Google Workspace is ending unlimited storage(old.reddit.com)
old.reddit.com
Google Workspace is ending unlimited storage
https://old.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/13fasuz/google_workspace_unlimited_storage_its_over/
4 comments
> 152TB (just how?) got the email. EDIT: One user claims to have 2 PB stored. Wow.
Need to backup the giant unwatched porn and movie collection somehow, and paying for that would be expensive, so pushing "unlimited" offers by companies as far as possible is a favorite past time of these people.
Need to backup the giant unwatched porn and movie collection somehow, and paying for that would be expensive, so pushing "unlimited" offers by companies as far as possible is a favorite past time of these people.
This is /r/datahoarders - makes total sense. That sub is full of entitled users that believe exploiting an “unlimited” storage loophole forever is somehow morally justifiable.
> exploiting an “unlimited” storage loophole forever is somehow morally justifiable.
this isn't a mom and pa business people are "exploiting"
and by "exploiting", I mean exercising their rights under the contract the multi-billion dollar huge multi-national wrote
this isn't a mom and pa business people are "exploiting"
and by "exploiting", I mean exercising their rights under the contract the multi-billion dollar huge multi-national wrote
These are single line users trying to exploit giant Corp. Yes that is exploitation too. They are not business users. They are exploiters trying to get the same benefit that someone with general use cases is offered.
If restaurant offers a person an all you can eat buffet, and that person sits for 4 hours in an online eating competition, that person definitely has abused the offer made. Doesn't matter the contract's fine print.
If restaurant offers a person an all you can eat buffet, and that person sits for 4 hours in an online eating competition, that person definitely has abused the offer made. Doesn't matter the contract's fine print.
> Doesn't matter the contract's fine print.
of course it does, this is the entire basis of Western business
you write contract that benefits the other party more than yourself? well, tough shit
the company offered unlimited storage in a freely offered contract in exchange for money
their counterparty paid them and is expecting to have unlimited storage to use
the only person being immoral here is the entity that marketed their service as unlimited when they had no intention of providing it
of course it does, this is the entire basis of Western business
you write contract that benefits the other party more than yourself? well, tough shit
the company offered unlimited storage in a freely offered contract in exchange for money
their counterparty paid them and is expecting to have unlimited storage to use
the only person being immoral here is the entity that marketed their service as unlimited when they had no intention of providing it
Contract is written to establish an understanding between two parties. Every now and then a dispute happens, and that is handled by a judge. The judge has no opinion in the matter except what is explicitly stated. And then goes on to the explicit intent to help with resolving the dispute.
Now here comes a single person with an intent to exploit service meant for another customer. And it happens quite often: "is there anything in the TOS that considers this particular use as against its terms?" The user makes a determination that it does not and proceeds to sign up. After excessive use, the provider determines this kind of use is not something it can help with and changes the terms.
> you write contract that benefits the other party more than yourself? well, tough shit
That is the abusers perspective. And he knows well that whatever he is doing is not kosher. It's like going to home depot with a generous return policy and abusing their policy. How long do you expect that to go on? Home depot changes its policy for seasonal equipment that it needs to be returned within a set time. The abusers expected this.
Now here comes a single person with an intent to exploit service meant for another customer. And it happens quite often: "is there anything in the TOS that considers this particular use as against its terms?" The user makes a determination that it does not and proceeds to sign up. After excessive use, the provider determines this kind of use is not something it can help with and changes the terms.
> you write contract that benefits the other party more than yourself? well, tough shit
That is the abusers perspective. And he knows well that whatever he is doing is not kosher. It's like going to home depot with a generous return policy and abusing their policy. How long do you expect that to go on? Home depot changes its policy for seasonal equipment that it needs to be returned within a set time. The abusers expected this.
you have a complete misunderstanding of how contracts work in common law countries
A giant company said it was unlimited and people took them at their word. That isn't a 'loophole' or a 'moral' decision.
I know about that subreddit but I'm still shocked at how you can stuff cloud storage to that amount, given upload speeds, shared links, throttling, etc. It must've taken ages to upload over a 100 TB, not to mention 2 PB.
google is exploiting their elasticity to avoid providing a concrete number and making any kind of fair competition impossible with companies that need to be profitable to remain in business.
this typical modus operandi of giving away stuff for free or at a loss until everyone is dead, the ground is salted and nothing grows, is toxic and bad for end users.
this typical modus operandi of giving away stuff for free or at a loss until everyone is dead, the ground is salted and nothing grows, is toxic and bad for end users.
I mean games these days are hundreds of gigabytes each. If you archive the not most popular TV shows and movies that can really add up. Especially 4k.
What tier of Workspaces are they discussing here? It's totally not clear. Are these personal users? AFAIR, personal Drive accounts have always had a limited quota.
When my employer first provisioned Workspaces accounts for us (Enterprise tier, I assume), I inquired whether there was some sort of quota for our individual accounts, and I was assured that there is not. However, there is definitely some sort of number assigned, which GMail displays, and it tells me I'm using XXX MiB of an XXX TiB allocation, which I assume is org-wide.
So we've recently seen Google acknowledge that there is a practical and administrative limit on the number of objects (files) in Drive, so which services are affected by this alleged crackdown (which has absolutely no proof or tangible evidence, just the claims of a bunch of "data hoarders" on a pseudonymous forum.)
When my employer first provisioned Workspaces accounts for us (Enterprise tier, I assume), I inquired whether there was some sort of quota for our individual accounts, and I was assured that there is not. However, there is definitely some sort of number assigned, which GMail displays, and it tells me I'm using XXX MiB of an XXX TiB allocation, which I assume is org-wide.
So we've recently seen Google acknowledge that there is a practical and administrative limit on the number of objects (files) in Drive, so which services are affected by this alleged crackdown (which has absolutely no proof or tangible evidence, just the claims of a bunch of "data hoarders" on a pseudonymous forum.)
This is Enterprise Standard/Plus. You could get truly unlimited storage for about $15/month. Lots of people/companies have been taking advantage of this for quite a while. Many users with 1 PB+ of data. Lots of users with hundreds of TBs.
I guess they figure out only a certain percentage of users go up to the hidden max warning.
If the customer leaves the platform, their withdrawal of funds doesn't hurt their profits.
EDIT: One user claims to have 2 PB stored. Wow.