
Upthere raises $77M to put a new spin on personal cloud storage - doppp
https://techcrunch.com/2016/07/27/upthere-puts-a-new-spin-on-personal-cloud-storage/
======
sp527
That is a tremendous amount of money relative to the market opportunity.
Displacing existing providers is necessarily going to be crazy difficult. I
would love to hear the VC insight on this one: why do they think Upthere will
actually manage to capture consumer mindshare? Advertising what distinguishes
it from related services in a way that consumers will care about is a
challenge.

~~~
api
The pedigree of the founders probably factors into it. Many VCs take the "we
invest in people first" idea very seriously. For them a super-impressive team
sells itself, while a less impressive team could only get funded with a ton of
traction and proof. It's just reality.

That being said, it's not a terrible idea for a certain customer base. I am
disappointed at the apparent lack of first class security features though.
That would be a differentiator. But I haven't looked hard... maybe they are
below the fold. They talk about securing their platform but not about how I
might secure my data.

Edit: why do none of the big cloud drive and sync providers offer basic
symmetric local encryption of data? This is easier to implement by far than
sync and I for one would pay for this.

~~~
jasonsync
We're building a secure cloud storage, sync and share Dropbox alternative with
local, end-to-end encryption built in:

[https://www.sync.com](https://www.sync.com)

 _> Why do none of the big cloud providers offer local encryption?_

\- They want to police your files

\- Free services typically monetize you through data mining your files (eg.
Google Drive)

\- It's difficult (not impossible) to build in usability features that might
need to access, scan or manipulate your file data, when you don't have access
to the file data server-side in the cloud (everything has to be pulled down
locally first which adds overhead).

\- Browser support for local HTML5 saveAs() etc. handling is still all over
the map (Safari is almost a showstopper).

\- Easy account recovery options are limited

The tech is getting better though, and there's certainly a number of good
options in terms of cloud storage with local encryption built in, including
Sync!

~~~
IanCal
> Free services typically monetize you through data mining your files (eg.
> Google Drive)

Do you have a source that Google drive is mining my files? Free vs paid vs
business?

~~~
jasonsync
Sure, from Google's TOS:
[https://www.google.com/policies/terms/](https://www.google.com/policies/terms/)

 _Our automated systems analyze your content (including emails) to provide you
personally relevant product features, such as customized search results,
tailored advertising, and spam and malware detection. This analysis occurs as
the content is sent, received, and when it is stored._

~~~
IanCal
[https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/drive/HgAeG7l...](https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/drive/HgAeG7ljlZA;context-
place=topicsearchin/drive/advertising)

> As with Google Docs previously, we do not target ads to you based on the
> content of your files. Our servers index the files you put into Drive in
> order to provide features like fast search, virus detection and optical
> character recognition.

~~~
jasonsync
Easy for a community manager to say, but she didn't agree to the blanket terms
of service. You did.

The _binding_ TOS explicitly states they may analyze your content, and the
analysis occurs as the content is sent, received, AND when it is stored.

If what the community manager says is true, it would be awesome if Google
actually updated the TOS to clarify that _file AND file meta data_ in Google
Drive are exempt. I mean I love my Chromebook, and it came with 100 GB of
Google Drive free. But I have no idea how much access Google has to the files,
so I can only assume the TOS is accurate.

==

There's many choice quotes from Google employees that contradict, skirt around
or gloss over these issues:

 _Are files stored on Google Drive Encrypted?_

You'll note the first response doesn't answer the question. Then finally a
contradicting response:

 _That 's a valid question. Google Drive does NOT currently encrypt files on
the server. Our team and our company take the security and privacy of our
users very seriously._

[https://productforums.google.com/d/msg/drive/6AdrOutSoFU/sgi...](https://productforums.google.com/d/msg/drive/6AdrOutSoFU/sgixqxX3yfQJ)

==

Here's a funny conversation regarding web search history being on by default
across all your devices:

 _I can 't believe that this option is enabled by default! Clearly it should
be DISabled by default if Google cares at all about their users' security and
privacy. It's one thing that Google collects anonymous data about what people
search for and do online, but to collect a database of detailed personally
identifiable information on an opt-out instead of an opt-in basis?_

The product manager isn't quite sure either:

 _I 'm a PM at Google working on Personalized Search / Web History ... We've
found that it is difficult to articulate the usefulness of having Web History
turned on without trying it out for yourself._

[https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/websearch/12cW5...](https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/websearch/12cW5YPyvzY/McZXqsIzP8oJ;noredirect=true)

==

~~~
IanCal
My concern here is that you're making really quite a strong statement about
what google do with your files on google drive, and the only information I can
find is a very generic TOS and a statement on googles forum that they don't
use your files like this.

Have you tried contacting google to get confirmation?

~~~
jasonsync
I hear you. Perhaps I'm overly paranoid. I don't think so though!

Many people (eg. [http://www.inc.com/larry-kim/5-online-privacy-tips-from-
edwa...](http://www.inc.com/larry-kim/5-online-privacy-tips-from-edward-
snowden.html)) have asked Google to clarify their policy in this regard, but
the "generic" TOS you agreed to is the best they could come up with. The
trouble with using soft language is that anything goes.

Data monetization goes way beyond serving relevant ads.

While companies like Sync.com encrypt your data end-to-end (making this a non-
issue - shameless plug I know - you should check us out though), if you do
continue to use Google Drive you may want to investigate third-party Google
Drive encryption software such as
[https://www.boxcryptor.com/en](https://www.boxcryptor.com/en) (I hate to
recommend a competitor, but it's better than nothing).

I'm making a strong statement, because I value my privacy.

~~~
IanCal
> I hear you. Perhaps I'm overly paranoid. I don't think so though!

I think perhaps there's a misunderstanding here. I'm less concerned with your
point of "google might be reading my files", that's a perfectly valid concern.
That's different to making the statement "google are monetising your files, so
pay for my service instead".

> I'm making a strong statement, because I value my privacy.

You are making a strong statement about a competitor that I'm not sure you can
back up. That is not the same as valuing your own privacy. Not using google
drive because you aren't sure what they're doing is fine.

~~~
jasonsync
I wasn't trying to imply that paying for Google drive would eliminate the data
monetization model. In fact, the terms of service appear to be identical for
free or paid if you're using Google Drive for personal use, so perhaps that's
where the disconnect is.

However, it's interesting to note that Google mentions that they are willing
to negotiate the terms of service for businesses using the paid Apps service:
_note that additional terms may apply for negotiated Google Apps agreements_.

[https://support.google.com/drive/answer/2450387?hl=en](https://support.google.com/drive/answer/2450387?hl=en)

In the case of HIPAA compliance for healthcare, or data privacy compliance
requirements for industries that store files with personally identifiable
information (PII) in the cloud, I wonder if Google would amend the TOS to
include server-side encryption, or other safeguards, which would mitigate the
issue.

 _This is something I will investigate further, as I 'm not sure what the
answer is._

Regardless of what a Google Product Manager states (marketing rhetoric or
current policy), Google's legally binding terms of service are the only terms
that matter at the end of the day:

 _Our automated systems analyze your content (including emails) to provide you
personally relevant product features, such as customized search results,
tailored advertising, and spam and malware detection. This analysis occurs as
the content is sent, received, and when it is stored._

It would be great if Google updated their terms to be clearer. In the mean
time I'll take their word on it.

------
benologist
My Synology NAS has a pretty good take on personal cloud storage, after I put
a domain and SSL on it (which they make really easy with Lets Encrypt) it's
pretty much interchangeable with a bunch of cloud services for music, files,
tv/video etc. Primarily open source too, they've really done a slick web
interface for linux.

Given we're on the brink of putting an extra terabyte or two into your phone
or tablet etc I think cloud storage is really going to boil down to allowing
others' access.

~~~
LongTermBond007
I've been looking into doing something similar for an offsite backup for my
extensive photo collection- how much storage do you have and how much did it
cost you?

~~~
benologist
I opted for a tiny little 2.5" drive version with 4 bays so currently it's
limited to 8tb for now, they do 2 - 8 bay units for 3.5" drives which is
probably more suitable for massive storage requirements, and with USB3 ports
you can attach additional terabytes effortlessly. They also have additional
devices to put even more drives in that extend your NAS storage.

$280 with separate drives - [https://www.amazon.com/Synology-DS416slim-NAS-
DiskStation/dp...](https://www.amazon.com/Synology-DS416slim-NAS-
DiskStation/dp/B00LB0E9B4)

One very cool part is it has sync software that can automatically sync all or
some of your stuff - one way or bidirectional - to dropbox, google drive,
backblaze, amazon glacier etc for backups and public access.

There's a fork of their software here to install on other devices too -
[https://xpenology.me](https://xpenology.me)

~~~
ValentineC
> There's a fork of their software here to install on other devices too -
> [https://xpenology.me](https://xpenology.me)

It's not a fork so much as a custom bootloader for Synology's version of
Linux.

Here's the official forum:
[http://xpenology.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=2](http://xpenology.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=2)

------
mynegation
Time for another rant, sorry. So how is it different from Dropbox, iCloud,
OneDrive and countless other offerings? At this point I opted for a physical
server at my home, with encrypted cloud backups of important stuff and
periodic offsite backups of everything. I have a love-hate relationship with
Synology. It is a closed system running some bizarre variant of Linux, but at
least they are doing something with a nice interface and nicely pairs with
their mobile apps. I wish there was some open-source effort for a home server
like this that is equally well-designed, but so far I have not found any, so I
am running with this. Hopefully Sandstorm or OwnCloud or someone else will get
there at some point!

It is very cheap storage, it is connected to the internet, it has some nice
phone applications that I can use to access my content, I can run scripts on
it to back up data from other services like Instagram, it is available on all
of my computers.

If I am ever to get sucked into another cloud storage, give me encryption,
open source client, mobile apps, connection to other services to backup my
content, API access to my data, openness to third parties building connections
with your platform and I will chase you to give you my money.

~~~
allworknoplay
> So how is it different from Dropbox, iCloud, OneDrive and countless other
> offerings?

It takes your files off of your computer except for an intelligent local
cache. It doesn't integrate with your file system. The creators clearly think
storing everything locally and syncing copies to the cloud is over.

I think a lot of techy people fail to realize exactly how little most people
rely on their computers for anything other than web services, and how
extensively most people rely on their phones for basically everything. None of
the offerings you mentioned are really that great with phones.

Based on your use of your own local physical storage server, it's pretty clear
that this isn't for you. It isn't for me either. But try putting yourself in
someone else's shoes for a change.

~~~
tlogan
I'm actually that "someone else..." so here is my feed back on that.

I do not care about "it takes your files off of your computer except for an
intelligent local cache." What does it mean for me and my photos?

Also, all my photos are uploaded into Dropbox via iPhone anyway...

------
vegabook
In my opinion it is a fundamental axiom of computer science that some local
storage will always be necessary. We've just seen AMD put SSDs directly onto a
video card [1] for precisely the reason that _local bandwidth_ is supremely
important, as use cases at the endpoint always swamp remote bandwidth. Just as
we get to gigabit to the home, we are on the cusp of needing 100 gigabit to
the display as things like VR and 360-degree video catch on (AMD's SSG will
give us 50 of those gigabits). The history of computing has always seen this:
remote bandwidth grows exponentially, but so does local bandwidth need, from
an order of magnitude higher starting point, meaning the former never catches
up with the latter. This is why I believe this business strategy to be doomed.

[1] [http://semiaccurate.com/2016/07/25/amd-puts-massive-ssds-
gpu...](http://semiaccurate.com/2016/07/25/amd-puts-massive-ssds-gpus-calls-
ssg/)

~~~
mrclubfoot
It's not so much that local storage will go away, but more that its role will
change from a place where you "store" original content to a place where you
"cache" content. As people move away from owning a single computer to owning
multiple different devices that all produce content, it seems logical that you
would move the "truth" of your data to the cloud.

~~~
vegabook
but that's Dropbox. So contrary to what the article asserts, this is just
another dropbox.

~~~
dougperkins
Are they trying to claim that it's better than dropbox for viewing your
content. Like just a better UI or what?

~~~
vegabook
well to raise 77 million something in their pitch is working. I'm guessing
it's implicitness, ie, unlike actual local directories, as in dropbox et al,
you'll just see the cloud, but there will still be a fat, local, cache. So
really it's just a thin layer of abstraction on Dropbox and IMO that's very
easily copyable by dropbox which is already moving in that direction.
Basically, technically, nothing to see here folks. But someone in this shop
must have good stage skills.

------
zellyn
I read/skimmed the whole article, and still don't understand why this is
better than Dropbox. Also, aside from mentioning Middle Out compression, this
was indistinguishable from Pied Piper… :-p

~~~
aaronpk
It seems they're pushing one of the differences which is that this doesn't
sync to a folder on your computer. The files only live in the cloud.

Why this is better than a syncing approach is not clear to me.

I was hoping the "new spin" would be something a little more radical.

~~~
kornish
It's better than a syncing approach because most people can't utilize the full
extent of their sync-based storage due to local hard drive limitations.

An example: if I have a 320GB local drive and Dropbox keeps all its files on
my local drive, I can't store the full 1TB of files in Dropbox that I'm paying
for. However, I probably don't need all of those 1TB of files at the same
instant, just various subsets which change over time, meaning that a cloud
storage solution which doesn't require constant client-server sync lets me
actually utilize the full volume of the service.

~~~
jpalomaki
Dropbox project Infinite should help with this. It should make it possible to
replace some contents of the Dropbox folder with place holders that only get
downloaded when they are accessed. Personally I'm very much waiting for this.
The current selective sync is too cumbersome.

[https://blogs.dropbox.com/business/2016/04/announcing-
projec...](https://blogs.dropbox.com/business/2016/04/announcing-project-
infinite/)

------
Apocryphon
Seen a joke somewhere else- isn't this product pretty much what Pied Piper
(prior to the latest season finale) was trying to create? Except without
compression.

~~~
wehadfun
It sure sounds similar.

------
sinatra
Local storage is extremely cheap. Except for mobile devices where it's kept
artificially expensive as a way to price discriminate.

However, I would not want to build a company around bypassing local storage
because when (if?) local storage becomes cheaper on mobile devices, there will
be absolutely no benefit of using their product.

Then, as the photos and videos keep getting bigger and bigger due to higher
resolution and quality, the bigger problem will be uploading those files to
the "cloud" in the first place, not not having enough local storage. Because,
compared to local storage, network connectivity for mobile devices will take
longer to become mature.

~~~
jpalomaki
Storage is still pretty limited on laptops. For example even on Macbook Pro
you are still stuck with max 1TB. If you carry your computer around, external
storage is pretty inconvenient.

One issue with cheap local storage is the reliability. It is easy to get an
external hard disk or NAS box, but quite difficult to setup appropriate backup
procedures and maintain those. For example keeping data and backups in one
physical location is not a very good idea.

~~~
sinatra
I'd argue that if you're running out of 1TB local storage for data you use
frequently, then this completely cloud based service won't work for you
anyway. Imagine how much data will go back and forth for that 1+TB. Something
like Dropbox/Google Drive with selective sync will be a better option.

And this cloud service doesn't solve the backup problem either. With Upthere,
the copy in their cloud is your only copy. If their data gets corrupted, you
lose everything. So, you want a proper remote backup solution anyway whether
you use Upthere or Dropbox or Syncthing. And if you think Upthere must have
good backup setup of their own, then I'd argue that so would Dropbox and
Google Drive.

So, I still am not sure if Upthere really provides that much value.

------
abalone
Isn't iCloud Photo Library already better than this for media? It's also just
an "intelligent local cache". It downloads device-optimized previews. It has a
sharing system (photo streams). It has data centers that handle scale.

Furthermore, it has native device OS integration. That means it can handle
syncing that cache with the cloud better. It can do it while the device is
otherwise alseep, i.e. overnight. Third party apps need a hack to keep the
device awake. Notice Upthere has a setting for this called "prevent auto lock"
which it recommends enabling for "large" uploads. That's really suboptimal.
iCloud is also native to the Photos app. Upthere has to compete with all the
library features in Photos too, like all the machine learning stuff that's
coming in iOS 10.

Maybe it's somehow better for other documents / as a straight Dropbox or
iCloud Drive competitor. Maybe the core tech and team makes them a good
acquisition target. But for the "rich media" that takes up the bulk of local
storage, it's going to be hard to move the needle as third party app.

------
dmix
There's about a hundred of these services but somehow none of them support
linux. Even if they do it's with the most half-assed software. I hope these
guys invest in it now that they have capital. They are missing out on some
critical early adopters to promote their software.

------
tlogan
I installed Upthere to my mac.

I have a question: for me, as a consumer, why would I use Upthere? What is
added value?

Both Dropbox and Google Drive work well (even OneDrive personal on mac is ok)
- buy maybe I'm missing point here.

------
newman314
Now if there was an Upthere overlay on my Synology, that could be a very
interesting use case. Seamless HSM.

------
andruby
I fail to see how this differentiates from what I currently get with iCloud
Photo + iTunes Match. iCloud Photo is cheaper ($2,99 vs $4,99) and is
officially supported and integrated by Apple on iOS and macOS.

What's the difference? Why would you choose a more expensive third-party
solution?

~~~
Wompy
If you aren't in the Apple ecosystem that might be one reason.

~~~
sanowski
Then you're in the android ecosystem which is heavy Google.

------
farslan
I've downloaded the app but the only way I can upload photos is to connect it
to a Photos library. But my photos are not there. I wonder what's the appeal
here is.

------
imbeau
Seems interesting and reminds me a lot of the Nextbit Robin - a kickstarted
android phone that can offload less-used data and apps to the cloud.

------
tsurkoprt
I'm surprised why would someone give so much money for something that exists
and no additional value to it.

Here is upcoming startup and I'm waiting to release its beta to the public:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3aXb5RqS0s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3aXb5RqS0s)

Private, Streams and Just works.

------
nullcipher
So this competes with Dropbox/ownCloud?

------
daxfohl
Yay, finally blockchain storage! Oh, wait, just another "me too" advert.

