Slashdot Mirror
Dropbox Wants To Replace Your Hard Disk
Barence writes "Dropbox has kicked off its first developer conference with the stated goal of replacing the hard disk. 'We are replacing the hard drive,' said Dropbox CEO Drew Houston. 'I don't mean that you're going to unscrew your MacBook and find a Dropbox inside, but the spiritual successor to the hard drive is what we're launching.' The new Dropbox Platform includes tools for developers that will allow them to use Dropbox to sync app data between devices. The company's new APIs will also make it easier for app developers to include plugins that save to Dropbox, or choose files stored in the service for use within apps."
Now network failures can cripple more of my devices. So long productivity!
Let alone the massive lag of loading or storing anything of size.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Paul Thurrott, the world's premier Microsoft fanboy, has been running a few articles about his concept of "zero data" - that is, keeping ALL computer data where feasible in the Cloud as opposed to your local HDD. He does so willingly because he has in his mind too much clutter, and would rather let some corporation take control over it instead of trimming what he has down to something more reasonable:
http://winsupersite.com/cloud/zero-data-hardest-part-saying-goodbye
http://winsupersite.com/cloud/zero-data-reducing-storage-clutter
It's one thing to give away so much of your personal data to a company - it's anther thing to then perform destruction over your local copies so everything you've ever done is totally out of your control. To me, the idea of giving away that level of control over MY data to a company is totally horrifying, but apparently I'm too stubborn and old-fashioned by saying so. Oh well.
If the NSA wants into my local file stores, they have to come into my apartment and steal them.
THEN decrypt them.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
It's not just about privacy.. it's about dependency. Considering the current crop of 'cloud' providers, whether they be storage or applications, truly be trusted? Current trends suggest not. Google keeps changing shit the fuck around just because they can, and megaupload was wiped out by a government that didn't give two shits whether your data was legal or not.
Having reliable tools is only part of it.. They also have to be reliably available. If they are not then that is an even greater inconvenience.
Here in Finland it's not the amount of data transferred that is the problem, it's the upload speeds that limit you. I mean, would anyone really consider a HDD with only 1mbps write speeds terribly useful? No? Then no, Dropbox et.al. won't replace traditional storage no matter how much they'd like to.
"Not all things 'cloud' are bad."
No, BUT...
As with any technology, it should have something better to offer than what is existing, at a comparable cost. Or much better at higher cost. Dropbox is neither, plus they have been dishonest to their customers in the pat.
(I am referring to their promise of end-to-end encryption, when in fact they were de-duping uploads, which requires access to the UN-encrypted content. When they were caught, it was "oops, guys, I guess we goofed" when in fact it is not even remotely possible that it was anything but 100% deliberate.)
So what you actually have is greater cost, plus security concerns... for a rather minor amount of convenience.
I have a great way to sync all my files with no need for an external server. It's called Git. And there are about 50 other ways that aren't a lot of trouble.
If it's free, who cares? Just don't forget redundancy. Don't put all your eggs in one basket, and all that.
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever