And this is funny - some angry user blaming rclone:)
1 Like
They correct though, I don't see any blame. rclone is fine, it's abusing the service and the AUP of Dropbox being done (which is being discussed in the forum threads here).
Like a knife; it's how you USE the tool. You can cook with a knife or take a life with it.
Blame the user, not the tool.
1 Like
Just got this concerning email. Anyone else have this issue with Dropbox?
This email is an automated notification from Dropbox letting you know that your Public links have been temporarily suspended for generating excessive traffic.
No public link were created. What does this mean?
Upgrade your Dropbox account today to increase the total amount of traffic your link and file requests can generate.
I’m on Advanced so I don’t see what can be upgraded.
Your current account bandwidth limit is 4096.00 GB and your current usage is 4096.10 GB. If this is your first suspension, you may remove the suspension by clicking this link otherwise please visit the Help Center.
The same will happen with Box. They're no bigger than Dropbox. Seems like that time is over for good.
Time to say goodbye to unlimited cloud storage providers! Vast amounts of data will be lost forever. But what is the bottom line of this story?
I believe that we will have to build our own servers, those NAS, or 24-bay cabinets and set up the amount of space for our use on average around 50TB, because this "unlimited" story, I think it is moving towards the "end".
With iDrive decreasing prices on per TB plans, I hope we can see this across the board. I think unlimited is dying, but if we can get to $1/TB - that would be huge. Putting into perspective real world costs of storing data - without having to build something locally.
1 Like
Ta for mentioning them. They indeed have very good pricing - actually the best among companies without "unlimited" options. In business since 1995, hosting centres around the world, real S3 API, no transactions fees and very reasonable egress policy (3x amount of data stored per month). Their pay-as you go is still $4 but going with subscription it goes down to $1.7.
I think I will start testing them.
How about instead of throwing your money into a deep, dark pit never to be seen again; why don't you invest in hard drives and local storage.
I don't understand why people want to waste their money on these cloud storage providers when it has already been shown they will impose limits or delete your data when it's not economically feasible to their bottom line.
Hmm or are you one of the hundreds of people running Plex paid memberships? 
it is simple balancing cost vs benefit. Let's say you need 50TB storage - local solution - NAS with RAID6/RAIDZ2 with 6x20TB HDD + UPS is about $3000 upfront. Then it is electricity, maintenance, things break out of warranty etc. - maybe $5000 in 10 years. And NAS is not backup... so still you need some other location for it (friend/family co-location:)) then it means $10000 per 10 years. With $6000 up front...
You do your excel - if you are hobbyist with time than your time cost 0. But if you do something than you have to subtract hours spent x hourly rate.
And obviously not everybody is interested in tinkering or even have skills to do it right.
So it is not so clean cut to go local vs I pay somebody else to deal with it. And cut off line will be different for everybody. Now with current $4/TB/month market prices it is still beneficial to build local solution for many. But with $1/TB/month equation will change dramatically.
The way how I see it is that "unlimited" storage is not healthy for storage economy:) Yes Google lasted 6 years and it was good enough for many - and I have to say it was great run. Now Dropbox looks like all timeline squeezed to 6 months. Box will follow. Anyway this is "unlimited" BS story.
Many people actually really need offside storage - and cloud is fantastic option when priced right. I do what I do - I do not want to spend time on building and maintaining local storage - as what next? build my own car and grow own potatoes and cotton to make clothes?
1 Like
Datahoading has ALWAYS been a costly hobby. If you don't have the money to do it properly, it's not for you.
Google ended that for all the people who can't afford it. Move on. It's not for you.
And no, cloud storage is not data hoarding. Never was, lol.
I do not mind people do what they like - they want to store all history of cinematography? Thumbs up.
And actually in this "unlimited" saga I do not blame users. People use something when available even if it is not beneficial long term for all - we are all like this.
And not companies neither - they try whatever strategy they think is the best for them.
Now with Google out - it should quickly settle and become more healthy. Google could afford paying billions of $ for one division from profits of other based on some cool power point executives saw:) Dropbox, Box - they do not have such luxury so they will move much faster. And then many will discover that there is market for people who want to store 100TB for fair price without all gimmick of extra value in editing spreadsheets online and collaborating. Data hoarders can be served properly too.
2 Likes
Um, the users are to blame.. they uploaded petabytes and abused the service.
Storing 100TB isn't cheap. You even said that ABOVE. There will never be cheap, online storage like 200TB for $5 bucks, lol.
Anyways, everyone enjoy deleting your movies and TV and closing down your illegal Plex subscription services. 
Yeap - some people do not mind spending all day walking all local shops to find the best promotion. Some will not bother and go back to their job. Nothing we can do about it.
Mind that it is totally not true. Some people built all their business models based on "unlimited" storage - and not necessarily doing anything illegal. People respond to market signals.
If my business required 1PB of data storage I would be using Google for the last 6 years for sure - or I would be an idiot.
2 Likes
Dang, I got to 44tb on dropbox, needed 134tb, 10tb per week suddenly turned into 0tb per week, doh.
I'm not even sharing, figured they'd crack down on people splitting faster 
I could've easily lived on 1tb/month but only after the migration, shame I didn't migrate 2months sooner and beat the rush. My 134tb is roughly 1tb/month for 134months :-/ DOH! early bird's look like they might get the worm here.
Tell me, what business, that is legal would depend on serving and storing a massive amount of large files? Auto CAD? Video editing? These would be well established companies which can afford the high price tag and has their own storage solution and a reliable backup solution to hold their large amount of data.
Edit: If you're independent free-lancer, etc you buy your own NAS and backup to Blackblaze.
Why would I backup 1PB to backblaze and pay $4000 per month when I could do the same for $25? - I can do this when it is over - but in 6 years I would save $300k - think about it. Real life sometimes is like that:)
If my competitor went with Backblaze from day 1 - I am $300k ahead to invest in something to make my things better.
2 Likes
You saved nothing. Now you have to migrate 1PB in 60 days and find another solution or your business is toast.
If you have 1PB of local data to back up, you can afford the proper solution. i.e. A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR COMPANY.
Not people running paid-for Plex servers with pirated content.
P.S. I'm done replying to you. You are a joke.
1 Like
Yes but I saved $300k - I pay somebody $1000 daily rate to do this migration. It will cost me $60k - I am still $240k ahead. And for this rate I will have people who know the business and can do job right:).
1 Like
You want to have a voice here please follow some common sense rules:
You do not have to agree with everything anybody says here but calling somebody "a joke" will give you ticket out quicker than you think.
Any civilised argument is welcomed.
10 Likes