I may be coming into a bunch of hard drives. Spouse of my wife's friend passed and had a huge media collection. She has no interest in it. Two 8-bay Probox towers (most likely packed with highest capacity they can hold) plus about 8 other 16+ TB drives. In addition to the 60TB worth of drives I have now, that should give me a lot of storage...but it would be onsite. I do like cloud storage because it is easy for collaboration/sharing...but maybe I just live without and use Backblaze or some such to backup the data for my offsite solution. Does beg the question though of why can Backblaze take 200+TB of data for $7/mo but storage folks like Sync require 3+ people at $15/user to do it (and still whine about what we store). I think the backup services call out the lie of the storage services claiming it costs too much for large users.
If you look at the terms of service, you will see that you are only entitled to 2TB of cold storage. If it exceeds 10TB of content, and there are no file downloads, they simply start deleting everything.
I've had a very bad experience with both uptobox and 1fichier.
Yeah very few posted that. Tho it wasn't clear to me whether they simply didn't properly set them up. But there could be something about it that Google starts (finally) cracking down on Service Accounts to bypass limits. However you should still be able to add a new temporary user, upload to a shared drive and copy from that shared drive to the regular user's drive.
Well you don't know what the average client looks like. Also comes down to how they run their businesses in the end. 200TB isn't common for Backblaze either. There was some post (this or last year), might have been in HN not sure, in which they gave out some rough number about average usage per client and iirc it was well below 1TB.
Not sure if you want all the drives you got spinning 24/7 as they draw a lot of power.
Please don't post about bypassing Google's limits.
soon there will be better aletnarive, and cheaper
https://www.cerabyte.com/
https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/16ajo62/haven_for_data_hoarders_is_coming/
Another option "soonish":
I think there was another thread with people trying to coordinate the same though, in case someone needs to get one sooner, since workspace is still working perfectly fine for me, is difficult to tell when they'll screw me
I agree wholeheartedly.
I've seen all kind of abuses of their service over the years.
And in the end it came to bite everyone, everyone, in the ass.
I don't know if this falls under the realm of practicality or not. The remaining "unlimited" plan providers seem to require a 3+ user minimum at $15+ per user. So, at the low end, about $45/mo for someone to store unlimited now. I've seen a few folks mention trying to pool together as users to meet those quotas...which works, I suppose if you trust each other and someone handles the billing (but can be awkward if someone is late or doesn't pay...would you cut them off from their data?). Another thought, which is not really "better", possibly worse...but maybe better is to pool across providers. Let's say you need 3 people with Provider A, B or C and each charges $45/mo for the 3 seats. SO - what if persons A, B, C each goes respectively with Provider A B C? You are at the same point as you'd be going alone. But now, A gives his extra seats to B and C, and B and C similarly give up extra seats on their plans to each other. Now, each person is paying $45 for their own unlimited cloud provider, without having to bill others for their shares...but each person now has 3 unlimited cloud provider accounts for the price of one - getting more for their $45/mo. How might this be useful or better than going solo at $45 on one provider (afterall, unlimited is unlimited no matter how you slice it)? Couple advantages:
- You can have backup copies of your data at different providers. If one provider loses it, you have the backup. If one provider later drops out of doing unlimited, you don't have to panic about how to move the data, because you have it already at the other locations.
- You can better fly under the radar. Let's say one of the providers is Opendrive, which doesn't allow NAS or Mass Media. You put those on the other ones and put non-NAS and non-Mass Media on this one. Or if you have 1.5PB of data, you divide it up and appear to each provider as only having 500TB.
No real perfect solutions...and the single provider account with folks pooling to cover seats is as good as any at this point...so really just adding the other to the mix as another alternative, wherein the main advantages are easier billing (each pays their own, giving the others free access in exchange for them doing the same) and ability to backup or spread data across providers.
Well. That sucks.
Apparently from reading all the above, Box is now out too as a viable unlimited provider? 1Tb per month, are they serious? And for real? I was just about to sign-up for the Business Plan but it will be useless like this to me.
I still need to find a new home for my (quite) large data collection. I moved a bit over to Dropbox but they're out too now because of their new storage policy on "unlimited" business plans.
So, what now? Where to go? Do I really need to rebuild my local NAS infrastructure and slim down on the data hoarding?
What about Vaultdrop? Any others?
I really, really dont care about your opinion concerning FUP abuse and such and that it was only a matter of time or that it will be only a matter of time before it happens at the next cloud storage provider. It doesnt happen because of the few % of people stretching their definition of unlimited, it happens because those SOBs are greedy and so are their shareholders. They earn more than enough on the 98% who under utilize their unlimited service.
iDrive e2 seems like a realistic option. It's more expensive and requires a storage commitment up front to get the better discounts but still cheaper than anything else i can see.
Also if you have existing storage above 35TB on dropbox they haven't actually announced how the pricing will work going forward yet. I suspect it will be outragous but we don't really know yet, it sounds like they will contact people over 35TB and offer them separate deals based on their current usage in November. Would not be surprised if its ends up $10 / 1TB though which will be a shame.
Their prices are on the face of it a bit cheaper than Google Enterprise Standard eg $2,000 for 100TB. Google will routinely on request upgrade the per user limit from from 5TB to 10TB so ten users at around $20/month is about $2,400 for 100TB for one year. What we don't know is whether after 90 days (when apparently they will consider the next upgrade request) whether Google will give an extra 0TB, 1TB or 5TB per user.
Dropbox is a shitshow anyway. Their (at least Windows) Client is slow and useless. Cant items from queue, cant delete queue. And about a 100 other reasons why it's at least 3 years behind the curve. Dont even get me started on their backend or the encryption process.
iDrive e2 is interesting but still way to expensive.
Looks like no one is covering high data volume for small/midsized enterprise anymore since it got abused too much,
I might have to build my own infrastructure.
I'll keep my huge data at Google for the time being. Nowhere to go anyway. Maybe they'll change their tone in a year or so and I'm happy I stayed lol.
My plan is keep my data at Google for now and get a Hetzner SX box for new storage. Connect to the SX box via a SFTP (maybe webdav) endpoint. Then use an rclone combine endpoint to mount both the google and SX box endpoints as one.
I dug around and the SX boxes seem to be the best bang for the buck. It's ~$1.30-$1.50/TB/Month which is much cheaper than the $4/TB/Month from the cheaper cloud options; especially at large capacities it really adds up.
Just waiting on Box.com to refund me...
Buying multiple MS365 subscriptions (cheaper via e.g. cjs-cdkeys) and 'rclone union'ing all the 1TB drives together. Add as needed.
Any reason this is not a good solution?
But why? 1TB and multiple accounts? It's a huge overload of managing and handling subscriptions for 1 stupid TB? Sry but it's just a bad idea.
I think he's doing it to pay €0.88/TB/month (MS365 Family is €53/5/12) which is a difficult price to beat...feel free to list here your solution for easier management at the same price or for a better price overall...
Exactly, it comes up much cheaper than e.g. Dropbox was for the amount of storage I currently have and project to have in the next 5 years.
I mean each account would be 1TB, so total would be X TB for however many accounts.
Subscriptions are easy to manage as it's one sub per 6 accounts. Calendar reminders to renew X number of accounts annually (plus, you can actually add more time whenever you want/whenever you find a good deal).
Currently EU MS365 is at £47 on cjs-cdkeys.
Yes there is a bit of an initial setup and a bit of overhead management (for example, I am making a script to notify me if any of the remotes goes down), but after it's all up and running I don't think there will be any issues - which is why I am asking here, in case I am missing something.
6 accounts? So it's even better at €0.73/TB/month...