1GB of Google Drive Storage Now Costs Only $0.02 Per Month 335
SmartAboutThings writes "Up until today, I always had the impression that cloud storage was pretty expensive and I'm sure that many will agree with me. It's a good thing that some bright minds over at Google have the same impressions as they now have drastically discounted the monthly storage plans on Google Drive. The new monthly storage plans and their previous prices are as follows: $1.99 for 100GB (previously $4.99), $9.99 for 1TB (previously $49.99), and $99.99 for 10TB.The 2 dollar plan per month means that the price for a gigabyte gets down to an incredibly low price of only two cents per month."
Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:5, Funny)
OMG, google will know where i've taken all the photos of my kids
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
marked as funny but... yes. they will connect your face to your kids face, and add you to the network of people and relationships along with facial recognition, age and place. welcome to the panopticon, only $0.02 per GB.
Re: (Score:3)
So just encrypt it before you upload it. problem solved. If I were to use it, I would probably use it for
archiving. I would prefer rsync but for the average person it would probably be enough to just upload
a zip file of last year's photos. It would be easy enough to encrypt it while you were zipping it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Wow. Just... wow. Google doesn't run S3.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps consumers tend to not use as much of their storage allocation as commercial users.
Re: (Score:2)
You want Google to drop S3's pricing? I'm not sure if you actually mean that or just worded the sentence badly.
Also remember with S3 you can choose your reliability level.
Regular storage is 99.999999999% reliable but Reduced Redundancy Storage is 99.99% reliable
You can bet Google's cheaper storage is somewhere in the middle - certainly not 11 nines.
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you take a photo of your own nude baby child and upload it to your Google Drive, I'm sure the law is badly written enough to the point that you were "uploading child porn on the Internet".
The morale of this story is: don't have children, the government will use them against you one day.
Re: (Score:2)
yep, all the parents i know are rotting in jail because their kids turned them in for kiddie porn
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't that the problem? Now it doesn't take any human involved even caring about it to be detected, flagged, and investigated before hauling your children off to a gov't training camp^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H orphanage, and you in front of a judge.
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Better they get served ads for things that may be inappropriate, instead of things that may be relevant?
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:5, Informative)
Seriously. This "article" reads more like an ad. $120/year for 1 TB is more than 9 times what I'd pay for 5 years of a 1 TB internal SATA.
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously. This "article" reads more like an ad. $120/year for 1 TB is more than 9 times what I'd pay for 5 years of a 1 TB internal SATA.
There are several problems with the whole "cloud" thing:
- I can buy a few terabytes of local storage for the same or less than paying Google
- Google constantly changes things (features, terms of service, etc) and if you don't like it, tough shit
- Encrypted or not, you have no control over your own data, they do
- ISPs severely throttle upload speeds. Getting a few terabytes into the cloud will take a really long time
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously. This "article" reads more like an ad. $120/year for 1 TB is more than 9 times what I'd pay for 5 years of a 1 TB internal SATA.
There are several problems with the whole "cloud" thing:
- I can buy a few terabytes of local storage for the same or less than paying Google
- Google constantly changes things (features, terms of service, etc) and if you don't like it, tough shit
- Encrypted or not, you have no control over your own data, they do
- ISPs severely throttle upload speeds. Getting a few terabytes into the cloud will take a really long time
Ah, if only...
Unfortunately, the biggest problem with Google Drive is that they don't provide any upload throttling at all [google.com].
So...post a folder of pictures to your drive account, then go do something else for a couple of hours, because your internet is useless until Google's done hogging all of your bandwidth...funny, DropBox had this figured out right from the start, yet after over two years of customer complaints, Google still hasn't figured out how to implement this.
Re: (Score:3)
Eh? Can't you just throttle it at your router? How hard is that? Hand in your /. credentials plz...
Mom and Pop aint gonna be using Google Drive, so don't bother with that excuse... any Gen Y and beyond should know how to fiddle with a router.
On the contrary, I propose that Google Drive is squarely aimed at non-technical (or barely-technical) people more than it is aimed at network admins. Much like DropBox, it's advertised as easy-to use and universal, so it's very likely that Mom and / or Pop will be using it...then calling the grandkids when they appear to be 'losing the internet' at semi-random intervals.
Have fun talking them through setting up router-level throttling from halfway across the country...
Re: (Score:3)
It's not the application's responsibility to limit its upload. Your operating system and/or your router should take care of that.
But default settings is for no rate controls on the OS or router side...meaning that both the OS and the router expect applications to play nice and manage themselves, or be user-adjustable at the very least.
Can you name any other application used to upload large amounts of data that doesn't provide user-adjustable bandwidth settings? My FTP client does, my DropBox does, even my bittorrent client does...I don't know about Picasa or FB, cause I don't use them, so I'm honestly curious here...?
Re: (Score:3)
That is nonsense. Everyone has limited bandwidth for a fact. Be it 256Kb/s or 20Mb/s or whatever.
When an application starts to upload or download something and takes all your bandwidth all other activites which are depending on that bandwith come to a halt. That is certainly most visible in the case of upload as the upload bandwidth is usually lower than download.
That is the reason why applications/services which are usually used in the background (as in dropbox, ftp, torrenting clients etc) all have thrott
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:5, Insightful)
And when that 1TB drive fails?
Cloud storage usually comes with a ridiculously high durability. S3 offers 99.999999999% over the course of a year. Your 1TB drive wont.
Re: (Score:3)
I can pickup a 1 TB drive right now for ~$60 which means I could afford 2 of them at Google's prices. Instead of 1 year of service I can expect 5 years out of a SATA drive typically. So if nothing goes wrong, I've saved myself $480, if something does go wrong with both drives, I've saved myself $360.
Re: (Score:3)
Remote chances:
Lightning strike
Fire
Theft
Flood
So, keep your backups at diverse locations, if you can. Personally, that's a lot of damn work to keep up, I've never managed to get the rsync processes setup to mirror from one end of the house to the other, let alone opening firewall ports and setting up an encrypted link to a remote location.
Sure, it's all possible, but your time really worth so little?
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:4, Interesting)
Add 50 watts of power 24/7 for a low-power server to the equation and you've added $420 over 5 years. There's your $600.
Re: (Score:2)
Ridiculously high is right.... 11 nines uptime works out to be less than a millisecond per year. At that level if you're going to need to specify allowable ping times.
In reality, Google only offers 99.9% per month (99% for "reduced availability", I'm not sure what these prices are for) and the value of the guarantee is pathetic: they credit (not even refund) you a maximum of half your bill that month if availability is =95%. They could be down a full day and only knock 25% of you bill next month. That ca
Re: (Score:3)
Unless someone breaks into your house and steals your computer. Then you've lost your 8 1TB drives and everything on them.
who breaks into homes and steals non apple desktops anymore?
Re: (Score:2)
Cloud storage is another type of media with distinct advantages/disadvantages. Yes, that 1TB HDD is about $75, but items stored on a cloud service can be accessed anywhere, and there is less chance of a single drive failure taking your stuff with it. Of course, cloud drives are vulnerable to malware doing a delete (which likely can't be restored), so long term archival media is always needed, preferably offline items, or perhaps something like Amazon Glacier.
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, there's a portable SSD in my bag, with eSATA and USB. There's a couple of 64gb SD cards in there too.
It's smaller than my smartphone and a lot more sturdy. It sits in one of those little slots on the side. Never had a problem with it.
I've had enough of trusting companies like Google to always have a particular service available and to keep their snoots out of my stuff.
On the other hand, if a company that doesn't data mine, and encrypts all data and does not acquiesce to NSA requests, then we can do business. But not for free or cheap because of data mining. I don't like F2P. I don't want anything for free. I don't trust anything that's being offered to me for free or for cheap. It just means the true price is hidden and that's creepy.
Re: (Score:3)
Isn't that the proposition of mega.co.nz ?
The data is encrypted before they get it, so they can't possibly tell if its a pirated rihanna song or not.
Re: (Score:3)
I've had enough of trusting companies like Google to always have a particular service available and to keep their snoots out of my stuff.
I've got enough "stuff" going on in my life that trusting a company like Google to keep "forever" backups of things like my e-mail seems to be a whole lot more reliable than relying on myself to make proper timely backups.
Plus, if I had anything to hide, it could very well stay hidden, off or on cloud servers. The sheer volume of crap that isn't hidden should be enough to keep any snooping investigators busy for a long time - meaning, it will be costly for them to sift through my records looking for someth
Re: (Score:3)
I hope you encrypt everything on those drives, just in case your bag is lost or stolen. Of course if you are encrypting everything anyway why not just use Google Drive or whatever? Is it unlikely that even the NSA can crack a TrueCrypt container with a good password and perhaps a local keyfile, and if they can and are willing to put in the effort you have bigger problems.
Re:Yeah, you can totally trust your data... (Score:4, Interesting)
Do you carry your SATA drive around with you wherever you go and attach it to every computer you use?
I used to carry my 2 TB drive with me everywhere until I built my own ssh/sftp server now it is anywhere that has internet and can be accsesed form a tablet with no sata port.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a server and my brother-in-law has a server. 10Mbps pipes on either end (upload), offsite automated backup (basic software handles this) with built in redundancy (again, software creates an image of the main backup drive) for both of us. We'd both have to be robbed/have fires at the same time.
Works pretty damn well and the only costs are the drives themselves and a little bit of electricity.
Re: (Score:2)
The main use case is not for private data. Private data is likely to fit into their free plan. This is for businesses who are using google services already, and want to share a lot of data "in the cloud."
Encryption? (Score:2)
Good luck data mining my TrueCrypt containers ...
Re:Encryption? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm worst than that, I make randomly-written files, compress them to ZIP, compress them again in RAR, put that inside a GZ, ROT13 the whole thing and then encrypt it.
And for the cherry on top, I name the file "confidential_data.dmg" before uploading it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If they can mine my TrueCrypt container, then they're doing something amazing.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree. Feature thrash sent me from fanboy to "slowly migrating away, one service at a time."
Re: (Score:2)
You can't encrypt children.
You can get a 1TB external for like, 80 bucks (Score:2, Insightful)
And you can use it anywhere. And it has USB 3.0 speed. And it won't be data mined by Google.
Re: (Score:3)
And get another one to back it up, and perform your own backups regularly, which of course has an opportunity cost of zero. :/
I've got 4-5TB of movies, music, and photos. I'm not ready to pay $50/mo for universal access and backups.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. It's still not cheap enough to move my media to, but it sure beats Dropbox on price.
Re: (Score:2)
You could get Crashplan or Backblaze and back it all up for between $4 and $5 a month.
Re: (Score:3)
Still better for what?
Certainly not ease of access across multiple devices in and out of your own network or away from your own storage. Certainly not for backup, without investing in your own off-site recovery method. Certainly not in terms of time spent caring for that solution.
Having a large virtual drive in the cloud would make my life easier, but certainly not cheaper.
I don't think it's cost effective for me yet, but there's certainly a lot of green checkmarks on the chart for their solution.
Re: (Score:2)
> Certainly not ease of access across multiple devices in and out of your own network or away from your own storage. Certainly not for backup, without investing in your own off-site recovery method.
Make a friend. Store it at his house.
Rent a safety deposit box.
Buy a fire safe.
Mail a copy to your mother's house.
The problem with "the cloud" is recovery speed. Upload speeds aren't that great either.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm aware that there are competing backup solutions, and other options for storing your media, but they still require doubling my drive capacity, and implementing one of those solutions.
If my data is dynamic, I've also got the added burden of fetching that second drive and syncing it regularly, something presumably I don't have to do with this service.
There are no doubt advantages to local storage, and local backup.
My point remains that, at this price, it's starting to become viable, and that if it drops lo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For slightly more you can get consumer NAS stuff. WD Live NAS drives for storing 1TB aren't much more than the USB versions.
And they even have phone/tablet apps for accessing them.
Re: (Score:2)
I already have a 2 TB nas stuffed with movies bit this has the advantage that it is off site.
If your house burns down your NAS goes with it. At least this way I have off site recovery.
Re: (Score:2)
If your house burns down your NAS goes with it.
My family members have a few nas drives scattered around, and we've got ecnrypted folders on eachothers, with a few GB of crucial data that are in sync.
We also mirror our digital family / vacation photos in folders any of us can access.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Damn straight. I'll remind myself that phones and tablets were never mean to watch movies or listen to music or share vacation photos or pull up a reference document when I'm on a job site. That's the kind of stuff I really should be carrying around a full laptop for.
Re: (Score:2)
And you can use it anywhere. And it has USB 3.0 speed. And it won't be data mined by Google.
If you have a fire or flooding and you're not keeping the backup at an offsite location, you've also lost all your data.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. But on the other hand, without extra effort that 1TB external is subject to the same hazards that the PC it's sitting next to is. Plus *I* have to monitor and replace that 1TB on a regular basis.
There's more to backup strategy that just "copy it to an external drive and hope".
And .. (Score:3)
How much does it cost you to get that terabytes worth of data from your local computer to Google Drive?
Re: (Score:3)
Startup idea, GoogleDrive bittorrent client. Downloads stuff directly into Drive, then add streaming service for GoogleDrive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I have a TB of data to move, a bittorrent client doesn't reduce the amount of data I have to send upstream. What forced for seeded warez doesn't work for unseeded personal files.
Re: (Score:2)
And if you really, really, really needed to get the stuff quickly you can "upgrade" to a commercial, highspeed account (100Mbps uncapped is ~$200/mo) and upload everything quickly or - in the case of a failure - download it all back faster than they can write it to a HDD and mail it to you.
Slashvertisement? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm curious, how much does it cost to run a Slashvertisement like this? I'm putting together a marketing plan and want to see if it fits within my budget.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they're being paid in GoogleCoins? (coming soon)
That's nice - but it's based in the US (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dunno about anyone else, but Google and Bing in the UK both provide data protection guarantees in line with EU data directives (or else a lot of places wouldn't be able to use them).
I've put Google Apps for Education into several schools, and that's pretty much their first concern - and the first one to be laid to rest, at least on paper...
Re: (Score:2)
at least on paper...
And therin lies the problem, if a megacorp whose headquarters are in the US is given the choice between handing the data over to the US government (and hence breaking EU law but probablly not being punished for it since the EU government won't know it happened) or refusing to hand the data over and getting punished by the US governemnent for doing so which do you think they will choose?
Re: (Score:2)
There is - F-Secure has a cloud solution called Younited. http://www.younited.com/ [younited.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Are you worried about the NSA? 'Cause here in the states they pretend like they need a reason to gather data. Snooping data in non-US countries is their raison d'etre.
Why do you think $.02*12/year/GB is cheap? (Score:3)
A 4TB drive is under 200 USD from several vendors. That is only $.05/GB. So, at 0.24/yr. This is 5..10X more expensive than commercial off the shelf home drive space assuming you have to buy a new drive every 1-2 years. That time figure is pretty conservative.
So, yeah, you maybe cloud storage gives you some replication, and the syncing of that replication costs some amount of money for bandwidth. How much extra that reliability costs really depends on the data dynamics, though and isn't as easy to estimate.
Also, 5..10X more is just about the ratio of SSD storage to magnetic disks. SSD is considered "relatively expensive storage" by most people I know.
Re:Why do you think $.02*12/year/GB is cheap? (Score:5, Informative)
Do you think data you upload to a cloud storage provider lives on just one hard disk that is plugged into the wall and that's it?
While some data centers do rely on more consumer level hardware (vs enterprise)... to help make up for the inherent unreliability of consumer level drives, they will replicate the data across multiple HDDs, in multiple racks, and possibly across multiple datacenters... as well as monitor the underlying bits for bitrot and overall integrity... in addition to sometimes offering backup options of what has been stored.
And this aside from offering you 24/7 access to the data from anywhere in the world while keeping that HDD and the attached server running (and power consuming) and with a redundant power system available.
All of these things quickly add up in terms of cost... so yes, two cents/GB is quite inexpensive for cloud storage these days when compared to like offerings.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a 500GB external that 1GB at this point has cost me less than $0.01/Mo... I more recently got a 3TB on sale for $103 but I'm not sure I would use a cloud storage service for large amount of data just because of the time involved with transferring that much data.
let's say I buy a 2TB hard drive for $99 each month, after 5 months I have 10TB, and at the end of the year I would have 24TB. That's more than twice the storage space and i don't need to spend $99/mo to keep it.
Re:Why do you think $.02*12/year/GB is cheap? (Score:5, Insightful)
You fail to consider the cost of electricity, or the cost of redundancy in case the hard drive crashes.
Re: (Score:3)
Let's not forget the cost of the computer to plug these drives into. Also forgetting the management time for backups, and whatever offsite mechanism you're using for DR, whether it's just the price of gas to drive to a friend or family, the power at a second facility, safety deposit box, or whatever it is.
Nobody is saying that you can't do it for cheaper yourself, if you don't place much value on your time. Backing up 1TB at $.02/gb for one year costs $240. A 1TB external drive costs about $70, and we ne
I'm confused. (Score:2)
"The 2 dollar plan per month means that the price for a gigabyte gets down to an incredibly low price of only two cents per month."
Translation, please. I must have missed something.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a $2 per month plan.
On that plan, the price per gigabyte works out to $0.02 per month. Because you get 100Gb.
What's hard about that? Okay, it won't win the Plain English Campaign, but for sure it's not the most obscure thing I've ever read.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm seeing my mistake now. Too much/not enough coffee...
Re: (Score:2)
Too not much enough coffee happens to all of us.
Re: (Score:2)
NSA Storage Service (Score:3, Insightful)
The NSA has an even better deal. The only price you pay for storage of all of your data is your freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but their sync service is total shit.
So the disk space is not that expensive... (Score:2)
... but for a lot of people, moving the data to and from the storage is what's really going to be costly. It'll be interesting to see how much of that disk space ends up going unused when word gets around about how much users get clobbered with data overage charges by AT&T, et al trying to use the cheap disk space.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on how you use that space... and how quickly you fill it.
Sure your ISP may not be happy if over the course of a few days you upload a few hundred gigs to any provider like this... but after that's done, the bandwidth bill stays low as there isn't usually much churn.
In the case that the amount of data to be uploaded is even larger... some cloud providers have the option to simply mail hard drives directly to the datacenter to import the data directly.
Costs money to upload it (Score:2)
You get charged for bandwidth so don't think it's cheap
Bad math (Score:2)
$1.99 for 100GB (previously $4.99), $9.99 for 1TB (previously $49.99), and $99.99 for 10TB.The 2 dollar plan per month means that the price for a gigabyte gets down to an incredibly low price of only two cents per month.
While it's true that the 2-dollar plan per month are $0.02 per month, the other plans are only $0.01 per month. Failing to mention this is bad math.
Here is a table of prices:
$2 / 100 GB / month ==> $0.02 / month
$10 / 1 TB / month ==> $0.01 / month
$100 / 10 TB / month ==> $0.02 / month
(Yes, I know it's technically $1.99 and not $2.00, but let's face it... prices ending in ".99" are retarded.)
Re: (Score:2)
$100 / 10 TB / month ==> $0.02 / month
Annnndd.... I can't type today.
(Why the hell doesn't Slashdot let us edit our articles to correct typos after posting?)
Amazon Glacier (Score:5, Interesting)
If you're looking for long-term archival storage, Amazon Glacier [amazon.com] is a pretty good deal at a $0.01/GB. I backed a few hundred GB's of data there and it's only costing me a few dollars/month. Restores will cost money, but if my house burns down and I lose my NAS + backups, I won't mind paying them a few hundred dollars to restore my data to a hard drive and ship it to me [amazon.com]. Does Google Drive provide a way to ship your data on a hard drive? It would take me days or weeks to download data over my currrent internet connection (assuming I don't hit my ISP's data cap)
Re: (Score:2)
This actually starts looking a lot better if you're near the TB+ mark. At 1TB, it costs the same as glacier ($0.01/GB) with no bandwidth charges and instant, sync access.
The restore data is a nice feature, but for a few hundred dollars you can almost certainly negotiate access to get your data back that quickly from someone (vs having someone else queue you up, copy to disk, and then ship). Most big cable operators have 100Mb connections now. I don't know this for a fact, but I have this suspicion that if I
Commercial? (Score:2)
Why do I get the feeling this was a paid ad?
I'll stick with SpiderOak and TarSnap. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
use encfs with Google Drive and it's just as safe.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux client (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, if only they would make a Linux client. Then, I might use it. Until then, Dropbox all the way!
advertisement (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Just upload encrypted filesystem containers and go about your business.
Re: (Score:3)
Just upload encrypted filesystem containers and go about your business.
Truecrypt containers are nice, but the downside is that the entire container has to be re-uploaded every time something inside it is changed. Good argument for having multiple small containers, but then it's a bit of a shell game figuring out where your data is...
If you're looking for file-by-file encryption, try AxCrypt [axantum.com]. It can bulk encrypt / decrypt files, apply strong encryption, and securely shreds the temporaries once you close up a file you opened for whatever reason. And it's also open source ;)
Re: (Score:2)
It is when compared to 10TB of local storage.
Re: (Score:3)
10TB for $99 a month isn't too terrible for a backup if you value your data enough to do so.
That's $1200 a year. For the same $1200 you can buy a NAS box of equal or greater capacity that's yours and doesn't require monthly payments.
Re:Now we have an answer to the 20TB backup questi (Score:5, Insightful)
But that NAS is likely sitting at your location, which means if it gets burned down by insane meth heads or swallowed by a sinkhole, you're good and screwed.
For my business, I use DFS that replicates our shared drives at all three locations, so I feel fairly confident that an almost up-to-date mirror of the data is being held at two other locations, all of which are separated by a lot of miles. Coupled with offsite backup, I feel the business data is secure.
At the moment my personal data is on Dropbox, with my absolutely confidential data in a Truecrypt container. Still, Dropbox is kind of expensive for the 7 or 8gb of data I'd like to store, so I will definitely be considering Google's offering. Since both work the same, at least for the PC versions, in that each computer has a full copy of the data, if Google goes offline or pulls the plug, I still have my multiple copies sitting around.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The point of a google drive backup is to have an offsite backup. Now, I agree you could set up that machine at a friend's house (or familly member) and get the offsite backup with a little bit of network configuration.