I have 1tb of data on icloud, including all my photos. Moving to a different platform is literally not an option (I was a happy Dropbox paid user until they decided to shut down the photos app, and Google Photos is a huge no no for multiple reason). The only alternative I can think of is self-hosting, which on itself is a nightmare, or a home NAS (not an option for me specifically). The lock-in is real.
Dropbox recently broke (accidentally or intentionally) hosted images/thumbnails from their Paper docs product (which they're quietly but noncommittally killing off) and that was a good wakeup for me to stop trusting hosted storage. And I'm saying this as a former Dropbox engineer of ~6 years who has plenty of free Dropbox storage for life. The brain drain and profitability crunch is real.
Recently bought a 14TB HDD and downloaded my entire Dropbox, Google Photos, and Lightroom photos. Planning to set up an off-site copy as well, and will probably build out a proper NAS within a few years.
Dropbox is just hard to trust. I used to pay for it, until they suddenly decided to shut down the photos app. Then the password app, recently. I don’t expect Apple to shut down Photos any time soon, so I find it easier to trust them with my data
which alternative platform exists? Onedrive is absolutely awful (it gets stuck in sync and crashes on Mac frequently), Google Drive/Photos doesn't respect your privacy and actually changes the resolution of your photos. The only alternative is Dropbox, which doesn't have a photos app anymore, or a bunch of disjointed small apps that together would cost multiples of what I pay for iCloud.
Name me one service outside of Google and Apple that’s seamlessly tied to your devices. Once you buy into the system you’re basically stuck. Apple is quickly becoming Oracle.
Not sure what the OP meant but I too feel locked into them. I dislike both the company and in some cases the product, but they currently provide the least bad option - almost certainly for laptops and probably for phones.
I feel like a provider having the 'lest bad option' is a LOT different than 'locked in'. Locked in means that you are forced to keep using an inferior product even if a better option exists because you can't move your data; not having a better option is something else.
Lock-in usually just refers to a situation where switching costs are (perceived to be) higher than the net benefit, within some reasonable payoff period. It can include things like high cost to extract data, but it can also include things like network/social effects.
The latter is a huge reason companies strive to establish "platforms" and suites of connected apps - even if competition is cheaper/better in a vacuum, it still may not be worth the effort to switch if you're already established within an ecosystem. The goal is vendor lock-in even if they're not holding your data hostage (though they might do that too).
Yeah, I agree with that. I didn’t mean to imply that it had to be impossible to move your data.
However, I do think that it has to mean something besides “there are no other good providers of a service”. Integrations, platforms, etc make sense as being “locked in”, but not “no one else provides the service”
To me, the key would be, “if you were starting from scratch and weren’t using any service at all, would you choose a different one than what you actually currently use?”
If the answer is “I would still choose the one I am using”, then I don’t think that is locked in.
it means that the cost of moving from X is too high (be it in terms of time, cost or lack of suitable alternatives).
In the case of iCloud, for most people, it's probably a combination of convenience (no other tool is so well integrated with the OS) and cost (you can sorta replicate the combo of photos + files + vpn + fake emails, but it'll be more expensive and complex to maintain)
I have 1tb of data on icloud, including all my photos. Moving to a different platform is literally not an option (I was a happy Dropbox paid user until they decided to shut down the photos app, and Google Photos is a huge no no for multiple reason). The only alternative I can think of is self-hosting, which on itself is a nightmare, or a home NAS (not an option for me specifically). The lock-in is real.
Dropbox recently broke (accidentally or intentionally) hosted images/thumbnails from their Paper docs product (which they're quietly but noncommittally killing off) and that was a good wakeup for me to stop trusting hosted storage. And I'm saying this as a former Dropbox engineer of ~6 years who has plenty of free Dropbox storage for life. The brain drain and profitability crunch is real.
Recently bought a 14TB HDD and downloaded my entire Dropbox, Google Photos, and Lightroom photos. Planning to set up an off-site copy as well, and will probably build out a proper NAS within a few years.
Dropbox is just hard to trust. I used to pay for it, until they suddenly decided to shut down the photos app. Then the password app, recently. I don’t expect Apple to shut down Photos any time soon, so I find it easier to trust them with my data
Why is moving to a different platform literally not an option? 1TB of data is tiny. You don't even need a NAS, 1TB is a trivial amount of data.
If you don't want to self host (which has actually become quite simple with immich), you could switch providers (even if you want to avoid google).
which alternative platform exists? Onedrive is absolutely awful (it gets stuck in sync and crashes on Mac frequently), Google Drive/Photos doesn't respect your privacy and actually changes the resolution of your photos. The only alternative is Dropbox, which doesn't have a photos app anymore, or a bunch of disjointed small apps that together would cost multiples of what I pay for iCloud.
Name me one service outside of Google and Apple that’s seamlessly tied to your devices. Once you buy into the system you’re basically stuck. Apple is quickly becoming Oracle.
Samsung?
Disclaimer: not touched a Samsung device in over a decade
Not sure what the OP meant but I too feel locked into them. I dislike both the company and in some cases the product, but they currently provide the least bad option - almost certainly for laptops and probably for phones.
I feel like a provider having the 'lest bad option' is a LOT different than 'locked in'. Locked in means that you are forced to keep using an inferior product even if a better option exists because you can't move your data; not having a better option is something else.
Lock-in usually just refers to a situation where switching costs are (perceived to be) higher than the net benefit, within some reasonable payoff period. It can include things like high cost to extract data, but it can also include things like network/social effects.
The latter is a huge reason companies strive to establish "platforms" and suites of connected apps - even if competition is cheaper/better in a vacuum, it still may not be worth the effort to switch if you're already established within an ecosystem. The goal is vendor lock-in even if they're not holding your data hostage (though they might do that too).
Yeah, I agree with that. I didn’t mean to imply that it had to be impossible to move your data.
However, I do think that it has to mean something besides “there are no other good providers of a service”. Integrations, platforms, etc make sense as being “locked in”, but not “no one else provides the service”
To me, the key would be, “if you were starting from scratch and weren’t using any service at all, would you choose a different one than what you actually currently use?”
If the answer is “I would still choose the one I am using”, then I don’t think that is locked in.
Locked in doesn't imply "inferior", nor it has anything to do with an option being better or worse.
Ok, it seems I don’t understand what locked in means then. What does it actually mean?
it means that the cost of moving from X is too high (be it in terms of time, cost or lack of suitable alternatives).
In the case of iCloud, for most people, it's probably a combination of convenience (no other tool is so well integrated with the OS) and cost (you can sorta replicate the combo of photos + files + vpn + fake emails, but it'll be more expensive and complex to maintain)
Yeah, VMWare post-acquisition is trying to help what the limits of lock-in are...