Hello Cloud Storage, Goodbye Consumer Hard Disk Drives

There are a lot of rumblings of recent about a possible Google Web Drive (GOOG) offering. Of course, Microsoft (MSFT) has its cloud storage counterpart SkyDrive, and there are a whole panoply of companies with existing offerings with a bias from online file sharing to storage to backups. Just to name a few, there is Box.net, IBackup, Mozy, Iron Mountain’s Connected Backup for PC, and many others.

For consumers, online storage is a lot about convenience -- one of the key values which consumers will pay for, and in this case quite possibly on a reoccurring basis. There's the convenience to access files from anywhere. And to share files with others groups or even with the public. And to have someone else deal with back-ups. Forget buying a NAS box for backups -- backup to a service. What enables this trend to occur is simply network bandwidth availability. It certainly wouldn't have been feasible with a modem dial-up ISP.

It's worth thinking about other trends to which cloud storage is very complimentary. Netbooks for example, are targeted for mostly online activities, and as such are well suited for use of cloud storage for user files such as photos, videos, songs, etc. If a lot of storage needs of user files can be pushed to the cloud, then the requirements of netbook local storage goes down or doesn't need to grow as rapidly (end of the Moore's law of consumer storage). That shifts the suitability curve of flash memory storage products (like SSDs), accelerating its adoption in netbooks. The same can be said for any PC platform, for that matter. Which would mean that HDD storage growth will shift from consumer products to the server dimension, where it's utilized by cloud storage providers.

What will be interesting to watch play out, is how each cloud storage vendor handles security. For private storage, consumers will want an option to secure their files with no less exposure than they have with a local drive. And at the same time, if smart-caching of well-used files is done well (even across boot-ups), we'll have a very functional cloud storage model with relatively few trade-offs.

Disclosure: no positions

Comments

[greedcanbgood:]

The public isn't ready for it it yet. There's a BIG difference between on-line backup (e.g. Carbonite) and cloud storage. The consumer looses a measure of control and thus will be more fearful about security. Also...look mroe carefully at the bandwidth argument. Not too long ago, customers could back up all of their documents on a few floppys then maybe a CD. Although bandwidth has grown tremendously, so has the amount of data consumer save (music and video in particular). Bankdwidth will remain an issue.

Jan 28 01:21 PM

[mahony:]

I'm a big believer in Cloud Theory; however, the doom of the local hard drive is not nigh (yet). There are several factors that will delay the cloudburst.

1) NAS hard drive type storage is still very cheap and paying a monthly bill like a cell phone to store 500GB of pictures is still a mental stretch for people

2) Most people's connections are still far too slow to work with gigabytes of data on a regular basis

3) Rapidly dropping prices of high-density storage media (sd cards, memory sticks etc.) and the ability to access them without internet connectivity makes them far more useful in the near term (I know this is similar to #1 above)

4) The Cloud effect was EMC's dream-come-true in 2000 (they didn't call it that, but it's what they preached) and yet even coroporations haven't moved into the cloud by 2009, so I think it will take consumers a fair bit of time before they will jump into cloud computing in a big way.

Jan 28 01:22 PM

[driftwood2:]

Cloud storage will definitely be useful for mobile purposes but it's just too slow and will never be fast enough to replace local storage. Even if everyone had fiberoptic lines, it would still be too slow with any foreseeable technology. Also, it's always cheaper to buy than rent so why pay the extra cost for cloud storage? Online backup companies are cost hundreds of percent more per GB to store data than simply buying hard drives.

Jan 28 01:23 PM

[jack dee:]

No one is ready for cloud storage. It is just not going to happen for a long time.

yet another dreamy clouds story. A world where connections are perfect and files can never be lost.
A world where companies value your photos as you as you. Where storing you personnal collections of porn, stolen dvds and tax records seems like a good idea.

Nope me thinks people will want files stored locally for sometime to come.
sure sure , we will all use the net to store some stuff , we already do. But consumers have very little incentive to jump on this band wagon.

(long goog msft and a host of others)

Jan 28 01:55 PM

[Bugs Bunny:]

Rules

1. Anything that is stored in a cloud is searched by the cloud-holder and the recipient is then sent advertising based on the results (think gmail).

2. Records are permanent. Anything, anything, you add to the cloud is subpoenable by the government (think Bush administration behind their veil of "homeland security").

3. Why would I want to do this? Is everything going to be run in a cloud (Excel, SQL Server). Doubt it. The capabilities are a couple of decades off. It won't be long before the "cloud" idea is deemed "antiquated". The reality is that consumers and BUSINESSES especially will want a mixture of both.

Jan 28 02:24 PM

[Bugs Bunny:]

I use cloud computing now. I have a desktop and keep all my files on my hard drive. It is my own little environment with my own cloud computing model.

Jan 28 03:59 PM

[Guero:]

Cloud storage at this point makes more sense for software service providers in the B2B space. Instead of companies being required to make large capital investments in local storage & local ownership/maintenance/... of software licenses, this can be provided via the cloud. From the standpoint of cloud providers like MSFT, they will be chasing that money first before little individual users storing family photos, music, tax records, etc.

Jan 28 05:11 PM

[leapingcat:]

At present cloud storage makes most sense for new or growing companies, where its scalability gives those companies the ability to easily cater for changes in storage needs without a large investment. For individual consumers, storage needs are generally more predictable and increasing local storage will remain the sensible option for some time to come.

Jan 28 06:10 PM

[User 346832:]

Hi Kevin. Full disclosure here: I work for nomadesk.com, which offers easy and secure file sharing, wherever you are. I read your post on Google's GDrive with great interest and just wanted to add NomaDesk to the mix.
In fact, NomaDesk has similar features and is geared towards the need of the "digital nomad". We are convinced that the more data gets synchronized, the more likely it gets compromised. Therefore, NomaDesk includes an encrypted virtual drive that keeps your files securely available off-line and remote file shredding and IP-tracking with TheftGuard. Of course, we impose no limits on storage and bandwidth.
The current NomaDesk release 2.6 displays file states and indicate whether files are already in use by someone else. You are also able to add and review notes (i.e. meta-data). The Mac version is on its way.

So, NomaDesk works with a local client and allows access to your files from anywhere on the web. We have very good reasons to work with a local client, next to the already "traditional" web interface (e.g., box.net, the late Xdrive, etc.):

(1) 100% availability of the data, regardless of network quality
(2) 100% performance when editing files, using any type of program
(3) 100% simplicity; just drag-n-drop files to synchronize and share them
(4) 100% security on the PC also: the virtual drives that NomaDesk creates on the PC are encrypted and can be shred remotely via our online TheftGuard service.

The bulk of our users, which are SOHO and SMB teams, appreciate the straightforward and secure file sharing they get through using the NomaDesk client software. You should know that in most cases NomaDesk replaces the traditional file server, FTP and VPN - with success!

Please let me know your thoughts.

Kind regards,
F.

Jan 29 03:09 AM

[donzelion:]

Hmmm...this reminds me of the "thin client" concept of the late 1990s - the next big thing! Perhaps it was a viable concept then, just a decade ahead of its time, sort of like Apple's Newton coming out 5-6 years ahead of the PalmPilot.

Thing is, for all the power of digital storage - I still keep a file cabinet at my office, filled with, well, files.

At the end of the day, there are practicalities that require multiple media, including (gasp!) hard copy. But at the end of the next decade, "cloud computing" will be as novel as "www" was at the beginning of the 90s.

Jan 29 11:56 AM

[Sumo Backup:]

I think the real advantage you're going to see in the future will come from the reduced maintenance and infrastructure costs that result from this movement.

Jan 30 03:52 PM