Canonical Is Shutting Down Ubuntu One

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Canonical Is Shutting Down Ubuntu One

Canonical has announced they will be ending their Ubuntu One cloud storage service. The Ubuntu One music store is also being shutdown...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTY1MjE

[Jedibeeftrix]

focus on owncloud integration now, please.

[Nille]

No wonder. The client Software are Horrible.

[Filiprino]

focus on owncloud integration now, please.

+1000000.

[talvik]

Stopped using it when I've found I couldn't install it on Debian. The buggy Windows and Android client also didn't help.

[chrisb]

No wonder. The client Software are Horrible.

Several issues killed it imho:

1. The client did indeed suck. Perhaps Python was not the best choice for a high performance file processing system? But development was the real problem: there never seemed to have a focus on performance, Ubuntu One would suck up CPU like crazy, and memory (those bugs have been open since 2011, and are still open). If you are going to have something running on a user's system all the time, then it absolutely needs to minimise its negative impact on the system. I would bet that CPU and memory usage was never a regularly benchmarked factor in their development setup, otherwise they would have seen these issues from the beginning. There were also those mysterious hangs and other problems, caused by (I assume) bad handling of asynchronous signalling and race conditions. Bugs, inadequate testing, no focus on performance.

2. Amazon HALVES cloud storage prices after Google's shock slash. The big boys are using online storage as a way to sell other services rather than as a profit generator. It's at best very low profit, possibly even a loss-leader now. Hard to compete with Google Drive when it comes on every Android device sold (over 1 million being sold every day).

3. The server was not open source, so it never saw widespread adoption in the open source world. Having said that, Dropbox and Google drive aren't open source, and they saw massive adoption, so while this issue was a factor for some users, for the majority it probably wasn't a factor.

[ssokolow]

Several issues killed it imho:

1. The client did indeed suck. Perhaps Python was not the best choice for a high performance file processing system? But development was the real problem: there never seemed to have a focus on performance, Ubuntu One would suck up CPU like crazy, and memory (those bugs have been open since 2011, and are still open). If you are going to have something running on a user's system all the time, then it absolutely needs to minimise its negative impact on the system. I would bet that CPU and memory usage was never a regularly benchmarked factor in their development setup, otherwise they would have seen these issues from the beginning. There were also those mysterious hangs and other problems, caused by (I assume) bad handling of asynchronous signalling and race conditions. Bugs, inadequate testing, no focus on performance.

I'd say the incompetence played a much bigger role than the Python, given that Dropbox uses Python too.

[_SXX_]

1. The client did indeed suck. Perhaps Python was not the best choice for a high performance file processing system?

Dropbox client written in python.

[mark45]

No wonder. The client Software are Horrible.

One of the reasons is Ubuntu devs are lazy and used Python for such a critical piece of shit (shit because the cloud mostly sucks and if it's in the cloud it ain't yours no matter what you think the eula says).
So, interpreted crap + cloud shit = fail.

[BubuXP]