| Subscribe via RSS

Googles Gets into Storage

August 10th, 2007 Posted in Google

One of the fastest growing markets in North America is storage as people look for places to store their “stuff” - most of it things they never/rarely use or need. (If you’ve ever moved and had to store your belongings for a few months, you know exactly what I mean!)

In the digital world, a growing number of people have too much stuff - photos, music, video, etc. - so Google has decided it’s a fertile/lucrative market to get into the online storage business. You can buy 6GB for $20/year, 25GB for $75, 100GB for $250 or 250GB for $500. My friend, Mathew Ingram, thinks the pricing is silly because online storage is virtually free these days. (In comparison, real life storage can be expensive, especially if you have a lot of stuff)

Judging by how many peoples’ GMail accounts (e.g. Jason Calacanis) are bulging at the seams, Google’s move seems like a no-brainer. The question is whether all those GMail users will upgrade to a premium package or simply create another GMail account and create their own storage facility using something like Gspace.

Read Write/Web has an overview on the storage market, including thoughts on Microsoft’s Live Sky Drive. (By the way, anyone notice Google’s Official Blog has 577,000 subscribers - making it a leading candidate to be the first blog with more than one million subscribers.)

2 Responses to “Googles Gets into Storage”

  1. Gmail Storage Counter Stopped Counting. Not a Rip-off, but …| Zoli’s Blog Says:

    [...] Between the Lines, Computerworld, ParisLemon, Insider Chatter, Google Blogoscoped, Googlified, Mark Evans, Geek Speaker, VentureBeat, Web Strategy,  jkOnTheRun,  Googling Google, Damien Mulley, [...]


  2. Aswath Says:

    I am interested in the pricing strategy. It may be true that the storage may be virtually free, but transport costs are not. So if I upload an album to Picasa and my tons of buddies can be downloading it to watch them. So I am curious to know how to model the usage so that I can predict the incurred transmission cost. I am stumped on this point for an application that I am developing. My current thinking is that metered charge is more transparent.


Leave a Reply


  • TwitterCounter for @markevans


  • Wikio - Top Blogs - Technology