Compared to the following clouds, media playback in mobile environments is advantageous. Especially in the case of videos, the next cloud has to be downloaded as a whole, while streaming. Just to stream! I need to install another app again. Cloud alone is not enough to stream.
Faster than the next cloud. About 20%.
When you open a document with a cloud viewer, it breaks less than the next cloud (but breaking itself has already been a problem).
Web app is supported. It's rudimentary, but it is possible to write. However, the problem is that the document format is a bizarre format, such as .ndoc, which makes it extremely incompatible.
File sharing through the URL (but this is as far as another cloud is concerned).
It includes a smaller capacity when compared to next cloud.
In comparison to foreign cloud services, it boasts poor service quality.
When compared to next cloud, it is extremely disadvantageous for music playback. Continuous streaming can be done only for several selected sound sources. The next cloud only needs to be in a folder.
You need to share a URL and that means you can't share music files or videos.
According to the report, there exists a saying that N drive appears like a local drive when installed, but only it happens like a local drive, which is no different from the folder synchronization setting. It's a whole lot worse for computers to begin with when external programs play tricks in it. It's far better to just clean up the synchronization folder.***
It is extremely specialized in playing music. In particular, it is the only cloud that may play sound sources within an environment much like MP3 players we are acquainted with. Although each song has some buffering, it appears to play around 192kpbs continuously, let's assume that communication is in good shape in a 3G environment. 다운사이트 Of course, in reality, it's often take off at that point)
It has a large capacity. It is a significant advantage when contemplating domestic cloud services all together, which have poor quality of media access in cloud services.
You can substitute the end drive above. In particular, in case a picture is contained in a document, it is rarely opened properly.
Streaming songs often cuts off (but not often) due to communication problems with the cloud, not Internet speed problems. I feel like it's about once every two hours. And when you listen to high-quality sound sources, it gets buffered often, or if you're in a place where the 3G environment isn't smooth, it gets take off more often. So when it's in that state, you have to find the path of the folder where the song was playing and play it again.
The only way to share is folder sharing. Only some documents or presentation files are for sale to file viewing. Aside from those points, there is nothing to say even if it really is almost a webhard level.
Foreign Cloud Comparison (Google Drive, Dropbox, Box, Skydrive)
It exerts tremendous power on paper documents. In particular, even lacking any office program, Google Drive can cover it to some extent. Not fancy ppts or fancy excels, nearly every simple document is OK.
It is beneficial to reflect the progress of work in the mobile environment. By establishing only offline views, the files you work on can continue being reflected in the cloud instantly. This can be a very convenient feature for sharing files with other users.
It is easy to connect with other Google services such as for example Gmail.
Unless you upload documents directly to the Google drive but write them on the Google drive web app, the capability of the file does not take into account cloud storage (what do you mean, if you just utilize the web app, the capacity of the Google drive is infinite).
Now, photo media access is strong at the dropbox level. It is possible to flip through photos and videos can be played right away. However, the loading time appears to take a little longer than the dropbox. I feel it), nonetheless it doesn't bother me.
There are probably the most apps which can be connected. In a desktop environment. Various connection apps allow various operations in the net environment without installing programs on the computer. It's a tiny problem that the app doesn't connect at all on mobile, but it's the best in the desktop environment.
Upload a small pdf file and change it to Google Docs format. It can then be stored again in MS Word format or something. However, it is only possible with pdf files of 2MB or less.
There is no bandwidth restriction in name. There is a testimony that it is a block after a lot of writing, but it isn't stipulated by company policy.
If you use Google Docs web app, you can save documents indefinitely, but in the event that you save them indefinitely, it is the same as once you lose your Internet connection, you are going to sink and work with MS word, right?)
Google Docs web app, cloud-connected web app, support for editing files utilizing a variety of programs, nonetheless it is still crude compared to office programs used on computers.Is it obvious?)
It exerts its strongest power in media viewing. Photo folders? Can be flipped smoothly (Domestic cloud services need a specific amount of buffering time for every photo). However, in the event that you wait a little bit for the dropbox, the photos in a single folder are loaded entirely. While considering Photo A, Photo B is loaded and scrolling is possible without the blockage. Video? Beyond streaming, you can freely specify before start of playback. It's the best in the world in terms of media reading.
There are various means of increasing capacity. Camera upload settings, invitation of friends, events at the business level, etc.
The speed is relatively good. It is a lot faster than the Box and doesn't work with Google Drive.
The file capacity limit that could be uploaded from the free account may be the largest. 300MB.
The bandwidth of the free account is bigger than that of the Box. It really is updated by 20GB per day. It's practically infinite unless you're going to share large files.
The starting capacity is the smallest. Two gigabytes of dirt.
Price compared to capacity is the most expensive cloud service. Dirty bastards...
There exists a saying that changes in documents can't be reflected in real time when working on documents.
Word documents shouldn't flip different files like picture documents.
The dropbox itself can't be documented.
There are the most compatible apps in the mobile environment. In order to work on a document, you can choose the interface you need through the app drive and focus on it leisurely.
Regarding document files, simple document inquiry is a convenient axis because previews are provided. Unlike additional.dropboxes, if there are multiple Word documents in a folder, Word documents can also be flipped on the file or file, as can be seen in the photo file.
File sharing support is quite good. This box allows anyone who manages or creates a website to share data conveniently with little use of the web page's resources. However, the bandwidth of the free account is 10GB monthly, which is quite small.
Slow. Not paid people.
Media access is very disadvantageous. It's a whole lot worse than Google Drive, which says it's disadvantageous above. It's better to just do it on some type of computer than listen to it for a test.
The uploadable file capacity limit may be the smallest. 100MB. Free account only.
In a mobile environment, real-time documentation is rarely supported.
If you don't install Boxeditor, the documentation will undoubtedly be written with an extension that may only be written on Box (it works, so it's better than Dropbox, but it's significantly less than Google Drive).
It had been recently updated (on 22 February?). Media access is currently quite convenient. Especially photo files. However the pace is still a little slow.***
The writing function is very powerful. Many cloud services offer Web apps. But Skydrive's is the most like the MS office documenting environment we've often used. And there are also the most supported handwriting, though it is four-legged.
The basic capacity is rather good. 7GB. Well, it isn't that strong a difference.
It is no exaggeration to state that the interface of mobile apps may be the most backward cloud service ever.