_suoiruc

Do you read carefully? When I asked if I missed anything I was referring to anything besides the arguable "value add". My apologies if that was not clear. But the value add is precisely what you focused on, and argued (predictably): the python, rsync and the icon. I'm asking about the S3 component.

Right. And the topic of this thread is a price matrix for S3. Presumably your Dad is not going to be looking at it.

So basically it's the same as rsync and a little scripting, but without commands and scriptability? I don't use Dropbox so I'm curious. I'd like to know if they're offering something to paying customers that S3 does not, apart from their particular combination of python and rsync. If we just focus on storage is Dropbox more expensive? If yes, by how much? I think this is a valid question.

I used to suffer with Cygwin. It is really slow to work with if you are used to native UNIX.

I never seriously tried this but I'm curious if it works:

http://www.suacommunity.com/tool_warehouse.htm

Perhaps you could expand on that?

If you pay for Dropbox what exactly are you paying for? Software to communicate with S3?

I'll accept that the software (python+rsync+an icon) is arguably "value added", but for the paying Dropbox user, what they are getting is still S3 storage.

Am I missing something?

This made me laugh. Perfect follow-up.

That's the way to get the good stories onto the front page.

Maybe you could add in price comparisons to Dropbox, since they are just an S3 reseller.

I know these folks are well-meaning but I find these constant "warnings" to be insulting. What people really need to be aware of is that the folks making decisions of how the internet should run, "the experts", are not always as smart as they think they are. They make mistakes. And it's hard to get a bunch of know-it-all's to agree.

It's also hard to get the entire `net to switch their behaviour, and adopt something that is incompatible with IPv4, without telling them what benefit they will gain by doing so. Can you blame them? But the "experts" and their zombie followers sure are trying.

IPv4 works. NAT works. NAT can be traversed. So what is the problem exactly?

As a home user, I can set up my own NAT'ing scheme with private IPv4 space far easier than I can learn to deal with the added complexity of IPv6.

OK, now I will get skewered by IPv6 fanatics. How many of them are getting paid to do IPv6 consulting work?

IPv4: It Just Works. "Experts": They make mistakes, just like everyone else.

Now, let's hear from the "experts".

I think MS will acquire FB.

The FB social network will die, in time, but it's still the world's largest email address list, plus all sorts of personal information that can be used to insidiously coax consumers.

Every FB user should gather up all the email addys of their friends and keep them in a safe place offline. This way you never lose contact.

FB allowed people to submit their email addresses to a central website and thereby connect/reconnect with friends, colleagues and so forth. This sharing of email addresses is not a new thing, but with FB it occurred on an unprecendented scale. Billions of email addresses (that work!). That is FB's contribution. Gather those email addresses and keep them offline. Soon you may be able to form your own social networks that are private, secure and more functional than FB. But you will need the email addresses of your friends to get it started. Don't believe that FB should be the safe keeper of your email address book. They will do what they have to in order to survive as their business winds down. Those email addresses are its most valuable asset.