be.nicolas.michel at gmail.com
Fri Oct 19 06:20:08 UTC 2012
So, nobody agree the idea of a "smart" sharing app'?
2012/10/18 Nicolas Michel <be.nicolas.michel at gmail.com>
> 2012/10/18 Jordon Bedwell <jordon at envygeeks.com>
>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:31 AM, Nicolas Michel
>> <be.nicolas.michel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > To be honnest I never gave a try to Ubuntu One, probably for bad
>> > conservative reasons. I will try it. But I still feel that even if
>> > right that pushing things into the cloud make things simpler, there are
>> > still some flaws :
>> Most of these flaws are always subjective, except when it comes to
>> security, since UbuntuOne still does not have encryption (from last I
>> heard) it's not a viable solution for people who need to backup secure
>> documents, and it comes at a cost too since AmazonS3 now supports
>> built-in encryption without the need of a 3rd party source. It comes
>> at even more of a cost when people realize that s3fs is not hard to
>> use at all. I don't know why Canonical or Ubuntu or whoever owns it
>> does not see these problems but whatever, I'm not their CTO.
>> > - what if we don't have access to internet and only want to share on the
>> Then you share the folder via LAN while still allowing UbuntuOne to
>> Sync. Ubuntu does not prevent you from accessing the folder at all,
>> or doing what you want with it, except renaming it, you do have to
>> play a little bit of filesystem trickery to rename it as a normal
> At the base it's a thread about sharing content. So I know that using
> Ubuntu One doesn't prevent me to share the same content also with Samba or
> something else. But my previous mail was talking about a simple app to
> auto-configure sharing and choosing the best me in function of the purpose
> and location of user A and B.
>> > - what with DLNA ? Are users needs to be technical guys to be able to
>> What has DLNA got to do with normal file storage? It's not content
>> hosting. Unless they started with it recently and went CDN which
>> would be pretty amazing considering they have no support for things
>> like the WD Live, Sony/Samsung/LG Blueray or others but a quick Google
>> search suggests they are not a content provider.
> A user don't care about a technical word definition: I agree that DLNA is
> not content hosting. But when a user want to "share", maybe it means that
> the best solution for what he wants to do is DLNA?
>> > - of course I think about the speed. To come-back on my earlier exemple
>> in a
>> > gaming LAN : what if I want to share some Gigs of data to others in the
>> > LAN? It can't be done through Ubuntu One I guess? Although technical
>> > solutions exists to do it (and really the most simple seems to me
>> webdav - a
>> > pretty good solution I think but until now it's usage never really
>> > took-off).
>> Speed is more or less on your end,
> That's the point. If I want to share to a point A to B, maybe that it will
> be really much faster to share the content in webdav or samba than with
> Ubuntu One.
> if Canonical is smart they will
>> geo-host via AWS (that is unless they build their own infrastructure
>> then you would hope they still zone.) If they are on AWS they have
>> access to a pipes bigger by 10x if not more than anything you could
>> get for less than 10-50K (1-50K realistically depending on the type of
>> servers they get) a month unless you are in KC (or North California)
>> and manage to convince Google to make your area a Fibrehood.
>> Nobody is stopping you from sharing "gigs" of data though. If you are
>> suggesting using it for storing games and what-have-you so called
>> "live-data" then that's on you because no storage service like Ubuntu
>> one is designed for that sort of thing, that requires an entirely
>> different stack design, one that thinks about what happens between
>> point a and point b and not one that only wants you to make it to
>> point b. People often assume that servers are the same, they are not.
> Generally, I don't say Ubuntu One is not a good thing. I think it is part
> of the solution but not all the solution by itself. That's why I was
> talking about a kind of app wrapper to help people sharing the best way to
> serve their purpose.
> Nicolas MICHEL
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss