Dropbox limits free accounts to 3 devices

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by stumped

Though I wonder if anyone will ever do a netflix for quality ebooks, audio books, not the junk heap that is Kindle unlimited

The major obstacle to that is, you couldn't use it on eink readers, because you can't install apps on them. And many people who read enough books to subscribe to such a service don't want to read those books on a computer, tablet or phone.

[stumped]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

The major obstacle to that is, you couldn't use it on eink readers, because you can't install apps on them. And many people who read enough books to subscribe to such a service don't want to read those books on a computer, tablet or phone.

But you can borrow Kindle books already from some USA libraries and have them arrive on your Kindle, I think, so that is solved?; and you can borrow kepub direct to some Kobos .

Not sure what percent of avid readers will only read on e-ink. I read a lot but almost always on tablet. I prefer that even though I own kobo and Kindle e ink devices also

There should be scope for a streaming audio book service. Audible want as much for a single book as netflix take for unlimited viewing , so streaming competition would be good.
It's already available with my local library into the Libby app, but they only have a few hundred books.so it's nothing like a netflix for audio books solution

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Only if I put all of my eggs in one basket. I'm not that dumb. A lot of people are not that dumb.

But, quite a few people are not that smart or tech-savvy, apparently, seeing the numerous complaints about losing books after one e-bookstore or another went out of business.

Now THAT sounds pretty dumb.


That's you. You are not the paragon of technological sense and sensibility..

Maybe so, but I'd rather pay €125 for my operating system and then use it as long as I want, as long as the computer functions. I'm already disgusted that I _have_ to use and know Windows 10 (because I work in IT). Not because of any problems I have with the OS per se, but because of the fact that Microsoft keeps jackassing around with it, because it's now an "operating system as a service".

I do nothing of the sort. I have complete control over where I choose to keep multiple incarnations of "my stuff" and complete control over who, and how much, I'm willing to pay for each incarnation of "my stuff." Because--once again--I'm not an idiot. I don't put all of my eggs in one basket.

With regard to where you put your files, yes. There are a lot of other services though.

For example: Chromecast (Audio). I have three JBL Chromecast speakers, a Chromecast Audio, and a normal Chromecast. I know their primary purpose is to stream internet media... but _even_ if you use only local media, the Chromecasts _still_ need an internet connection to function. If I had known that before, I'd not have bought them.

AFAIK, last time I looked, Sonos needs you to be logged in to their service to use your speakers, even with local media only. That's why I didn't buy any Sonos speakers.

With regard to hardware, software and media, I don't want to have to deal with any company after I've bought whatever I want; and that precludes subscription services.

To which I say, "so what?" I'm not going to deny myself conveniences I value today, out of fear for potential future problems that I've already safe-guarded myself against. If/When I find the convenience is not worth the price, I'll stop paying. At that time, none of "my stuff" will be stranded or lost. It will be safely present in several other locations. Just like it always was. I'm not afraid of adapting to new technological climates. I've done it fairly successfully for most of my life.

For Dropbox, there are alternatives. For other services such Adobe's cloud, there aren't. There's other software that is similar, but nothing has all of the functions that the Adobe software has. Some people think/feel like they need that; others really do need some of those functions. IMHO, Adobe is abusing this monopoly position to force customer's hands and raise prices. That is one of those subscription-based services/software that are evil.

[haertig]

For those of you who are using Dropbox, etc. to store personal stuff - what are you using for encryption?

[Josieb1]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

For Dropbox, I think it's fair to pay as a subscription since you're paying for the service, not the content/software.

If Dropbox stops operations, I still have all my data stored locally. It's just the automatic, up-to-date syncing and offsite backup service that I'd lose.

I still buy CDs and Blu-rays for content I want to actually keep. Netflix and Spotify are fine for content I don't care to own. Mind, I don't actually subscribe to Spotify. I just use Amazon Music that comes included with my existing Amazon Prime subscription.

I do wish I didn't have to get an Office 365 subscription for my iOS devices though.

I’m the same. I even bought a standalone Office 2016 for my Mac as we still have a working Office 2010 for windows. Dropbox and Prime are the only services we pay a subscription for.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by haertig

For those of you who are using Dropbox, etc. to store personal stuff - what are you using for encryption?

Anything so personal and sensitive that it needs encryption I would never put in a cloud. 99% of my stuff isn't sensitive nor particularly personal. So I let Dropbox take care of any encryption.

[stumped]

Originally Posted by haertig

For those of you who are using Dropbox, etc. to store personal stuff - what are you using for encryption?

nothing at all!
but if it is passwords, I only put in hints that work only for me, unless they are for unimportant web sites for info only
buy more security concious folks could put stuff into password protected zip fiels, I guess, i see no sense in encrypting family photos, videos.... or my calibre library copy

i think that rival service pcloud encrypts stuff automatically in their virtual drive

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Anything so personal and sensitive that it needs encryption I would never put in a cloud. 99% of my stuff isn't sensitive nor particularly personal. So I let Dropbox take care of any encryption.

Yep. I use evernote and it's encryption for my password list. Financial records and that sort of thing are backed up on various local hard drives and USB thumb drives, not on cloud storage. I use cloud storage for photos, ebooks and the like.

[DiapDealer]

There's nothing in any of my cloud storage data that I would even consider encrypting. I don't really have sensitive data. I have a password file in a password-protect zlpfile on various thumb-drives that live in my home/car/office (not on cloud storage), but other than that, I'm a fairly open book--data-wise.

[haertig]

Ah, OK. Encryption-free is not my cup of tea, but may be fine for others. I guess it depends on what you will put up in the cloud, and how stringently you want to watch and monitor your use of it. I'm more of the "cover your bases ahead of time" (paranoid) thought process, "default = protected" rather than "default = unprotected". Thanks.

[stumped]

Checkout pcloud
https://www.pcloud.com/encrypted-cloud-storage.html

But all the encryption in the world is no protection of you are du0ed into revealing your password, or have it stolen by a key logger. An always offline flash drive, in a safe , is safer, but less convenient

[haertig]

Originally Posted by stumped

Checkout pcloud
https://www.pcloud.com/encrypted-cloud-storage.html

Thanks. That sounds a lot like Cryptomator, except it's $4.99 per month instead of free.

My main complaint about Cryptomator (and apparently pcloud as well, per their description of how it works) is that they natively store your data in encrypted format and provide a driver to decrypt it into a separate filesystem that you can access read/write. So you are dependent on their driver working in order to access your data (ignoring the obvious workaround to keep separate copies of your data). I would prefer a product that keeps your data main storage in its original non-encrypted format, and then provides a driver that creates an encrypted filesystem that you then sync with the cloud. In this case, if their driver failed you would still have access to your unencrypted data.

Note that this is exactly backwards from what one would want for normal system encryption. In the normal system encryption case you want the primary storage to be fully encrypted. But we are talking specifically about "cloud upload encryption" here, which at least for me, is a different animal. There is also an element of trust involved - there are many long standing and thoroughly tested system encryption offerings. But these cloud-specific offerings are rather new and unproven IMHO, thus I'd prefer them to use the safer primary storage method of un-encrypted.

[Lemurion]

One way to get at least partially around the Dropbox limit is to share folders.

My brother just gave me a MacBook Pro, which immediately bumped me up to four computers that I use for writing-related work (in addition to the iPad and iPhone) so there' no way I could add it. I simply created a new Dropbox account and shared the writing folder so that I could sync Scrivener on the new computer.

Note that while Dropbox makes a big deal about not being able to share folders within a shared folder on a free account, that simply means you can't share the subfolders independently, not that you can't access any subfolders within the shared folder.

[mak12]

[QUOTE=MAK;3841499]Nonsense. There are plenty of non-subscription alternatives to Adobe. There are even articles specifically calling those options out. Heck, for the vast majority of home users, Photoshop Elements is affordable and is probably going to yield better results with less effort than the full blown Photoshop.




Yes, the ones where they force people to subscribe and drag the fees out of their bank account no matter what they say. Yep, those are the evil ones.




You need a photo editor such as Photoshop, Image-ready, or other program where you can reduce the image size. You can do this via pixels or dimensionally in inches. I would see about either of the first two so you can optimize them for web. I am sure there are others though. Check here for Open Source editors. https://www.gyanbar.com/best-free-ph...-alternatives/ I do not warrant any of these, as I have not used them. If you do use one, be careful of file extension reassignment during installation.

Have a blessed and prosperous day,

Alis

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Relying on cloud-based subscriptions to get your stuff done nets you this:

https://9to5mac.com/2019/05/02/adobe...ud-price-hike/

This is the main reason I'll never ever pay for any cloud product.

This information is incorrect.

Adobe have two price points for their photographic package:

$10 a month for 20GB Cloud storage.
$20 a month for 1TB Cloud storage.

Both packages get you the same software (Photoshop, Lightroom, and various associated tools).

All that Adobe have done is made the 20GB option slightly more difficult to find. It is still available. It’s what I use myself. For anyone who’s even a moderately serious photographer, getting LR and PS for $10/month is unbelievably good value for money.