonging to us!!!"

    --
    Don't fear the penguins
  91. Re:Mod Parent +1 Insightful by russ1337 · · Score: 1

    >>> "It looks like you are uploading an MP3 with no DRM!

    Hey, wanna check out Microsoft's new music file sharing service? Just use the username: "RIAA" and password: "Sue-MSFT-here" for access to 500GB of freshly squeezed illegal tunes that Microsoft are kindly holding on their servers.

  92. Anyone heard of Xdrive? by crazyvas · · Score: 2, Informative

    Xdrive.com by AOL? 5GB of free space. And software to map your xdrive as a network drive.

  93. Re:"We"? Speak for yourself. by Monsuco · · Score: 1

    And I for one would like to welcome our new search engine overlords.

  94. Re:"We"? Speak for yourself. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and when Google becomes the next Microsoft, we'll remember all the Microsoft-hating sheep who had their back.

  95. Windows XP ISO by jihadist · · Score: 1

    I'm uploading the Windows XP ISO right now. The password is "retribution."

  96. 2 gigs free by srwood · · Score: 1

    mozy.com

  97. Re:"We"? Speak for yourself. by revengebomber · · Score: 1

    I still hate Microsoft, and still love Google. You hear that Google? I love you, and this submitter doesn't. When you take over the world, you know who had your back. Anyonymous coward. Gotcha.
    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  98. you could be set up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's also the possibility that you could be setup for blackmail coercion with a ton of phony stuff that you had nothing to do with, but gets associated with you.
    I think similar to this happens to powerful legislators eventually, and they get controlled that way behind the scenes, I mean beyond normal corruption, on purpose phony "dirt" creation. "Vote such and such on this bill, or we release these documents showing your secret swiss bank account " and etc., said bank account something "they" setup on purpose for framing and blackmail.

  99. Such generosity from Microsoft by elronxenu · · Score: 1
    That costs like 10c a month on Amazon's S3 service.

  100. Re:Too little...Slices. by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
    Gee, mass production. Who would have thought you could apply that to the software industry?

    Duplication, not production.

    Just as the invention of the printing press led to the rise of the media barons, personal computing has created our software barons. The difference this time is that each computer is fully capable of duplicating any software it can load, so our barons need powerful protection to maintain scarcity of their product.

    Hopefully, when our modern Star Chamber is overturned and its support vanishes, the power of the software barons will also evaporate.

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  101. Re:Too little...Slices. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Duplication, not production."

    *looks at CD in hand*

    "The difference this time is that each computer is fully capable of duplicating any software it can load, so our barons need powerful protection to maintain scarcity of their product."

    And that all it can do. DUPLICATE. People CREATE.

    "Hopefully, when our modern Star Chamber is overturned and its support vanishes, the power of the software barons will also evaporate."

    You should hear yourself some time.

  102. Re:Too little...Slices. by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
    You should hear yourself some time.

    I'll do that. Thanks for the advice.

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  103. AJAX? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is nice, but lacks the familiar file system features like cut/copy/paste. Check out Fresh Logic Studios Folders for an AJAX UI with all the bells and whistles... like drag and drop, right click, etc.

  104. the real solution by Nyph2 · · Score: 1

    the real solution to hosintg all of your files online or sharing files is something I dont know how to code and keep waiting for.
    It connects to multiple free storage servers, probably multiple accounts per aervice
    It chunks data, creates a header keeping track of where chunks are, and can upload or download basically as fast as your connection can handle by increasing the number of connections & hosts you're connecting to, decreasing the load per service - and probably still getting more than any other user of the service by connecting multiple times.

    If you wanted to get careful about this you could impliment some sort of passive checker of accounts & something similar to raid style redundancy to keep your files up even if a site goes down or an account gets banned. If you did this you'd probably want to include some sort of bandwith monitor to assess where of the available locations of a chunk to download from.

    It would be a bit annoying to keep a seperate list of accounts for personal and per group - and creating accounts often needs to be done by hand, more annoying still -- but we're talking about unlimited online storage at up and down speeds as fast as your connection can handle, and in the fancier version it's resilient to services cracking down on a program like this without wiping your data or even losing access.

  105. Someone explain to me... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 1

    What function does this service offer that FreeBSD + tftpd wouldn't? Log in over the Internet, shuffle files about, leave. Same thing, with the added bonus of not getting assraped by Microsoft's EULA.

    Ya know, frankly someone needs to create something like that: Preinstall a stripped-down FreeBSD on a micro-sized computer, duck tape a bigass hard drive to it, and run nfs/tftpd and some media center software on it. Then you plug it in to your network, put it's address into your browser, fill out the questionaire, and it's ready to use. Just be sure to put in a button that says "geek" to take away the cutsey stuff and it's golden.

    1. Re:Someone explain to me... by Anrego · · Score: 1

      I believe we call that NAS

  106. Great by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

    by the previous large corporation we all loved to hate

    Rub it in, won't ya. Yes, we're losers that love to hate a damn software company. It what makes us wake up on the morning.

  107. And I thought my privacy meant nothing to Google.. by Zekasu · · Score: 1

    Google may "peak" at your email, but so far I've seen nothing to prove that it tries to incriminate you based on what you have stored in your Gmail inbox. I feel so much safer knowing Bigger Big Brother is offering me to use his storage.

  108. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

    You still have a maximum file size of 20MB for messages you send and receive, which I think was what the GP was trying to say.

  109. Welcome to my Parlor... by Azuma+Hazuki · · Score: 1

    ...said the spider to the fly. I hope I don't have to explain how utterly stupid it would be to trust Microsoft with any of your personal files.

    Though really, I'm against online file storage of this sort anyway because it makes the assumption that you have a network connection. I think local file storage is best for most people; at least you can get to your stuff anytime (unless there's some kind of major hardware or software failure) that way.

    --
    ~Eien no Inori wo Sasagete~ Searching for my Hatsumi...
  110. Who will ever need more than... by weinrich · · Score: 1

    ...640K? Sound familiar? 500MB in this day in age is a joke. But to state that it is specifically targeted for users to store their digital pictures and *video*, that's just plain insulting.

    --
    Error: .sig not found, using /etc/passwd instead
  111. Google not the target here by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

    Apple is. Consider the whole antitrust stigma. If they start doing exactly -or damned close to- what Apple does with the .mac account then there is grounds for them to do it. After all others are already doing it. I have a strong hunch that this is the first step in MS trying to counter/catch up with the gains Apple has with the .mac/iLife/iPod combo.

    Sure, everyone's "eyes on MS" are on how it relates to Google, but MS has never operated that way. Mac is out of the single digit share and posting gains each month. Vista is a bit slow on pickup, and Leopard is due out soon. Apple is pulling off what Linux people have said for years: put an appealing application on the MS platform. The iPod/iTunes(/and iPhone?) combo has done that.

    Consider the different paths for Business use of Linux and Windows. Windows essentially was taken up by businesses because they wanted workers that were using the apps already (and thus didn't need training or as much). They then eventually started working their way into the server market. Linux started on the serve rmarket and is making it's way to the desktop.

    Now, MS is trying to make it's way into the "personal device" market - phones, Zune, "media PCs". Apple, however, seems to be going the opposite direction. iPod (audio), iPod (Video), OSX (Intel). So far there is good evidence this strategy, if it exists is working. But the question here is which strategy is more likely to succeed assuming equal competence?

    I'd say the apparent Apple strategy is the winner. Seriously, does having a Windows PC make you WANT a Windows phone? Most Windows people I know (professional Windows engineers) find the opposite. People with Windows machines that keep failing also develop an aversion. But Apple's apparent strategy of making the iPod and using that leverage to get people to look at other Apple products is the one based on people *wanting* something. It's been the big Linux desktop failing. Linux Desktop has been largely about it being an escape from MS, not a seeking of something from a positive desire.

    Microsoft's compatibility issues only strengthen the perceived Apple strategy. People have learned to expect compatibility issues with devices from different makers. So, the thinking may be, if you get an iPod sure you'll start with iTunes on Windows but then start looking at Macs "just to be sure". And many who try OSX seem to quite enjoy it. I know my wife is loving it, and I am doing pretty well.

    MS does not have the "accessory" market range or penetration Apple does. Ultimately, the Mac ads and current orientation are clearly at the masses. People seem to have an innate sense that computers *should* be easier and less hassle - and they're right. For average home user, OSX does fit that expectation. This is the real threat to MS, and it's someone MS has fought before. It is common when facing potential enemies to take on someone you've beat before as a morale and PR move.

    All the signs for me point to MS being a tad concerned about Apple's gains. After all, if people start using non-MS software at home and run non-MS machines at home, they know that is the road to deeper penetration. They've been down that road.
    Apple doesn't have to take over as dominant. But a 25-40% share for Apple would spell serious trouble if not general doom for the monopoly (but not necessarily the company). If the experience with OSX leads more people to consider Linux[1], and Linux can capitalize on it, then the monopoly is in greater risk.

    1: I'm using Linux as shorthand for "The Linux Community"

    --
    My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  112. But seriously by lindseyp · · Score: 1

    mp3.com, anyone? How can microsoft justify allowing you to upload music to their servers where it could be downloaded by anyone with the password?

    --
    j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
  113. Not a Legal Issue (honest!) by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1

    I wonder if they'll allow MS employees to use this service to store email that MicroSoft (ahem) doesn't have room to store on their own servers.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  114. Yeah, sure, I would trust MS with my data.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't even give them the public stuff because I'd have to worry about its integrity all the time.

    No thanks.

  115. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    In a completely non-trolling and neither MS- nor Googlebashing way, I feel like poking fun at the fact that MS has to fabricate their vaporware all by themselves, while Google can have it for free without a single official press announcement.

    Perhaps this is a secret to its success...

  116. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Unoti · · Score: 1

    I was doing some development a couple days ago with a library for accessing Google mail under program control, and Google did in fact suspend my account for 24 hours. It happened after I tried to read about 1200 email addresses from a particular tag. The gmail drive extension is probably dead now, unless I'm mistaken. Perhaps that extension has a different way of doing it than what I was using?

  117. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by Unoti · · Score: 1

    Actually let me amend that. It was working great until I tried to read the contents of those 1200 emails in a loop. The suspension seems to be traffic oriented. So the drive extension may be fine as long as you don't do something really outlandish like try to actually read the contents of too many of your emails.

  118. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by adpowers · · Score: 1

    Still waiting on that confirmation from Google...

    That website just shows that they are still internally using an internal program.

  119. Gmail offers what? by More_Cowbell · · Score: 2, Informative
    Gmail offers a gig"

    Um, Taking a look at my account now, it's at 2869MB of storage and growing daily. (they actually have a ticker: mail.google.com ) I think you are thinking of when they first started?

    Oh, by the way, Gmail is also available to everyone now too, without an invite.

    I was going to mod on this story...

    --
    Experience teaches only the teachable. -AH
  120. Pfffft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have that much storage on an SD card sat on my keyboard, and the same on a couple of pen drives in my shirt pocket. Why on earth would I rather upload my data somewhere else than keep it in my pocket?

  121. 500 Mb is so small you can't see it by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    No, really. Look at the ridiculously small mmcmicro and transflash camera cards that are around now. 512 Mb on a card ¼ the size of a postage stamp.

    --
    Deleted
  122. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by donaldm · · Score: 1

    Yes Google has already done this but like any business Microsoft is looking into ways of making money by offering this service although from the article I would assume the first 500MB is free or until they get enough subscribers to nickel and dime them for additional storage. You really don't think Microsoft would do this out of the goodness of their hearts do you? It must be noted that this is not an evil plan in-fact it is actually quite a good service "but".

    Now this brings up a can of worms:
    - Who actually owns your data?
    - Can other parties look at your data without your permission?
    - Is your data secure?
    - Do you trust Microsoft for confidentiality or any other data storage service for that matter?
    - What is it going to cost me over the life of my data?

    The few trivial questions I have raised are not just important for the average home user but all business in general. All computer users should be aware that any physical device will eventually fail and unless you have backups and the knowledge to restore from them you are eventually going to loose your data. Unfortunately most people including business don't think along these lines until the inevitable happens and then they are severely embarrassed if not out of pocket.

    As more and more data is generated people or business must put a price on their data and spend appropriately on computer disaster recovery. For the home user this is a dilemma because it is not difficult to have over a Terra byte of data when you have a media center and the only reasonably viable solution is to have a separate and equal sized disk or disk array to duplicate that data. This is viable and reasonably cheap but "fire" and "theft" makes your backups worthless. Of course the same can be said for any backup strategy if you keep your backups in your house or on-site.

    Even if dual layer Blu-Ray disks were the same price as a single sided DVD's backing up a Terra byte would take 20 Disks (forget about DVD). Holographic Versatile Disk burners and Tape systems acceptable for business but they are not cheap. Still you need to have off-site storage (eg. friends or relations place) to provide a reasonable level of protection for your data.

    If you have valuable but a small amount of data it would be best to save it off-site and even though Google does provide approx 2.5GB of personal mail storage you are at least free to opt for Microsoft when they start their service, which I would assume would integrate quite nicely with your existing Microsoft OS. I would even go as far as saying that Microsoft may even provide a backup service for non Microsoft OS's. If if generates an income why not.

    Now this also brings up the question of DRM and the law. What happens when you save your DVD's, or HD movies (legitimately purchased of course - cough!) to your media center disk(s) then backup this data and send it off-site to a "trusted" person such as a relation or Google or Microsoft. Are these providers breaking the law? To prevent this these providers must vet your data but is this not breaking your trust in them?

    --
    There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
  123. 500MB's? by VariableGHz · · Score: 1

    Other sites, like DropBoks for example, have over 1GB of storage, AES encryption and are much less of a target for data theft/hacking. I think I'll pass on this until they offer something like true drag and drop and unlimited upload sizes, etc. There's a lot of competing sites for online data storage (just too lazy to do the Googling right now...)

  124. spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    499MB of it will be filled with spam, as usual

  125. The security implications of this are horrific by giafly · · Score: 1

    Microsoft Corp. is giving computer users up to 500 megabytes of online storage for their documents, music, photos and video.
    Basically you're putting your life on the line. Allegedly, early this June, *chan took down subeta by hacking an admin's GMail account (using social engineering to get the password). Having gained access to the 1GB+ of emails stored online at GMail, the hackers then used this information to cancel Subeta's domains, servers etc. and destroy the business. Allegedly.
    --
    Reduce, reuse, cycle
  126. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

    Just use Webdav and always use the shared drive. That way, you don't have to remember to upload. Ok, it's not quite as fast as a local drive, but it will get the job done. Personally I've tried running a home server, and it's just too much trouble. Between your cable connection cutting out, changing IP Addresses, it's just not worth the trouble.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  127. Re:I am Microsoft! by Ticklemonster · · Score: 1

    What is up with the first post on so many articles here on slashdot being like the above? Can slashcot not just remove them, or are they afraid of offending the free speach nazis?

    --
    Karma: Bad is the liberal way of saying this guy won't drink the kool aid here on slash dot. I wear my Karma with pride
  128. Hmmm by Heembo · · Score: 1

    Ok, who wants to write a service that combines many free accounts to have one big multi-gig online storage engine for free?

    --
    Horns are really just a broken halo.
  129. Re:I am Microsoft! by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

    Or you could just browse at 0 rather than -1...you won't see them once the mod's get to them :)

    --
    People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
  130. Too Bad by pseudosero · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    My pocket has 512.

    --
    sometimes, nothing.
  131. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by trolltalk.com · · Score: 1

    Maybe its time to demand better service. My cable connection went out this winter because a 5-alarm fire down the street burned through the wiring (most people also lost power). They restored service the next day, and there were a few temporary outages while they took the opportunity to upgrade the local infrastructure. The time before that was because I moved.

    The cable modem is always on - my IP changes maybe once a year, if that. Running a home server in my case is as simple as just leaving the machine on when I leave for the office ...

  132. Transferring Pronto: +1, Presidential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I'll have Fredo move all of our wiretapping e-mails from the Fuhrerbunker to the Microsoftbunker.

    Regards,
    W

  133. no wireless. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1


    Less space than a Nomad. Lame.

  134. Re:death before dawn? by Trent+Hawkins · · Score: 1

    Good? Bad? Just more room for porn on the internet.

  135. Re:I am Microsoft! by denverradiosucks · · Score: 1

    It's the Digg effect on Slashdot.

  136. Re:Mod Parent +1 Insightful by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

    Nobody in their right mind would upload ANY personal documents to free hosts unless the filenames end in .tc.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  137. Re:subby loses by mulvane · · Score: 1

    I'm far from being an MS fan. Of the 32 computers in my house, only 5 computers run an MS OS. Soon to be 6 when I get my daughter her computer built. The rest of the machines are mostly headless servers or htpc running freebsd. My distrust in google is in how they are trying to dominate markets they have never been involved in before. They are trying to be a be all, end all to the web in general. Once they are the monopoly, once they own the fiber and are your isp, your search engine, your offline storage, your god knows what else, who is to stop them? The became who they are through the people and the ability to provide based on a do no evil mentality, but as history has shown itself to often, all good things will fall. Remember, their was a time when even Wal-Mart was good for the economy and the middle to lower class.

  138. my biggest problem with online storage by vuffi_raa · · Score: 1

    color me a stick in the mud- but,
    if I am putting personal data online it is accessible to being stolen not to mention that it will be accessible to the host (google, MS etc)- I don't want to do that
    if I am putting up someone else's data I am violating intellectual property rights- I can get in trouble for that
    if I am putting up open source or creative commons material there are better places to do that
    if I put up work data it is a security risk for my company
    am I missing something here?

  139. I don't even trust Google enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to give them my data. Why the hell would I trust *Microsoft* with my data!

  140. Pick your Web hoster by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    Dreamhost offers 200GB of Web space (well, 148GB now, they drop it a bit every little while - but it can go up to nearly 400GB), AND offers a file storage plan where you pay, IIRC, $2.50 per gig ONE TIME for them to host the file FOREVER (or until they go out of business, whichever comes first.)

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  141. Re:I am Microsoft! by Ticklemonster · · Score: 1

    Pixel Pusher, please share with me this marvelous tactic which should de-diggilate my ./ experience! Where do I change that? And thank you.

    --
    Karma: Bad is the liberal way of saying this guy won't drink the kool aid here on slash dot. I wear my Karma with pride
  142. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by MeditationSensation · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't feel berry comfortable either!

  143. Re:"We"? Speak for yourself. by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

    Don't speak so fast, competition is ultimately good for the consumer.

    This is Microsoft, it has nothing to do with competition.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
  144. Dreamhost's interface by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

    Dreamhost's interface for file transfer is scp or ftp.

    Any more statements you'd like to share with the group?

    --
    They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
  145. Re:Google already done it... indirectly by ffg · · Score: 1

    who.hasfiles
    It's a service that has been around. Gives only 100 MB for free, but provides "native" storage usage. So that no extra software is needed -- a plus comparing to GMail storage.