No one expects free stuff from Apple, but then no one gets free stuff from Apple: their break-when-you-look-at-them-wrong Lightning cables cost €25 and don’t come with a power plug, that’s another €25. Yes, that little white all-too-delicate 5W iPhone charger costs €50. And their phones are also very expensive.
If Apple is actually about easy of use and giving their customers a great experience, they need to consider taking a pinch of that $250-300B they made on the backs of their customers and make iCloud compelling. They charge enough for their products already. Imagine, it is possible to buy a 6K MBP, a 13K iMac, a 1K iPhone and a 1K iPad and Apple still want $1 per month to back up your photo collection.
They should simplify the whole thing and backup people’s devices for free, up-to 100 GB, and after that they should offer a 1TB paid option and a 5TB option, at appropriate and reasonable prices. This gives Pro users and small businesses in Apple’s ecosystem great options, and gives everyone else a great experience—they only need pay for Apple’s very expensive devices.
But there is an option out there you did not touch . That is Mega (50GB for free). It also works with the Files app on iOS. But I personally like Mega is because, the files remain encrypted, even on cloud. They don’t keep the keys.
Totally agree with recerhomie3, I'm using mega.nz web page and app on iPhone since they closed megaupload and since then I have no troubles. App is getting more stable, files are easy to share and files are encrypted. Obviously, there is simple way to get an app also on Mac, working like dropbox app.
Flickr (Yahoo) offers 2 TB free for photos and videos. It's more of a backup solution than a shared drive... Photos and videos default to private, unless you change this.
Apple format 'llve photos' have only the still portion backed up though.
And file management isn’t properly covered either. Meh.
You can say that again. The lack of local file storage on iPad Pro is a serious PITA if one wants to truly use it as a laptop/computer replacement. Large files going up and down to iCloud Drive eats mobile data and forget about it if you are on a plane or traveling to a place with spotty/expensive internet. That said, Apple have done a remarkable job in iOS 11 making iPad more usable as a laptop replacement. I don't see any indication they'll bring it or selective sync in iOS 12 but we still have several betas to go.
This is yhe primary reason i have a hard time using Apples apps except for calendars and mail. The ability to have confidence that importsnt files are stored locally is not there with iCloud and Apples apps. Im regularky out of touch with any RF based communications but yet would still need access to reference materials. Apples broken apps dont leave you with a warm fuzzy feeling here. I also cant fathom why a deletion on one device should delete files everywhere. In the end i dont believe Apple has any sense as to how people need to use apps in the real world. They seemingly believe that we have a connection 100% of the time. On the flip side it isnt always desirable to splatter files acroos all devices.
In the end my usage of iCloud is extremely limited basicslly to syncing a few apps. Frankly i really dont care about the file handling issues on iPhone but it really sucks on iPad. It sucks so much that id switch to a Linux based tablet if i could find a decent Android free one.
I dont expect Apple to fix icloud so i dont invest much effort into it. IOS is extremely frustrating for those that want clean simple file management and the easy exchange of data files between apps.
iCloud comes in at a really good price point and being able to share space with family members makes it even more economical. I currently have a 200 GB subscription for each of my wife and I, but will likely be going to the shared 2 TB solution soon.
The main problem with iCloud being my one and only solution is that it totally lacks the ability to have shared folders in the way that Dropbox does. Apple tries to drive all sharing into the apps themselves and not account for sharing folders and files regardless of file type and app.
Along the same lines, I’m continually disappointed with Apple’s inability to marry Family Sharing, Photos, and iCloud Photo Library. The current implementation of iCloud Photo Sharing is useful for sharing photos with extended family and friends but does nothing to help my wife and I maintain a consolidated family photo album. I want to be able to designate some photos as “family photos” and doing so would automatically make them appear in the photo library of all members of Family Sharing. Edits such as cropping and red eye and deletion of duplicates would effect all members. Currently, it’s a nightmare to be sure my wife and I have and see all photos of our kids. Any “sharing” is really just duplicating and using 2x the cloud storage. Don’t get me started on trying to synchronize metadata...
No one expects free stuff from Apple, but then no one gets free stuff from Apple: their break-when-you-look-at-them-wrong Lightning cables cost €25 and don’t come with a power plug, that’s another €25. Yes, that little white all-too-delicate 5W iPhone charger costs €50. And their phones are also very expensive.
If Apple is actually about easy of use and giving their customers a great experience, they need to consider taking a pinch of that $250-300B they made on the backs of their customers and make iCloud compelling. They charge enough for their products already. Imagine, it is possible to buy a 6K MBP, a 13K iMac, a 1K iPhone and a 1K iPad and Apple still want $1 per month to back up your photo collection.
They should simplify the whole thing and backup people’s devices for free, up-to 100 GB, and after that they should offer a 1TB paid option and a 5TB option, at appropriate and reasonable prices. This gives Pro users and small businesses in Apple’s ecosystem great options, and gives everyone else a great experience—they only need pay for Apple’s very expensive devices.
Lightning cables in the US from Apple are $19 but to be fair, Samsung charging cables are $15 and there are hundreds of alternatives for both that range down to $2 so I'm not sure what your first point was about.
Apple is not the only company that charges nearly 1,000 for their phones and on the plus side their phones are worth more at resale which makes up any difference. You might not like it but if you don't buy a lower end phone.
Why Apple should give away 100GB when most companies only give 5-15 (as apple does) just sounds like sour grapes. $12/year gets enough storage for many users and $3/month works for most individuals. $10/month handles my family of 5 with 2TB of shared storage. This sounds totally within reason for the level of integration iCloud storage gives, but if you don't agree, use one of the many other services.
The main problem with iCloud being my one and only solution is that it totally lacks the ability to have shared folders in the way that Dropbox does. Apple tries to drive all sharing into the apps themselves and not account for sharing folders and files regardless of file type and app.
Finally something I can agree with! Apple really needs to figure this out. They have a workable system for documents but they need shared folders and libraries.
I also cant fathom why a deletion on one device should delete files everywhere. In the end i dont believe Apple has any sense as to how people need to use apps in the real world.
This is your problem not Apples. If you move your library to the cloud, There is nothing to delete from your device because everything is now in the cloud. Thus if you delete something you are deleting it from the cloud and if all you devices are reading from the cloud, of course it would be deleted from your other devices. This is how the cloud works. If you don't want this, don't "optimize device storage" and leave it with originals on the device. Use photo stream to auto sync everything, it is just that simple.
Bottom line is if you want access to everything, buy a phone or iPad with massive storage and sync and store what you want on the devices. Apple makes that easy but you have to have a basic understanding of what it means to MOVE your photos to the cloud.
I put a 400GB microSD card in my phone because it's not made by Apple or Google. There's no monthly fee. It's faster than LTE - it doesn't even need a cell signal.
My phone has all of Wikipedia in two languages, full detail maps of the half the US and several other countries, a huge music collection, some videos, and there's still a total nearly 200 GB free on the phone. I can also sync any files I want to any other computer because it's not limited by Apple. I can make a backup of a laptop, DSLR camera, or video camera onto my phone.
Oh, and I listen to that music with some nice wired headphones.
From my opunion very very lame article Lame lazy journalism. Verbal exercise instead putting data into clear table shoving space and prices when paying monthly or per year.
And there are many more seevuces. Just look at Wikipedia. Namely at least Megasync with 50 GB free!!!
And there are other functions each service offers and differs from others. Like direct sharing among users
On other hand only iCloud gives you option to make bake up of iOS device.
There are great articles on Ai but this not one ic them.
As an I professional developing apps for both Android and iOS, I need a
cloud service that is accessible from all my devices, my Android devices
included. As long I cannot browse to icloud.com from an Android device, I don't perceive iCloud as a professional service.
iCloud remains since its inception a lame and expensive service and that is a shame, because I like the Apple hardware
I put a 400GB microSD card in my phone because it's not made by Apple or Google. There's no monthly fee. It's faster than LTE - it doesn't even need a cell signal.
My phone has all of Wikipedia in two languages, full detail maps of the half the US and several other countries, a huge music collection, some videos, and there's still a total nearly 200 GB free on the phone. I can also sync any files I want to any other computer because it's not limited by Apple. I can make a backup of a laptop, DSLR camera, or video camera onto my phone.
Oh, and I listen to that music with some nice wired headphones.
No arguments about the convenience of having a huge local storage on a device. One challenge is what do you do when the SD card fails or is lost/stolen? I'd suggest a good backup of the SD card, or at least the portion of the data on the SD card that cannot be easily restored from public sources. This backup needs to be synchronized at a time interval that represents the worst case data set you are willing to lose or let go stale. All those snapshots of big data sets like Wikipedia and device backups start to get out of sync with their sources over time... more synchronization problems you have to deal with. Ouch. With a single device the huge local storage model may be okay if you don't mind doing all the legwork to make it work reasonably well for you.
Cloud based storage puts the burden of backup and sync, even at multi-device and multi-user levels, in the hands of the cloud storage provider. When you start talking about multiple devices, multiple users, data/content sharing, updates, data/content staleness, disaster recovery, etc., ... yikes, the local storage model starts to let you down. At some point you realize the cloud storage provider is actually providing a pretty good value for your money and saving you a lot of time. They are doing work that you no longer have to do. The SD card is still okay for convenience sake, like disconnected operations, but relying on it for most of what a cloud storage provider delivers at a very low cost to you and with almost none of your time invested, is going to lead you down a dead end path requiring your constant attention.
Correction: The Dropbox pricing for the 2TB business has a minimum requirement for 3 users - so actual storage is 6TB and price is three times that quoted - which prices it out of this comparison completely.
Also for Photography users Lightroom CC or Google Photos are good value - Google Photos is free if you accept Google downsampling your images
Google Photos is free if you accept Google downsampling your images
Google downsamples for the free storage only if your image is 16MP or larger, so in practice only DSLR owners should be concerned about it AFAICT. iPhone pics will be fine.
Loving my 2TB of iCloud space. Frankly it is a bit too much but I shared it with my girlfriend just because I had all that extra space. I keep all my work in there and upload all my RAW-files when I’m doing photography. We have used nearly 1TB already. But there are lots of old RAW-files that can be deleted when needed. Just wish Apple would allow sharing of folders from iCloud Drive. Then I could finally let go of Google Drive and have all my work in one cloud storage.
Loving my 2TB of iCloud space. Frankly it is a bit too much but I shared it with my girlfriend just because I had all that extra space. I keep all my work in there and upload all my RAW-files when I’m doing photography. We have used nearly 1TB already. But there are lots of old RAW-files that can be deleted when needed. Just wish Apple would allow sharing of folders from iCloud Drive. Then I could finally let go of Google Drive and have all my work in one cloud storage.
Why don’t you keep a simple iCloud subscription for device syncing and backups, and take a professional subscription (e.g Google Drive)? Apple’s solution lacks in many, many ways and I guarantee you that once you’re working with Drive (and G Suite) for a while, you won’t look back at iCloud.
I pay for 200GB for the family devices and it works great. My only gripe is having to manually share photos between users, we've nothing to hide from one another and would like to see all photos on all devices, hence we have to use Google Photos in tandem.
Comments
If Apple is actually about easy of use and giving their customers a great experience, they need to consider taking a pinch of that $250-300B they made on the backs of their customers and make iCloud compelling. They charge enough for their products already. Imagine, it is possible to buy a 6K MBP, a 13K iMac, a 1K iPhone and a 1K iPad and Apple still want $1 per month to back up your photo collection.
They should simplify the whole thing and backup people’s devices for free, up-to 100 GB, and after that they should offer a 1TB paid option and a 5TB option, at appropriate and reasonable prices. This gives Pro users and small businesses in Apple’s ecosystem great options, and gives everyone else a great experience—they only need pay for Apple’s very expensive devices.
Yahoo? ....
In the end my usage of iCloud is extremely limited basicslly to syncing a few apps. Frankly i really dont care about the file handling issues on iPhone but it really sucks on iPad. It sucks so much that id switch to a Linux based tablet if i could find a decent Android free one.
I dont expect Apple to fix icloud so i dont invest much effort into it. IOS is extremely frustrating for those that want clean simple file management and the easy exchange of data files between apps.
The main problem with iCloud being my one and only solution is that it totally lacks the ability to have shared folders in the way that Dropbox does. Apple tries to drive all sharing into the apps themselves and not account for sharing folders and files regardless of file type and app.
Along the same lines, I’m continually disappointed with Apple’s inability to marry Family Sharing, Photos, and iCloud Photo Library. The current implementation of iCloud Photo Sharing is useful for sharing photos with extended family and friends but does nothing to help my wife and I maintain a consolidated family photo album. I want to be able to designate some photos as “family photos” and doing so would automatically make them appear in the photo library of all members of Family Sharing. Edits such as cropping and red eye and deletion of duplicates would effect all members. Currently, it’s a nightmare to be sure my wife and I have and see all photos of our kids. Any “sharing” is really just duplicating and using 2x the cloud storage. Don’t get me started on trying to synchronize metadata...
Apple is not the only company that charges nearly 1,000 for their phones and on the plus side their phones are worth more at resale which makes up any difference. You might not like it but if you don't buy a lower end phone.
Why Apple should give away 100GB when most companies only give 5-15 (as apple does) just sounds like sour grapes. $12/year gets enough storage for many users and $3/month works for most individuals. $10/month handles my family of 5 with 2TB of shared storage. This sounds totally within reason for the level of integration iCloud storage gives, but if you don't agree, use one of the many other services.
This is your problem not Apples. If you move your library to the cloud, There is nothing to delete from your device because everything is now in the cloud. Thus if you delete something you are deleting it from the cloud and if all you devices are reading from the cloud, of course it would be deleted from your other devices. This is how the cloud works. If you don't want this, don't "optimize device storage" and leave it with originals on the device. Use photo stream to auto sync everything, it is just that simple.
Bottom line is if you want access to everything, buy a phone or iPad with massive storage and sync and store what you want on the devices. Apple makes that easy but you have to have a basic understanding of what it means to MOVE your photos to the cloud.
From my opunion very very lame article Lame lazy journalism. Verbal exercise instead putting data into clear table shoving space and prices when paying monthly or per year.
And there are many more seevuces. Just look at Wikipedia.
Namely at least Megasync with 50 GB free!!!
And there are other functions each service offers and differs from others. Like direct sharing among users
On other hand only iCloud gives you option to make bake up of iOS device.
There are great articles on Ai but this not one ic them.
Cloud based storage puts the burden of backup and sync, even at multi-device and multi-user levels, in the hands of the cloud storage provider. When you start talking about multiple devices, multiple users, data/content sharing, updates, data/content staleness, disaster recovery, etc., ... yikes, the local storage model starts to let you down. At some point you realize the cloud storage provider is actually providing a pretty good value for your money and saving you a lot of time. They are doing work that you no longer have to do. The SD card is still okay for convenience sake, like disconnected operations, but relying on it for most of what a cloud storage provider delivers at a very low cost to you and with almost none of your time invested, is going to lead you down a dead end path requiring your constant attention.
Also for Photography users Lightroom CC or Google Photos are good value - Google Photos is free if you accept Google downsampling your images