![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Nakido is a slightly different type of file share service that keeps files forever & never deletes them,(I have 3 GB & 4 GB files stored there with only 1 or 0 downloads that have been there for 4 years now and not deleted), has a 99 GB file size restriction - which for all practical purposes is unlimited size - and functions both for uploading and downloading. How it differs from the major players like Rapidshare and MegaUpload is you need to install a "service" called the Nakido Flag, which can be turned on and off in the Computer Management/Services tools, and allows users with it installed to access files in high-speed mode. If you don't install it, you get throttled but can still access files both ways on the site. To the best of my, and other people I've had look at it, knowledge, the Nakido Flag is mostly a tracking cookie type arrangement and doesn't appear to contain any malware/worm/virus/zombie software at all - though I find it highly unusual that it gets installed as a Service on the computer. Anyway, it's not listed here and should be in any such list as it is extremely HUGE and while not known well in the U.S. and Europe, is quite popular in Asia. IdioT.SavanT.i4 ( talk) 06:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
I am sure dropbox doesn't delete your files after 90 days of inactivity. Might be an old policy, not in new documentation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.215.170.251 ( talk) 11:05, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Dropbox allows you to store up to 2 GB free of charge. Dropbox reserves the right to terminate Free Accounts at any time, with or without notice. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, if a Free Account is inactive for ninety (90) days, then Dropbox may delete any or all of Your Files without providing additional notice.
Also, check this discussion: http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?id=48972 - they claim files are not being deleted, but they reserve the right to do so. So, this info should remain here. Perene ( talk) 16:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Encryption methods (including server side vs client side, algorithms, etc) should be included. Thoughts on exactly how to approach that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgimbi ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I would also like to see encryption methodology used. Because of the Snowden revelations this would be a key piece of information to point out. I agree about the columns suggested for No, Server-side, and Zero-knowledge. However, should we also include one for transport? I don't know if all of them support secure connections. This could be a simple yes/no, with possible notes about various methods like, yes for https but no for ftp. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan cauthorn ( talk • contribs) 06:49, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
I believe a HIPAA compliant column would also be useful. Agreed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.104.130.57 ( talk) 18:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree. It's an important consideration for a large industry. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 06:54, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
What about inserting a column with payout for uploaded files' downloads?
I'd rather keep this list manageable, and those change and go out of business constantly. You may want to consider making a new page regarding file hosting services that pay.
JCauthorn (
talk)
21:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
A good comparison should have included some info. on number of mirrors. For e.g. I know that Rapidshare uses a CDN and has something close to 18 odd mirrors around the world. The info. is a bit dated but still if people would start putting up a column then news of such networks would start as well which would also make people who want to use such a service a bit more aware as well. Shirishag75 ( talk) 14:47, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I believe there is a very important column in this comparison missing: [whether the service allows automatic] synchronization. Do you agree?
512upload ( talk) 22:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Are you referring to apps like Google Drive or Dropbox that can upload/download files automatically in the background? If so, we would also need to list the clients that it runs on, i.e. Windoze, Mac, Linux, IOS, Android, etc. Maybe a secondary table might be better to describe just the services that support that and their ability and restrictions. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 06:58, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
Don't you think that these two columns should be separated each one in two: 'free' and 'paid' and the values be written in scientific notation? This would make it possible for readers to sort the services by these two criteria (Storage size and Max. file size) correctly (now, this is not possible). 512upload ( talk) 22:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I can't believe it isn't setup this way already. It should have several columns as numerics only for easy sorting - default free space, maximum free space, maximum file size for free, maximum file size paid. There may be other size related columns as well. These columns should be numbers only, and maybe based on GB, from 0.1 GB for a 100 MB file to 1,000 GB for a Terabyte file. Thoughts? ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:05, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
The major part of the users are free users that don't read the FAQ of the file hosting sites, they only click the wanted links to download. In many of those sites, like Badongo and Rapidshare, it's is practically impossible download anything as free user (in my experience, it's impossible). A good comparison must include those omitted facts. I don't think is helpful a comparison that only transcribes what the services decide that they do. I believe that is necessary to rewrite this article in a neutral POV. Caiaffa ( talk) 18:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
For the sake of file security it would be nice to know were some of these file hosting sites are located and what local laws govern what stored on them. TA. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
110.174.171.20 (
talk)
04:06, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
If we have an encryption column that covers zero-knowledge client side encryption, we wouldn't need to know where it is hosted. This would be a more important factor if you are concerned about keeping your files secure. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:08, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
I think this comparison chart should only mention free of charge websites. If the website is charging a fee for its services, it should not figure here, otherwise it will be certainly misused for commercial purposes. Unless the site in question also offers a free service, then it would be mentioned as well, but if it's only paid, it should be removed. What do you think? Perene ( talk) 15:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
I disagree. I have seen many pages on Wikipedia about software, and without exception they all feature as least some proprietary only software. While I prefer open source/free one shouldn't discriminate against proprietary/non-free options. Svnpenn ( talk) 03:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I also disagree. I would rather have a complete table that shows all the options so you can make the best choice on all the factors. If we create a "free space" column that can be sorted, the ones that provide no free space will be obvious in the list, and you can make your decision based on that. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:12, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
The table headers do not show when you scroll down, making it difficult to know what is the header matching for the cell contents , without scrolling up again back and forth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.142.116.124 ( talk) 15:16, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Is it possible to do it in wikipedia?
/info/en/?search=Help:Table/Manual_tables Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:27, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
For Google drive, the "Direct access" column is currently "Yes", but from my experience it doesn't have real direct access.
For example, if you upload an image file, you cannot get a direct link to it, a link that you can use on your website in an HTML image tag, to link to google drive. The share link it gives you, when you choose the "Share..." menu option of a .jpg file, is something like this: " https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B5-BileB3h_2Vi1IRnZhRk5OY3c"
Which doesn't end with ".jpg" and can't be used to direct link from HTML on my website. It is not a direct link to the image, but a link to a google docs website page that contains the actual image, where you can view the image with other things like the google docs menu options.
If anyone thinks that Google docs has direct access, please explain why and how to use it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.142.116.124 ( talk) 09:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
The same goes for HackerBox and eDoc. In the wiki it is written "Yes" for "Direct access", but their FAQ states that "hotlinking is not allowed". Please verify and fix the incorrect values. I do not want to modify without verification.
I believe "Direct Access" should be if you get a link that takes you directly to the file. Anything less is a "no". If it makes you wait or click a captcha, it is not Direct Access. If you want another column for wait times or other items, that's fine. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:23, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
Mediafire requires login to upload(not mentioned - can someone add "Login required to upload files" to it?).
Some sites only let you download files uploaded with the same account.
Others require a login to download.
Note: Not saying rather the account is free, but that you're forced to log into it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.246.113 ( talk) 17:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I found out yesterday that filefactory.com has a "reward" system where users are given cash for X number of downloads of files they upped. I feel like this would be very relevant to this article. Apparantly it is one of the few doing this because if I'm not mistaken the rewards system is what got megaupload in trouble a while back. UselessToRemain ( talk) 16:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Why removed many sites from comparision? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.235.170.75 ( talk) 02:05, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I think the only sites that should be relegated to a secondary table are those that are no longer doing business. If they are active, they should be included. If they are not, they can be put in a secondary table for historical purposes. That's as clear cut a policy as you can get - no arbitrary criteria like "lack[ing] any kind of third party reference or claim to any importance". Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:37, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
The comparison table has quite a few columns. Would it be an idea to remove the language column to limit the information to a more functional comparison of the offered service? This doesn't create much room for additional columns, but it's at least some. I would really like to add one or two columns like encryption, but I feel that some sacrifices have to be made by sticking to the most information in order to keep the table as usable as possible.-- Forage ( talk) 13:34, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
The main usage of this page is for readers to find file hosting services with the parameters they desire. Not accepting this is delusional. Thus, please make it as useful for this purpose as possible. Thank you. (IF you disagree, feel free to explain why you feel this page is even worth having)
Example: I want a file hosting service with the following properties:
Currently, it is very hard to quickly scan the information for my example purpose.
"Direct Access": What does that even mean? For me it's not enough that I can access my documents "directly". I need anyone with a simple link to reach a download page directly and with no intermediation.
How do you sort the table on more than one column? (For example: I want to sort on "Direct Access" and "File Expiration" so that the entries that are green in both columns show up first).
Thank you, 90.229.34.175 ( talk) 09:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
I'd rather see the table expanded with more information, but include scrolling. More info on sorting here: /info/en/?search=Help:Sorting but simply click on the least significant sort to the most significant sort. Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:46, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Backblaze Unlimited $3.96 a month for 2 years ($95 total) $4.17 a month for 1 year ($50 total) http://www.backblaze.com/
/info/en/?search=Baidu_Cloud 2TB free http://pan.baidu.com/
Jottabackup 5Gb free, unlimited for $6/month for desktop, $3/month for mobile. http://www.jottacloud.com/
Tencent Cloud QQ 10TB free http://www.weiyun.com/act/10t-en.html
Kanbox 10Tb free — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.211.113.22 ( talk) 07:47, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Copy.com by barracuda systems. 15 GB free for new accounts and 5 GB extra for each referral. 9.99 a month for a 250 GB plan. http://www.copy.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilreader ( talk • contribs) 17:23, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Yunpan360 36Tb free (10Tb for PC app +26Tb for mobile) http://yunpan.360.cn/
A: When it's a note or comment on the content.
A number of the items in the (first of two) References section are not in fact references. For example, at the time of writing the first two 'references' read as:
Which have no 'reference' function. This sort of stuff should be in a (foot)Notes section.
I also note there is a second, currently empty, References section. I don't know why.
Wayne 03:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I deleted all entries that didn't have any references or wiki articles for the web host, still I should have deleted more that didn't have any references. Every web host in this article must have a link to a webpage that proves this data, or a least proves most of it. References are a basic requirement of Wikipedia, so "man up" and do it right, or someone else will swing an axe on your favorite web service. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
What is meant by the so called "remote uploading" column? Basically all uploading is from a remote location so I think it needs some clarification.-- Forage ( talk) 13:19, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
I just uploaded a 7GB file to dropbox from a remote terminal I was connected to thourgh a vpm connection. Does this mean that dropbox has remote uploading? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.101.94 ( talk) 15:57, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
I consider this table useful, but also lacking, and I think we could improve it. I would like to discuss the overhaul of this table, which includes reordering / renaming / clarifying / adding columns. Moving columns and data is a pain, so I'd rather get the column names and order nailed down before an overhaul is started. After the columns get nailed down, then we could start a new table above the existing table, then migrate old data to it. Please provide feedback and suggestions. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 02:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
The following are my initial concepts. I would like to see more fields split out, especially for free details, and 2 encryption columns so a person can easily determine if files are stored as encrypted in the cloud. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 02:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Web host | Win | Mac | Linux | Android | iOS | Other O/S |
Free storage lowest | Free storage highest | Paid storage lowest | Paid storage highest | Free max file size | Paid max file size | Public file links | Public dir links | Public file password | Encrypt transport | Encrypt storage | Encrypt keys | Traffic limit | Files expire | Add more columns |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BogusBox | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | 10 GB | 25 GB | 500 GB ($10/mo) |
100 TB ($200/mo) |
1 GB | 4 GB | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | Unknown | 5 TB | 90 days | TBD |
BogusHybrid | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | RPi | Unlimited Client Computer |
Unlimited Client Computer |
100 GB ($10/mo) |
10 TB ($100/mo) |
Unlimited | 4 GB | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | TBD |
Requesting input on the above new table concept. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 14:56, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Should this be merged with Comparison of online backup services? • Sbmeirow • Talk • 15:11, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Referencing Spideroak's website (9th Feb, 2015). https://spideroak.com/mobile/, the paragraph is "Here's the deal: when accessing your data via the SpiderOak website or on a mobile device, you must enter your password. The password will then exist in the SpiderOak server memory for the duration of your browsing session. For this amount of time, your password is stored in encrypted memory and never written to an unencrypted disk. The moment your browsing session ends, your password is destroyed and no further trace is left. The instance above represents the only situation where your data could potentially be readable to someone with access to the SpiderOak servers. That said, no one except a select number of SpiderOak employees will ever have access to the SpiderOak servers. To fully retain our 'zero-knowledge' privacy, we recommend you always access your data via the SpiderOak desktop application, which downloads your data before decrypting it locally.`
This is not client side encryption (as the password is sometimes transmitted and held on Spideroak's servers). Given the semantics of the column the value of the table should be strictly "no". Or potentially find a reference to an audited confirmation of some clients performing client side encryption and some other clients uploading the password to Spideroak's servers and change the cell value to "partial".
COI disclosure, I work for Mega and I'm making sure that all reference material on Wikipedia is accurate. Obviously it would be a COI for me to make an edit to a competitors service, so we can discuss here. AklMeditor1 ( talk) 22:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected links on Comparison of file hosting services which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\br10\.net\b
on the global blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:13, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
This table could be very useful to find a service that offers file sharing services. However, it is hopelessly organized from the viewpoint of a user looking for the following:
I want to store a number of small PDF files (single-digit megabytes; definitely not gigabytes) and share public links to these files. I want these links to be maintenance-free and not be deleted after, say, 30 days. Neither me nor the other party should have to register, and preferably put through as few other hoops (waiting timers; popup advertisements; impossibly difficult capthcas etc) as possible.
Is there a service where I upload a small file (~ 1 MB) and recieve a download link for others to use even months from now, and where clicking on said download link comes as close to immediate download of the target PDF as possible?
Trying to use the present table for this purpose is, in my opinion, nigh impossible.
CapnZapp (
talk)
08:16, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
First, several of these sites have shutdown. Second, there is no indication if an account is needed for upload or not. This is a key thing people are looking for when coming here, to save time. 73.181.82.26 ( talk) 16:59, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Userscloud and Usersfiles are the two sites providing infinite storage for 100% free.
Userscloud stores below 1 GB files forever, but files which are more than 1 GB will get expire within 30 days (day counting from last download) Usersfiles stores files only for 365 days since last download. Usersfiles has 5 GB file size limit. userscloud has no file size limit. Ram nareshji ( talk) 13:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Wuala has shut down and should be removed. Connectionfailure ( talk) 23:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Could you please add info regarding the specs of Adobe Document Cloud? pelister 21:49, 5 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pelister ( talk • contribs)
Google drive imposes limits onto how many times anyone who did not create the file can download a file in a given day, based on an algorithm including the file's size.
This is an unpublished limit- and it affects people looking to use google drive as a storage mechanism for web site downloads.
How is "direct access" defined for the purposes of this comparison? As an example, OneDrive says "no", but you can share links to individual files? ratarsed ( talk) 11:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
It seems somebody edited the table to make 4shared always appear on top. 61.230.122.211 ( talk) 05:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
I think it would be valuable to add a "Mobile Offline Folders" column. This column would show whether the mobile client for the named product can be configured to sync a specified set of folders onto the mobile device, i.e., download the folders and their entire recursive contents to the device. Values would be no, manual, and automatic. Gasharratt ( talk) 23:01, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
It would be helpful for viewers to know what is limit of a download from a link shared with a non-paying customer. Perhaps this should be added to the chart under a column called "Download Limit." W84jon ( talk) 12:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
As this article is about "Comparison of file hosting services", I have removed two services described (in the table) as peer-to-peer from the table. These were MagicVortex and Infinit. If their descriptions as P2P-based services were wrong, they can be reinstated. However, if they are genuinely P2P-based services, then they do not belong here: they can instead to added elsewhere, perhaps to something under
Peer-to-peer_file_sharing.
—DIV (
120.17.235.238 (
talk)
13:15, 5 February 2017 (UTC))
Green > Orange > Yellow > Red is out of order and do not follow order of increasing restrictions. Instead of
No restriction
Limit on some types of accounts
Limit across all accounts
Total restriction across all accounts
|
it should be
No restriction
Limit on some types of accounts
Limit across all accounts
Total restriction across all accounts
|
No restriction
Limit on some types of accounts
Limit across all accounts
Total restriction across all accounts
Uncategorised
|
I agree. I have updated the table templates to have more intuitive colors and names. Here's the new scheme:
No restriction. Use template {{yes}}
Limit on some types of accounts. Use template {{some}}
Limit across all accounts. Use template {{rarely}}
Total restriction across all accounts. Use template {{no}}
|
Balazer ( talk) 22:08, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
I've noticed that this list is missing some very popular services. The two I can think of right off are: Filefactory.com and zippyshare.com. I'd add them in to the grid, but I'm facing a wall of work. Also, I figured this heading could function as a place for folks to list missing services and then delete from as they are researched and inserted into the grid. Cheers!
Dropbox is now only two computers for basic (free), it used to be unlimited — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJGB ( talk • contribs) 07:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Could someone please add Uptobox, 1Fichier and Baidu Cloud to the table? -- 190.52.192.2 ( talk) 15:57, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Please add u.teknik.io to the list. Thanks in advance. Zero3K ( talk) 16:48, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
On 22 Sept 2017, Ukota (new editor) added Droplr, and Mean as Custard removed it saying, "remove red links". I disagree that the lack of a WP article disqualifies it. WP:SAL says, "one of the functions of many lists on Wikipedia is providing an avenue for the retention of encyclopedic information that does not warrant separate articles, so common sense is required in establishing criteria for a list." The Droplr article was deleted, but that does not show if its entry is useful in an encyclopedic list of file hosting services, just that the brackets should be removed, so it is black, not red. The lead paragraph says the list is designed to cover "file hosting services which are currently active". I prefer completeness over incompleteness, especially when the list is so short already. Furthermore I'd prefer that editors feel welcome to add services to make this list more complete without having to add whole articles. Other comments on this talk page urge adding entries. Does anyone else have thoughts? Numbersinstitute ( talk) 21:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
"the functions of many lists on Wikipedia is providing an avenue for the retention of encyclopedic information that does not warrant separate articles"- As above, this is not that sort of article, but you're welcome to start an WP:RFC if you would like it to be considered as such.
"Red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future."- This directly follows the first criteria:
Every entry meets the notability criteria for its own non-redirect article in the English Wikipedia.So yes, if it's notable and we don't have an article yet, then in some cases it can be fit to include. To show that it's notable and that an article could be forthcoming, you could include multiple sources which show significant coverage such that it could sustain an article. But if you're going to do that, you might as well just write the article first. Also, that a redlink is acceptable in terms of policy/guideline, doesn't mean it's acceptable to add any redlink as long as you claim it to be notable. It's acceptable to add verifiable information to an article, but not all verifiable information should be added, for example.
and you apparently just completely ignored WP:NNC- We're not talking about notable content, we're talking about notable entries which comprise the content. As that says, notability doesn't have to do with the content of an article, thus we are obviously talking about the notability of individual subjects and their fitness for the article. That would be odd if NNC were so directly at odds with CSC.
"the detailed criteria for inclusion should be described in the lead"- indeed it should. if you would like to propose something along those lines, you are welcome to. The default, however, is not to include every example that exists, given WP:NOT and the very standard interpretation of WP:CSC, for which this would fall under the first criteria pending a different local consensus.
Just to throw in an apple to this discussion, I will point out that I have no time to write a Droplr article, but a quick search engine query suggests the following links to establish notability:
CNET |
G2 Crowd* |
Crunchbase |
9 to 5 Mac |
Mashable |
App Advice* |
Finances Online* |
MacWorld #1 |
Quora |
MacWorld #2 .... There's plenty more, but I think you get the idea.
* (questionable, source is unknown to me)
That's
WP:NOT enough for me, just the CNET and the two MacWorlds, right there.
And if it stays redlinked for a while, it's not because of lacking notability. --
Eliyahu S
Talk
19:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
The lead now says
This is unclear. The article File hosting service includes services for single users as well as services for sharing. I think it would be better to be consistent with that article, but I'm not sure what difference previous editors meant between File hosting service and online file storage. The term online file storage redirects to File hosting service, so the current WP definition seems to be that these are the same. What "features or characteristics" distinguish them here? Numbersinstitute ( talk) 16:44, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
TeamDrive seems to be another entry that should be here; in fact the article Other links to this one. -- Eliyahu S Talk 19:32, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Nakido is a slightly different type of file share service that keeps files forever & never deletes them,(I have 3 GB & 4 GB files stored there with only 1 or 0 downloads that have been there for 4 years now and not deleted), has a 99 GB file size restriction - which for all practical purposes is unlimited size - and functions both for uploading and downloading. How it differs from the major players like Rapidshare and MegaUpload is you need to install a "service" called the Nakido Flag, which can be turned on and off in the Computer Management/Services tools, and allows users with it installed to access files in high-speed mode. If you don't install it, you get throttled but can still access files both ways on the site. To the best of my, and other people I've had look at it, knowledge, the Nakido Flag is mostly a tracking cookie type arrangement and doesn't appear to contain any malware/worm/virus/zombie software at all - though I find it highly unusual that it gets installed as a Service on the computer. Anyway, it's not listed here and should be in any such list as it is extremely HUGE and while not known well in the U.S. and Europe, is quite popular in Asia. IdioT.SavanT.i4 ( talk) 06:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
I am sure dropbox doesn't delete your files after 90 days of inactivity. Might be an old policy, not in new documentation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.215.170.251 ( talk) 11:05, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Dropbox allows you to store up to 2 GB free of charge. Dropbox reserves the right to terminate Free Accounts at any time, with or without notice. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, if a Free Account is inactive for ninety (90) days, then Dropbox may delete any or all of Your Files without providing additional notice.
Also, check this discussion: http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?id=48972 - they claim files are not being deleted, but they reserve the right to do so. So, this info should remain here. Perene ( talk) 16:41, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Encryption methods (including server side vs client side, algorithms, etc) should be included. Thoughts on exactly how to approach that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgimbi ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I would also like to see encryption methodology used. Because of the Snowden revelations this would be a key piece of information to point out. I agree about the columns suggested for No, Server-side, and Zero-knowledge. However, should we also include one for transport? I don't know if all of them support secure connections. This could be a simple yes/no, with possible notes about various methods like, yes for https but no for ftp. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan cauthorn ( talk • contribs) 06:49, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
I believe a HIPAA compliant column would also be useful. Agreed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.104.130.57 ( talk) 18:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree. It's an important consideration for a large industry. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 06:54, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
What about inserting a column with payout for uploaded files' downloads?
I'd rather keep this list manageable, and those change and go out of business constantly. You may want to consider making a new page regarding file hosting services that pay.
JCauthorn (
talk)
21:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
A good comparison should have included some info. on number of mirrors. For e.g. I know that Rapidshare uses a CDN and has something close to 18 odd mirrors around the world. The info. is a bit dated but still if people would start putting up a column then news of such networks would start as well which would also make people who want to use such a service a bit more aware as well. Shirishag75 ( talk) 14:47, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
I believe there is a very important column in this comparison missing: [whether the service allows automatic] synchronization. Do you agree?
512upload ( talk) 22:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Are you referring to apps like Google Drive or Dropbox that can upload/download files automatically in the background? If so, we would also need to list the clients that it runs on, i.e. Windoze, Mac, Linux, IOS, Android, etc. Maybe a secondary table might be better to describe just the services that support that and their ability and restrictions. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 06:58, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
Don't you think that these two columns should be separated each one in two: 'free' and 'paid' and the values be written in scientific notation? This would make it possible for readers to sort the services by these two criteria (Storage size and Max. file size) correctly (now, this is not possible). 512upload ( talk) 22:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I can't believe it isn't setup this way already. It should have several columns as numerics only for easy sorting - default free space, maximum free space, maximum file size for free, maximum file size paid. There may be other size related columns as well. These columns should be numbers only, and maybe based on GB, from 0.1 GB for a 100 MB file to 1,000 GB for a Terabyte file. Thoughts? ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:05, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
The major part of the users are free users that don't read the FAQ of the file hosting sites, they only click the wanted links to download. In many of those sites, like Badongo and Rapidshare, it's is practically impossible download anything as free user (in my experience, it's impossible). A good comparison must include those omitted facts. I don't think is helpful a comparison that only transcribes what the services decide that they do. I believe that is necessary to rewrite this article in a neutral POV. Caiaffa ( talk) 18:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
For the sake of file security it would be nice to know were some of these file hosting sites are located and what local laws govern what stored on them. TA. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
110.174.171.20 (
talk)
04:06, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
If we have an encryption column that covers zero-knowledge client side encryption, we wouldn't need to know where it is hosted. This would be a more important factor if you are concerned about keeping your files secure. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:08, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
I think this comparison chart should only mention free of charge websites. If the website is charging a fee for its services, it should not figure here, otherwise it will be certainly misused for commercial purposes. Unless the site in question also offers a free service, then it would be mentioned as well, but if it's only paid, it should be removed. What do you think? Perene ( talk) 15:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
I disagree. I have seen many pages on Wikipedia about software, and without exception they all feature as least some proprietary only software. While I prefer open source/free one shouldn't discriminate against proprietary/non-free options. Svnpenn ( talk) 03:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I also disagree. I would rather have a complete table that shows all the options so you can make the best choice on all the factors. If we create a "free space" column that can be sorted, the ones that provide no free space will be obvious in the list, and you can make your decision based on that. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:12, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
The table headers do not show when you scroll down, making it difficult to know what is the header matching for the cell contents , without scrolling up again back and forth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.142.116.124 ( talk) 15:16, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Is it possible to do it in wikipedia?
/info/en/?search=Help:Table/Manual_tables Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:27, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
For Google drive, the "Direct access" column is currently "Yes", but from my experience it doesn't have real direct access.
For example, if you upload an image file, you cannot get a direct link to it, a link that you can use on your website in an HTML image tag, to link to google drive. The share link it gives you, when you choose the "Share..." menu option of a .jpg file, is something like this: " https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B5-BileB3h_2Vi1IRnZhRk5OY3c"
Which doesn't end with ".jpg" and can't be used to direct link from HTML on my website. It is not a direct link to the image, but a link to a google docs website page that contains the actual image, where you can view the image with other things like the google docs menu options.
If anyone thinks that Google docs has direct access, please explain why and how to use it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.142.116.124 ( talk) 09:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
The same goes for HackerBox and eDoc. In the wiki it is written "Yes" for "Direct access", but their FAQ states that "hotlinking is not allowed". Please verify and fix the incorrect values. I do not want to modify without verification.
I believe "Direct Access" should be if you get a link that takes you directly to the file. Anything less is a "no". If it makes you wait or click a captcha, it is not Direct Access. If you want another column for wait times or other items, that's fine. ( Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:23, 20 June 2014 (UTC)).
Mediafire requires login to upload(not mentioned - can someone add "Login required to upload files" to it?).
Some sites only let you download files uploaded with the same account.
Others require a login to download.
Note: Not saying rather the account is free, but that you're forced to log into it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.246.113 ( talk) 17:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I found out yesterday that filefactory.com has a "reward" system where users are given cash for X number of downloads of files they upped. I feel like this would be very relevant to this article. Apparantly it is one of the few doing this because if I'm not mistaken the rewards system is what got megaupload in trouble a while back. UselessToRemain ( talk) 16:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Why removed many sites from comparision? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.235.170.75 ( talk) 02:05, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I think the only sites that should be relegated to a secondary table are those that are no longer doing business. If they are active, they should be included. If they are not, they can be put in a secondary table for historical purposes. That's as clear cut a policy as you can get - no arbitrary criteria like "lack[ing] any kind of third party reference or claim to any importance". Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:37, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
The comparison table has quite a few columns. Would it be an idea to remove the language column to limit the information to a more functional comparison of the offered service? This doesn't create much room for additional columns, but it's at least some. I would really like to add one or two columns like encryption, but I feel that some sacrifices have to be made by sticking to the most information in order to keep the table as usable as possible.-- Forage ( talk) 13:34, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
The main usage of this page is for readers to find file hosting services with the parameters they desire. Not accepting this is delusional. Thus, please make it as useful for this purpose as possible. Thank you. (IF you disagree, feel free to explain why you feel this page is even worth having)
Example: I want a file hosting service with the following properties:
Currently, it is very hard to quickly scan the information for my example purpose.
"Direct Access": What does that even mean? For me it's not enough that I can access my documents "directly". I need anyone with a simple link to reach a download page directly and with no intermediation.
How do you sort the table on more than one column? (For example: I want to sort on "Direct Access" and "File Expiration" so that the entries that are green in both columns show up first).
Thank you, 90.229.34.175 ( talk) 09:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
I'd rather see the table expanded with more information, but include scrolling. More info on sorting here: /info/en/?search=Help:Sorting but simply click on the least significant sort to the most significant sort. Jonathan cauthorn ( talk) 07:46, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Backblaze Unlimited $3.96 a month for 2 years ($95 total) $4.17 a month for 1 year ($50 total) http://www.backblaze.com/
/info/en/?search=Baidu_Cloud 2TB free http://pan.baidu.com/
Jottabackup 5Gb free, unlimited for $6/month for desktop, $3/month for mobile. http://www.jottacloud.com/
Tencent Cloud QQ 10TB free http://www.weiyun.com/act/10t-en.html
Kanbox 10Tb free — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.211.113.22 ( talk) 07:47, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Copy.com by barracuda systems. 15 GB free for new accounts and 5 GB extra for each referral. 9.99 a month for a 250 GB plan. http://www.copy.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilreader ( talk • contribs) 17:23, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Yunpan360 36Tb free (10Tb for PC app +26Tb for mobile) http://yunpan.360.cn/
A: When it's a note or comment on the content.
A number of the items in the (first of two) References section are not in fact references. For example, at the time of writing the first two 'references' read as:
Which have no 'reference' function. This sort of stuff should be in a (foot)Notes section.
I also note there is a second, currently empty, References section. I don't know why.
Wayne 03:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
I deleted all entries that didn't have any references or wiki articles for the web host, still I should have deleted more that didn't have any references. Every web host in this article must have a link to a webpage that proves this data, or a least proves most of it. References are a basic requirement of Wikipedia, so "man up" and do it right, or someone else will swing an axe on your favorite web service. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
What is meant by the so called "remote uploading" column? Basically all uploading is from a remote location so I think it needs some clarification.-- Forage ( talk) 13:19, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
I just uploaded a 7GB file to dropbox from a remote terminal I was connected to thourgh a vpm connection. Does this mean that dropbox has remote uploading? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.101.94 ( talk) 15:57, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
I consider this table useful, but also lacking, and I think we could improve it. I would like to discuss the overhaul of this table, which includes reordering / renaming / clarifying / adding columns. Moving columns and data is a pain, so I'd rather get the column names and order nailed down before an overhaul is started. After the columns get nailed down, then we could start a new table above the existing table, then migrate old data to it. Please provide feedback and suggestions. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 02:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
The following are my initial concepts. I would like to see more fields split out, especially for free details, and 2 encryption columns so a person can easily determine if files are stored as encrypted in the cloud. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 02:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Web host | Win | Mac | Linux | Android | iOS | Other O/S |
Free storage lowest | Free storage highest | Paid storage lowest | Paid storage highest | Free max file size | Paid max file size | Public file links | Public dir links | Public file password | Encrypt transport | Encrypt storage | Encrypt keys | Traffic limit | Files expire | Add more columns |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BogusBox | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | 10 GB | 25 GB | 500 GB ($10/mo) |
100 TB ($200/mo) |
1 GB | 4 GB | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | Unknown | 5 TB | 90 days | TBD |
BogusHybrid | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | RPi | Unlimited Client Computer |
Unlimited Client Computer |
100 GB ($10/mo) |
10 TB ($100/mo) |
Unlimited | 4 GB | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | TBD |
Requesting input on the above new table concept. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 14:56, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Should this be merged with Comparison of online backup services? • Sbmeirow • Talk • 15:11, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Referencing Spideroak's website (9th Feb, 2015). https://spideroak.com/mobile/, the paragraph is "Here's the deal: when accessing your data via the SpiderOak website or on a mobile device, you must enter your password. The password will then exist in the SpiderOak server memory for the duration of your browsing session. For this amount of time, your password is stored in encrypted memory and never written to an unencrypted disk. The moment your browsing session ends, your password is destroyed and no further trace is left. The instance above represents the only situation where your data could potentially be readable to someone with access to the SpiderOak servers. That said, no one except a select number of SpiderOak employees will ever have access to the SpiderOak servers. To fully retain our 'zero-knowledge' privacy, we recommend you always access your data via the SpiderOak desktop application, which downloads your data before decrypting it locally.`
This is not client side encryption (as the password is sometimes transmitted and held on Spideroak's servers). Given the semantics of the column the value of the table should be strictly "no". Or potentially find a reference to an audited confirmation of some clients performing client side encryption and some other clients uploading the password to Spideroak's servers and change the cell value to "partial".
COI disclosure, I work for Mega and I'm making sure that all reference material on Wikipedia is accurate. Obviously it would be a COI for me to make an edit to a competitors service, so we can discuss here. AklMeditor1 ( talk) 22:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Cyberbot II has detected links on Comparison of file hosting services which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
\br10\.net\b
on the global blacklistIf you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:13, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello,
This table could be very useful to find a service that offers file sharing services. However, it is hopelessly organized from the viewpoint of a user looking for the following:
I want to store a number of small PDF files (single-digit megabytes; definitely not gigabytes) and share public links to these files. I want these links to be maintenance-free and not be deleted after, say, 30 days. Neither me nor the other party should have to register, and preferably put through as few other hoops (waiting timers; popup advertisements; impossibly difficult capthcas etc) as possible.
Is there a service where I upload a small file (~ 1 MB) and recieve a download link for others to use even months from now, and where clicking on said download link comes as close to immediate download of the target PDF as possible?
Trying to use the present table for this purpose is, in my opinion, nigh impossible.
CapnZapp (
talk)
08:16, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
First, several of these sites have shutdown. Second, there is no indication if an account is needed for upload or not. This is a key thing people are looking for when coming here, to save time. 73.181.82.26 ( talk) 16:59, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Userscloud and Usersfiles are the two sites providing infinite storage for 100% free.
Userscloud stores below 1 GB files forever, but files which are more than 1 GB will get expire within 30 days (day counting from last download) Usersfiles stores files only for 365 days since last download. Usersfiles has 5 GB file size limit. userscloud has no file size limit. Ram nareshji ( talk) 13:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Wuala has shut down and should be removed. Connectionfailure ( talk) 23:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Could you please add info regarding the specs of Adobe Document Cloud? pelister 21:49, 5 December 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pelister ( talk • contribs)
Google drive imposes limits onto how many times anyone who did not create the file can download a file in a given day, based on an algorithm including the file's size.
This is an unpublished limit- and it affects people looking to use google drive as a storage mechanism for web site downloads.
How is "direct access" defined for the purposes of this comparison? As an example, OneDrive says "no", but you can share links to individual files? ratarsed ( talk) 11:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
It seems somebody edited the table to make 4shared always appear on top. 61.230.122.211 ( talk) 05:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
I think it would be valuable to add a "Mobile Offline Folders" column. This column would show whether the mobile client for the named product can be configured to sync a specified set of folders onto the mobile device, i.e., download the folders and their entire recursive contents to the device. Values would be no, manual, and automatic. Gasharratt ( talk) 23:01, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
It would be helpful for viewers to know what is limit of a download from a link shared with a non-paying customer. Perhaps this should be added to the chart under a column called "Download Limit." W84jon ( talk) 12:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
As this article is about "Comparison of file hosting services", I have removed two services described (in the table) as peer-to-peer from the table. These were MagicVortex and Infinit. If their descriptions as P2P-based services were wrong, they can be reinstated. However, if they are genuinely P2P-based services, then they do not belong here: they can instead to added elsewhere, perhaps to something under
Peer-to-peer_file_sharing.
—DIV (
120.17.235.238 (
talk)
13:15, 5 February 2017 (UTC))
Green > Orange > Yellow > Red is out of order and do not follow order of increasing restrictions. Instead of
No restriction
Limit on some types of accounts
Limit across all accounts
Total restriction across all accounts
|
it should be
No restriction
Limit on some types of accounts
Limit across all accounts
Total restriction across all accounts
|
No restriction
Limit on some types of accounts
Limit across all accounts
Total restriction across all accounts
Uncategorised
|
I agree. I have updated the table templates to have more intuitive colors and names. Here's the new scheme:
No restriction. Use template {{yes}}
Limit on some types of accounts. Use template {{some}}
Limit across all accounts. Use template {{rarely}}
Total restriction across all accounts. Use template {{no}}
|
Balazer ( talk) 22:08, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
I've noticed that this list is missing some very popular services. The two I can think of right off are: Filefactory.com and zippyshare.com. I'd add them in to the grid, but I'm facing a wall of work. Also, I figured this heading could function as a place for folks to list missing services and then delete from as they are researched and inserted into the grid. Cheers!
Dropbox is now only two computers for basic (free), it used to be unlimited — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJGB ( talk • contribs) 07:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Could someone please add Uptobox, 1Fichier and Baidu Cloud to the table? -- 190.52.192.2 ( talk) 15:57, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Please add u.teknik.io to the list. Thanks in advance. Zero3K ( talk) 16:48, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
On 22 Sept 2017, Ukota (new editor) added Droplr, and Mean as Custard removed it saying, "remove red links". I disagree that the lack of a WP article disqualifies it. WP:SAL says, "one of the functions of many lists on Wikipedia is providing an avenue for the retention of encyclopedic information that does not warrant separate articles, so common sense is required in establishing criteria for a list." The Droplr article was deleted, but that does not show if its entry is useful in an encyclopedic list of file hosting services, just that the brackets should be removed, so it is black, not red. The lead paragraph says the list is designed to cover "file hosting services which are currently active". I prefer completeness over incompleteness, especially when the list is so short already. Furthermore I'd prefer that editors feel welcome to add services to make this list more complete without having to add whole articles. Other comments on this talk page urge adding entries. Does anyone else have thoughts? Numbersinstitute ( talk) 21:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
"the functions of many lists on Wikipedia is providing an avenue for the retention of encyclopedic information that does not warrant separate articles"- As above, this is not that sort of article, but you're welcome to start an WP:RFC if you would like it to be considered as such.
"Red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future."- This directly follows the first criteria:
Every entry meets the notability criteria for its own non-redirect article in the English Wikipedia.So yes, if it's notable and we don't have an article yet, then in some cases it can be fit to include. To show that it's notable and that an article could be forthcoming, you could include multiple sources which show significant coverage such that it could sustain an article. But if you're going to do that, you might as well just write the article first. Also, that a redlink is acceptable in terms of policy/guideline, doesn't mean it's acceptable to add any redlink as long as you claim it to be notable. It's acceptable to add verifiable information to an article, but not all verifiable information should be added, for example.
and you apparently just completely ignored WP:NNC- We're not talking about notable content, we're talking about notable entries which comprise the content. As that says, notability doesn't have to do with the content of an article, thus we are obviously talking about the notability of individual subjects and their fitness for the article. That would be odd if NNC were so directly at odds with CSC.
"the detailed criteria for inclusion should be described in the lead"- indeed it should. if you would like to propose something along those lines, you are welcome to. The default, however, is not to include every example that exists, given WP:NOT and the very standard interpretation of WP:CSC, for which this would fall under the first criteria pending a different local consensus.
Just to throw in an apple to this discussion, I will point out that I have no time to write a Droplr article, but a quick search engine query suggests the following links to establish notability:
CNET |
G2 Crowd* |
Crunchbase |
9 to 5 Mac |
Mashable |
App Advice* |
Finances Online* |
MacWorld #1 |
Quora |
MacWorld #2 .... There's plenty more, but I think you get the idea.
* (questionable, source is unknown to me)
That's
WP:NOT enough for me, just the CNET and the two MacWorlds, right there.
And if it stays redlinked for a while, it's not because of lacking notability. --
Eliyahu S
Talk
19:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
The lead now says
This is unclear. The article File hosting service includes services for single users as well as services for sharing. I think it would be better to be consistent with that article, but I'm not sure what difference previous editors meant between File hosting service and online file storage. The term online file storage redirects to File hosting service, so the current WP definition seems to be that these are the same. What "features or characteristics" distinguish them here? Numbersinstitute ( talk) 16:44, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
TeamDrive seems to be another entry that should be here; in fact the article Other links to this one. -- Eliyahu S Talk 19:32, 24 January 2018 (UTC)