Win 7

October 23, 2009 Royall Uncategorized

Ok ok, what’s Dell doing to put Windows 7 on Lilly 4?

RE: Carbonite

October 6, 2009 Royall Uncategorized

Well, let’s review. You have
already stated that Carbonite cannot currently meet my needs so it’s out
of the running. That makes you simply an expert in the field, doesn’t it?

Oh yes, I do blog. That’s just
another reason why I say what I mean and mean what I say. I am quite real, with
quite real requirements. So far, only Mozy seems to get close to them, but you
know the market far better than I ever will.

Right now, I’m trying
Mozy. But, time will tell.

From: David Friend
[mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 19:59
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

You’ll have to tell
me! I can see it on the blogs now: “Carbonite CEO recommends
competitor’s product.” J

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 3:54 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

So, now
that you really know my usage model, which of your competitors would you
recommend? (Hey, I can’t imagine a more honest observer under the
circumstances.)

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 14:45
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Good
points, and thanks again for your thinking on this complicated issue.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 3:43 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

I am
struck how our two topics of conversation are converging. You don’t like
caps, but that is really what cellular carriers do in practice. The paragraph
you cite indicates that AT&T will simply give you a surcharge if you exceed
the cap, but that’s not what happens. In practice, if you exceed your
limit more than once or twice, your contract is terminated with cause. If you
don’t believe me, please listen to past podcasts of Mobile Tech Roundup.
The explanation the carriers give is that these data hogs are abusing and
overtaxing the networks. That should seem very familiar to you!

You
don’t like caps, but I think the current Carbonite plan is crying out to
be gamed. As I’ve said, l could easily game Carbonite by writing a script
to copy my 115GB Music folder to the internal drive in, say, 50GB chunks. As
long as the client sees the files in each chunk within every 60 days, your
server would obediently maintain a virtual archive. Of course you know what I
mean, but we would both rather see a business model where laptop users can back
up what they need to without breaking you. I think that means tiering, like it
or not.

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 09:48
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Scott:
I’m really glad you turned me on to the AT&T pricing, because their
wording is actually very interesting. They are not saying that they will
shut you off if you hit 5GB, but it gives them the right to impose additional
charges (unspecified) provided that they also give you time to leave
first. I don’t like the idea of a hard cap because your
backup just stops working, and that’s a poor user experience.
What I would like to do is find a way to gently limit our exposure to people
who are using far more than 150GB. These serious abusers are very
small in number but are huge money losers for us.

Thanks
for bringing this to my attention.

“If you are on a data plan that does not include a monthly MB/GB
allowance and additional data usage rates, you agree that AT&T has the
right to impose additional charges if you use more than 5 GB in a month;
provided that, prior to the imposition of any additional charges, AT&T shall
provide you with notice and you shall have the right to terminate your
Service.“

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 6:47 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

I
started to say AT&T is notorious, but the truth is that all US carriers are
equally bad. In fact, Verizon recently had to stop saying
“unlimited” to avoid legal Hell. I was fortunate enough to have a
Verizon manager appeal to Corporate to double my limit to 10 GB for medical
reasons (which they no longer do).

I have
already described my own mode of how I might use Carbonite. If we expand my
model to talk about laptop users in general, it is easy to say they don’t
use external drives. But wait, isn’t that an iPhone you have? If you
connect an iPhone to a Windows machine, it is an external drive. A external
drive with a lot of valuable data, and iTunes only backs up what they sell you.
If you have a digital camera (I have two), those pictures really can’t
live inside your laptop. A laptop is a lot like a city’s downtown, it is
a nexus of activity. However, there isn’t room for much of the data it
uses to actually live there! As a result, a laptop becomes a city where the
suburbs come and go as needed. Maybe one model is to figure out a way to
protect those “suburbs.” You mentioned that you break even at 150GB
for $5/mo., and perhaps that should be telling you something. Maybe you
should/could sell Carbonite optionally in 150GB chunks. This isn’t
necessarily tiering, because you’re focusing on EXTERNAL drives. Your
current product covers the internal drives so what I just came up with would be
a bolt-on. Indeed, it could be a product users could buy multiples of, much
like tiers.

Cabonite made this week’s episode of Security Now. Check it out.

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:18
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Hmmm.
I did not know that. I will look at my AT&T contract. I’m
sure I did my initial backup of about 50GB at my desk, so that would have gone
over wi-fi. But most of the time now I’m on AT&T, but the
incremental backups daily are pretty minor.

I
think what we may need is something in that $100/yr range, as you suggest
Scott. It probably should be capped at some number, but have no restrictions
in terms of the drives that would be backed up. The new product I
alluded to, Carbonite Pro, will be coming out in Nov but it is really aimed at
businesses, not individuals, so I don’t think it would be a good fit for
you. It seems to me that we need both an entry-level consumer
product and one that is a step up for users who need more speed, support for
external drives, and perhaps a premium level of customer support.
I’d be interested in what you think would make sense.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:26 AM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

None
of the carriers are truly “unlimited.” Read your fine print and
you’ll find a 5 GB cap.

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 08:52
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Scott:
Interesting suggestion, but not sure what’s so bad about backing up on
EVDO? I have AT&T for my laptop and back up stuff on the network all
the time without any difficulty. Is your data service
metered? Mine is unlimited, so there’s no cost. And since
Carbonite basically sleeps when I’m typing on my laptop, it doesn’t
interfere with browsing speed.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:16 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

I
suppose everyone has their own definition of what’s
“economical.” I’m on very limited funds, and even I think
your $50/yr. subscription price is obscenely low. I understand that
you’re trying to attract customers, but there’s a price-point where
you start attracting people who are unlikely to stay for a variety of reasons.
I think you’re well below that. I would support both $100/yr. for 300 GB,
and then additional tiers.

If I
may switch topics slightly, there are some changes to your client that would
really help laptop users. Most important would be the awareness of the type of
internet connection. I’m typing this email on the road to a meeting, and
I darn sure wouldn’t like Carbonite backing up stuff on EVDO unless I explicitly
order it to. True, Carbonite can be disabled, but it’s actually designed
to be forgotten.

Meanwhile,
I really need to back up that USB drive. Can you offer any ETA on your new
product?

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 06:00
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Scott:
The policy is 60 days. If you delete a file on your PC, we
delete it 60 days later. That gives you plenty of time to change your
mind or download the file to another PC using Remote File Access. If your
whole computer is disconnected from Carbonite, i.e., there is no explicit
Windows file deletion, we store the files for as long as your subscription
lasts.

You’re
correct that we should be moving to an archival model, and that is indeed on
the roadmap. However, it just doesn’t work economically with
an “unlimited” pricing plan. Just like any all-you-can-eat
plan, your economics are based on averages – you’re always going to
lose money on a small percentage of users. In the case of archiving,
large users would so skew the formula that everyone would have to be charged
substantially more money, and we would no longer be competitive with vendors
who offer tiered pricing. All the giant users would migrate to us, and
the bulk of the average users would migrate to a competitor.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:48 PM
To: David Friend; leo@leoville.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

I am
amused to think of Leo paying for the terabytes he backs up! However, your
response raises a very interesting and important issue. You say that
you’re currently only in the “back up” business, meaning that
Carbonite mirrors protected files on internal permanent drives. Very well, but
what happens when a file is deleted locally? How long does it take for your
client to report the deletion, and then, for your servers to delete the backup?
The various comments from Leo in his multitude of podcasts suggest that he uses
Carbonite as short-term archiving. Indeed, the distinction between a
“back up” and an archive is fuzzy and entirely dependent on the
answers to the above questions.

In
essence, I’m suggesting that those questions have to be answered the same
way regardless of a file’s location. After all, Windows doesn’t
care where your Documents folder is, so why should Carbonite? Your concerns are
valid, but they are equally valid for internal drives. If you have folder X on
an internal drive, you can swap files into and out of it. Of course, Carbonite
will eventually delete files that aren’t in X presently so why should a
USB drive be any different? A drive really is just a folder on steroids.

In my
case, 250 GB would be plenty. Even 150 GB would be enough, if I can pick the
files. But, why should anyone tell me what I can safe-guard? I suppose
that’s an argument for tiering. You see, once you get past exceptions
like Leo who are drowning in bandwidth, you see a much drier landscape. We have
bandwidth, but nowhere near what the San Francisco and New York pundits assume
is the norm. Those people who think it’s time for IPTV are in for a wait.
Most of America is a good piece below the cloud so ubiquitous real-time
cloud-based services are a pipe-dream for us (literally), and will be for the
near future. If Carbonite wishes to be relevant in more than a few places, I
think you must shift to an archival model because average users simply
don’t have the bandwidth to make “cloud” back ups worthwhile.
Restoring any large amount of data would be painful.

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 15:38
To: leo@leoville.com; royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: Carbonite

Hi, guys.
There’s a technical issue and a commercial issue. Leo is
exactly right about the $5/mo. We already lose money on a small
percentage of our users, and that’s the price we pay in order to make it
really easy for everyone. However, we don’t want to make the
economics any worse than necessary or we’d have to raise prices for
everyone. A small number of users already use a highly disproportionate
amount of our storage. The alternative would be to charge by the
gigabyte like most of our competitors do, or simply shut off your backup
without notice if you get too big, as one of our “unlimited” competitors
does. There’s no free lunch, and none of us can afford to back up
more than about 150GBs without losing money at $5/mo. In a few
months we will have a new product on the market that will backup USB external
drives, NAS, and any other lettered drives. But pricing will be tiered by
the GB, not unlimited. I’m sure people will buy one license and
back up all their PCs, and that’s fine.

Regarding USB drives, here’s
why we don’t back them up today: What should we do when the drive
is unplugged? Do we assume that the data is deleted and so delete the
backup? If not, then we are essentially archiving the data, not backing
it up. If we don’t delete data when you unplug the drive, someone
could fill up an external drive, load it up to Carbonite, erase the drive and
fill it up with other data, and repeat. This is not what
we’re getting paid to do and it wouldn’t make any economic sense at
all. If we’re charging you by the GB, then of course
we’re happy to archive as well as back up.

Hope that answers the
question.

Dave

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 – Release Date: 10/01/09
18:23:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/02/09
06:46:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/03/09
06:20:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.420 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/05/09
06:19:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.420 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2415 – Release Date: 10/05/09
06:19:00

FW: Carbonite

October 5, 2009September 27, 2010 Royall Uncategorized

From: Scott Royall
[mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 14:54
To: ‘David Friend’
Subject: RE: Carbonite

So, now that you really know my
usage model, which of your competitors would you recommend? (Hey, I can’t
imagine a more honest observer under the circumstances.)

From: David Friend
[mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 14:45
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Good points, and thanks again
for your thinking on this complicated issue.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 3:43 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

I am
struck how our two topics of conversation are converging. You don’t like caps,
but that is really what cellular carriers do in practice. The paragraph you
cite indicates that AT&T will simply give you a surcharge if you exceed the
cap, but that’s not what happens. In practice, if you exceed your limit more
than once or twice, your contract is terminated with cause. If you don’t believe
me, please listen to past podcasts of Mobile Tech Roundup. The explanation the
carriers give is that these data hogs are abusing and overtaxing the networks.
That should seem very familiar to you!

You
don’t like caps, but I think the current Carbonite plan is crying out to be
gamed. As I’ve said, l could easily game Carbonite by writing a script to copy
my 115GB Music folder to the internal drive in, say, 50GB chunks. As long as
the client sees the files in each chunk within every 60 days, your server would
obediently maintain a virtual archive. Of course you know what I mean, but we
would both rather see a business model where laptop users can back up what they
need to without breaking you. I think that means tiering, like it or not.

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 09:48
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Scott:
I’m really glad you turned me on to the AT&T pricing, because their wording
is actually very interesting. They are not saying that they will shut you
off if you hit 5GB, but it gives them the right to impose additional charges
(unspecified) provided that they also give you time to leave first.
I don’t like the idea of a hard cap because your backup just stops
working, and that’s a poor user experience. What I would like to do
is find a way to gently limit our exposure to people who are using far more
than 150GB. These serious abusers are very small in number but are
huge money losers for us.

Thanks
for bringing this to my attention.

“If you are on a data plan that does not include a monthly MB/GB
allowance and additional data usage rates, you agree that AT&T has the
right to impose additional charges if you use more than 5 GB in a month;
provided that, prior to the imposition of any additional charges, AT&T
shall provide you with notice and you shall have the right to terminate your
Service.“

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 6:47 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

I
started to say AT&T is notorious, but the truth is that all US carriers are
equally bad. In fact, Verizon recently had to stop saying “unlimited” to avoid
legal Hell. I was fortunate enough to have a Verizon manager appeal to
Corporate to double my limit to 10 GB for medical reasons (which they no longer
do).

I have
already described my own mode of how I might use Carbonite. If we expand my
model to talk about laptop users in general, it is easy to say they don’t use
external drives. But wait, isn’t that an iPhone you have? If you connect an
iPhone to a Windows machine, it is an external drive. A external drive with a
lot of valuable data, and iTunes only backs up what they sell you. If you have
a digital camera (I have two), those pictures really can’t live inside your laptop.
A laptop is a lot like a city’s downtown, it is a nexus of activity. However,
there isn’t room for much of the data it uses to actually live there! As a
result, a laptop becomes a city where the suburbs come and go as needed. Maybe
one model is to figure out a way to protect those “suburbs.” You mentioned that
you break even at 150GB for $5/mo., and perhaps that should be telling you
something. Maybe you should/could sell Carbonite optionally in 150GB chunks.
This isn’t necessarily tiering, because you’re focusing on EXTERNAL drives.
Your current product covers the internal drives so what I just came up with
would be a bolt-on. Indeed, it could be a product users could buy multiples of,
much like tiers.

Cabonite made this week’s episode of Security Now. Check it out.

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:18
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Hmmm.
I did not know that. I will look at my AT&T contract. I’m sure
I did my initial backup of about 50GB at my desk, so that would have gone over
wi-fi. But most of the time now I’m on AT&T, but the incremental
backups daily are pretty minor.

I think
what we may need is something in that $100/yr range, as you suggest
Scott. It probably should be capped at some number, but have no
restrictions in terms of the drives that would be backed up. The
new product I alluded to, Carbonite Pro, will be coming out in Nov but it is
really aimed at businesses, not individuals, so I don’t think it would be a good
fit for you. It seems to me that we need both an entry-level
consumer product and one that is a step up for users who need more speed,
support for external drives, and perhaps a premium level of customer
support. I’d be interested in what you think would make sense.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:26 AM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

None
of the carriers are truly “unlimited.” Read your fine print and you’ll find a 5
GB cap.

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 08:52
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Scott:
Interesting suggestion, but not sure what’s so bad about backing up on
EVDO? I have AT&T for my laptop and back up stuff on the network all
the time without any difficulty. Is your data service
metered? Mine is unlimited, so there’s no cost. And since Carbonite
basically sleeps when I’m typing on my laptop, it doesn’t interfere with
browsing speed.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:16 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

I
suppose everyone has their own definition of what’s “economical.” I’m on very
limited funds, and even I think your $50/yr. subscription price is obscenely low.
I understand that you’re trying to attract customers, but there’s a price-point
where you start attracting people who are unlikely to stay for a variety of
reasons. I think you’re well below that. I would support both $100/yr. for 300
GB, and then additional tiers.

If I
may switch topics slightly, there are some changes to your client that would
really help laptop users. Most important would be the awareness of the type of
internet connection. I’m typing this email on the road to a meeting, and I darn
sure wouldn’t like Carbonite backing up stuff on EVDO unless I explicitly order
it to. True, Carbonite can be disabled, but it’s actually designed to be
forgotten.

Meanwhile,
I really need to back up that USB drive. Can you offer any ETA on your new product?

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 06:00
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

You’re
correct that we should be moving to an archival model, and that is indeed on
the roadmap. However, it just doesn’t work economically with an
“unlimited” pricing plan. Just like any all-you-can-eat plan, your
economics are based on averages – you’re always going to lose money on a small
percentage of users. In the case of archiving, large users would so skew
the formula that everyone would have to be charged substantially more money,
and we would no longer be competitive with vendors who offer tiered pricing.
All the giant users would migrate to us, and the bulk of the average
users would migrate to a competitor.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:48 PM
To: David Friend; leo@leoville.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

I am
amused to think of Leo paying for the terabytes he backs up! However, your
response raises a very interesting and important issue. You say that you’re
currently only in the “back up” business, meaning that Carbonite mirrors protected
files on internal permanent drives. Very well, but what happens when a file is
deleted locally? How long does it take for your client to report the deletion,
and then, for your servers to delete the backup? The various comments from Leo
in his multitude of podcasts suggest that he uses Carbonite as short-term
archiving. Indeed, the distinction between a “back up” and an archive is fuzzy
and entirely dependent on the answers to the above questions.

In
essence, I’m suggesting that those questions have to be answered the same way
regardless of a file’s location. After all, Windows doesn’t care where your
Documents folder is, so why should Carbonite? Your concerns are valid, but they
are equally valid for internal drives. If you have folder X on an internal
drive, you can swap files into and out of it. Of course, Carbonite will
eventually delete files that aren’t in X presently so why should a USB drive be
any different? A drive really is just a folder on steroids.

In my
case, 250 GB would be plenty. Even 150 GB would be enough, if I can pick the
files. But, why should anyone tell me what I can safe-guard? I suppose that’s
an argument for tiering. You see, once you get past exceptions like Leo who are
drowning in bandwidth, you see a much drier landscape. We have bandwidth, but
nowhere near what the San Francisco and New York pundits assume is the norm.
Those people who think it’s time for IPTV are in for a wait. Most of America is
a good piece below the cloud so ubiquitous real-time cloud-based services are a
pipe-dream for us (literally), and will be for the near future. If Carbonite
wishes to be relevant in more than a few places, I think you must shift to an
archival model because average users simply don’t have the bandwidth to make
“cloud” back ups worthwhile. Restoring any large amount of data would be
painful.

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 15:38
To: leo@leoville.com; royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: Carbonite

Hi, guys. There’s a
technical issue and a commercial issue. Leo is exactly right about the
$5/mo. We already lose money on a small percentage of our users,
and that’s the price we pay in order to make it really easy for everyone.
However, we don’t want to make the economics any worse than necessary or we’d
have to raise prices for everyone. A small number of users already use a
highly disproportionate amount of our storage. The alternative
would be to charge by the gigabyte like most of our competitors do, or simply
shut off your backup without notice if you get too big, as one of our
“unlimited” competitors does. There’s no free lunch, and none of us can
afford to back up more than about 150GBs without losing money at $5/mo.
In a few months we will have a new product on the market that will backup
USB external drives, NAS, and any other lettered drives. But pricing will
be tiered by the GB, not unlimited. I’m sure people will buy one license
and back up all their PCs, and that’s fine.

Regarding USB drives, here’s why
we don’t back them up today: What should we do when the drive is
unplugged? Do we assume that the data is deleted and so delete the
backup? If not, then we are essentially archiving the data, not backing
it up. If we don’t delete data when you unplug the drive, someone could
fill up an external drive, load it up to Carbonite, erase the drive and fill it
up with other data, and repeat. This is not what we’re getting paid
to do and it wouldn’t make any economic sense at all. If we’re
charging you by the GB, then of course we’re happy to archive as well as back
up.

Hope that answers the
question.

Dave

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 – Release Date: 10/01/09
18:23:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/02/09
06:46:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/03/09
06:20:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.420 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/05/09 06:19:00

RE: Carbonite

October 5, 2009September 27, 2010 Royall Uncategorized

I am struck how our two topics
of conversation are converging. You don’t like caps, but that is really
what cellular carriers do in practice. The paragraph you cite indicates that AT&T
will simply give you a surcharge if you exceed the cap, but that’s not
what happens. In practice, if you exceed your limit more than once or twice, your
contract is terminated with cause. If you don’t believe me, please listen
to past podcasts of Mobile Tech Roundup. The explanation the carriers give is
that these data hogs are abusing and overtaxing the networks. That should seem
very familiar to you!

You don’t like caps, but I
think the current Carbonite plan is crying out to be gamed. As I’ve said,
l could easily game Carbonite by writing a script to copy my 115GB Music folder
to the internal drive in, say, 50GB chunks. As long as the client sees the
files in each chunk within every 60 days, your server would obediently maintain
a virtual archive. Of course you know what I mean, but we would both rather see
a business model where laptop users can back up what they need to without
breaking you. I think that means tiering, like it or not.

From: David Friend
[mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 09:48
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Scott: I’m really glad you
turned me on to the AT&T pricing, because their wording is actually very
interesting. They are not saying that they will shut you off if you hit
5GB, but it gives them the right to impose additional charges (unspecified)
provided that they also give you time to leave first. I don’t
like the idea of a hard cap because your backup just stops working, and
that’s a poor user experience. What I would like to do is
find a way to gently limit our exposure to people who are using far more than
150GB. These serious abusers are very small in number but are huge
money losers for us.

Thanks for bringing this to my
attention.

“If you are on a data plan that does not include a monthly MB/GB
allowance and additional data usage rates, you agree that AT&T has the
right to impose additional charges if you use more than 5 GB in a month;
provided that, prior to the imposition of any additional charges, AT&T
shall provide you with notice and you shall have the right to terminate your
Service.“

From: Scott Royall
[mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 6:47 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

I started to say AT&T is
notorious, but the truth is that all US carriers are equally bad. In fact,
Verizon recently had to stop saying “unlimited” to avoid legal
Hell. I was fortunate enough to have a Verizon manager appeal to Corporate to
double my limit to 10 GB for medical reasons (which they no longer do).

I have already described my own
mode of how I might use Carbonite. If we expand my model to talk about laptop
users in general, it is easy to say they don’t use external drives. But
wait, isn’t that an iPhone you have? If you connect an iPhone to a
Windows machine, it is an external drive. A external drive with a lot of
valuable data, and iTunes only backs up what they sell you. If you have a
digital camera (I have two), those pictures really can’t live inside your
laptop. A laptop is a lot like a city’s downtown, it is a nexus of
activity. However, there isn’t room for much of the data it uses to
actually live there! As a result, a laptop becomes a city where the suburbs
come and go as needed. Maybe one model is to figure out a way to protect those
“suburbs.” You mentioned that you break even at 150GB for $5/mo.,
and perhaps that should be telling you something. Maybe you should/could sell
Carbonite optionally in 150GB chunks. This isn’t necessarily tiering,
because you’re focusing on EXTERNAL drives. Your current product covers
the internal drives so what I just came up with would be a bolt-on. Indeed, it
could be a product users could buy multiples of, much like tiers.

Cabonite made this week’s episode of Security Now. Check it out.

From: David Friend
[mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:18
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Hmmm. I did not know
that. I will look at my AT&T contract. I’m sure I did my
initial backup of about 50GB at my desk, so that would have gone over
wi-fi. But most of the time now I’m on AT&T, but the
incremental backups daily are pretty minor.

I think what we may need is
something in that $100/yr range, as you suggest Scott. It probably should
be capped at some number, but have no restrictions in terms of the drives that
would be backed up. The new product I alluded to, Carbonite Pro,
will be coming out in Nov but it is really aimed at businesses, not
individuals, so I don’t think it would be a good fit for you.
It seems to me that we need both an entry-level consumer product and one
that is a step up for users who need more speed, support for external
drives, and perhaps a premium level of customer support. I’d
be interested in what you think would make sense.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:26 AM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

None of
the carriers are truly “unlimited.” Read your fine print and
you’ll find a 5 GB cap.

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 08:52
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:16 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

If I
may switch topics slightly, there are some changes to your client that would
really help laptop users. Most important would be the awareness of the type of
internet connection. I’m typing this email on the road to a meeting, and
I darn sure wouldn’t like Carbonite backing up stuff on EVDO unless I
explicitly order it to. True, Carbonite can be disabled, but it’s
actually designed to be forgotten.

Meanwhile,
I really need to back up that USB drive. Can you offer any ETA on your new
product?

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 06:00
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:48 PM
To: David Friend; leo@leoville.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

In my
case, 250 GB would be plenty. Even 150 GB would be enough, if I can pick the
files. But, why should anyone tell me what I can safe-guard? I suppose
that’s an argument for tiering. You see, once you get past exceptions like
Leo who are drowning in bandwidth, you see a much drier landscape. We have
bandwidth, but nowhere near what the San Francisco and New York pundits assume
is the norm. Those people who think it’s time for IPTV are in for a wait.
Most of America is a good piece below the cloud so ubiquitous real-time
cloud-based services are a pipe-dream for us (literally), and will be for the
near future. If Carbonite wishes to be relevant in more than a few places, I
think you must shift to an archival model because average users simply
don’t have the bandwidth to make “cloud” back ups worthwhile.
Restoring any large amount of data would be painful.

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 15:38
To: leo@leoville.com; royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: Carbonite

Hi, guys.
There’s a technical issue and a commercial issue. Leo is
exactly right about the $5/mo. We already lose money on a small
percentage of our users, and that’s the price we pay in order to make it really
easy for everyone. However, we don’t want to make the economics any
worse than necessary or we’d have to raise prices for everyone. A
small number of users already use a highly disproportionate amount of our
storage. The alternative would be to charge by the gigabyte like
most of our competitors do, or simply shut off your backup without notice if
you get too big, as one of our “unlimited” competitors does.
There’s no free lunch, and none of us can afford to back up more than
about 150GBs without losing money at $5/mo. In a few months we will
have a new product on the market that will backup USB external drives, NAS, and
any other lettered drives. But pricing will be tiered by the GB, not
unlimited. I’m sure people will buy one license and back up all
their PCs, and that’s fine.

Regarding USB drives, here’s
why we don’t back them up today: What should we do when the drive
is unplugged? Do we assume that the data is deleted and so delete the
backup? If not, then we are essentially archiving the data, not backing
it up. If we don’t delete data when you unplug the drive, someone
could fill up an external drive, load it up to Carbonite, erase the drive and
fill it up with other data, and repeat. This is not what we’re
getting paid to do and it wouldn’t make any economic sense at all.
If we’re charging you by the GB, then of course we’re happy
to archive as well as back up.

Hope that answers the
question.

Dave

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 – Release Date: 10/01/09
18:23:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/02/09
06:46:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/03/09
06:20:00

No virus
found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.420 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/05/09
06:19:00

RE: Carbonite

October 4, 2009September 27, 2010 Royall Uncategorized

I started to say AT&T is notorious,
but the truth is that all US carriers are equally bad. In fact, Verizon recently
had to stop saying “unlimited” to avoid legal Hell. I was fortunate
enough to have a Verizon manager appeal to Corporate to double my limit to 10 GB
for medical reasons (which they no longer do).

I have already described my own
mode of how I might use Carbonite. If we expand my model to talk about laptop
users in general, it is easy to say they don’t use external drives. But wait,
isn’t that an iPhone you have? If you connect an iPhone to a Windows machine,
it is an external drive. A external drive with a lot of valuable data, and iTunes
only backs up what they sell you. If you have a digital camera (I have two),
those pictures really can’t live inside your laptop. A laptop is a lot
like a city’s downtown, it is a nexus of activity. However, there isn’t
room for much of the data it uses to actually live there! As a result, a laptop
becomes a city where the suburbs come and go as needed. Maybe one model is to
figure out a way to protect those “suburbs.” You mentioned that you
break even at 150GB for $5/mo., and perhaps that should be telling you
something. Maybe you should/could sell Carbonite optionally in 150GB chunks. This
isn’t necessarily tiering, because you’re focusing on EXTERNAL drives.
Your current product covers the internal drives so what I just came up with
would be a bolt-on. Indeed, it could be a product users could buy multiples of,
much like tiers.

Cabonite made this week’s episode of Security Now. Check it out.

From: David Friend
[mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:18
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Hmmm. I did not know
that. I will look at my AT&T contract. I’m sure I did my
initial backup of about 50GB at my desk, so that would have gone over
wi-fi. But most of the time now I’m on AT&T, but the
incremental backups daily are pretty minor.

I think what we may need is
something in that $100/yr range, as you suggest Scott. It probably should
be capped at some number, but have no restrictions in terms of the drives that would
be backed up. The new product I alluded to, Carbonite Pro, will be
coming out in Nov but it is really aimed at businesses, not individuals, so I
don’t think it would be a good fit for you. It seems to me
that we need both an entry-level consumer product and one that is a step up for
users who need more speed, support for external drives, and perhaps a
premium level of customer support. I’d be interested in what you
think would make sense.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 10:26 AM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

None of
the carriers are truly “unlimited.” Read your fine print and
you’ll find a 5 GB cap.

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 08:52
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:16 PM
To: David Friend
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

If I may
switch topics slightly, there are some changes to your client that would really
help laptop users. Most important would be the awareness of the type of
internet connection. I’m typing this email on the road to a meeting, and
I darn sure wouldn’t like Carbonite backing up stuff on EVDO unless I
explicitly order it to. True, Carbonite can be disabled, but it’s
actually designed to be forgotten.

Meanwhile,
I really need to back up that USB drive. Can you offer any ETA on your new
product?

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 06:00
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:48 PM
To: David Friend; leo@leoville.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 15:38
To: leo@leoville.com; royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: Carbonite

Hi, guys.
There’s a technical issue and a commercial issue. Leo is exactly
right about the $5/mo. We already lose money on a small percentage
of our users, and that’s the price we pay in order to make it really easy
for everyone. However, we don’t want to make the economics any
worse than necessary or we’d have to raise prices for everyone. A
small number of users already use a highly disproportionate amount of our
storage. The alternative would be to charge by the gigabyte like
most of our competitors do, or simply shut off your backup without notice if
you get too big, as one of our “unlimited” competitors does.
There’s no free lunch, and none of us can afford to back up more than
about 150GBs without losing money at $5/mo. In a few months we will
have a new product on the market that will backup USB external drives, NAS, and
any other lettered drives. But pricing will be tiered by the GB, not
unlimited. I’m sure people will buy one license and back up all
their PCs, and that’s fine.

Hope that answers the
question.

Dave

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 – Release Date: 10/01/09
18:23:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/02/09
06:46:00

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2409 – Release Date: 10/03/09
06:20:00

RE: Carbonite

October 2, 2009September 27, 2010 Royall Uncategorized

David,

I suppose everyone has their own
definition of what’s “economical.” I’m on very limited
funds, and even I think your $50/yr. subscription price is obscenely low. I understand
that you’re trying to attract customers, but there’s a price-point
where you start attracting people who are unlikely to stay for a variety of reasons.
I think you’re well below that. I would support both $100/yr. for 300 GB,
and then additional tiers.

If I may switch topics slightly,
there are some changes to your client that would really help laptop users. Most
important would be the awareness of the type of internet connection. I’m
typing this email on the road to a meeting, and I darn sure wouldn’t like
Carbonite backing up stuff on EVDO unless I explicitly order it to. True,
Carbonite can be disabled, but it’s actually designed to be forgotten.

Meanwhile, I really need to back
up that USB drive. Can you offer any ETA on your new product?

Scott

From: David Friend
[mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 06:00
To: royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

Scott: The policy is 60
days. If you delete a file on your PC, we delete it 60 days
later. That gives you plenty of time to change your mind or download the
file to another PC using Remote File Access. If your whole computer is
disconnected from Carbonite, i.e., there is no explicit Windows file deletion,
we store the files for as long as your subscription lasts.

You’re correct that we
should be moving to an archival model, and that is indeed on the
roadmap. However, it just doesn’t work economically with an
“unlimited” pricing plan. Just like any all-you-can-eat plan,
your economics are based on averages – you’re always going to lose
money on a small percentage of users. In the case of archiving, large
users would so skew the formula that everyone would have to be charged
substantially more money, and we would no longer be competitive with vendors
who offer tiered pricing. All the giant users would migrate to us, and
the bulk of the average users would migrate to a competitor.

Dave

From: Scott Royall [mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 11:48 PM
To: David Friend; leo@leoville.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

Scott

From: David Friend [mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]

Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 15:38
To: leo@leoville.com; royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: Carbonite

Hi, guys. There’s
a technical issue and a commercial issue. Leo is exactly right about the
$5/mo. We already lose money on a small percentage of our users,
and that’s the price we pay in order to make it really easy for
everyone. However, we don’t want to make the economics any worse
than necessary or we’d have to raise prices for everyone. A small
number of users already use a highly disproportionate amount of our
storage. The alternative would be to charge by the gigabyte like
most of our competitors do, or simply shut off your backup without notice if
you get too big, as one of our “unlimited” competitors does.
There’s no free lunch, and none of us can afford to back up more than
about 150GBs without losing money at $5/mo. In a few months we will
have a new product on the market that will backup USB external drives, NAS, and
any other lettered drives. But pricing will be tiered by the GB, not
unlimited. I’m sure people will buy one license and back up all
their PCs, and that’s fine.

Hope that answers the
question.

Dave

No
virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 – Release Date: 10/01/09
18:23:00

FW: Carbonite

October 2, 2009September 27, 2010 Royall Uncategorized

From: Scott Royall
[mailto:royall@conchbbs.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 22:48
To: ‘David Friend’; leo@leoville.com
Subject: RE: Carbonite

David,

I am amused to think of Leo
paying for the terabytes he backs up! However, your response raises a very
interesting and important issue. You say that you’re currently only in the
“back up” business, meaning that Carbonite mirrors protected files on internal
permanent drives. Very well, but what happens when a file is deleted locally?
How long does it take for your client to report the deletion, and then, for your
servers to delete the backup? The various comments from Leo in his multitude of
podcasts suggest that he uses Carbonite as short-term archiving. Indeed, the
distinction between a “back up” and an archive is fuzzy and entirely dependent
on the answers to the above questions.

In essence, I’m suggesting that
those questions have to be answered the same way regardless of a file’s
location. After all, Windows doesn’t care where your Documents folder is, so
why should Carbonite? Your concerns are valid, but they are equally valid for
internal drives. If you have folder X on an internal drive, you can swap files
into and out of it. Of course, Carbonite will eventually delete files that
aren’t in X presently so why should a USB drive be any different? A drive really
is just a folder on steroids.

In my case, 250 GB would be
plenty. Even 150 GB would be enough, if I can pick the files. But, why should
anyone tell me what I can safe-guard? I suppose that’s an argument for tiering.
You see, once you get past exceptions like Leo who are drowning in bandwidth,
you see a much drier landscape. We have bandwidth, but nowhere near what the
San Francisco and New York pundits assume is the norm. Those people who think
it’s time for IPTV are in for a wait. Most of America is a good piece below the
cloud so ubiquitous real-time cloud-based services are a pipe-dream for us
(literally), and will be for the near future. If Carbonite wishes to be
relevant in more than a few places, I think you must shift to an archival model
because average users simply don’t have the bandwidth to make “cloud” back ups
worthwhile. Restoring any large amount of data would be painful.

Scott

From: David Friend
[mailto:DFriend@carbonite.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 15:38
To: leo@leoville.com; royall@conchbbs.com
Subject: Carbonite

Hi, guys. There’s a technical issue and a
commercial issue. Leo is exactly right about the $5/mo. We
already lose money on a small percentage of our users, and that’s the price we
pay in order to make it really easy for everyone. However, we don’t want
to make the economics any worse than necessary or we’d have to raise prices for
everyone. A small number of users already use a highly disproportionate
amount of our storage. The alternative would be to charge by the
gigabyte like most of our competitors do, or simply shut off your backup
without notice if you get too big, as one of our “unlimited” competitors
does. There’s no free lunch, and none of us can afford to back up more
than about 150GBs without losing money at $5/mo. In a few months we
will have a new product on the market that will backup USB external drives,
NAS, and any other lettered drives. But pricing will be tiered by the GB,
not unlimited. I’m sure people will buy one license and back up all their
PCs, and that’s fine.

Regarding USB drives, here’s why we don’t back them up
today: What should we do when the drive is unplugged? Do we assume
that the data is deleted and so delete the backup? If not, then we are
essentially archiving the data, not backing it up. If we don’t delete
data when you unplug the drive, someone could fill up an external drive, load
it up to Carbonite, erase the drive and fill it up with other data, and
repeat. This is not what we’re getting paid to do and it wouldn’t
make any economic sense at all. If we’re charging you by the GB,
then of course we’re happy to archive as well as back up.

Hope that answers the question.

Dave

FW: You’re Eligible To Upgrade – Check Out Our Most Popular Devices!

October 1, 2009 Royall Uncategorized

Verizon Wireless

I wonder if this can be parlayed into a MyFi.

From: Verizon Wireless
[mailto:verizonwireless@email.vzwshop.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 22:45
To: ROYALL@CONCHBBS.COM
Subject: You’re Eligible To Upgrade – Check Out Our Most Popular
Devices!

To
ensure our emails reach your inbox, please add
verizonwireless@email.vzwshop.com
to your address book.

All
promotions valid for mobile number 281-723-6283

Phones & Accessories

Plans

Features & Downloads

Messaging

Support

My Verizon

Get your upgrade now. Save up to $50 off already-discounted devices!

Upgrade today and save on our most popular devices.
Plus take advantage of free overnight shipping
with online orders!

Check out this month’s feature device: LG
enV TOUCH

LG enV TOUCH

(read 5,669 reviews) *
2-yr Contract Price Online Discount	$279.99 – $100.00
New Every Two® Discount	$50.00
Your Price	$129.99

Other Popular Devices

LG enV3 in Slate Blue

(read 2,477 reviews) *

2-yr Contract Price Online Discount	$179.99 – $50.00
New Every Two® Discount	$50.00
Your Price	$79.99

Samsung Alias 2

(read 1,976 reviews) *

2-yr Contract Price Online Discount	$99.99 – $50.00
New Every Two® Discount	$50.00
Your Price	FREE

BlackBerry Tour 9630
smartphone

(read 1,781 reviews) *

2-yr Contract Price Online Discount	$249.99 – $100.00
New Every Two® Discount	$50.00
Your Price	$99.99

* Based on customer reviews as of 09/30/2009.

Upgrade Device

IMPORTANT CONSUMER INFORMATION: Subject to Customer Agmt,
Calling Plan, and credit approval. Up to $175 early termination fee and other
charges. Offers and coverage, varying by service, not available everywhere.
Network details and coverage maps at vzw.com. Research In Motion, the RIM
logo,BlackBerry, the BlackBerry logo and SureType® are registered with the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and may be pending or registered in other
countries – these and other marks of Research In Motion Limited are used
under license. All company names, trademarks, logos and copyrights not property
of Verizon Wireless are the property of their respective owners. Offers valid
for customers who have not upgraded in the past 20 months for 2-year
contracts and 10 months for a 1-year contract. Shipping charges may apply.
While supplies last.

Verizon
Wireless | One Verizon Way | Mail Code: 180WVB | Basking Ridge, NJ 07920

This
email was sent to ROYALL@CONCHBBS.COM and associated with your Verizon
Wireless mobile number
281-723-6283. We respect your privacy. Please review our privacy policy for
more information
about click activity with Verizon Wireless and links included in this email.

If you no longer wish to receive future emails, you may unsubscribe, or easily
adjust
your subscription preferences from your profile information.

Disability in America

A Day in the Life of a Disabled Person

Month: October 2009

Win 7

RE: Carbonite

FW: Carbonite

RE: Carbonite

RE: Carbonite

RE: Carbonite

FW: Carbonite

FW: You’re Eligible To Upgrade – Check Out Our Most Popular Devices!