Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Google One (one.google.com)
246 points by binaryanomaly 38 days ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 368 comments

"Google One" suffers from designer in a box syndrome.

It's probably a great internal name - hey, we've been providing storage for photos, email, docs, drive, and more, for over a decade, and we've finally integrated that storage into one space, so let's call it Google one! It's a great name - simple and powerful, symbolizes the effort and direction we've taken in the past 5-10 years of integrating our consumer, day to day products.

However, outside of the Google box, no one understands or cares what they've been doing. "Google one" sounds like... nothing. "What is it???" is an extremely appropriate response.

Maybe in the future it will come to symbolize all the services of Google, available in one centralized location, allowing for future consumers to easily access all of google services without separate pay schemes, storage, or other infrastructure, and make it a 1 stop shop for your services needs, common or obscure.

But right now, the copy and landing page are way off the messaging mark.

They bought into their own subliminal messaging. They just really like hearing "Google Won".

All your data are belong to us

I wish for once they would really offer a unified storage-solution. But Yet it's all just a colelction of different storages with different interfaces, rules and so on. Google Drive has integrateion into all their services somehow, and Google Photos has some bad integration into Google Drive. But what about Google Books? Google Music? Google Mail? Youtube and all the other stuff they have? At best they have some import/export-functionalitity, not a real "One-for-all" type of filemanaging-solution.

I haven't tested Google One yet, but it doesn;t seem to change anything there, just offering more space for them all.

Sounds like something The Queen might enquire for looking herself up on Google, "How does one Google one?".

> How does one Google oneself

Indeed, but then the "joke" is lost!

Waymo named their self-driving service "Waymo One", so it seems there's some force within Alphabet pushing for that name to be used everywhere?

Besides it being a service you pay for, there aren't many similarities between Google One and Waymo One and I think it'll just be confusing.

There's also Android One (https://www.android.com/one/)

Also known as "pure Android" for the curious ones.

curious Ones?

Did someone say OneDrive?

I guess someone there really liked the naming of their XBox.

Agreed, when I read the title of the post, I thought this would be about self-driving cars.

> "Google one" sounds like... nothing. "What is it???"

It sounds precisely like Amazon's "Prime" brand, and it's no coincidence. It's a sunk-cost feature to convince you to come back (like membership shopping clubs - Costco, Sams). Unfortunately I don't think it has the draw of 'free shipping' (+ music/TV/etc).

Prime has all kinds of built in positive connotations. “One” is pretty meaningless here.

Interesting comment; as a non-native speaker "prime" evokes the idea of f'(x) and prime numbers. Prime is pretty silly (e.g., "Optimus Prime") and might be an inside joke.

What are these positive connotations? To me prime sounds neutral, like a fact.

Prime has a well established meaning and predates Amazon by, well, probably centuries. It is also well aligned with their original usage, in that preferred customers could pay more to get better treatment (faster deliveries and customer service response).

Google Plus would probably be a better name... but, well...

I think you're right on there. When I saw the title, my initial thought was that Google had developed some kind of rocket! In other words, the name gives so little information about what the product actually is that it could be literally anything.

i thought it is something to replace Google Plus :)

Speaking about bad namings - reminds me how back at Sun at one moment everything became "Java" (even stock ticker, no kidding). "We've got just 5 product boxes (Java this and Java that), just 5 boxes, that's all! Simplify things for the customer!" Lets just say that naming as Java various non-Java things simplified nothing for nobody.

I thought it was a new phone.

After reading the top comment I realised it was a new version of drive and apps.

After reading the link I now realise it's not even anything.

It's just plain old Google with a new landing page at one.google.com.

Perhaps this is going the away of Amazon Prime - which started off as subscription for faster shipping but grew to be a one-stop subscription for various things?

A lot of Windows users probably know about OneDrive (https://onedrive.live.com/) since this is a similar service, I totally understand the naming choice here.

Ironically OneDrive used to be SkyDrive until Sky sued them. I guess everyone's switching to numbers because words are all trademarked, apart from the phoneme strings generated by the pharma industry.

When Porsche was releasing the 911 back in the 60s, Porsche wanted to name it “901”. Except Peugeot had a trademark on three-digit model numbers with a zero in the middle...

how could you trademark 0s in the middle? All 3 digits one maybe? that would be 9 * 9 = 81 separate trademarks. Seems like it's too comprehensive.

92818181818 0 1. Probably didn't get that, eh!

how could you trademark 0s in the middle?

By talking to the French patent office, circa 1950s, apparently. I don't know what you're on about with the rest, but I'm just parroting what's well-documented, you're welcome to go look it up.

I figured you had to trademark specific numbers, not a regular expression "[0-9]+ 0 [0-9]+", which is how I'd guess it would work in the US, vs enumerating all the numbers in separate trademarks (patent #1 (100), patent #2 (101), ... (909)).

They should follow the smartphone industry and just use arbitrary algebra expressions. I'm enjoying my OnePlus 5T solve when T = 3.

Google One + Google Drive? There's no way that nomenclature will ever be confused with OneDrive... /s

Also: "One" has so bad SEO that Google One does not show up on the first page of Google Search results and OneDrive only on the third page. Google One was not on the first five pages.

I'm sure they'll fix that soon

"We've noticed that you use Google Search. So we've customized your search to include more Google Products"

As of now, it appears on page 1, 6th item.

Most probably they'll follow the path like other products have followed:

Google Keep -> Keep -> Keep Notes -> Notes (In near future)

Google One ⇒ One ⇒ One Two ⇒ Two?

More like: Google One => One => Google => product canceled

Haha more probably

They must be using a roadie for their product naming.

No, they killed Google Plus ;-)

Which would actually have been a GREAT name for this service... but they already used/burned the name.

It’s also a straight rip off of a name from Microsoft...who produces the product Xbox One

Not unlike how Google became alphabet which seems influenced by *Amazon A to Z

Its not a rip off, its just a very generic name. Tons of products do this, I assume because its relatively safe play when you can't (or don't want) a more standout branding.

“One” is generic...but it’s not descriptive. In other words it’s not cloud, drive, OS, etc. So in the context of computer goods and services One could be trademarked (which of course MS has). It’s like saying Apple is generic, it is but as Apple relates to computers and software it receives trademark protections.

When MS uses “one” across its product spectrum (OneDrive, Xbox One, One OS, One Note, One Guide) then google uses One...it’s not the same as MS OneDrive and Google Drive (ie descriptive) it’s more on par with MS creating a social network and calling it MS+. I think most would agree that’s either a ripoff or at least fail on many levels.

More like a straight rip off of a first grader’s math textbook.

Microsoft also likes to add 365 and Live to their product names, and (to me) seems to be moving away from using One in new products.


Strange analogy, surely it would have to be ripping off a product called ‘Microsoft One’

I mean, microsoft's storage solution is called onedrive. That's pretty damn similar.

Yes they own more than a few trademarks for One in the space. MS OneNote, One guide.

But hey Googlers are gonna downvote when Google spends millions of branding/marketing a new product only to be called on copying MS of all companies.

Well it’s not an analogy. It’s just stealing a product name from a competitor, it really doesn’t matter if the products aren’t in the same space.

If Google created Google Windows and the product wasn’t an OS, it’s still a rip off right?

It’s one thing when it’s Apple/google maps because it’s a generic and descriptive mark, but One? Should have just gone full stop Google Windows.

If we are going down this road, Microsoft copied HTC, who not only had a product called "One" but also ones called "One S" and "One X"



Ok...I’m no MS fanboy.

But MS OneNote was released right around the same time.

But let’s be serious Google spent millions to brand/launch this, and it’s got to be embarrassing that either: a. None of the yesmen thought to speak up and say hey should we really use a name MS uses for a bunch of their products (One Note, Xbox One, One OS, One Guide); or b. Straight ripped it.

Android One is 4 or 5 years old.

Companies have been naming things with "one" since forever.

Had they called it “iDrive”, or summat, the rip-off would have been obvious even though Apple has no such named product. Little accessory makers can get away with such naming because a) “Cheap-Ass iAccessories” isn’t a household name and b) their product probably has something to do with Apple stuff.

For a company like Google, I find it a bit embarrassing.

Who ripped off whom?


The "i" in all of Apple's names stands for Internet in 1990s nomenclature.

Similarly the word "one" predates any usage by MS.

Possible. First thing Google One made me think of was that they're getting into the gaming space.

and Microsoft OneDrive

at least they didn't go from Google (v1) -> Google 360 -> Google One -> Google X

“One” is very trendy right now.

Makes sense, "One is the loneliest number"

The ‘one’ stands for 1.0, as in the people signing up will become beta users for a product that will inevitably be shelved. /s

> Thank you for uploading 2 TB of data. Unfortunately Google One is being phased out and you will have until July 31st to download your data before it is pruned. Our new storage product is called Google Two - we don't currently have a migration program so you'll need to download and reupload your data once you pay for a Google Two membership. Thank you for being a loyal cus-tomb-er!

Just like Google Plus.



It’s a huckster hook word, engorged with talking points so that PowerPoint decks can prompt for easy segues during sales pitches.

The name Google Plus would have made more sense for this product in my opinion.

And a G+ instant archiving button will be their 'killer' feature in a couple of months. KA-CHING!!

Yes, it will even conveniently estimate the exact plan you'll need to purchase in order to store all of your posts, collections, and important communities.

Grab your shit now, and also once every following month until you have fully migrated off.


They forgot the golden rule of user experience design. People spend the vast majority of their time not using your product.

Amazon Prime doesn't sound like much either, does it?

Names are hard. Maybe "Google Bundle"?

Google OneStorage or Google OnePlace (for everything.. gedit?)

Maybe "One Place" would have been better. I saw the article title and I thought it was a new smartphone or something

whats Stripe mean? Whats Google mean? Whats Uber mean? Paul Graham has an essay about how the name of your company doesn't really mean anything, and you should always pick a name with the .com available.

true, I had to scroll up and down at least 3 times until I more or less got what it is

> It's probably a great internal name

Well, Google+ was taken :)

It also seems to symbolize Google's real new mission statement, changed from "Organizing the world's information" to "Collecting all of your information*, whether they publicly admit to it or not.

Consolidation of the services is nice, but I feel like this is just getting creepier and creepier.

It’s like “put your entire digital existence onto our platform” Oh and by the way took “don’t be evil” out. Now give us all of your data, look at this beautiful UI!

Sorry Google, I don’t trust you anymore, I used to love you, it used to be about the ideals and ideas, but now avarice has possessed and consumed you.

No thanks.

To quote Google's code of conduct as it exists today:

> And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up!


Media headlines from the time gave the impression that it was removed, which was absolutely false.

Strange, I remember one person who spoke up at Google with what he believed was a legitimate problem and was subsequently tarred, feathered, and fired. Sets a good precedent for this culture they're promoting.

It was effectively removed.

1. Moving from top of the doc to very bottom of multi page doc, after things like Trade Controls.

2. Change of first party imperative to third party - you remember, not we

Are you suggesting that the conclusion of a document isn't an important part of it?

I'd argue that the last sentence is more prominent than anything that isn't in the first paragraph.

And who is "we" if not "you" in your second sentence? That's an employee code if conduct.

Virtue signaling in a generic slogan all but guarantees the peanut gallery has a petty grenade to throw at you for the rest of time.

Google does something unfavorable: "don't be evil, HUH?"

Google takes away the slogan: "so now you're evil, HUH?"

Factually correct, but missing the point entirely. Classic Robot.

It's ok Google, I'm not angry, I'm just disappointed.

You can go back to relentlessly optimizing the max($) function, but everyone is wising up to you.

I'm actually more worried about Amazon, Amazon are an aggressive weed with reaching tendrils, you are more like an aging billionaire, wealthy, unable to innovate, jaded, your spark has gone.

Your questionable activity means you no longer command the respect you once did. The greats are ambivalent about working for you, and the ones you hold - you only hold with money. When you have to pay all the time, it's not love (that's a joke, stand down the database queries)

Incidentally, don't you sometimes wonder why your founders are gone? Why Schmidt is gone? The greats have left, because of who you have become.

Best summary

They could win privacy-conscious users back by offering an ad and tracking free Google experience with the paid plans.

Would anyone trust them to not silently still collect personal data?

For example, even if they don't need the data now because you're paying not to see ads, they might still collect it so that they can show you "better" ads if/when you stop paying.

I don't really get why people assume they're chaotic evil rather than lawful evil. This is a large company with lots of lawyers. Modulo bugs, they're going to make sure anything they do is covered by the privacy policy rather than leave an opening to be sued.

So the answer is that I would trust that it (mostly) doesn't happen if the legal terms say it won't.

It is not illegal to spy on users, you just need to call it "metadata".

And as long as it has a warrant for one individual + multiple hops from that person you potentially legally sweep up hundreds/thousands of other innocent people's information - often full bore, not just metadata.

Isn't there a consistent history of shady practices from such companies, like purposely ambiguous language in the Android location activity preferences, or similar stuff from Facebook when they try to make you share more data with them like contacts?

There would be no economic advantage to that kind of behavior. I'm a fan of paid services rather than ad-based services because it switches the focus. The customer is the person that pays, not the advertising company, so the company will have an economic advantage to give a better service to you, not to the ad companies. Something like that would just jeopardise the customer for no particular economic gain, so yeah, I'd trust them.

I agree there wouldn't have been (much of) an advantage to that sort of behavior if Google had started with paid services from the beginning and never depended on advertising.

However, now that we're where we are, it's just so easy to keep tracking you, since they'd actually have to go out of their way to remove it from their tech stack, that doing it on the off chance that either A: someday you'll stop being a paid customer or B: someday a PM will need to show more revenue and they decide to stick ads on their paid service anyhow, the combined probability of which approaches 100%, is worth doing it. Path dependencies can cause strange things to happen.

I can't trust a company who has tracking everything and everybody woven into their tech stack at every level to stop.

If it says so in the Terms of Service, yes. Actually it does say so for G Suite: https://gsuite.google.com/terms/dpa_terms.html

With a good ToS in place, Google is actually more trustworthy than smaller companies.

Disabling ad tracking is not going to change how they scan all the file contents and categorize them using AI. It might be even more effective for them than tracking you on web.

They would need to compartmentalize their services to win me back. Some tracking I'd accept but I don't want them to aggregate my 'whole life'.

They tried to do e2e encryption with Allo, then they integrated all the crappy smileys from it to their other messagong products, and got rid of Allo. The scary thing is that in theory they don't have ads on messaging, but if it would be true, they would have gone farther with e2e

I basically agree with you, but my behavior is not consistent in regards to Google and privacy: I use Fastmail, DuckDuckGo, use Firefox containers for Google (and FB and Twitter), use Siri, etc. But, I have put all my pictures on Google Photos (used to be Picasa) since they rolled out the service and I buy a bulk of entertainment from Google Play movies/books and use GCP. So I do let them track me in some ways.

The more interesting part is that the line between "digital existence" and real life is getting blurrier everyday.

I’m surprised I had to scroll this far to see a privacy concern comment. Totally agree with you by the way.

It feels like there is an ever growing privacy awareness yet companies like google keep pushing the cloud storage for typical consumer. I’d be curious to know how average person feels about storing their private photos in google’s servers.

My biggest fear is accidentally losing or deleting all my family photos. I don't trust myself to run proper backups and archival.

I think the average consumer is in the same boat. They want someone else to take care of this problem.

To be fair, this stuff is probably not for the privacy conscious (and neither is FB). I doubt they mind you not signing up, you are not their target. Lots of other people are happy to give them all of their data, and that's ok.

Their support site is far more valuable than the landing page.

From the main support index at https://support.google.com/googleone/ here are various tidbits of useful content that the surrounding HN comments wished for (sorry, none describe the "expert help" available):

"Get Google One":


> With Google One, you get more storage, help from experts, and extra member benefits. You can share your membership with up to 5 family members.

"How your existing storage works with Google One":


> You'll get storage through your Google One membership, which will become your new storage limit. You'll no longer buy storage through Google Drive.

"Claim a Benefit":


> Google One hotel deals depend on the day, time, and other factors. There might not be a deal for every hotel search.


"Learn where Google One is available":

> Create or join a family; Use Google Play Family Library; Subscribe to the Google Play Music family plan; Use a family calendar

How on Earth are hotel discounts related to cloud storage?

Yeah, the hotel benefits creep me out. At first glance, it’s an iCloud-like storage plan, fine. But reading more and finding the hotel benefits makes me think “oh right, Google wants to track everything I do online and offline and sell my info to advertisers.”

Yep it creates a direct connection between a cloud service and what you type in Google search box. That... seems strange. It make it sound like a repository for all of your data/activity on all Google services not just, you know, the data you upload to their cloud service.

hotels are cloud storage for people?


Maybe they try to move toward aAmazon Prime-Style "one subsription to feed all your live-areas"-Service. Next time they might add pLay store-flatrates for books, video, music, apps and then combine it with youtube premium.

My guess would be a slow introduction of concierge type services linked into their phone AI thing that they launched 6 months ago to great fanfair, and a general move from software service companies (and my bank.) into offering concierge type services in general.

Banks have been doing concierge for ages, if you're at a "expensive enough" level (and it's not as expensive as one first might assume, my bank offers a full concierge service for 10 000€ / year that's basically "it's 2 am and you want something specific and you're wherever, call this number and we'll find it for you").

I don't think tech companies can compete with that; if you want a concierge on retainer you want a guy you can talk to and explain your weird request. Nobody is paying 10+k a month to get a "barely close enough" answer. I also don't believe that's what they aim.

Instead they intend to go for the "fake concierge, but close enough": tie-ins into all their sub products, in an unified subscription and interface, at a small fraction of the cost. Oh you want an hotel ? We have that. Renting a car ? Buying a musical instrument ? Make a reservation at a restaurant ? Done. Oh, you want that actually unique request that does not get enough volume by month to be a business on its own ? No, we don't do that, but here is the google search results for it.

In other words, I believe Google One aims to play in the same court as Amazon Prime.

Founder’s Club is a good example of the mid-tier concierge services, as it exists exclusively to provide concierge-like discounts for a specific demographic target at a significant enough to overcome the “not enough volume” concern that banks face.

These discount services have one critical weakness for most of us: you must spend at least 10x the membership fee each year on compatible services to benefit from the discounts. If you don’t spend at least $2000/year on eligble costs, paying $200/year for discounts rarely makes any sense once you add up the money saved.

Credit cards try to democratize through “points” but the same math applies when comparing to a debit card.

It doesn't even include a messaging platform!

They’re both offered by Google.

Easy with the criticism folks. This is just the first version. All the confusion will disappear with Google One 2.0

I'll wait for Google One 2.3

Is that the release where it's specialized for certain groups? Like, "Google One 2.3 for businesses"

Well, it's still better than "Google One 2.3 Tab S3 Plus 10.1 (EU ver), with stylus"

You mean Google Two.

Or maybe one Google One will be deprecated in favor of two Google Twos.

All three will come preinstalled with Android phones at the same time.

I'll wait for Google One Lollipop.

I'll wait for Google One 4.3 API 34 Nobby Nobbs 17.3.1 Libraries 12.22

I figured that it would be Google One (beta) for 7 years first.

Hey Google ... I know you're here, looking for how this is going to go over.

It seems like a nice idea. I'm not on board with any new Google platform unless I have some sort of assurance that you're just not going to kill this off in two years, or let it suffer a slow death of neglect and attrition.

Thanks, but you need to grow up a bit, Google.

My employer uses gsuite and managing google cookies in a multi-login scenario is sufficiently annoying that I simply avoid using google services altogether.

Try using a browser that can better isolate your work account from your personal account. I recommend the latest firefox with site containers, but you could also use Chrome/Chromium and add a seperate profile for work (top right user icon > Manage people > Add person). This way, you will have separate windows for work/personal stuff with isolated histories and bookmarks.

I would go in that direction if I needed to but so far I simply haven't needed any google services that require a login.

I've read some horror stories about google pulling the plug on all accounts due to a billing conflict somewhere else in their ecosystem. That, together with the absolute PITA of managing multiple accounts pretty much ensures I will avoid ever paying to put my data in their hands.

This isn't some side project like Wave that they'll cut off. It sounds like a pretty core business. If anything it will get renamed and take on a different form in a couple yrs, but I doubt they'd ever stop offering a cloud service like Drive.

But still, this is a very valid point. It's hard to trust any Google service and it's risky to make any significant investment of time structuring your life around them. This is why I don't use Google Music anymore. I invest far too much time into my playlists and music collections to trust them.

> This isn't some side project like Wave that they'll cut off.

Wave was launched to a ton of fan-fare and seemed like a first-order product, similar to Hangouts... which is now also dying a slow death.

I wouldn't be so sure that they won't cut it off.

For example, they have already removed the marketing page that people here are making fun of: https://imgur.com/a/xsF1ZX3

Ha, amazing. Not only are they bad at it, they are thin-skinned too.

Everything in Google apart from Search are side projects. And Everything in Google that you didn't paid for have a high chance of getting cut off.

It is actually quite simple, no revenue no services.

I've had pretty good luck with apps like songshift to migrate between services. It's never %100, but pretty decent.

Does the pricing make sense to anyone? 2TB is is $10/mo but 20TB is $200/mo. That means on a per-TB basis, the bigger plan is 2x as expensive. And then the 30TB is 2x as expensive as 20TB.

Aren't things usually cheaper when you buy bulk?

Not necessarily. Many people pay for 2 TB without actually needing 2 TB. I currently pay for Dropbox Pro, which has 2 TB of space available, but I'm only using 300 GB. I'm pretty sure that at this point people going over 500 GB are a tiny minority.

When you pay for 30 TB on the other hand, you probably need it, so their actual cost might be reflected well in that price. This is basically the long tail effect, so when you optimize the price for the majority, price increases are not linear.

This is a fantastic example and explanation (kudos to you) of value pricing vs cost pricing.

Which basically every book on pricing recommends doing - pricing on value. People always apply Walmart style retail pricing models onto everything - including most entrepreneurs to their own detriment. Which is a terrible idea for software and most other non-retail/non-low-margin businesses.

Lol, I would just buy multiple 2 TB subscriptions from different accounts.

Services usually offer convenience. If you don't care about it then you can already register on tons of sites with multiple accounts and get vast amounts of free storage.

This and they have been working on making many accounts hard for some time now.

> This and they have been working on making many accounts hard for some time now

I disagree with that.

The only "hard" part is stuff that absolutely makes sense during the creation part if you're making several: captcha, not allowing the same phone number to be the recovery for more than ~10 accounts, etc ... It's all very obvious protection against spam/mass registration, and if you are an actual person it takes only a few minutes to get around.

And if you go for paid accounts, all of those limits cease existing.

But beside that, once you have the accounts, it's all very friendly, the multi login where you don't even have to logout / log in other account / logout again / relog in first account, account delegation so you can have a master account with automatic access to others, library (apps, photos, ...) sharing, and all of that is on the free accounts !

It might be far from perfect, but compared to the other big ones Google is very friendly to multi-accounts users.

You can just register a GSuite Business account, with unlimited storage.

They have a fine print that says you need at least 5 users in your account or something, otherwise they limit you to 1 TB.

However they are not enforcing that limit and on /r/DataHoarder/ you can see people with dozens of TB stored without issues. And even if they start enforcing it, if you pay for multiple accounts it would still be pretty cheap and you don't get this multi-account management overhead.

> Lol, I would just buy multiple 2 TB subscriptions from different accounts.

If you don't mind multiple accounts and want to optimize on price, just get one 100GB subscription (for the expert help benefit), and lots of free accounts.

Probably easier to exploit the biz plan thing Linus Tech tips did.


So if your main use of space is original quality pictures in google photos like me you basically can't use them ?

That’s usually the case, however they’re pricing for value, not some simple linear increase.

A business that needs 100TB (or whatever) has more to spend, and is much less sensitive to price.

Think this is a personal product, they have Google Apps or Suite or Drive or whatever for businesses.

To be fair, someone who needs hundreds of TBs of storage is probably using it for something they're willing to spend quite a bit on (my first thought is self-employed photographers).

They put expensive pricing out so that the items covering 90% of their userbase look more appealing. Pricing 101. Look at any free to play game where you can buy in-game currency.

[poor man's offer] [crap offer] [real offer] [expensive crap offer]

I've started to notice this sometimes. I kinda laugh it off but am actually terrified about how much thought I give to figuring out the optimal bargain offer for something I had zero need for.

Price anchoring. I do this with my services.

Typically. I guess this one has something to do with the target market. 2TB/10$ is still a reasonable offer for individuals. 100$/month would already be rather an offer for companies, and those might not care if it's 200 instead.

alone the 2tb at $10/mo is what me annoys way more.

I need 1tb of space for my images but having to pay $10 makes me feel strange (yes it is relativly cheap and i can afford it) but this non linearity is probably here because of some mix calculation they are doing.

They're not doing mix calculation they're aligning themselves to the market, aka Dropbox, while doubling the space offered.

It's way more than doubling.

Dropbox offers 1TB for $10 and 2TB for $20. Google added another zero (10x as much for the same price).

Dropbox was definitely the first to offer a viable cloud storage, but they've always offered laughable storage plans (compared to their competition).

> Dropbox offers 1TB for $10 and 2TB for $20. Google added another zero (10x as much for the same price).

2 TB on Google One is $10, which is half of $20. I don't understands what you means by adding a zero. Are you comparing the 20TB offer which is $200 and have missed the 10x prices increase too?

It could be a typo. That happens.

The pricing is interesting when you compare it to G Suite pricing. For $10/user/month (with a minimum of 5 users) you get unlimited storage space. a pretty roundabout way of getting unlimited storage, but then you'd also save yourself $150/month or $1.8k/year

Split the cost with 4 other like-minded individuals and all of a sudden you're paying $10/month for all the benefits.

They're not enforcing the storage limit for <5 person accounts, either. My wife and I have GSuite+storage for $10/mo each and I've got about 4TB in my Drive right now.

They're trying to discourage large amounts of data in a single account, probably because the solution is currently engineered to scale in O(cN), where c > 1. Can't think of any other reason. If the engineering scales O(logN), you'd see linear pricing as a way to make a killing in bulk.

“Never attribute to big O notation that which is adequately explained by an Excel error.” —- some razor

Lacking any data it's better to start with the face value that is given to one.

For a moment I thought it was going to be another chat app.

Instead it's... something? A one sentence description at the beginning of the page wouldn't hurt...

It seems to be google drive but with paid support.

That seems unclear. You get access to google ‘experts’, but they don’t sound like employees to me.

oh, are they chat bots?

Of course. It's Google.

And hotel discounts! It’s all very straightforward.

Is Dropbox supposed to be a better example? I find their homepage horrible.

"Dropbox is a modern workspace"

"Keep everything organized without breaking your flow"

I don't understand why these companies feel the need to describe their services in this way.

Because valuation of a software company doesn't come from the products they offer, nor the current user base with credit cards on file. It comes from a perceived potential growth/platform/network effect so all of these companies have to pretend that they will someday be a panopticon that commands your entire life in order to keep that sweet VC money flowing in even if they just repackage s3 with a nice client.

But that's a customer landing page, not "investors" page

Neither Dropbox nor Google is particularly concerned with courting VC money.

You're right. I should have just said "investor money"

And then?

People know what Dropbox is, and people that don't know what Dropbox is, probably aren't going to buy Dropbox.

People don't land on Dropbox.com by chance.

In fact, when describing GDrive ir iCloud Drive or OneDrive, people say "it's like Dropbox".

Woah. I clicked the link and was logged in already. I'm sure I logged in on this computer (work) at some point, but I'm disappointed that session didn't expire. I can't remember the last time I logged into dropbox here, it feels like months!

> You're currently signed in to your G Suite account. Switch to your personal Google Account to upgrade.

Ugh... Google never misses an opportunity to shit on its most ardent supporters - the people with personal G-Suite domains.

Very true, this is the case among many of their products. For example Google Home is not fully working on G Suite accounts, ridiculous.

I had to switch back to Spotify a while ago to give my wife access to the premium I was already paying for via the family plan because Google Play Music doesn't support family plans for gsuite accounts.

If they addressed this issue I would probably consider consolidating Dropbox, Spotify, and maybe some other stuff into a single Google One subscription but I suppose grandfathered free gsuite accounts are a low priority for these things.

Organizational accounts have a different storage plan they can use that's more suited to their needs. This is only for personal accounts. And no, you don't have a personal account, which hopefully you knew 5 years ago when that happened.

The pedantry doesn't help the customer. Your correction reminds me of the bureaucracy in the movie Brazil.

Reasons may be justified internally but a shitty experience for customers is still a shitty experience.

I have just completed a migration... here's my guide and the background: https://medium.com/@buro9/one-account-all-of-google-4d292906...

In the process I found many small bugs, but also a huge one... if you have 200GB of photos in G Suite, share & copy to a Gmail account (G One) and then break the share... you have the 200GB of photos but Google One storage will report usage as 0GB.

Google One = Google Drive + more space + Customer Service for around $2 a month.

Customer Service is not called Customer Service but Google Experts. What does this mean for actual service?

The thing I like/jumps out for me is no compressing of images. That is one of the reasons I decided to go with Backblaze for backup. I would still stay with backblaze as I am not so confident about Google keeping the product around.

"Your stuff, anywhere". I have managed to setup a upload workflow for Backblaze on my linux machine without going through a browser. Not sure if it is possible in Google One drive. Browsers crash/freeze at the most importune moments. Then I need to restart the upload and pray. There is no way to say upload only the diff (atleast as far as I remember). The extra upload just means increased cost.

Still somewhere, someone in Google has finally listened(?) to the community and heard that customer support is needed. This is an excellent step in the right direction, I suppose.

> + Customer Service

My skeptical meter just went off the charts.

The no compression thing caught my eye as well, but then I started thinking-- if I actually started using it to archive ALL of my 42MP photos I would start running into the higher cost brackets, and I don't want to pay that much. I still need an archiving solution, but since my photography is only a hobby for me, I would only see using it to archive my favorite shots while I keep everything else on external hard drives.

> I have managed to setup a upload workflow for Backblaze on my linux machine without going through a browser.

Would it be possible for you to share your way of doing this? I would be very interested in B2 access without browser.

rclone supports B2


Arq supports B2.

Duplicati 2. It is still beta but quite stable.

There is no special privacy policy, in other words, if you upload your "whole life" to there, as they suggest, then your whole life is owned by Google and they can do whatever they want with that data, as you signed over all the rights.

I mean, I use online storage for my family pictures, my important documents etc. etc, and so the minimum requirement is that it is encrypted and the company contractually agrees not to snoop, data-mine or even sell that data. Google basically tells you they will do all of that, tied to the most invasive unique ID except than maybe facebook.

Why would anyone actually do that? That's just a disaster waiting to happen...

Encrypt your data yourself and don't trust any cloud provider to do it for you. You can only trust yourself.

That's the complain: they could do it, and be liable for it, if they wanted, and still be profitable.

That landing page was too busy and did a weak job at selling what "one" was if it's really more than a cheaper drop box.

Expert access for $1.99/mo? Huh?

Well, poor customer-service is a longstanding complain about google. Maybe with GOne you now get some real human who takes care of your complain, before they ban your account for violation of what their AI Overlord told them.

Hah, GOne.

In the near future, 2 people are on GChat, I mean Hangouts, I mean Duo, I mean Allo, I mean FB Messenger. And one of them is one of those people that can't use the shift key:

"Where did you put the pictures from our trip?"

"oh, gone"

"What do you mean they're gone?!!!!?"

Pardon this low quality comment but I must “hehehe”.

One is just the "in" thing like what "Cloud" was once. One has somehow equated to Storage in the Cloud that is accessible everywhere. OneDrive, OneNote, Ubuntu One etc.

Don't worry, It will, too, pass.

By the end of the page, I wasn't even sure what "one" is.

Thanks, I thought I was dumb for feeling exactly the same after seeing the page.

Is it that hard to include a sentence of the form "$PRODUCT is..." somewhere?

I am really wondering if there is any person on this whole planet who visits the page and thinks: "Wow, I want that!".

$1.99/mo expert access seems like it could be a valuable selling point to sway older people over to Google One that have never used cloud storage much before. There's still people out there that don't know how to use Dropbox or Google Drive.

So looking from a single private user's perspective: Google One has best pricing, but no Linux native client and Dropbox has Linux native client and no flexible pricing.

I don't understand why they won't develop a client for Linux. Is it that difficult? Maybe the code could be also useful for Chrome OS and I guess many Googlers use Linux, so it would be useful for them too.

I stick with Dropbox for the Linux support. It is fantastic. It works on servers, with no GUI, so I can easily sync stuff from my Windows Laptop and my Linux server, where I perform scientific stuff.

Linux is something like 2% market share.

We're also the only set of users that will actually saturate the oversold storage while still burning through that $2.50 worth of customer service with a single question prefaced with "hi, I run Linux."

Hell even the Windows client is shit compared to Dropbox. I think it is because they want everyone to keep everything in the cloud - not to use it as synced backup for stuff that really lives on your desktop (which is of course what everyone actually wants).

This! Killer feature of Dropbox, being able to partially sync just the things you want on a Linux server and your laptop.

I also pay for SpiderOak cloud storage but they don’t allow selective sync - you get everything mirrored on your laptop.

That said, Google Drive and Microsoft OneDrive are still useful on Linux laptops through the web app.

Funny enough, all options almost exactly match Apple pricing.


50GB for 0.99

200GB for 2.99

2TB for 9.99


100GB for 1.99

200GB for 2.99

2TB for 9.99

afaik they run their Cloud Stuff on Google too

For flexibility there is ownCloud. Build your own, where you want, has Linux and all the stuff you need.

I'd suggest NextCloud instead. Including Two Factor Authentication in the latest release https://nextcloud.com/blog/next-generation-2-factor-authenti...

Have you tried Nextcloud? Its slick right up until you get a few users that actually use all the core apps (contact syncing, automatic uploads, calendars, etc), then rendering the PHP login page jumps to taking 20 seconds of maxing out all CPU cores on the server.

Their IRC channel is no help in debugging. Disabling all apps doesn't help, looking at the php & syslog don't show any errors, and adding caching only saves a few seconds of rendering time.

Nextcloud has seriously lowered my standards for bad PHP projects, making most others look well written and decently documented/debuggable.

Are you arguing that Owncloud is better?

Nope, its been years since I last used a friend's Owncloud server. Has it improved?

Dropbox is ext4 only, which led me to drop Dropbox entirely. Not that I was a heavy user, but I've moved to self-hosted nextcloud which has been mostly fine.

You'd think an advertising company would be better at, well, advertising. All of the listed benefits at the top of the page are either things everyone has already been using with the exception of full-quality photos, which was previously available as a paid option with the same pricing, and unspecified additional promotional features.

It seems like the main improvements are adding family plans to match Apple and having presumably not-chatbot support but that requires scrolling a long way down the page.

Advertising service.

Previous thread from 7 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17067168

This page looks like http://hooli.com/ . Google does seem to have a sense of humor.

It is amazing how Google screws up any UI or explanatory pages apart from search. I guess common sense isn't taught in CLRS.

For those wondering, this is Google Drive's paid plans, but it has undergone a rebranding to emphasize Google's ecosystem. I can think of some reasons why this might be a good idea:

1. Your storage in Google Drive is actually not used only by what's on GDrive, but includes your emails and Google Photos. So it is more correct to deemphasize the connection to GDrive.

2. This is a good first step to unify Google's paid B2C services that it may want to offer, especially since G+ is being discontinued.

Kind of related, I was recentl thinking about making some backups of valuable (emotionally speaking) things like wedding pictures.

Currently they are backed up on my local machine and my server, but was considering cloud options. My wife does use Google Drive (paid account w/ Chromebook) but I don't feel that comfortable with Google things.

Does anyone have good alternatives that perhaps respect privacy? :)

Services dedicated to this purpose like Backblaze and Crashplan allow/enable, maybe even enforce client-side encryption. In some cases, you have quite a lot of control over things like the keys and precise encryption settings.

With Google -- and especially considering recent history -- I be worrying about when this product is going to be end-of-lifed.

If they OEL a storage platform, surely they'd let you export it fairly simply, and you can transfer it to another provider.

Quite happy with Backblaze for exactly this reason, as it allows you to set your own private encryption key.

That they're quite reasonably priced doesn't hurt either :)

I wouldn't dismiss Google. I personally use both Google Drive and GSuite. The ability to search inside the files of your whole library (documents/pdfs/videos) is very useful, while the integration of gmail + Drive + Docs bumps your productivity.

How does it achieve searching inside photos and videos? Have they been fed to the machine classifier so that if I enter "Poland" it will try to show me my holiday photos from there?

That’s easy, photos have location metadata already. But does it also support searching for people and objects?

Yes. Google photos recognizes landscape features as well as people.


I tend to manually back up digital assets to Google/Dropbox/OneDrive by Zipping by category with good file naming protocol including date, GPG encrypt the Zip files, and not depend on the trustworthyness of cloud providers. ‘Deep backups’

Also, high value digital artifacts like my book projects and customer work get backed up automatically to remote git servers.

I seldom do local backups anymore on my MacBook to TimeMachine, perhaps once a month, and for backing up my Linux laptop I only back up to multiple cloud providers and git remote services.

You cannot assume that any remote storage provider will respect your privacy. So you will need to encrypt on your end.

With that in mind, borg backup does a great job at archiving/compressing/encrypting. Then you can sync to GDrive or any other service using e.g. rclone.

Arq Backup works well as long as you remember your passphrase.


I pay $5/yr (a legacy plan that will disappear if I ever have a billing information imperfection) for 40GB Gmail storage, which is all I need. This announcement reminds me that Google has no respect for pricing, SLA, data mining transparency, consumer terms stability, support ("Google Expertsbutprobablynotouremployees!") or consistency. The future is easy to see: "Drive is now One!"

So this announcement is the thing that will finally get me to export all of my data and leave Gmail for personal use altogether. Congratulations, One Team!

You have a nice rent controlled storage offering and you're leaving because Google is adding a new service? Or are they evicting you from your old plan?

Really don't follow how this announcement lacks respect for pricing or sla.

I have a fair amount of stuff on Google drive and I would have liked to consolidate there, but the lack of a Linux client was a deal breaker, so I'm stuck with Dropbox.

Not that Dropbox is bad. It would be nice to have things in one place only, but maybe it's better to not be completely dependent on one service.

Dropbox now only (officially) supports un-encrypted bare ext4 filesystems. If you plan on using XFS, BTRFS, or even encrypted ext4, you're SOL with Dropbox. https://itsfoss.com/dropbox-linux-ext4-only/ NextCloud and a $5/mo VPS work great for me.

Funnily, on my encrypted disk in Debian, Dropbox needs constant monitoring to make sure it's working (need to execute a couple of simple python scripts now and then), while Drive works perfectly through InSync.

In what seems to be a standard move for Google these days, the page contains no information about the product for me as it's not available in my area yet. Would someone care to post that information?

Its google drive but developed by a different team.

what the hell -- this is like 7 months ago news/rolled out

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17067168 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17079306

Google One sounds like a device to me. I think it would be clearer to take the existing "Google Family" service they already offer (of which Google One is feature) and add "Shared expanded storage on Drive, Gmail, and more" as an optional feature.

Is Google just a prepetual exercise in branding? They create a slightly different product, get it to popularity, kill it, announce a new brand to replace it, rinse, repeat.

How else would the people proposing and working on these things internally get promotions?

I've learned here in HN, that's how you get promoted in Google

Language wise this sounds like the Trojan horse that eventually becomes their amazon prime as far as being a “one stop” membership. It’s disguised as storage right now but seeing the bit about hotel deals... also prime ~ one... hmm.

Why this wouldn’t also bundle things like YouTube red or google music proves my hypothesis wrong though.

I just don’t know what the hell is going on at Google lately. What is their strategy? What is their vision? Everything they do is so disjointed and incongruent.

Remember that billboard puzzle google put up in 2004?

I think this might be the same thing.

If you can figure out what Google One is you are a genius!

Thank you.

Prediction: this will shut down in 2.75 years.

Why would it, though? It's not a new product, it's just Google Drive under new branding and Drive has been around for about 5 years already. It's also a paid service where they now even offer better customer support.

I don't get the "they'll shut this down anyways" sentiment in every Google related submission on HN. It's getting tiresome.

Could be sooner, even


Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact